Search results

That said, I'll probably never find it here in Canada :) I'm fed up with paying almost the price again for shipping and duties so I'm not ordering from the US :) Maybe Amazon.ca has it. IceBear

Yeah, I guess his main point is there is a an existing method in the rules (feats/prestige classes) to modify your character so adding yet another way might be too much. To address those not wanting to multiclass I'd basically make that level of prestige class = what he would have gotten if he...

Yeah, if I were to design a certain fighting style in my campaign world I'd probably do the path of a pseudo-prestige class. Basically you'd have to find a teacher, take some training (ie roleplay) and then when you leveled you could take the "Extreme Swordmaster Fighting Style" prestige class...

So, is Path of the Sword worth picking up? IceBear

I don't know why you're attacking the Sage here. That's how the feat works. We discussed this when Sword and Fist came out. It was basically a useless feat (there were a couple more as well). This wasn't the case of the Sage sticking in his own judgement on a ruling, it's how it works. You...

Hmmm, I always thought there was a hard limit to range increments, but it varied on the weapon. If there was a hard limit to the range increments for spells (I was using 5) then you would end up with the same maximum range on melf's acid arrow as with the current spell, but it would be harder...

Actually, I would have used something like 60ft+5ft per level, but yeah, something like that would be nice to see in 3.5. IceBear

That's not what I meant. I leave it the way things are for simplicity, but what WotC COULD have done was give ranged touch attacks a range increment value instead of a range value. If they had done that it would remain simple and make a little more sense. That's all :) IceBear

But for each ranged touch attack, they COULD have given a range increment for that specific touch attack. It wouldn't really add any more complexity than there already is when you look up the range for the spell, it would have been nice if they had. Also, I *think* Star War's has range...

Ok, I still don't know where you stand here :) You said that it would fizzle on a major image but might appear to work if the MI caster made it react properly. What does that mean? Does a magic missle go out and hit the image or none at all? If you mean the first then it should work the same...

*sigh* That's why I said in general. Honestly, the rules don't cover EVERY area. Someone changing Type while under the influence of a spell is one of them. That's why DM's get paid the big bucks :D to make those decisions. IceBear

That's because that's normally all that matters. There are some spells that will explicitly mention in their descriptions that they will end if certain conditions occur. I'll get one as a sample. In general, if the information is in the TARGET entry then it only applies during the casting...

And that's true. That's why I said it's a DM's interpretation. In general whether or not something is a valid target only applies during the instant the spell is cast. After that it's up to the spell description or DM interpretation. With the case of Domination I made a judgement call based...

That's been addressed in the lastest FAQ or Dragon magazine. Basically is says that preparing to cast a spell is like picking the ammo for a gun and loading it, THEN you pick your target. So, I guess you don't pick until finish. IceBear

See, Berk's got it (I never bothered to look them up :p) I don't know what's so relevant about the Dominated monk becoming an outsider to this discussion. I thought your original scenario had Domination cast on an outsider monk that lost a level. I think we both agree that the spell would be...

Those are good questions. I'd say they'd keep working because at the instant the spell was cast they were valid targets and thus the magic comes "into effect". I'm sure there are specific spells that will state that if someone moves outside of a certain range the spell ends, but those are...

Hmmmm - don't like that ruling (though you're probably right by the rules, I haven't looked). If it's an invalid target for the spell then the spell shouldn't have any effect and instanteously end. I'd rather just have the spell fizzle like Hyper than that :) IceBear

BTW - if you were at range from Monster X and tried to feint while it was in melee combat with someone else, I'd imagine most of the time it might not even notice you. I'd probably wouldn't allow this to work in many situations. IceBear

I made mention of this in another thread, but I think it bears repeating - Remember, we're looking at these rules in a vacuum so keep that in consideration. We don't know if they've changed something with respect to how enchantments from bows and arrows stack in 3.5, or if they've given new...

There was a blurb on this from T'ed or someone from WotC. They said they would allow it within 30ft, but with some modifiers that I just can't remember at this point. IceBear