Search results

While I agree with most of this (all of it if the trigger is "takes damage that would drop it to 0 hp"), if the trigger is "drops to 0 hp" then it has already taken the damage and all that's left to resolve is the effect, specifically death. Therefore it would have 0 hp when the charge happens...

The specific rule is that you get to spend a healing surge on a "roll of 20 or more". Given that you can't roll better than a 20 on the die alone, it's meant to include bonuses.

If the trigger is "drops to 0 hp" as you say, then ANY amount of damage will stop the charge. Dealing damage leads to the "resolve the effects of damage" step before the charge continues, at which point the monster will be found to have 0 hp or fewer, causing it to drop. Of course, if Savage...

At level 1 characters have access to 1 Daily power, 1 Encounter power, 1 racial power, a class feature or two (unless you're a Fighter), and a pair of At-Wills. I don't think that's very front-loaded: you have four attack options, two of which are no longer available after you use them, and 2-3...

I want to dispel a perception of my statements that seems to be the default assumption of the first few posts: I don't think WotC is evil, or in any way disapprove of their marketing ploy. I think it's silly that anyone was taking in by their blatant efforts, but if all you needed to get...

It depends on the trigger. If the trigger is taking the damage then the hit has already happened and can't be prevented, which means that he won't be able to save himself unless he has some means of reducing damage. Sure, he might take someone down with him, but that's the best he can do. Also...

Which is a result of their presentation. They were designed to evoke that feeling while diverging very little from the mechanics of their base class. It was a marketing ploy, the efficacy of which is proved by your positive response.

They're less different than you think. For example Cleaving Assault is just Cleave presented in a different manner, and Power Strike/Backstab combined with stances/tricks are normal Encounter powers. Really, the only thing that's changed is the absence of Daily powers, which isn't all that weird...

Essentials is what 4e has been all along. The difference is almost entirely in presentation and restriction of options.

Normal Paladins don't have to STAY the same alignment as their god, and the only mechanical difference between a Paladin the serves an Evil god and a Good one is which Channel Divinity feat they're eligible for. I suspect that the Cavalier will work the same way the Warpriest does, with the...

They have admitted it. In MM3 (or maybe 2, I don't remember) they said that the old monsters are outdated and then give tables that contain new stats-by-level-and-role so you can convert them, and Monster Vault contains a bunch of the monsters from MM1 updated to use the new stats and layout.

Paladins with Alignment restrictions? I don't think they could be more blatant that Essentials is meant to pull in the 3.5/Pathfinder crowd. Good job standing up for the principle of alignment being unconnected to mechanics WotC.

That's what Combat Superiority is for: you don't want to provoke an OA from a Fighter because they're unlikely to miss and tend to use d10s or better for damage. Adding the Combat Challenge attack on top of the OA is just going to cause monsters with ranged attacks to shift before attacking...