Search results

Just drop it, guys.

Agreed. Once I heard they were focusing on wild shape for the 4E druid, I threw all my druid eggs in the 'hopefully the cleric is sufficiently flexible' basket. And if the cleric is sufficiently flexible, great. That's all I need for a druid in my game.

I'd imagine it's like what it was in the PHB2. That book had a number of different example character traits you could apply to your character. They were just suggestions designed to get people to think about their character's personality a bit more. In that book, there was no mechanical benefit...

"Elf rangers, rogues, druids, and barbarians are the most common adventurers." That makes sense, considering their renewed focus on nature. So again, because there is no druid in the PHB, they're recommending elves becomes clerics, presumably of a nature deity. If you like, you can even call...

I like the sound of that. I disagree with the idea that an enemy can't fall for the same 'stunt' twice in one encounter, but it's probably as good of a justification for anything short of at-will powers as there is. It's certainly better than the "I've been exercising for five minutes, now I...

Ok.

Well, I suppose that particular phrase wasn't in the 3E PHB. But it did have: "Their well-hidden villages blend into the trees, doing little harm to the forest. They hunt game, gather food, and grow vegetables, and their skill and magic allow them to support themselves amply without the need...

I'm not seeing it. At least not anything more than what was in the 3E PHB.

I'm guessing most people just put the bonuses provided by the familiar on their character sheet and then stuffed their familiar in their character's backpack or whatever to ensure that the familiar was always nearby. With another party member, though, it's not quite so easy. I don't think the...

Will any of this fluff be in the core books, though? I mean, this is a Dragon article. Dragon articles during 3E provided all sorts of fluff as well.

I think it has to do more with the fact that there's no druid or other explicit nature-priest in the PHB, so they used clerics with the understanding that they were talking about a cleric of a nature deity.

There's the +2 dexterity and +2 wisdom. Looking at the eldrain entry: Seems like +2 dexterity and +2 intelligence. Also looks like where elves get +2 bonuses to their perception and nature skills, eladrin will get +2 bonuses to their history and arcane skills.

Maybe that's the ranger/wizard one? Seems to make sense. I don't think it's been confirmed, but this seems to be another strong indication that they're looking at having 8 classes in the PHB. This is awesome. It's certainly not for everyone, but I think it's great. If I take a favorite...

I really like that elves get a wisdom bonus. Not only makes them more perceptive, but it's perfect for nature-priests/druids/shamans. I think it'd be a bit more intuitive if the PHB entry said that elves made for good druids (in the 3E sense) than clerics. But since there's no specific nature...

Wouldn't that essentially have no effect? Say I roll a 5 and miss so I decide to use my elven accuracy to make a reroll. The second roll I roll a 3 and miss again. With that feat, I'd get to keep my first roll, the 5. But that roll missed, which is why I used my elven accuracy in the first place.

I love the elf entry. Absolutely perfect for what I want out of elves. My only concern is the +1 to allies within a certain distance thing, and I'm only concerned because those type of abilities could be annoying to track if there's a lot of them. But my small concern about that is vastly...

ee-LA-drin with the 'a' sound like in cat The rules should really have some sort of pronunciation guide.

Chill out on the sarcasm guys. It should be pretty easy to disagree with a comment you don't like without resorting to seething sarcasm.

Because they don't always cover the same niche. You say the ranger class fills the archer niche? What if someone wants a great archer that isn't a better woodsman? Where's that niche? What if someone wants a quick, lightly armored melee weapon user who isn't phsyically frail and has to rely on...

Seriously? Was that characterization necessary?