Search results

That seems a little silly though. I mean, if you had to command your victim to not tell anyone they were dominated, you'd have to do thatall the time, and pretty much right away. I guess it isn't a big deal, but this just reminds me of the lawyering "disclamer" for Wish spells (you know what I...

1minute/level would make the spell useless. I could see if it was meant to be a combat-only spell, then sure, 1min/level would work. But if that were the case, you are better of just doing damage to the target to get rid of them in combat rather than dominating them. The way the spell works...

So if they know they are dominated, when the "controller" goes to sleep, what prevents the dominated person from telling thier friends "Help, I am dominated!"???

Why not just telekinetically throw a bunch of stakes at him instead? One of them is bound to hit his heart.

This may have been covered already but... If we are talking about a Flaming Whip here, it is safe to say it is at least a +1 Flaming Whip. If the whip part does no damage, but the flaming part does +1d6), wouldn't the +1 part do damage as well? Why or why not?

It seems to work fine as it is written.

It's strange, when you spell it out on here, I am very confused. But for some reason, when it comes up during game play, my group has no problem implementing this "optional" rule. Works for us anyway.

Sure it does, because once you are stuck then the enemy knows where you are. On your next turn you can "reshuffle" yourself into the figments once more and confuse the enemy again.

Did you also account for Dexterity? If the attack misses the target but only because of the cover BUT the cover is not hit, because of his Dex, then that means the cover actually dodged out of the way, thus providing no cover bonus, and it actually DOES hit the intended target.

Rule 0 is a house rule?

BTW... Divine Vigor doesn't require Extra Turning... Sorry, had to say it, lol :)

Yeah, if you allow someone to read the MM and use their out-of-game knowledge to influence the game (when their character's wouldn't have the same knowledge)... well... that's the problem right there. You don't allow your player's to read your DM notes do you?

It's like fire and water... water can put out fire, so why doesn't fire have DR/water?

With 1 level of Barbarian, and take a bunch of Speed of Thought's (Psionic feat that adds +10 movement, and I believe stacks with itself).

Bartmanhomer, just curious, but is English not your native language? Perhaps the confusion with your questions is because of a language barrier?

Well according to the rules you can't Take 20 on any skill that would have "bad" effect if you fail it. If you fail a Disable Device check on a trap, you spring it. Therefore you can't Take 20. You can, however, Take 10.

Is that Bullette as in "bullet" or as in "boo-lay"?

Because if the DM rolls the check and the check fails, the player won't know why the check failed. Was it because it was a low roll on the die, or was it because the trap is above his skill level? If the player rolls for himself and he rolls a 2 on the die, and the DM says "you fail" then the...

As I said... Player states he wants to try and disable the trap... DM makes the secret roll and tells the player one of four possibilities: 1) Not only do you figure out how to disable this trap, you know how to bypass it without disabling it, if you'd like to do that. 2) You figure out how...

The fine folks here are only trying to give you their opinion because they don't want you to make any rash or not-well-thought-out decisions that could later affect your game, and possibly even the world! Just imagine, if you will, that the player of the Rogue agrees to your Sneak Attack house...