Search results

Another way to encourage pulling out the big guns later in the fight could be to introduce more game mechanics like the Bo9S maneuver "finishing move", which deals minimal damage to an undamaged opponent, moderate damage to a damaged opponent, and heavy damage to a heavily damaged opponent.

Here's what the FAQ says on the subject:

I feel like the recombinance problem could be solved pretty easily in a new edition. A lot of buffing effects are much more complicated than they need to be. As has been mentioned, barbarian rage is a good example of this. Rage primarily gives a bonus on attacks and damage, as well as hit...

I'd like to see more PrC abilities as feats. Feats are more usable, and more useful for character customization. PrC abilities as feats also ensures that there's a cost for gaining the new special ability. I would also like to see a reduction in the number of bonus types. I think quite a bit of...

SRD link.

Can you provide an example of an effect that deals "holy damage"?

I can't decide. I know I'd cut half-elves, but I'm torn between cutting halflings and gnomes.

I want to meet this DM, and see how his games run today. How did he even get a group together?

Here's one I thought hilarious: I'm bringing this up in every edition wars thread from now on.

I thought this one was interesting:

I almost always am the DM for my group, which is too bad, because I much prefer playing. However, I'm the only person willing and able to sit in the big chair.

Gish (or zerth) would have been a much better name than "duskblade" for a melee combatant spellcaster. Neither name makes it obvious what your character actually does, but at least gish has a long history in D&D. It also avoids the silly trend in D&D towards classes whose names are just two...

I'm actually pretty surprised at the results. I always thought that I ran a pretty combat-heavy game, but I would estimate only about 1/3 of the session is actual combat.

I've been doing that in my game for 8 sessions now. I've not noticed a big difference. The PCs are only 7th level now, so I may see more effect later.

I'm not sure that dead creatures are objects. Per the condition summary, being dead has the following effects: On the other hand, the definition of "creature" is: Actually, that definition makes "dead creature" an oxymoron, as creatures are living by definition. Hmm. I guess raise dead doesn't...

I think its pretty clear that the second entry is wrong; if a hand is "free", I would think you could use a weapon with it.

The damage is almost exactly the same as regular harm. At 15th level, its 150 vs. 157.5 mean damage.

I've never liked that harm did flat damage instead of determining damage through dice rolling. What do people think this variant? Are there any pitfalls to switching to damage dice instead of fixed values that I'm overlooking?

I don't think there's a good answer. +10 hit points for a feat at 1st level would be far too good, but at 20th level, it would be a wasted feat. I don't think there's a value where that's not true.

I've dropped them from my game. (Don't care for half-races, generally.) If I wanted to keep them in, I'd probably give them -2 Constitution, +2 Charisma and the human's extra skill points. It would make them the best at interpersonal relations, which seems to be their "theme".