Search results

Well, it's up to the DM to determine what the jelly wants to attack, but I see no reason why the jelly couldn't attack the bat. If you could reach it, so should the jelly. I wouldn't think height is an issue, anyway. When I think about how an ochre jelly would attack, I imagine it extruding a...

What about retraining and paragon multiclassing? For example, let's say we have a level 11 rogue who multiclasses as a wizard. At level 11, he takes the paragon multiclassing option and swaps out a rogue at-will power for Magic Missile. When he reaches level 12, is he allowed to retrain Magic...

I agree. The feat isn't giving the character anything that he wouldn't already have if the player rolls well. In fact, if the player rolls well, the feat is kind of wasted. Not only that, I could see characters multiclassing as warlocks for the sole purpose of taking this feat. I'm currently...

It's pretty clear to me that "targets" means "one or more targets"; I don't think it's restricted to AoE attacks. If it meant "two or more targets", the feat would be nearly useless since most warlock powers only affect a single target. I agree. Reusing encounter powers at a cost opens some...

Yes. No. The slow and unconsciousness effects each have their own (save ends) and there's nothing else in the power that says otherwise, so each effect requires a separate saving throw.

I was flipping through Dragon Magazine 266 (August 2008), and I found this heroic tier feat:Sacrifice to Caiphon [Warlock] Prerequisistes: Con 13, warlock Benefit: When you attack with an encounter power that has targets and you miss all targets, then you can deal damage to yourself equal to...

Yes, I did that once, too. The discussion continued for another two pages afterward. :blush: From now on, I preface any response from Wizards Customer Service with "Assuming you accept CS' response..." They're just as fallible as the rest of us. :)

I agree with this interpretation. The caster's ability to sustain the spell is a negative effect that has been placed on the target. The target should be allowed to save against it, just like ongoing damage or any other ongoing effect.

Nice to see Wizards of the Coast is maintaining its usual high standards of software development. :p

The detailed rules about sustaining powers are on page 278 of the Player's Handbook. Yes. You can sustain a power regardless if you hit or miss with the initial attack. No. You start sustaining on the round after the initial attack. No. If you stop sustaining, the effect ends.

Ah, you're right. I misread that. That does make the DC 15 check more useful, then.

Actually, MrBeens is correct. It's described as part of the Heal skill description on page 185 of the PHB. You can make a DC 15 Heal check to stabilize a dying character. If you succeed, the character no longer has to make death saves until damaged again, but doesn't regain any HP and stays...

True, but in this particular instance, the Customer Service response makes sense to me.

Not so. You don't get random food metaphors from Customer Service. :p

Yeah, you're right. Now that I look at it again, the thread title is a bit unclear. This is true in 3E, but not in 4E because of the change in the vulnerability rules. In 3E, certain damage types can do +50% or +100% damage (double damage) to vulnerable creatures. Using your example of a...

I got a ruling from Wizards customer support. Looks like TheLordWinter is doing it correctly. 1) What happens if a target has several vulnerabilities to a single attack? Do they all apply, or does only to greatest vulnerability apply? -- They all apply. In your example, Lance of Faith would do...

I like your analogy, HighTemplar! :lol: Unfortunately, the template resistance rules don't quite answer the question because the OP involves two separate "allergies". To continue your analogy: Say you're allergic to peanut butter. Then, instead of casting a spell to make you more allergic to...

If a target has multiple vulnerabilities to a single attack, do they all stack? For example: Let's say a cleric is fighting a zombie (radiant vulnerability 5). The cleric hits the zombie with Cascade of Light, spends an action point, and then hits the zombie with Lance of Faith. The Lance of...

Well, I guess that's settled. I still think it's a bit weird, but so are some other 4E rules. Thanks for checking, Almuric.

Exactly! No, the dice are probably hot. :) When considered on its own, Elven Accuracy has exactly the same chance of hitting as your normal attack (unless you take the elven racial feat, of course).