Search results

I agree with your assessment, but note that it is dc 10 + hardness + thickness in feet (min 1) so since this is a force effect it is dc 31. Which isnt necessarily automatic even at level 20 and it still requires a lot of other resources spent. At level 15 one can have spent up to 18 points in...

Umm.. it is only the 'correct' method if you choose for it to be so. Using 1 - 9 is just as valid as useing 1-9 *2 -1, it merely scales how you view each individual spell. We could just as easily square each of the numbers and use those values. You would just wind up with each spell level being...

I'd have to say that veril did a good job. While it is important to take into account ability scores that would be a seperate additional factor, but it is good to have the basis down. Also, comparing nonspecialist to nonspecialist makes sense. Comparing a specialist to a generalist makes the...

I was going to stagger the progression, but then I figured it would be mostly the same anyway and this way is much easier to read. I have no problem with the normal mystic theurge gaining 10 of each over 10 levels, even with that they are lacking in power anyway. I was just trying to combine...

I was looking over the various theurge threads and thinking about what makes it powerful and what makes it weak. Generally I see the wiz3/clr3/MT10 + taking levels in only one of the two as being the strongest option while going wiz5/clr5/MT10 to be the weakest. Some may disagree, if so I'd...

I think that if you simply made it give someone the sickened condition there probably wouldnt be any problems with it being 'overpowered'. Maybe some with underpowered, but that is better than disallowing it completely sometimes. I dont have the book but from other posts it sounds like if they...

In your campaign having this boost may be a bit much then? I am hopeing to get a baseline feel, it seems to be comparable with bane, but may work too well for its cost. Obviously a tough call ;/ I'll have to do some more thinking.. thanks for the thoughts guys.

That sounds rather a lot like 'taking 10 with a circumstance penalty of X' there infiniti ;) I would allow people to take 0 if they wanted. In effect, giving themselves a 10 point penalty for whatever reason, most likely RP. Of course, I would also treat it just like taking 10 with a...

+3 or +4? I could kindof see it as a +2, but you feel that it is on the same power level as speed? +1 attack at highest bonus when making a full attack. Good against anything. vs. DR mitigation (the weapon is already magical and of some material so DR may be bypassed anyway), hardness...

Someone brought up the dissipater in a different thread and it got me to thinking. What if there was a weapon enhancement that was similar, but for summoned/called/etc type beings. Going off of this I thought of the following: Desorber: This kind of weapon is devastating to creatures and...

Actually, it is the same except at the discontinuity points. I started another thread about them. If you are above then it works fine, if you are below it works fine, but if you are right at the discontinuity then it breaks down. Very odd system. Something I see as a bug. But just because this...

At some point the standard rules for increasing damage dice from whatever means hits a discontinuity, generally with the jump from d8 to 2d6. I was thinking about this in another thread, does anyone have any ideas as to why this happens? Does it happen at any other point? Also, where does one...

So comparing something that changes constantly based on what level you are, what equipment you are useing (not including weapon changes), requires a nonclass specific ability, and what size you happen to be at the time to something that is static, gear independent, class specific, and size...

I do not know what formula they use to get the dice change that they are useing for the bastard sword, but it doesnt use the other guidelines given elsewhere. Which means either it is a special, unwritten rule (and so we cannot compare it) or it was done improperly (at which point you then have...

That isnt what my version of the SRD says, but again, it may not be correct. Note the difference between it and weapon focus.

The second you say X damage vs Y damage you are argueing from the base damage. They both can increase a weapons damage by one step. This is clear from the RAW. If you wish to argue that weapons doing different base damage is unbalancing somehow we will need a ton of other balancing factors...

It might be important to make a special note that you cannot take INA multiple times and if you do somehow have it multiple times the effects do not stack. This is primarily because the feat itself does not say you can take it multiple times nor does it say that it stacks with itself (unless of...

I dont know how to be more clear than when the rules literally state something explicitly. They literally do increase by one step. If you wish to say that one weapon does too much base damage vs another go right ahead, but that is a completely seperate arguement. Or even if a certain weapon...

Completely false. By definition they mean the same thing. Just because after you apply them to different weapons the final total might be different is irrelevant to my point. All the arguement of +X damage vs. +Y damage says, for this comparison, is that different weapons have different base...

No, because of the reasons I have already outlined. In addition, there are other factors involved, as I and atroomis have both mentioned before. Just because the base damage die of the weapons happen to be different isnt what is important in the comparison, merely that the effects that they...