Search results

I voted "mix". I prefer ordinary people becoming extraordinary - somewhat earning it. But not always. For some campaing is better change this. Moreover, be straordinary could mean be a freak, too, Some race or class across the editions have this characteristic.

I voted 1/10 level, assuming that the party is active and the challenge is real. I mean for real challenge not only one where there risks involved if something goes wrong, but difficulty in accomplishing the goal (nothing like: "I want followers. Wanna come?" "Uh, why not").

They restored the pounce too? This is just great, the barbarian needed it! Now at high level the fighter will deliver devastaing blow with his techniques, but the barbarian will pull the weight of his ferocity. Great flavour (and great a**kicking too!). I liked the core barbarian, because of...

Nice! :D Thanks!

YAY! Thanks.. could you "spoil" something? ;)

I am tempted to ask about rogues and fighters, but in top of my head.. our most urgent case... Are there interesting rage powers or ACF for the barbarian? :)

Neochameleon and I discussed aspects of the edition because are connected with my toughts about the essentials (why this look back, and if is effectively this aspect - the class diversity) to take people away from 4th. From there, a discussion about WHAT diversity is, and where lies, rises. I...

This is why I cited ToB. Of course is a case of take and give. I just don't play that way. I of course recognize the issue - just don't agree with the cure. Ok, but it seems to me that you are fitting the gameworld to explain the mechanics. I like the explanation, though. I see. Well, that...

But they trigger because are ranged, area attacks, or because they are magic and need concentration? Pay attention - my point is not to praise or bash the goodness of the simplification, because has several good sides. My point is find the source of the sense of disconnect and of the sense of...

I restate it again - is not the point of of absence or presence (there are things missing here or there, but is another topic). In 4th edition, the way powers are conceived and shown is not the same. My point is that since, just to say, eldricht blast is a spell-like, and the arrow is not...

Reading Neochameleon post and yours, I start to see your point of view. But, expanding what I said before, we were talking about customization. I concede that for some gamestyle is more functional, but the 1/2 level could make you knowledgeable of things you never met. See above. But compared...

Maybe you are right. (IMO, even if some class has too few, you customize better with skill points but whatever). For multiclass I mean the freedom of build a fighter dipping rogue, vice versa, or a 50:50 fighter/rogue. Puggins indeed raised a good point (see below). Well, another generaization...

Skills matter less because of the 1/2 level thing. Noncombat utility is rare. Feats.. I concede, when you are not forced to take "fixes". You know what I mean. Multiclass is laughable. And one thing is utility spell I can change every day, one thing is long rituals I have to pay. We are miles...

Totally different from 4th edition characters! Wait, is actually different.. spells are vary more compared each other, and follow rules that make them feel different from swinging a sword (compnents, concentration..). A game that revamped an old system and take my money for gaming instead of...

You are pretty absolutist in your statements :) Me, and other people, simply don't perceive them this way because our priorities are others. I mean the large clunky thing tham mad the wizard feel like a scholar. And what you adress is a spell mechanics problem, not a spellbook mechanic...

I of course realize, as I pointed out, that different people have different tastes: but, on the same way, what I said should (could?) explain why some other people feel the sameness. I dare to go further: if the purpose of the essentials is to call back people like me, they fail. Hard. Because...

Sorcerers weren't vancian in the same way of wizards. And look at SPELLS of these classes. Class features of the sorcerers were lame, but just core spells made possible roll sorcerers dramatically different one from another. And better not start with what Pathfinder did with sorcerers. You...

:lol: you are right - teh internet tends to overreact . Nevertheless, it's likely that people complaining about blink elves were not Kaiyanwang, or Remathillis. The latter EVEN said that jumped happily into 4th edition, at the beginning IIRC (Remathillis, correct me if I'm wrong). My point is...

A warlock had class features related to his eldricht lineage. A ranger had nature spells, a companion and track utilities. Eldricht blast could become an area attack. Ranger could poison his arrows. Mechanics for this were different, kind of damage they dealt (physical, magic) was relevant...

You don't have to, because you already paid for updates through the insider erratas. This time, compared to 3.0/3.5, simply, has been step-by-step. This is, indeed, just true.