Search results

Actually I'd say WOTC has taken a Set your phasers to suck principle(yeah SYPTS isn't a cool acronym) with a large amount of oversimplification. What the RAW crowd frequently are trying to do is shake a little bit of suck of there game when the simplification becomes an oversimplification. So...

I personally think they should of just had at wills and per encounter powers and not put in per day ones. It is actually very counterintuitive to one of the goals of fixing the novaing problem of 3e. You still can nova in 4e, you use your dailies and a bunch of healing surges, you then fall...

I hate that philosophy. It is essentially saying defenders and controllers are the side kicks to the hero of the story, the striker. Taking out the suckers that you did not want to be bothered with is not an attractive class feature, taking hits so someone else can kill the bad guy is also...

You could kick any door in existence down faster and cheaper than using a ritual. I am not sure it is still useful at that point. It is not like a ritual is the stealthy option.

Some of the costs and restrictions seem way out of line to me. It is hard to say without really knowing the value of a GP in 4e, but 50,000GP and level 28 to finally get teleport where you want as a ritual. You are two levels form godhood and you finally figure out this amazing mystery? Hey I...

My answer is to this issue which bothers me as well, is I will allow players to use old encounter abilities and dailies as stunts, while keeping there per encounter or per day status. You are a little bit rusty at using it, but you can pull it off if you need to. Martial stunts will use...

Yes, the price you pay for stat balance between the players is a disturbing amount of uniformity. For some it is worth the cost. I usually give the players a wide range of options that statistically work out to being equal on average, with rolling being one of the options. Almost all of them roll.

No, it is different. This does not violate the logic of how armor works or how movement in reality works it violates the internal logic of the game system, with things like turn based movement.

I'd say only burning blizzard you will get without meaning to. A 13 con would be nice but its hard to afford, and a 13 dex is only going to happen if you are a wand mage or a race with +2 dex, and I don't expect to see many of those. The pre-reqs aren't needed, none of the weapon based...

If they did not have any stat requirements I think they would be occasionally picked to fit a theme for your character, but overall they would not seem necessary. With 2 13s needed I doubt they will ever be taken except when by a fluke you happen to have those 2 stats at 13. Maybe +1dmg per...

It seems weird to me that the design decision for splash damage is one roll to hit, compared against the primary target. And for all other area of effect attacks it is roll for each target. I'll have to re-read that section, I had not thought about it during my initial read through.

It hurts my soul to see a 8 Int ranger/archer, but yeah it is probably the best dump stat for the archer build. And yeah, that would likely whoop butt.

I'm not sure I'd go for a 18 in most cases. I wont deny its probably more effective, but in most case when I make a character I prefer thematically a more even spread. And I do not think the hit in effectiveness will be particularly large. For wizards, I'd want a 20. This goes back to 1st...

Actually yes, illogical rules do make it confusing. It is not wishful thinking its reading rules from a context of the game world and what it is supposed to represent. There are different methods of thinking about things and some people don't just look up rule c on page 45 column 3 or whatever...

When a spell defies logic it makes it confusing. Run lets you move what +2 a turn, a charge another +2, you can double move so maybe more 16 or so a turn. Somehow with this spell you can move 6+ squares and then when your turn is up move again as if you had not used any movement.

With all the questions pouring in I doubt they could ride shotgun on this, even if they stopped doing there primary job of making new books. I prefer to go with no running allowed. Slow is a decent effect if you don't allow people to increase there movement with things like run and charge...

Well, I'd like it if there were more attack spells that did not do damage. IOW instead of damage with a debuff on the side, just a pure debuff, or a pure control effect. There are a couple like sleep, but yes virtually all combat spells being X damage, y side effect is a tad boring to me.

I like illusionary wall a lot, especially since it adds another per encounter utility spell into the wizards list. With almost all of his utility powers being daily, the wizard felt really limiting in that regard. Sure the per encounter abilities are usually weaker, but at least you can use...

They may not suck, but you wont need a controller on the team. The wizard has some decent effects, but lots of other classes have controlling effects and area of effects, so its not that impressive. Heck I think the cleric is the best AoE specialist in the game, the areas may be a bit smaller...

Also note, the one class with a higher save than AC is the cloth wearer, so yeah people without armor don't have a high AC, compared to other saves. Monsters seem to fall in the same type of categories with saves similar to what you will see in a player. A skirmisher type mob will have similar...