Search results

That's a pretty good point, actually. I had nine groups rolling dice. I love you guys, because instead of writing out the groups longhand like I had to do for my prof and my classroom teacher, I can tell you there was one group each rolling: 1d6 2d6 3d6 1d8 2d8 3d8 1d10 2d10 3d10 I wanted...

Awesome--thanks! I'll probably find a dice simulator and show them the difference between their results and expected results. Daniel

So I have a question for the math nerds. Let's say I roll 3d6 29 times. What are the chances that none of those rolls will be less than 8? (I was teaching a lesson on probability to some fourth graders, focusing on medians and modes of different data sets; the group rolling 3d6 gave me these...

Wow, Aaron, that sucks. On the bright side, if you ever want to write a country song, you're set for material! Figuring out relationships is really no fun, and when folks pull stuff like this on you, it's awful. But if you keep working at it, the chances are excellent that things will...

In some ways I agree. However, spells can break rules and modify them, and as I see it, the primary goal of interpreting the spell should be to make the spell playable, not to make the monster playable absent the spell. If the spell never gets cast, it may as well not be in the book; it needs...

Moderator's Notes I trust all of y'all know the board rules. You may offer your opinions about behavior, as long as you do so in a civil, respectful, polite manner. If your opinion is one that cannot be offered politely, bite your tongue. Or your fingers, I guess, unless you're posting with...

If you had fun, then, what's the problem? Daniel

May I suggest a different question? The different question is, "Did everyone have fun?" It sounds like you didn't have fun, and your players didn't have fun. Why does it matter whether you were fair or not? This isn't a trial, it's your leisure activity. If you didn't have fun and your...

Hmm. That's not really how I think about balance. My ideal balance makes all options equally fun--it spreads out the fun rather than concentrating it in a few places. I much prefer a character who casts a different 7th-level spell each day than one who relies of firestorm to do all his...

A suggested change to the spell that might make it much better: what if the druid could direct the swarms as a free action? That might make it worth casting--I'm not sure. Daniel

Moderator's Notes Alzrius, I'm not worried about the unpopular nature of the opinion you've voiced--I'm worried about its inherently political nature. This isn't in a gray area: this is exactly the sort of thread we don't allow here. Thread locked. Daniel

Okay, quick mod note. Mod Note: This thread isn't the place to discuss the purpose of this forum. If that's a discussion that interests you, please read the stickies at the top of the forum and then start a thread in Meta. But don't carry that discussion on in a thread on a different subject...

WOw, that's an interesting idea, SM. If a swarm does its damage to each square within its area, that makes them a lot nastier and more interesting: they become much better to use against large creatures than against small creatures. I'm pretty sure that's not how they're supposed to work, but...

That was pretty much my thinking: it seems cheesy to me. On the other hand, I've never used the spell, because it seems really weak compared to firestorm, heal, windwalk, or summoning a greater elemental. Unless I'm missing a way in which it's really good, it just doesn't seem worth the...

In 3.0, I believe, Creeping Doom was the super-nasty spell. Didn't it do 1,000 points of damage or something, spread out among opponents? It was a battle-ender of a spell. The new edition is much less nasty: you summon between 6 and 10 swarms of centipedes, which you can command to move with...

So you're not going to post again in this thread? Daniel

I actually disagree. It says nothing about what Break Enchantment does; all it says it was the spell itself does. The spell itself makes you remain in that state, until one of four specific things happen. These four specific things cancel the effects of the state. That seems highly specific...

My reason for it is that, as a player, it's more fun to be told "yes" by the DM than to be told "no." I'd rather have my enemies quickly cured of feeblemind than be doomed as a PC because nobody in our party has the necessary magic to get rid of the spell. (And you didn't really cross over a...

I'm assuming that last sentence is not restrictive ;). For example, I believe that the list in Feeblemind is restrictive--AND I believe there is a conflict. The conflict doesn't arise because of any nonrestrictive nature in Feeblemind; it arises because of the nonrestrictive nature of Break...

Yeah--I was joking, but I think if we can agree to disagree, we're doing good. A very quick reminder that, due to its tendency to inflame tempers, we frown on referring to other folks' sincerely-held rules interpretations as "house rules" in this forum. There's a sticky at the top of the forum...