Search results

Definitely, this here, yeah. It's what I tend to do with my own designs, but I don't think my gaming group is ready to go that far yet. One-size-fits-all Perception is just such an uber-skill and lame.

None of which are rule-supported actions, or which might as well be met by DM going 'okay, roll Athletics, since parkouring is obviously jumping/climbing'. Which is my point. Seems much cleaner to use Athletics with Dex for those, than to concoct a separate skill that... is... well, Wizards say...

Yeah, I hope this is true. That feat alone makes sword'n'boarder sweet and awesome.

Yeah, the line between the two seems really blurry, which sounds like a case for just combining them (which is what we're doing at our table). Seriously, rules as written, only thing you can expect from it is balancing on stuff. Which can be nice, but is so not worth a skill pick. I'm just...

Yes, but the skill itself does not seem to DO anything. Why not just use Athletics with Dex? Now it just looks like Use Rope.

RPG.net thread: http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?731729-L-amp-L-7-21 Likely he has a PHB early. Perhaps he's :):):):):):):):)ting. WHO CAN TELL

Boom, bad news for you.

Copied from someone else's post: Moderately Armoured +1 to Str or Con and proficiency with medium armour and shields Ritual Master Choose two level 1 spells from a single class and you can cast them as rituals (yes, your fighter will be able to cast spells in this way). You can also later...

Acrobatics seems to only get used for balance. In 3e, Tumbling could prevent opportunity attacks from moving past enemies, while in 4e you could reduce falling damage with Acrobatics, which are concrete listed mechanical benefits. But Basic Acrobatics just lists 'balance on stuff. Oh yeah, DM...

Ah yeah, now I see it. NEVERMIND

He gets it as long as the Fighter is still part of the equation. Just to be clear to random passers-by.

Any advantage negates any number of disadvantages and vice versa. Fighter can punch the Wizard, and as he fulfills the Sneak Attack requirement 'ally within 5 feet of target', Rogue gets his Sneak Attack. Things get murkier without the Fighter. With him, it's crystal.

Or c), like our table, where if the modifiers are there, we will do our best to make use of them, but that may not lead to the desired experience. We don't necessarily enjoy chasing for bonuses, but will do our best so as not to die, because the game expects those. If that consideration is...

Thanks for posting. I like that you have the not-90-degree-turns corridors, too. And the pitons are wonderful. :D

I love this. :D ...I just cannot tell if it's serious or not...

Okay, it requires a constant game of 'GM may I?', which is annoying as hell.

Yes, but do those differences come up often enough? If a small tree is half cover, but a large tree is 3/4 cover, then you're suddenly left having to describe every tree as small or large. Which I would definitely rank as 'keeping track of minutia'. Plus, then you have to use terms like 3/4...

Yeah, I found it after 'shooting into melee' didn't bring up anything. 'a target has half cover if an obstacle blocks at least half of its body. The obstacle might be...a creature, whether that creature is an enemy or a friend' Which isn't an overall 'shooting into melee' penalty, it only...

Oof. Very true. On the other hand, we've moved to ignoring light cover, so this only affects what would've been 3/4 cover anyway, whose +5 AC might've dissuaded the Rogue from following that shot anyway?

So, what if we ignore half cover, it takes a tree trunk or whatever else qualifies as 3/4 cover (a horrible term, thanks, natural language), and that gives the disadvantage? Yes, it makes having bare terrain, and having rocky terrain (but with SMALL ROCKS) the same... But I tend to find 'and...