Search results

And the other thing that bothers me - if it takes 16th level to get five minutes of flight, what level do you have to be to actually get overland travelling flight? 30th? I can see people wanting to delay flight a bit from 3E standards, but come on - if you're a Paragon-tier character...

It's not so much that I mind Flight being higher level - it's that I mind crappy flight being higher level. Flight speed 40' for 5 minutes that takes your minor actions to sustain (thus preventing any other buffs and some spells)? That's not Flight, that's "Flight Jr., with Training Wheels"...

Now that people have actually been playing 4E (and can admit such), and we've got more solid info, I've got a question. How well does 4E handle PC deviousness? Personally, I don't play RPGs to hear a story - there are novels and movies with much better plots than any DM I know can come up...

Ok, but that 20th level spell would still only be lasting 1-2 rounds. Sure, the archmage can kill the goblin, no problem. But what if he wants to control its mind, or petrify it for later questioning? The problem is that because there's little difference between how a drunken goblin makes...

Warlocks already have Dimension Door at will as one of their invocations. Sure, not at level 1, but it's also much longer than 15' range. And Totemists using a Blink Shirt can teleport short distances at level 2, IIRC. Plus, there's those "Transposition" spells, which are fairly low level...

One thing that bugs me: 10+ is not a 50/50 chance, it's a 55% chance to break the effect. They could have said 11+ and actually had a 50/50 chance, but no. :\ Since the save occurs at the end of their turn, most effects now last 1.45 rounds. I guess that's alright in itself, but it does...

Heck, make it d20s - 1d20 per 30' is the same average damage as 1d6 per 10', but extemely variable, which fits falling pretty well. Also, people are more likely to have lots of d20s than lots of d10s or d12s.

The armor isn't a problem ... yet. Right now, most of the kobold armor is worse than normal armor, which is easily explainable, and PCs are unlikely to take it for that reason. But someday soon, I predict we'll see something like an "Bugbear Juggernaught", who wears super-tough spiked armor...

Thanks for reminding me about the Quarry/Curse abilities - it does shift things in the Strikers' favor, at least as far as "at-will" goes. However, I'm not going to count Split the Tree as double because it hits two targets. The Wizard's encounter and daily powers can hit up to nine targets...

Well I'd have to disagree on that point - there's lots of spells without material components, and lots more that have very easily obtainable ones. Plus there's a feat that eliminates them entirely. As for implements - if the only allowed implement is a wand, that would be pathetic design...

Now that the 4E character sheets are out, I figured it might be interesting to do some basic class comparisons. Now these are obviously incomplete, being based on a single character each, but let's assume the example characters are pretty typical members of their class. Class Will Enc...

I notice a lot of people have been mentioning multiclassing as a solution to narrow class roles. While it may be a solution, all the information I've heard up to this point is somewhat contrary to that. What it seems like, based on the mention of the Class Training feats, is that you can't...

However, the number of choices is secondary to the breadth of those choices. For instance, a Wizard with Fire Blast, Mind Control, and Create Labyrinth is more flexible than one with Fire Blast, Ice Blast, Large Fire Blast, Large Ice Blast, Lingering Fire Blast, and Flaming Ice Blast, even...

Wow, I seem to have sparked quite a bit of response. My thoughts in a second, but first - would people please stop mentioning that Rogues can gain proficiency with weapons like bows? Yes, they can, and no, it doesn't matter. Sneak attack, and all the powers seen in the preview, have a...

Back when Races and Classes came out, there were some complaints that Fighter no longer supported the "agile warrior" type. But this was countered with the statement that since the classes were flexible in flavor, you could simply play a Rogue or Ranger for your agile warrior. And I was fine...

Well that's the thing - I wouldn't necessarily call it a "better" ratio. Quick and deadly fits many settings just fine, sometimes much better than long and drawn out. Secondly, you're assuming that it takes the same amount of time out-of-game - I'm contending that it would take more, as...

Just to clarify a couple of points: From everything they've said about 4E, a Fighter (Defender) will be doing less damage than a Rogue (Striker). Yes, and in 3E it was literally applied up to 6+ times per round no matter which power or attack you're using. And it was about twice as many dice...

One thing that immediately struck me about the 4E Rogue is how much lower damage it was dealing than in 3E. And since the Rogue is a Striker, other non-Striker classes will presumably be doing less damage than the Rogue. This isn't inherently bad - HP are all relative anyway. However, this...

Actually, I liked Fighter as a name, for the same reason as I liked the d20 Modern ones - they're so generic, they force you to actually decide what your character calls himself instead of falling into the "class = character" trap.

It's not even the realism, or lack thereof, that's going to be noticable in play. It's the fact that a 1-1 rule has a visible, obvious effect on tactics, that doesn't mesh with normal spatial perception. What I'm talking about if defense. Specifically, trying to block people from charging...