Search results

[To lord_banus: Sorry for posting off-topic. If it bothers you, let me know and I'll keep my posts to the original topic.] It'll propably come as no surprise that I've house ruled the Ranger as well. While I'm not quite sure how to do his combat styles, he almost certainly won't get freebies...

The last campaign ended with the characters around 10th level, and the Haste variant turned out fine (the spell was only used on occasion, indicating to me that it was neither over- nor underpowered). In my new campaign it hasen't seen any use yet, as the characters are still 1st level...

Compared to Weapon Focus your feat seems a bit weak (giving the same bonus, but only under specific circumstances as well as having higher prereq's). But since Weapon Focus 'only' grants a +1 bonus, aiming should propably do the same. How about: 'Aiming a ranged weapon is a full-round action...

It's not that I came up with something so much as I've been inspired by (A.K.A. 'stealing from') the discussion on this board, particularly in this thread. So here's what I have: The Two-Weapon Figting feat works as normal, but improves automatically to Improved Two-Weapon Figting and Greater...

I'm not looking for a new feat, rather a mechanic available to all, that lets them get a bonus to their ranged attack rolls when aiming for a certain amount of time. Here's my first draft: 'Aiming a ranged weapon is a full-round action that lets you make a single ranged attack with a +2 bonus...

True, but I'm implementing other rules to make TWF more attractive. Also, I feel that if a DM has to consciously thwart a special ability to keep it in line, it's propably unbalanced to begin with.

It seems that most people agree that sneak attack is balanced as it is, and if you do the math that's propably right. But under certain circumstances sneak attack can be pretty overwhelming, like when a 9th Rogue with Improved Two Weapon Fighting hits with all 4 attacks and deals an extra 20d6...

Some good ideas here. Do people generally agree that letting TWF improve automatically wouldn't be overpowering? What level should 'Expert TWF' be?

As I prefer low level play too, I've already thought about this and I don't mind a heavy crossbow being lethal to a first level warrior (and it's only a given if you don't roll for their HP's). Haven't given it much thought, but I don't see why not. Btw, my last PC was a dwarven fighter with a...

I agree with Norfleet's post above. But as I'm not looking for that level of complexity in my game (making mighty crossbows that require a certain strenght to load within a certain time, but which can also be loaded slower by characters with less strength), here's what I've done with crossbows...

In rewriting the Paladin and Ranger for my campaign I had at first decided on not using the 3.5e Ranger's high level abilities Camouflage and Hide in Plain Sight as I found them inappropriate when I first heard of them. But in giving it some more thought, I think that at least Camouflage is...

This is almost exactly the Haste variant I use in my campaign. I wanted Haste to be almost the exact opposite of Slow, so they could cancel each other out. Therefore I went with the same +2 bonusses to AC, Attack Rolls and Reflex Saves. Unless the 3.5e Haste, my Haste still grants a Partial...

Good points. And while I can imagine some instances where the thief acrobat should be able to fall (like when being hit by arrows, or having somebody shaking the rope he's walking on), I'm not really interested in exploring a possible mechanic for that at this time. I would much prefer to hear...

To me, one of the main reasons for a feat like this, is to make two-weapon fighting a viable option for a spring attacker. Spring Attack fits my image of a ligtly armored skirmisher wielding two shortswords or two handaxes. Yet, at present you need a high damage dealing (preferably two-handed)...

I thought about making it a feat as well, and it might work. But I'm not sure what you mean by 'those character concepts shouldn't ever fail' - shouldn't there be a risk of the tightrope walker falling? And unless you give the skill system a major overhaul there's quite a few skills that only...

If Spot and Search were combined to 1 skill, what should the key ability be?

I agree that Balance is 'bad' skill, but I would be wary of giving any more power to Tumble. For most instances I believe reflex saves are more appropriate than Balance. E.g. I don't think it's fair for an experienced fighter with a decent ref save to stumble as he's moving over a hewn...

True. Which is why I wouldn't let Tumble e.g. govern more than it already does, as it's plenty worth the cost as it is. (My reason for bringing up Tumble is that it was touched upon in the other thread I made about skill points, which I linked to in my post above this one.)

A valid point. Which is why I'll propably end up with something like what we're discussing here, as part of my reason for combining skills is the freeing up of skill points, to allow for greater customization. (The other part being the removal of redundant skills for an overall streamlining of...

Let me try to write up how the two ways of doing it would work out: (For a fighter taking spot using my idea (GH) or using AeroDm's idea (AD) Level MaxRank(GH) MaxRank(AD) 1.________1________2 2.________2________2 3.________3________3 4.________4________3 5.________5________4...