Search results

Likely true, and I appreciate the responses, but unfortunately I need a bit more on the quoted rules to resolve the issue overall ;/ Although reasoning definately helps as well, I like to see all of the angles. I am trying to stay out if it as much as possible for now so I didnt think it would...

thanks ;) looking forward to your thoughts!

Not me, I am in a discussion attempting to break a certain prc and the person I am discussing things with has brought up many of the points here but I have been unsuccessful so far in proving my point to his satisfaction.. hence, I am trying to get as much rules help as possible, it would be...

Sorry for the vague title, but this is a bit varied. I have been discussing with another poster on a different thread a few potential areas of the rules.. I would love to see what people had to say on the matter, especially if they know the proper place to look in the rules. I am going to try...

Not exactly what you are looking for, but how about an item that gives you a negative level? lol

This could help then: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a But I would still definately suggest ranger or druid. Ranger will allow you to get the archery feats and you could pick up a few of the close combat feats as well so that you can be passable at both build types while...

go druid or ranger (if ranger pick up 'natural bond' feat and maybe even a few levels of beastmaster).. this will at least allow your mount to survive, which can be important. There should be ways for you to make your attacks and have your mount make attacks as well. If you go druid you can...

Zombies are twice as hard (for the hd part) to figure out as compared to skeletons of the same creature ;) I definately go for the commonality dcs.. although in one game I simply let people choose a number of creatures to know everything about based on how many ranks they put in (it started...

Now that is being a bit ridiculous. In the end, if a creature has the appropriate feats I would allow them to use them. I believe in a different thread someone mentioned a book which had armor with special slots for a 'rider' even though the mount is intelligent or bipedal. If you could have...

you guys have something against intelligent mounts? ;)

Just a simple question, and it is unlikely that the raw sufficiently covers it, but I thought I would ask anyway. Assuming that a character has improved evasion (and has sufficient 'room' to use it :Þ) and they wish to forgo their save may they also forgo the protection of improved evasion...

You dont always know when it is needed, plus there are other buffs which help with other things more.. and sometimes people dont want to waste the slot on it.. I think that protection from xxxx is a 'much' better solution over all ;)

He is probably worried about the extremely short duration.. it isnt much good for long hauls ;)

It was the arguement taken to its conclusion and is the arguement broken down to its basic form. Again, if you feel that your arguement is different then you may want to rework it a bit. As is, I have pointed out a few places where it is inconsistant both with the rules and the assumed 'spirit'...

As that seems to be the basic arguement of yourself and the poster right above yours I would have to say that I disagree. Just because the guy would turn down a benefit does not mean that the benefit would cause him to lose the vow, merely that he looks for the greater good in all things. If...

I am afraid that just doesnt follow. A vop character may very well give up his one day of meals to the needy and starve himself and even turn down any and all offers to give him food in favor of feeding some needy person, but that does not mean that accepting the food would negate his vow...

Which is allowed by the rules through various means, one of which is through the act of 'begging'. So, it is allowed. Hence I feel that your spirit of the rules arguement doesnt make any sense as it directly contradicts some of the rules text. 'you cant kill commoners'.. but the spirit is that...

And I am afraid you have missed mine. I dont think that it matters one way or another what it might cost the one offering the service, it only matters if it violates the vow, which I do not think that even a long duration effect would unless it was an item or something that the character could...

All spells have an intrinsic worth that you could sell them for. Plus, many spells have a component that is listed as a negligable price, but it still has a cost 'somewhere', it is just too small to bother the character with.. but, with a very strict reading and 'spirit of the rules', even that...

And where does it state this? Explicitly, if you would be so kind.