Search results

Yo, Inda Ranger, read this real quick: I have concluded that converting any character from any fantasy source (whether role playing or literature) will be relatively easy to do with the 4e rules. I have also concluded that there could be many approaches to each character, and that if someone is...

I think the person who thought that you should use a short sword and pretend it's a greatsword was probably most on-track. I don't agree that the agile rogue fighting style holds with someone lugging around a 4' sword. It would take an incredible amount of strength and control to maneuver a...

They addressed the issue of opposed rolls in social situations with passive Insight and Perception, I believe. Dumbed it down too much in my opinion.

The problem, BaenEndkind, that they have is that the Warlord's powers that we've seen are all melee-based. Of course, they could just change it to include ranged in their game, but they don't want to. Because they think that the new PHB should have forty or fifty playtested and balanced classes...

It might be more accurate to say that it is tied to a pre-4E mechanical concept. I think the problem with that is that the reason you don't like it doesn't make sense to anyone, and they think that you need to be convinced that Hunter's Quarry actually is something a rolling-around opportunistic...

Well, I appreciate the effort of organizing this debate into one thread.

Mourn for president of the thread.

I'd go with the same rule for Encounter/Daily/Utility powers that you have for At-Will powers. Albeit it doesn't affect 1st level. The Hitpoints and armor are also slightly skewed, as I suspect Wizard will be a very popular part of the combination.

That'd be sweet but I can't see how it'd be profitable. As for yer brawler, sounds to me like he acts as a defender, which sort of makes him one, but that it isn't really built into the class. I mean, Grapple was always fun, but it only worked on a small range of enemies, and only one at a...

The problem would most likely be a certain lack of space with which to easily position the weapon for precision insertion, and lack of time in 6-second-round combat. Everyone crits on helpless enemies.

I dunno, I don't really see monks as being very defendery. Generally when Jackie Chan is protecting someone he does so by flinging them away rather than grabbing their attention. I wouldn't say they're a controller, either, because even if they fight hordes of enemies it's generally two or...

^ this is why the only problem I have with 4E is how to manage Encounter and Daily powers. Sure enough, it's far superior to 3.x in terms of game balance, but I'm guessing I'll have to home rule is up so that it makes more logical sense to me. I'll have to wait to see an excerpt on rituals to...

Yeah, you could probably just amp up the abilities or fighting methods you use when angry.

Combat Advantage helps everyone, not just Rogues. The clever melee combatant will make use of it regardless of class.

I expect Barbarians will have something of this nature. However... It already exists in the game. The PC race of Dragonborn has an ability to fight better when "furious" (bloodied) and the monster race of Orc has a similar ability to a much larger extent. Why would you want to be? Just because...

So it doesn't seem, to you, that 4E is much better about not being restrictive than 3.x was? ...Lack of alignment emphasis, targeted cultural racial abilities or racial class preferences... I guess they do have some silly names for Powers, but...seems unrelated....

Before 4E, nothing resembled the Warlord. So should I hate 3E because it didn't have one in its first book? Maybe. Then make a Rogue that doesn't use sneak attack. Then wait for an official variation of what you're describing to come out. Or just change the Rogue's sneak attack feature into...

Seriously? You people worry about an implied setting? Seriously? This is your problem? That WotC gives you suggestions for the flavor text of your game, that you are under no compunction to accept whatsoever? Good gravy.

This is known as the Cleric. Or any other ranged character that can support the group. It's definitely not a Bard. But it can be a bard, if you want it to be. Actual Bard rules will be coming out in a year, sorry if you can't wait, but in my personal opinion 4E makes making new classes...

Definitely seems like they should. Seems to fit with the general perception of what rogues are. Ya haven't actually tried it yet, sir. You seem to want to be called a Rogue more than conforming to what you define to be your character concept. You mean Acrobatics? They both get Acrobatics...