Search results

In one of my gaming groups we're discussing the Expertise line of feats. The DM is leary of allowing them, and would like to see some justification. Help would be appreciated. B-) Additionally, I have a related question: "Has WotC released any official justification for the feats?" Has...

You've done the math then, I take it.

Here's what the PH1 says: "In most situations, the DM uses your passive Perception check result to determine if you notice a clue or an imminent danger." and "For example, if you’re walking through an area you expect to be safe and thus aren’t actively looking around for danger, you’re taking...

Bingo. ....and I know the rule well, as I play a warlord: giving the rogue an extra attack after he's hit with a sneak attack that round is not very useful.

This is something often missed in houserules...and occasionally missed by game designers. :p

I agree the wording can be misinterpreted. If you read the second paragraph in the "Warlock's Curse" section first, and then mentaly replace all of the single references in the first paragraph with group references. It takes some doing, but it can be done. ;) You've not met the rogue, then? :D

In this case, the sentiment remains the same. "The best way to interprete the rules is to let a computer program do it?" Yikes!

Hee, hee, hee!:lol: Of course you think so. :cool: ...but that's not how it works, RAW. One target. One damage. One round.

Oh lord. ...that sends a shudder down my spine. The only way to understand the rules is to let the computer program do it? Ick. :erm:

Is that the complete text of the Focused Expertise feat? It's unclear: what bonus?

....or the DM finds out the hard way. The trick here is that it's not immediately obvious that this monster does what it does....unless you really think it through. That's problematic, at best; a hallmark of poor design.

Sure! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IYlzFkCxpo

What? How could you? Only bad DMs, who misunderstand the word "philostigousness" ban that feat. It's completely balanced, and I've got the proof right here. :lol:

Are you using the PCs rules to essentailly "build a PC for the DM" (as an enemy of the player's PCs)? Explain the term NPC as you are using it in 4e, please.

That's the way I think of it too.

I just skim over it once, then hope to remember it during play. ....come on: how many people do this? Raise yer hands.....

I see.

This....this isn't about being "optimized". :)

Yeah...... See, "missing" isn't much fun, so....:erm: Take the &^$@#!*! feat! :lol:

You know what they say about the word "assume", right? :lol: