Search results

Seems like rolling like that is the only way to beat that encounter if you do it immediately after the previous one.

One thing my group are loving about my inspiring warlord is getting 5 HP and a free saving throw at +3 every time they use an action point.

That said, I do feel a bit disappointed that you just stab ghosts to death in D&D.

Personally, I never go for plate on a fighter. I find the -2 armour check penalty too debilitating for the benefit of a single point of AC. I suppose it all comes down to how much you value your physical skills, how many times you're going to get attacked on your AC, and what else you could...

You're still going to want to have Athletics when you fall in the sea, armour check penalty or not.

I usually use knights as heroic NPCs - they can be of pretty much any level, and each one is unique. They are supposed to be the hardest guys in the kingdom, after all.

Yup. Very pleased with them, too.

Core books and Keep on the Shadowfell.

I find that having a lot of mobility doesn't mean very much when there's nobody to hide behind. I'd assume in any fight where the rangers can't just focus-fire an enemy (solos, for instance) that they'll have a lot of trouble.

No, I'm saying that the game does none of the work for you in this respect, so it is often left undone. I'm not going to continue to argue in the thread though, I really don't have a great deal of experience with M&M, I simply didn't enjoy playing it for the reasons I gave. Your mileage varies...

Huh. I didn't say that.

My advice would be to run a few "investigation" or "murder-mystery" type adventures before you decide to start throwing orcs and goblins at the party like you would in D&D. WHFRP characters start off very weak with very little equipment (though obviously a Soldier starts off better than a Rat...

Not that I enjoy being the one dissenting voice, but I didn't find Mutants and Masterminds to be a very good game. You basically need an iron GM and very mature players or you'll end up with a lot of min-maxing in the character concepts. Certain powers (when I played, it was super-speed that...

Well, his figure of 80 pounds didn't just mean armour. He also meant that 100 foot of rope, tent, fifty scrolls and a dozen potions, as well as the golfbag of weapons your average adventurer carries around.

Cheesy I can see (it's a matter of opinion), but "rules loophole"? It's patently a design decision - the designers saw enough people trying to build rangers with two bastard swords that they just took the pain out of it.

I wonder if the monk class might be useful as a base for the bathrobe samurai concept.

To be honest, I find that any power that allows sustaining for the entire encounter usually turns out to be pretty overpowered. See fighters and their Rain of Steel power for an (in my opinion) even more egregious example. At least with Flaming Sphere the person you have to kill is a weedy...

I don't get how raising a ranger's intelligence and charisma doesn't gimp him in 3e, but does gimp him in 4e.

Well, instead of being bugged by it, try revelling in it. This guy is so amazing that he can use two giant swords where a mere mortal could only use one! Have your more cowardly foes "take one look at the blood soaked maniac with the two huge swords and flee" every so often. It's clearly what...

I think you'd have to house rule your races and abandon balance for them. Elves are just humans++, and Dunedain are humans+. They should be better than humans by their very nature. Oh, and I think you'd have to vet the list of rituals significantly. Things like Teleport don't belong.