Search results

Agreed, like I said - it was a kneejerk reaction. Upon reflection I would let it stand. IF it got abused THEN I'd switch to my initial stance. BTW - I might be using that same house rule (I recorded it in my notes ages ago) in a future campaign. Given how no one was interested in the...

Hehehe - that's what I get for making a generalization :p I prefer the Klingon coder to the random coder anyway :) IceBear

Rav, stop putting words in my mouth. I don't consider Wizards weak without this feat. What Apok and myself are saying is that we don't consider Wizard OVERPOWERED and UNBALANCED (like you seem to do) with it. If you disallowed the extra +2 bonus to DC (in one school) that this feat gives, the...

The same high level rogue could probably shoot a couple of arrows instead doing 1d8+10d6 points of damage EACH too. Granted, the touch attack is easier to make, but probably not so much that it's unbalanced. I don't see the big deal. You either have rogues doing a lot of damage with sneak...

Hyper - I WAS arguing against it from a balance point of view. I know from a rules point of view it's legal. Then again, since I don't have anyone that could REALLY abuse this in my campaign, I'd probably let it stand as per the rules. If I had someone abusing it like crazy then I might not...

Well, since I'm in SUPPORT and not software design (ie, I don't do any coding), there's not much my attitude can do to make it better can it? As for being an optimist, I used to be, but after getting disappointed so much I've decided to lower my expectations to a realistic level. Besides, for...

I'd rule that a spell with Personal or Touch as the range wouldn't qualify for persistence (just to keep people from having persisent Improved Invisibilty). The OR in the range keeps it from being "fixed" in my mind (at least that's how I'd argue against it to a player :D) IceBear

Ask and you shall receive. From the FAQ IceBear

Ah, you're probably right...I read it too fast. IceBear

I take what I said back - I'm not sure. IceBear

Well, I would rule that the acid would stay potent for a time (probably take days to break down so for all intents and purposes I would treat the acid as if the cube was alive for the next hour or so at least). I also don't think the cube would collapse upon death. It would eventually decay...

I was just surprised it was still around :) IceBear

Well, I just consider that unfair to the paladin. "Gee, I picked a class that has some cool abilities and is a roleplaying challenge, and you're saying that because I have these abilities I don't get any XP? Is it too late for me to switch?" Just because he doesn't have to choose to use the...

So, a fighter walking down the trapped corridor gets XP and not the paladin? Walking and breathing is not the same as a class feature so I think that's a bit of a stretch. I would give XP, but given that the DM is allowed to modify the XP given based on circumstances, I'd probably not give as...

Well, since Undead are immune to Crits, I don't think that's a house rule. IceBear

Wow, talk about resurrecting an old thread :) IceBear

Apok and I don't agree much (at least I don't think so :D) but I agree with him here. IceBear

I think the whole reason why there is a Greater Spell Focus is because of the ongoing opinions of many that it should be harder to save against the spells of higher level mages. I keep seeing people proposing rules where the caster level factors into the DC of the save. GSF and Heighten become...

Tome and Blood specifically addresses the issue of critical hits (and sneak attacks) with spells that need an attack roll. As was pointed out above, the spells have to cause damage so you can't critically cure someone. IceBear

I'm with Zhure. There have been too many issues with the Glossary (shield bonus anyone?) for me to take it without a big grain of salt. As for the Customer Support answer, isn't that the same guy that answered the Phantasmal Killer vs Deathward question one way and the Deathward vs Phantasmal...