Search results

If you can't use it to solo Orcus in one round, it's not broken.

Really? That's awesome. Where does it say that?

Like many of the posters before me, I'd say that this isn't a flaw in any sense. As for the question, I'd almost always use it on the boss.

It would not only break D&D, it would actually, literally, cause all D&D game books on earth to spontaneously incinerate themselves. So if my Player's Handbook bursts into flame, I'm going to be sending you a very disapproving e-mail, sir.

I really like the idea of houseruling that the default stat for basic melee attacks with light blades is Dexterity. No feats, nothing class specific, and it wouldn't have any effect on any powers. But just using Dexterity for light blade basic attacks seems very sensible to me, though. I...

It looks like a bad idea to me.

Yes, temporary hit points are not really hit points. Losing them is not "taking damage". You don't take damage until YOUR hit points are reduced, and temporary hit points are tracked as a totally separate amount of buffer damage that specifically shield your real hit points from being damaged...

My thought was that monsters only knew of what you'd actually affected them with so far, not whatever might happen to them in the future due to a power. In other words, Dance of Death doesn't grant the target a prophetic glimpse into the future. So I was going to argue this on the basis of...

I'm not really sure why people debate the precise minutiae of "the RAW" in cases where the spirit and intention of the rules is patently obvious given even the smallest application of reason. No one could rationally think that it's intended that the effects of a marked condition persist beyond...

This post perfectly mirrors what my own rulings would be.

I'd think that the demand for pre-made parties of PCs with higher-level adventures would be fairly small. Most players would much rather make their own characters. Now, it makes sense for things like Keep on the Shadowfell, Into the Shadowhaunt, Treasure of Talon Pass, or the like, because...

I agree.

This is so absurd.

Here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showpost.php?p=4402421&postcount=10

This seriously made me laugh out loud. Classic. I'd totally say yes to this as DM, even though it's nowhere near the strict rules as written.

There's a reason why the game has no set rules about deciding who or how a monster attacks. There's no "aggro" mechanic, and it's a very good thing. The DM is supposed to roleplay the monsters appropriate to their nature, just as the PCs are supposed to roleplay their characters...

Indeed. Not all paladins are shining knights of virtue anymore. This seems completely in character for a paladin of Lolth, or Vecna, or Zehir. Heck, even a paladin of Sehanine or the Raven Queen could arguably be very trickster-oriented.

I answered this question over on the WoTC forums with what everyone seemed to think was a compelling argument. The specific question was about whether a fighter who had marked a ranger could then attack him if the ranger used one of his Twin Strike hits on the marking fighter, and the other one...

I really like the new minion concept. I think it's genius.

Interesting ideas. Well presented, too. I think it's a bit more complicated than I'd want to use, personally. But it does look quite sound.