Search results

Yes, though paintbrush diagrams would be sufficient, of course.

... so can we rotate the grid in 4th edition, too, thus fixing one of the prime complaints; to wit: Let the DM match the grid to the room, and the differing levels of maneuverability on the orthogonal and off of it cease to be (as much of) an issue. Because that's what you're doing in 3.5.

A base that is 3 squares wide across the orthogonal is _not_ 2 squares across the diagonal because you don't get to rotate the mini. No rules for it, y'see; it occupies the squares that it occupies, nae more, nae less. xxx xxx xxx is the shape we're looking at. 3 across the diagonal, not 2...

I'm pretty sure you just made that up too :) I've seen nothing to indicate that and hints to contraindicate that.

Go get a mini and put it on the map -- its base doesn't fit. Since 3.5 doesn't have facing... the huge critter is SOL, screwed by the grid resolution.

Pish, you and your reading comprehension. Oops. Hong is, as ever, quite right.

If you think of the animus this way, you're thinking of it wrong :) The animus in W&M is the stuff that makes the other stuff go -- body + animus = shambling around with various levels of animal cunning and reflex memory; body alone (no animus) = inert lump of protein and calcium. Soul + animus...

"More trouble than it's worth" is extremely subjective, and we don't know (yet) what 'worth' is in 4e, given (as other posters have mentioned) the amount of sliding and shifting moves that will be available.

But not idle, first time players. It's the initial buy-in cost with which we must concern ourselves; it's bad enough for the DM!

I wants one!

Argument for another day. "Truer to a euclidean metric of threespace", perhaps, is a better phrasing of what I'm trying to say :)

Started during the early nineties -- and bought 2nd edition first -- but played with the red box first. Definitely going to 4th edition, because I'm a neophile in many ways. I like almost everything I've heard, and can easily ignore the (for me, small) fraction that I haven't liked.

And this, ladies and germs, is why the 1-2-1 counting is a complex rule: Square/Total in 1-1-1 Total in 1-2-1 1 (5) 1 (5) 2 (10) 3 (15) 3 (15) 4 (20) 4 (20) 5 (25) 5 (25)...

:D You're welcome.

Bwah hah hah hah hah. It's true, raw steaks make way better adventurer rations. Still, I'm glad to see waybread on the equipment list; my guess is that it's the Silk Rope of rations; the adventurer standard because it's 1/10 the weight for 10x the cost, and +2 to some sort of check (maybe fort...

You guys really hate journeybread that much? Wow. I really don't see the difference between journeybread and "iron rations", especially in the departments of portability, fungibility, nutrition, and spoilage. Oh, except "journeybread" comes from Tolkein, which is sort of a neutral statement...

And wizards can't use shields at all, so the staff seems a likely place (two handed item, intended for people who can't use shields... hmmm...) to allow a defensive-minded wizard to buff up in genre.

Well, you're certainly wrong about vampire :) But I agree with the idea you've got here -- I'd be amazed to see a lycanthrope template, unless they've changed the build significantly.

And this time, I full attack, making more than one point. And if I win initiative, you're still flat footed versus this. You don't get to take attacks of opportunity, and my friends and I get into excellent flanking positions. Now is a time to take all those actions that normally provoke AoO...

Really? I call dibs on an extra round of posting a rebuttal to your post.