Search results

Cool, thanks.

I'm not sure why you'd say that. The Compendium is a rules source, paid for by the consumers who can access it, same as the books. If a consumer chooses to use the rules in the Compendium to make a character, why not? This is how the WoTC website describes the Compendium: Contrary to this...

The entries in the DDi Compendium for the Hunter and Hexblade classes seem to be imcomplete. Most powers are not described, making it impossible to create a character with the rules in the Compendium. For instance, the Hunter entry says: But no Aspects are provided. The Disruptive Shot power...

Except that the one spell we're shown in the preview, Summon Shadow Servant, has the Prerequisite: You must have the Expert Mage benefit associated with necromancy or nethermancy. In other words that spell (and presumably there are others with a similar prereq) is unavailable to pre-essentials...

While I find this situation neither painful nor obvious, I agree that CS and Grabuto have it right here. An update is probably in order though, to make the wording more clear if that is the intent.

Created a new character, worked well. Saved. Imported a character from the old CB, added an Essentials feat (only crashed once). Saved. Now, when I try to load either character the Builder freezes irrevocably. I can't access either of my characters. At all. Has anyone else had this problem...

You're not taking into account the fact that the second attack for Daul Weapon attack requires the main hand to hit. That's very significant. Assuming 55% hit chance with +3 prof. bonus weapon: classic ranger, no feats- 1d8 (*0.55) + 1d8 (*0.55) + 1d6 (*0.7975) = 7.74125 dpr scout ranger, no...

It makes sense if you view it as the DC scaling with the level of the PC being helped - It's naturally harder to provide meaningful aid to someone who is more of expert themselves.

This reminds me of when, before 4e was released WoTC previewed an epic level monster... and chose the swordwing. Everyone derided how boring they are and how they just seemed like orcs, with +20 AC. Of course, the swordwing is actually one of the most boring epic monsters in the MM. Hopefully...

Actually, the 21/sq. mi. figure Korgoth provides is for the 11th century. 14th century France had about 100/sq. mi. Modern France has a pop. density of close to 300/sq. mi. I often wish that WoTC designers would read this awesome, very useful article by S. John Ross Medieval Demographics Made...

The latest information we have from WoTC is that the September 21 update was moved back to early October. You're suggesting they have until November 1st to make it by the end of early October? I think most of us reasonably expected to get the update by October 15 at the latest, if they were to...

And that's all on the Thief's turn- then he can do it all again on the warlord's turn (or a monster's turn with an immediate reaction power).

I actually expected it to be 5d6 and knocked prone. With the retro-vibe of the Essentials updates, 5d6 would make sense, since when you picked up fireball in AD&D at 5th level, you did 5d6 damage.

So they added an extra d6? That's a useless upgrade; even with that tiny boost no one will take it over Stinking Cloud, Grasp of the Grave, Visions of Avarice, Magma Beast etc. Is stinking cloud included as a Wizard Daily 5 in HFL? BUT... I assume Fireball is an evocation power. I guess with...

WoTC has published three (!) epic adventures outside the Scales of War AP. I figured at first they were waiting a couple of years for groups to hit epic levels, but they haven't changed anything in 2010 either. It would be great if they adopted the Paizo Dungeon policy of one low level, one...

What do you mean? The July rules update has a new damage by level chart for monsters from DMG pages 184-5. I can't see any update to DMG page 42 in the July update. EDIT: And to Bagpuss- the Increase from Previous columns show how the DC increases from the level in the row just above it in the...

Yes, that would be very useful. As Stalker0 has shown, WoTC skill challenge match is very sensitive to DCs and challenge complexity. For instance, while the numbers in the table give 75% success rate for medium DC complexity 1 challenges, they give a 55% success rate for medium DC complexity 2...

Interestingly, the new table shows that what is hard for low level PCs (Hard DC is 19-21 at levels 1 to 4) is easy for high level PCs (Easy DC is 19-21 at levels 21 to 25). So the system as (will soon be) printed works as you describe.

I didn't know that. Is that guideline in the DMG2? If the system really only uses 1 and 2 complexity challenges, then the numbers are probably pretty good. Of course not. Chance of failure is important, especially for events like you describe. For an event like sneaking into a fortress, I...

The success rate seems low for a complexity 1 skill challenge equivalent to fighting one monster. Surely those basic challenges should be passed overwhelmingly? A 75% success rate seems more appropriate for a full blown complexity 4 or 5 challenge.