Search results

No, I never said that. Read posts before you reply to them, please. Thanks. I agree, and have already written as much. Read posts before you reply to them, please. Thanks. No, I never said that. Read posts before you reply to them, please. Thanks. You seem not to realize it, either - stop...

He's got a few tricks, but only a few. But what tricks!

Read the book and find Hideous Blow, then get back to us. I'm forced to wonder why the moderators sit by quietly while you openly insult me, while they jump down my throat over a word that even American TV allows. You must not like newcomers here much.

Get Improved Feint and you can do it every round. I just came upon the idea when I noticed that a lot of the rogue's skills jive with the warlock's, and many of the warlocks invocations suit rogues well. Since then, however, I've discarded the idea in favor of a ninja/iaijutsu master from the...

Whoops! Beat me to it. :)

From the PH: Improved Uncanny Dodge (Ex): At 5th level and higher, a barbarian can no longer be flanked; he can react to opponents on opposite sides of him as easily as he can react to a single attacker. This defense denies a rogue the ability to sneak attack the barbarian by flanking him...

Remember that barbarians/rogues, etc. with Uncanny Dodge can't be flanked!

I agree, it is well within a 12th-level character's cashpot. But please see the post just above your last one, and keep in mind that averages don't always tell the whole story, which is why I posted the possible maximum damages. Say, for example, both character get bad rolls, rolling all 2s. For...

You're right, but we're talking about an eldritch blast with sneak attack, for 7d6 damage, which only has to hit the opponent's touch AC. Assuming the fighter misses one shot per round and the rogue/warlock has Improved Feint, that's an average of 24.5 points of damage per round (possible...

And I suggest that you pay attention to whom you're quoting and replying to. Saves embarrassment sometimes.

If anyone thinks I've insulted them, it's entirely in their mind, as my posts have contained no insults. And I'm not the one putting words into others' mouths. That is indeed impolite.

I was talking about taking away a fighter's primary weapon, not all his weapons. Any fighter worth his salt is going to have a back-up weapon, usually a light one. That's terribly uncreative. Anyone can just give the enemy more HD and throw him into the fray, and the result is likely to be...

Um... no, I didn't say anything about any lack of grapplers. That would be something you just pulled out of your ass. Didn't smell too good, either.

That'd have to be a pretty expensive bow to come even close to the same damage.

Certainly. But taking away a warrior's weapons is one of the easiest ways to challenge him, so it's hard to imagine a DM that can't even figure that out coming up with anything more interesting. It's like assuming someone that doesn't know the letter "b" can't read. Sure you can read some things...

That's an interesting idea. Too bad the novels aren't considered canonical.

Dagnabbit! Did I get it confused with 3.0? I notice the two classes share several skills, too.

You don't have to spend a round if your enemies are in magical darkness that you can see through. That's potentially 7d6 damage, every round, from 30 feet away.

Doesn't sound like your DM was particularly creative or challenging.

You're judging the characters based only on the damage they do. With the fighter, it's basically all he's capable of, while the rogue/warlock can do so much more. Balance means these characters should not even be close to doing the same amount of damage per round, not to mention that the fighter...