Search results

I'm torn between Archer and Sisko (he was captain of the Defiant, the coolest Federation ship ever, dagnabit!) for Star Trek captain. For TV sci-fi captain, Mal is probably my choice, too. But I have a soft spot for Dylan Hunt, with all his attendant cheese. (Stargate has no starship...

Umm... that's exactly what a Paragon Path is.

Yeah, I always sided with John Hodgman in those damn commercials. I pitied Justin Long - so naive, willing to shell out twice the dough for a computer that's compatible with one tenth the software. Just so...hipster-than-thou. Yecch. I mean, it's cool if you're looking to fluff the ego of...

I'm willing to bet that the Rogue still just gets the proficiencies we've been shown. I know people will miss sneak attacking with a greatsword, but the revealed rogue proficiencies just feel...right. I bet the Ranger gets SRP, MRP, and SMP.

Hey! You got your realistic weaponry seminar in my fantasy action game!

This is about as clear and sensible an argument as I have found for keeping wuxia and psychics separate. What exactly would a Friar Tuck monk bring to a party, besides cowering in a corner when the violence starts? Really, though, I'm having trouble imagining the archetype in an adventuring...

Is there still 'Magical Beast' as a Body Plan? I can't imagine why it's still there. I assume it's a mistake.

If a lich illustration still has all its skin, you really can't tell it's a lich. And I absolutely love the phane pic. I'm stealing it for a lower level creature, because it's just that awesome.

No, that's how I read it, too. "Oh, you thought you were big damn heroes? You don't know anything." I think he was just trying to make a point about professional sports and 4e.

"Close" in regards to Blast just means that it doesn't provoke OAs. An "Area" Blast would provoke OAs. They're both adjacent to the caster.

You're still thinking that melee exploits will all be Str based. This is not true in the slightest.

If you're still stuck in the 3.x mindset, The Monster has an innate enhancement bonus to attacks. It's just that simple. Oh, and the "Ogres and +3 greatclubs" example? Here's what it's really saying: "Think about why you're giving monsters magic weapons. Is it to make them better fighters...

I like to think of it as 'it looks really bad, but you can't be sure until you get over there and take a look (i.e, Heal check)'.

I think it was in R&C, too.

Bull. I've seen enough post history from these "I'm not trying to insult you..." vagabonds to know that they're not arguing in good faith, and probably never were.

Please don't call them the Butt-imar. Ick. I don't understand what's wrong with Celestial - something to do with the Chinese? What?

There are a few people making a fuss. They have been given a dozen alternate explanations each for how it might work, and they have refused to recognize any of them. Sometimes I think pessimism is the official sport of ENWorld.

How can we believe that you really mean this when you have categorically refused to admit that viewpoints other than your own are valid?

See Also: D&D The Movie. ...what? As an aside, I'd like to thank Cadfan for introducing me to Og and Faery's Tale. I look forward to picking them up.

Both of these ideas are great. I can't decide which one the Grey should be. And this: is sweet, too.