Search results

The one thing that I think 4E did well is that there's mechanical fluff, especially for races. You can have all the convoluted history and back story you want, but it doesn't really make a dozen monster races stand out from each other. However things like a shifty kobold or goblin tactics or an...

Because, unlike rolling for stats, there's no depth. There's nothing interesting fighter having 16 HP vs 12. There's plenty of interesting things about a fighter with 7 Int vs. one with 16 (and other things may make up for it). Rolling for health/mana is just an annoying 'possibly screw the...

No, charisma does not apply to the secondary hits. However the wild magic spell source bonus to damage (Dex) does apply.

I actually worked up the genasi double scimitar version through heroic. I choose to start with 12 Dex and Wis. Like all hybrids, this guy has LOTS of good feat options and needs them to make up for the lack of awesome class features, so holding off on the two-weapon feats until paragon is...

If you're worried about damage why not stick with d8(2d8 at epic), but use Dex instead of Int for damage. Retains the original idea of making Dex useful while not making it nessessary.

Another option is to take a double scimitar. If you have 13 Dex you can use it for Dual Implement Spellcaster, it's stout so you can used it for the two-handed barb at-wills and it's defensive. Plus you get high crit when using it as an implement and have the option of two-weapon defense.

Thanks! I had missed this before and only seen the above quoted when the discussion came up.

I'm going to be pissed if Dak'kon isn't used in the names of one of the Gith feats.

Unless I'm mistaken the dichotomy of damage type vs. keyword for weapons that change damage is as clear as mud in the rules as written. Both sides of the argument have a case and I wouldn't really slight a DM for allowing/disallowing keyword related feats and powers in such cases. The issues...

This should be posted in the rules forum. I also don't know that there's an answer. I'd expect it to be covered either when these are cleaned up for the next DDI update or by an FAQ entry...

Demigod or anything else at epic for +2 to an attribute brings the AC up 1 point further for the light armor guys...

This build seems to be really good at granting multiple allies attacks and has fantastic access to close burst 1 weapon powers (many of their augments are the same power as a close burst 1), without throwing out the bonuses warlords tend to on their granted attacks. While the tac-lord generally...

I think I'd be willing to buy it around $500. But it would be important to have mature software, an easy way to swap out the PC side of the hardware and good reliability, durability and life expectancy. I don't see any of these happening within the next few years, 5-10 maybe.

Or, you know, move away from their bleeding body for a round and let it end when they fail to maintain the challenge. My opinion on this is pretty simple: there's equally stupid arguments for it and against it. Most fighters can't do a thing against an opponent 6 squares away marked with a...

Superior Implements and Skill Powers come to mind..

There's really no need for such a rule, and adding rules to the game only makes things more complex, which isn't good. Likewise the more eratta that gets added the further the game drifts away from the books as printed, which is another bad thing IMHO. RAW there's no issue with mark durations...

It comes with an encounter that can immobilize and the action point ability is another immobilize. It's not a perfect combo, but it certifiably has some potential (which is a lot more interesting than something like an orb-wizard with an inescapable immobilize power). For what it's worth I...

My quite war on half-breeds continues. Half elf again (I really like the mechanics of half orcs, at least).

A Simple question, I don't have anything in the RAW to support how I'd rule it at the moment. Let's say there's an effect like "Dazed and ongoing 5 fire damage (save ends both)" Does the warforged bonus to saves vs. ongoing apply? Can a kalashatar make the save at the beginning of their turn...

That's a question I've been meaning to ask in Rules for a while. If I have a bonus to save vs. ongoing damage and I take an effect that's something like "Dazed and Ongoing 5 fire damage (save ends both)" does my save bonus apply? My instinct as a DM is to say yes, and by that logic I'd think it...