Search results

We will probably do something like this eventually, as I know certain players in my group like this kind of style. For now we'll probably stick to the rules and only modify small things that annoy us... Major changes like these should really wait until we have a full grasp of the new rules...

Yeah... I know my group and me are going to be stuck in 3e terminology if not rules for quite a while...

One thing you take out of the game that way (or make less important) is to chose when you use your encounter/daily power. Yes, it's more versatile, but people will also be less inventive with their powers that way, I think...

One thing I can imagine is that certain magical items typically enhance your defenses, but not so many of them give generic skill boosts. That would even things out a little... Also, the trained/non-trained thing is exactly to indicate that yes, somebody trained and even focused on bluffing...

What I also like about this system is that it gives you a a certain guideline as to how well/badly the party succeeds or fails at it. With the 6/4 system while trying to convince the king of something for example, it'd be completely different if they fail 4 times in a row, which might earn them...

Spells were even more ridiculously overpowered than they were in 3e. Charm person on a low intelligence character would last for months for example...

If it really is supposed to be the norm (which I do not necessarily agree with), then switching to 4e should be even better, because it would be easier to make fun of such a system...

The point is that I never have problems if my character dies after a heroic stand. I like it, most people in my group like it and will happily make a new character and play on. They get pissed if their character dies because of a random 1 on a save or die roll from a random encounter (I'm glad...

And that is just the brilliant stuff that makes me really like this version of the Warlock. Even just at level 1 he has these kind of tactical choices... Absolutely good stuff and way more interesting than the 3.5 version imo...

I love this explanation. I always felt Raise Dead was just cheating, so most of the times I just didn't allow it at all, but this way I could see it working. My problem was always that a character who just made this heroic stand against a pursuing dragon and gave his life to give his companions...

QFT...

Yeah, that sounds like it would be a lot of pointless rolling... If they introduced that again, it would be the first thing to go in my campaign...

Oh come on. A huge fighter swinging his weapon at you fast and hard forces you to back down from him a few steps, because of the onslaught. You give ground so you don't become overwhelemed. However, if I was on the edge of a deep pit, I would try to fight back more and do everything I could not...

Actually, I imagine that the harpooned character would be moving along to avoid it ripping from his flesh and causing more pain. Even a small fishhook and fishline will pull me along, simply because I don't want to endure the pain of that small hook ripping into me, but it won't really create a...

Well, call it a success... You just succeeded in making me giggle... :D

It would be kind of cool if a harpooned character could pull the goblin towards him too, though... A tug of war can go both ways, right???

That's a fairly reasonable system. Being prone is still a pretty good effect instead of completely killing the skeleton and it does make the involuntary movement powers a little less deadly...

While rooftops are dangerous, they are not "you die. no save." dangerous. They don't kill you instantly if you fall off (depending also on the height of the roof of course)... Boats and bridges usually have some sort of boarding or railing that I would rule prevents somebody from just pushing...

Yeah, you're going to have to be careful as DM with stuff like lava and chasms with all the involuntary movement going on during combat...

Touché... :) Then again Latin did have less exceptions to the rule than French did...