Search results

Int as reflex save seems the most natural of the lot to me. Quick wits being equal to quick hands.

I don't see that having a two handed weapon adding an AC bonus is going to significantly violate that principle?

I plan on purchasing the 4e books at release time and running a campaign with them. If that proves fun and well I may run or play in other games. There's no real switch going on, though, because I'm not currently playing in any 3.x games. I think it's unlikely I'd play 3rd in future but just as...

We've been promised it's all improved and simplified but no rules have been forthcoming.

Er, no. They've not said that. It's just gone for the first round of type-setting, layout and editing.

They're blatently NPCs :cool:

According to World & Monsters, yes. At Hero levels; it's a lot harder than it was, but basically permanent. At Paragon; you can get raised but it's not widely avaiable or easy - and, mostly, unavailable to NPCs. At Epic; it's a "speed bump".

I hope they go back to the system used in 3.0. Small characters wield light weapons in one hand; or one-handed weapons in two.

My impression is that a fighter with wizard training will be an effective fighter who can dabble a little in spells (and vice-versa).

No-one I know is currently playing 3.5, I've run a big 3rd campaign, and played in an open 3.5 game and there were a few others kicking around. They've all petered out in favour of other systems. I'm currently running the Great Pendragon Campaign. It's probably got another 18 months to run, so...

I'm just hoping the ugly Standard Point Buy from 3.x isn't made the default with the boring characters it creates. Me, I still like 4d6, drop lowest, roll six times. Or roll 21d6, arrange three dice to each stat to taste, drop lowest three.

I am so glad to see the traditional spellcasting removed from dragons. Dragons have plentiful powers and abilities without having to mess around wading through spell lists in order to play them properly.

While true as a realistic indicator of size; I strongly get the impression that the designers of prior versions of D&D have taken an altogether different approach: namely, how big do we want our cities, towns and villages to be for the kind of stories we want to tell and the kind of games we...

Having said I prefer tougher 1st levels... One of the most enjoyable games I've DMed recently was one in which all the PCs played 1st level commoners, complete with 3d6 in order for stats and d4 hit dice (I let them start with max hps though, I'm so generous). Watching a party tremble in fear...

I'd rather Gnomes were in the PHB but, really, I don't care. It's hardly a buy/don't buy point for me. Apart from anything else they're going to be right there in the MM so if I want 'em, I can have 'em. I'm more disappointed that neither Half Orc nor Orc made it to the PHB; how disappointed I...

Tougher; but still fragile, I think. About equivalent to a second or third level 3rd ed character in hit points, I'd say.

Woah. What? They're making it so that characters only get one attack a round? All the time? Is that confirmed? If so, I think I've found my first thing to really dislike about 4th ed :]

Most of the mechanical balancing that needs doing does not require a playtesting group. You can do it on your own. Set up some characters, see what they have to face, play it out. It's a lot quicker so you can run through more permutations.

What they're doing is entirely normal; standard and good practice for a project like this. They've hired an external company to do the original development - which they'll have had their existing in-house teams managing and liasing with. Now they're coming up to the hand over point they're...

Am I the only one cynical enough to read this as "we think people who are excited about D&D will work for us for way less than market rate!"?