Search results

I dunno about the myth part, but I think it started out a lot closer to Lieber-esque sword-and-sorcery than it later became. And now 4e is moving back in that direction, though it remains to be seen to what degree.

Someone with a bit more Bo9S play experience than me help me out here. Are there balance-related reasons why certain disciplines can only be used by certain classes, or is it just fluff? If, say, a warblade could pick from Shadow Hand when learning maneuvers, would that be too strong? What if...

I always thought mind flayers should have less inherent power and more psion levels.

I suspect you'll be disappointed. They're just moving the "you can do new stuff" abilities into class powers, most likely.

The Charisma bonus is tricky because it's so good for classes like sorcerer that balancing it requires loading the race down with so many drawbacks that no one will want to play a satyr for any class that doesn't have Cha-based spellcasting. Suggestion: instead of +2 Charisma, give them a...

Consider specializing in divination. An extra divination spell per day isn't as attractive as other schools, but you only have to drop one school in exchange for it. That's correct. Note that you aren't required to prepare more than that one spell per level from your specialized school. Even...

That it's the same cost as the enchantment for a suit of armor doesn't mean it's not overpriced. You have to compare it against the other options for getting an armor bonus when your class isn't built for armor, like the ones Pale Master mentioned.

Am I the only one who really likes the mention of high-level adventurers having significant items with names and stories? I mean, maybe that's just this writing and it won't be borne out in the rules... but I would be so pleased to never again see a hero walking around with his +3 sword, +4...

Well, that's not the reason I wanted them to junk that picture, but I'll take it. Anything to be rid of that awful thing. The fighting-a-green-dragon picture would make a much better PHB cover.

Rangers get +4 to attack rolls at will? Interesting. I wonder if there's some downside to that power that didn't get mentioned, like reduced damage or something.

Hell, maybe size is now just a flat modifier to weapon damage instead of something where you have to consult a table and pull out different dice. That would be neat.

Yep. Not from the attack, but because you're using an invocation, which always provokes an AoO. Although you can do it defensively with a Concentration roll.

I'm with Nifft on this one. Although the "he already wasted a round, so why not let him have the bonus" part of the argument ceases to apply when you consider a duskblade channeling shocking grasp through her weapon. That +3 along with the electrical damage would make it a pretty sweet...

Because many RPG players are scrawny geeks who daydream about beating up the muscly jocks with their ninja-like agility.

No, he'll just look a little foolish. And apparently mhacdebhandia considers looking a little foolish to be generally undesirable.

I'm already a little worried that warlocks may have too many pact options. Squeezing too many of these things into one class can be bad. You end up with characters who should have very different abilities being almost the same in play - just look at the 3e cleric, who can be a priest of any...

This is why warlocks do not need angelic pacts to be good guys.

I think you could empower a dispel magic, actually, but all it would do is suppress magic items for 50% longer than the usual 1d4 rounds.

Iron is right there in the poll options.

But why? Once you're fifth or six level (and thus able to cast hold person), hideous laughter will probably last comfortably longer than it'll take to get rid of the laughing victim's allies. And once you've done that, it shouldn't be hard to gang up on the laugher and finish him off even...