Search results

Even 18 is a bit silly, my halfling can be as strong as an ogre, what would the little guy look like?!

Yes, in 1st Ed they shared a god: Vaprak the Destroyer, I hope they bring him back, which looks like they might, as they are bringing back a lot of the old school racial gods (Kurtulmak, Hruggek, etc), which I dig, love the 2nd Ed Monster Mythology.

My gripe ia the all this talk of change, I prefer when D&D campaign settings don't suffer at the hands of meddling writers (Time of Troubles, Prism Pentad. Faction War, Grand Conjunction, etc). Al-Qadim handled it well, I now just use the original boxed sets/book for all the classic campaign...

Absolutely (The Hunter was a good example, in that Snow White flick?), but this brings up another point, fighting with a one-handed weapon in one hand and nothing in the other.

Of course, but there are other fighting styles aside from sword & board and dual-wielding, my brother's Ranger from back in the day loves his two-handed sword exclusively. On a side note: I dig that the quarterstaff is a finesse weapon in 5th Ed.

I agree, keeping track of The Complete Gnome Cobbler's Handbook or what-have-you because of that broken feat and those 2 broken spells was painful. In 1st Ed it was very easy, it says straight out in the PHB that the DM might omit certain spells, alter them, and/or add some; I mean, you can do...

In my experience most of the broken stuff of 3rd Ed is in Core.

What facts?

I would never really on the wonky trip-monkey of 3rd Ed; try, try again.

Exactly, the "caddy" line has gotten old beyond belief.

1) Well, that there's what it is, I believe they are (for many reasons), why then the sudden need for a woodsman to dual-wield? 2) Of course they are; let's not kid ourselves. 3) I do not agree that the dual-wielding and animal companion shtick is integral to the Ranger.

He is primarily a Fighter in all editions, IIRC, save 4th Ed, where he is a Solo Striker monster.

Calm down (listen to Jeff Beck's The Pump), I did not call him a liar, but he was definitely "padding" the job. Basically, TSR was capitalising on the popularity of the Drizzt character, I mean, what 13-year old doesn't dig dual-wielding ink-coloured angst-ridden elves. We don't have to agree...

1) Nice, totally agree (3rd Ed started the nightmare, IME). 2) I have DMed 4th Ed extensively, and totally disagree, IME.

Is the Reaper feat no more?

In your opinion, I think David was just covering.

*counter-spells* (what I read about Salvatore cannot be denied); Drizzt and the dual-wielding ranger are a fluke.

The editor (The Silver Shard) asked Salvatore about a companion for Wulfgar (the original main protagonist), off the top of his head he came up with a dual-wielding good drow ranger; due to the immense popularity of the Drizzt character, they stuffed dual-wielidng into the 2nd Ed ranger, which...

Mind blowing, this thread should have been closed/locked instantly.

Ideally 5th Ed will support TotM, minis, and everything in between (piece of graph paper with pencil marks to show positions, or a plastic dinosaur on the table and a measuring tape, etc). I like to mix it up.