Search results

Yes.

(750 x 3 x 10) / 25 = 900 XP. (25 x 3 x 10) / 25 = 30 XP. EDIT: except shadow evocation is a 5th level spell, so it's actually: (25 x 5 x 10) / 25 = 50 XP.

And yet, you're not obligated to follow me out of the COUNTRY merely because you pledged to follow me even if I left the STATE. Do you get it yet?

No, it doesn't. It says nothing about what you will do if I leave the COUNTRY. EDIT: It also says nothing about what you will do if I kick you in the nuts. :D That's correct. And that's why the same language wouldn't work in the case of uncanny dodge: because then a rogue would retain her...

No, that is not what is being asserted. Let me try to explain it to you again, since you clearly haven't understood what is actually being said. A rogue (or anyone else) retains her Dexterity bonus to AC unless there is some explicit exception that applies. Those exceptions include (1) being...

If a Bull Rusher wanted to move an entire Grapple, I'd simply allow him to make opposed strength checks against each participant in the Grapple. If he beat all of the participants, I'd allow him to move the Grapple as far as possible using the least successful result. If a Bull Rusher wanted...

No, it really doesn't. "I will give you twenty dollars, even if you punch me in the face" doesn't say anything about what I'll do with the money if you kick me in the nuts.

Yes, precisely so. I don't understand why there is any confusion about this.

Nope. You're right about that, though.

There is simply no comparison between the power loss suffered by, say, a Wiz6/Clr6 and a Ftr6/Rog6. None. Any argument to the contrary is just silly.

That's why I mentioned "the market" in my response: it's the closest thing to an "objective standard" that I think you can apply here. I could continue to play games on my TI-99. I could even program new ones to play on it. But I can't go out and buy any new games for it, because it's...

It's because games do become obsolete...in exactly the same way that, say, computers do. Do they become instantly obsolete? Overnight? No. Just because a new game (or new edition of a game) comes out, that doesn't mean the old game is no longer playable or worthwhile...and the same is true...

The phrase "into or within" is an exceedingly strange one to use if the author(s) really just meant "into or out of." The only sensible construction I can make of the words used is to read them as "into or [entirely] within" the area. Forbiddance is all about keeping things out, not in.

I've highlighted the relevant portion of your post for you.

Puzzles that the player has to figure out rather than the character.

The PHB has a glossary entry for "damage" that isn't particularly helpful here, but the real question is: does it make any sense that a Swarm of X would be immune to damage from a Swarm of Y. (And the answer is: No, not really.) Swarms are immune to "weapon damage" because you can't hurt 1,000...

No, some swarms are immune to weapon damage. It would be eminently reasonable for a DM to rule that the automatic damage inflicted by swarms is not "weapon damage," if only to avoid the "million swarms in a 10-ft square" problem.

Good point. It's not enough to convince me that a monk can TWF-and-flurry if he's holding a sai in his left hand, but not if he chooses to make an unarmed strike with his empty left hand, but it's a good point. I suppose it's inevitable that there will be great confusion whenever the rules try...

There's always animal growth. :]

It seems clear to me that the Wizards employee who wrote that article was confused about the meaning of "caster level" (as opposed to "spell level"). A CL3 darkness spell suppresses a CL20 faerie fire just like it does a CL1 faerie fire. Thus, the fact that "a drow's spell-like abilities have...