Search results

I disagree; I love the multiclass-only dragonmark idea and I hope the mechanics get used over and over. Besides, weren't the Dragonmark PrCs the equivalent of this in 3e?

Well, they seem obvious to me, too, and I wasn't on the design team. I'd bet that most people who aren't trying to game the system settle on the 'obvious' reading. For example, when Combat Challenge says it's an Immediate Interrupt and not an OA, most people would read that and think that it's...

Creating teleport circles is a story concern, and should be left up to individual DMs. Besides, each group is going to want to do it differently if at all.

They thought we'd be able to understand it by ourselves. Seems like most of the errata so far has been clarifying things they thought would be obvious.

I am more than slightly repulsed by the idea of a controller/anything Hybrid. It feels like having your cake and eating it too. I would much prefer the druid be a defender/striker hybrid or even a striker/leader hybrid.

One target means one target.

Ah, but when you're not in range of an alchemist's shop, the feat's the thing.

Well, the rolled damage is going to be 6-12, so 9 average damage, which I think is equivalent to 2d8's average.

Quick-casting rituals seems to be a phenomenally bad idea. Like, one of the worst D&D ideas I can imagine. Almost on the level of refusing to roll any dice. But I guess if that's your thing, feel free to make rituals have instantaneous casting. Please, WotC, don't.

I was already going to snatch this book up the second it came out, and now I have even more reason to get it. New weapons, new magic items, alchemy and airships? Plus things we don't even know about yet? Yes please.

Runestar and Saeviomagy, your ways of thinking on this issue are so completely orthogonal to mine that I'm having trouble understanding what you're trying to say. The time when the players are most likely to use Scry is the time when the DM has information to give via Scry. See, for example...

This is exactly the reason why rituals have a long casting time. If you could use them in-combat, they'd be an I-Win button. That's why I have no problem with the casting times.

Um, narrative storytelling? If you're thinking that "What would really happen is you get 30 seconds of BBEG on the toilet" you're committing one of the gravest sins of 4e, and that's expecting a simulationist result from a game that embraces - nay, revels in - the notion of being a game first...

It's a change from previous editions, certainly, but I feel it's a good one. Scry is not a stakeout, it's not a phone tap. It's "Show me the person who killed the king/looted the temple/etc". And that's just perfect. I don't think "Oh, good, the evil priest is finally asleep. We teleport in...

I don't think you need to give them a special quality. Just go the path of the rogue - allow their striker damage to apply only when using unarmed attacks, q-staff, shuriken, etc. EDIT: I also like Cadfan's idea of splitting the monk up by weapon/school a la the Warlock, and giving...

Sorry, that probably looks more snarky than intended. Should teach me to pay attention to join date and post count. Still, I could swear there was a post about it on the top of page 1 yesterday. Could be mistaken, though. Anyways, yeah, I'm pretty sure it works.

I think it'd be best to leave the half-ogre PC Medium size and give him the oversized weapon ability of minotaurs and bugbears.

It works. There have been at least a dozen threads on this already. It costs two feats and it only works with a Frost weapon. Meaning you lose out on all the other possible weapon powers.

This forum isn't edition neutral. It's for 4e. 3.x isn't anywhere near relevant. And as for optimization, I no longer find 'Theory' optimization worthwhile, relevant, or interesting. It's loophole-twisting, hyper-literal kerning taken to its most humorless and most pedantic. I understand...

Your idiosyncrasies aside, people hock comics and Magic cards and videogames and jewelry and firearms and tools for pennies all the time.