Search results

Holy Ardor does include one exception. That is a double 1's fail to score a critical under it. Now if it was neccessary to roll doubles that hit the targets defense under Holy Ardor the 1's exception would be redundent as 1's always miss. Instead Holy Ardor should read you score a critical hit...

No recharge its an immediate reaction to a missed melee attack on a Kou-Tua Marauder or Harpooner. Immediate reaction restrictions would apply.

Just to be clear I'm talking about the Kou-Tau's immediate reaction Sticky Shield disarm ability. The Kou-Tau's immediate reaction first requires a missed melee attack on it, then it gets to attempt its immediate reaction to disarm. If that is successful the attacker can still most likely...

What would really work is to have the Marauder run past a Warlock with a pact blade, drawing an OA, while the Harpooner has a readied action to reel him in. Then the Marauder kicks the pact blade into the water. Bye-bye implement! That's a chain of four attacks. Assuming 50% hit chance for...

Yes but this is a passive ability in that it only occurs if the Kuo-Tau Marauder is attacked in melee and missed by that attack. If Kuo-Toa Marauder is successful with Sticky Shield the targets weapon drops in the targets hex where it can be recovered with a minor action. In essence this...

Thanks Mouseferatu and Nytmare.

What your saying seems reasonable and makes since but the two examples on pg 291 both involve enemy triggers, and Immediate reaction does specifiy being triggered by enemy action. Have I missed something that says it can be triggered by other actions?

I don't think A and B have readied legal readied actions. A readied action is an immediate reaction which in turn is triggered by an enemy action (PHB1 291). A and B are not enemies of C therefore C cannot serve as a trigger for A and B. Only the Ranger or another PC could do that. Good Luck

Good point. WOTC could have written it as an interrupt triggered by the attack if it was intended to thwart the attack and not just make the Ranger harder to catch. Still I did like the image conjured by the flavor text. Now I will just view it as the Ranger scrambling to evade the charging...

All true but the flavor text has the ranger weaving through the fray avoiding being pinned down, leading me to see it as allowing the ranger to avoid the triggering enemies attack.

Good point and for that matter what would stop a moving monster from just continuing its move, negating Weave most of the time for a monster moving up to then attack.

Since Temple of Light (PHB2 P.36) lasts until the end of the encounter it would remain weither the target was dead or alive. The zone would remain centered on the dead target.

I would track the experience for the encounters as written for a party of five and level up your party of three at the same time a standard party of five would do so. Or you could just dispense with tracking Exp. and tell them they level up at some point in the adventure. Also since your...

I throw in with the let him redesign or rebuild group. The game is about having fun for the DM and the players. So keep Tempus out but let the player rework his character into something he will enjoy.

If it was not intended to be reserved for stopping the triggering attack the I would expect shield to require the Wizard to state his use of it before the attack was made not after he has been hit.

I agree with Dan'l. It makes no mention of burst or close or blast attacks, and the trigger is "you or an ally is attacked". I think the penalty is to the one triggering attack and others attacks would be uneffected, unless of course Disrupstive Strike should kill the attacker. Then there would...

Shield has come up in the Dnd podcasts and the DM has let the Wizard know the number, so that the Wizard would know if Shield would turn it into a miss or not. player.