Search results

Thanks for the replies. You two have summed up our debate in two posts. Some think that there's something "different" about invisible creatures while others think that you have to spend extra actions performing "Spot" type checks to figure out if you're seeing an invisible creature.

Let's say your character has made permanent See Invisibility. He is on a crowded street, with throngs of people going about their daily business. 30 feet away, a wizard, who has cast Invisibility on himself, rounds the corner of a building and enters into the cone of your character's See...

jdavis, How do you adjudicate reach weapons without measuring or using grids? For example, if I played my huge longspear wielding troll in your campaign, how would you know how far I could reach? Am I dependent completely on your memory for the position of the baddies?

The 3.5 version of Haste states that: "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with any weapon he is holding. " A buddy of mine thinks that since a monk doesn't really "hold" his unarmed attack, he is therefore not affected by Haste. I realize that...

Wanderer, you have summed up exactly how I feel better than I ever could have. This move has left a bad taste in my mouth. And I'm sure it's not just my bad breath.

Another problem I don't like this idea of paying for data, but using a free program to use the data. So I've paid for my non-SRD subscription, but now the "free" program doesn't work. What happens? Secondly, I'm not going to pay $5 per source per year. No way. Maybe $5 per year for all...

You could make one of the gladitorial combats a sports game with violence, a la the movie "The Blood of Heroes". The gladiators must put a ball in a basket but they could be killed doing so. You could give the ball anti-magic properties, make it really heavy, whatever. Or you could create...

The OG "Curse of the Azure Bonds" and "Pool of Radiance" games back in the late 80's used turn based combat and I didn't mind it at all. Yeah, combats did take longer, but like other posters have said, you also gained the ability to use better tactics in your combats. Ever since Command and...

I really enjoyed NWN. Enough so that I finished the single player campaign three times with three different characters. Roleplaying opportunities are small, but they are there. For example, if you play an evil character, you can threaten, bribe and blackmail NPC's to get what you want...

I forget if this was the 1e Fiend Folio or 1e Monster Manual 2, but there was this beefed up fighter or barbarian wielding a two handed sword on top of some steps. He had just finished slicing a lizardman. Great action shot.

I don't see a problem here. If everbody gets to use diagonals for "free" movement, where's the abuse?

Convincing argument mkletch, except for the fact that you're not stating if the character in your examples has done anything that round. If you have attacked with a reach weapon or a ranged weapon using both your hands, then IMO you don't get to threaten with your other hand. If, before you...

I'm with IceBear and Calliban on this one. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you want to use a ranged weapon or a reach weapon then you don't threaten the 5 foot area around you. I think that's the intent of the Core Rules. I don't like to parse the combat round so closely that we...

I love multiclassing. Right now I'm playing a half-orc: Brb2/Ftr2/Rgr1/Clr1/Tribal Protector2/Holy Liberator3 :)

I like 'em and will allow them in campaigns that I DM. They are rare, but not extremely rare. <Casts Resist Elements(Fire) on himself> Besides, I find the spiked chain way more cheesy and unbalancing than the merc. greatsword. :)

nsruf has hit the nail on the head. If your DM uses this house rule, then, to be fair, he should also remove the grid and make the fighter types state their actions first, then measure move distances and resolve whether they have enough movement to perform their actions. Part of the power...

Okay jontherev, thanks for referring me to the books, because I've been playing invisibility wrong. Doh! First. You're right. A simple successful Listen check does not reveal the exact square of an invisible enemy. However, if you beat the Move Silently DC set by the enemy by 20 (fat...

KaeYoss, since we are talking about this in the rules forum, I'd like you to point out where your interpretation is supported by the rules. I don't think it is. By the rules, if you make your Listen check, you know where the invisible enemy is, and therefore you can make AoO's if the enemy...

jonthrev, what zeela said. :) I totally agree with her that not provoking AoO's while being invisible is unbalancing and AFAIK, not by the rules. As to your point about pinpointing the exact square of an invisible opponent 150' feet away, I believe there is a Listen check penalty of -2(?) per...

jonthrev you make a good point, if I fail my Listen check vs. your Move Silent check, then yes, I agree with you. But if I make a successful Listen check, I detect you (i.e. I can "see" you) and I can hear what you're doing, therefore I can make an AoO if you provoke one.