Search results

Yes, and volume 1.

I rather like the one in the Dragon Compendium, called the diopsid. It's very insectile, with six limbs and a carapace worth +4 natural AC. Its limbs are divided into two legs, a strong pair of arms, and a weak pair. You could wield 2 greatswords like 2 one-handers, or one greatsword and a...

To me, the ranger spellcasting is only worth anything with the Spell Compendium spells. Then, the ranger picks up minor shapeshifting ("aspects"), and a host of moderately useful combat spells, mostly for ranged combat. Of course, some utility can be milked out of the ranger's default spell...

I detected some sarcasm in the end of the "designer's notes", calling into question the seriousness of the entire post. Of course, it was definitely a good chuckle, but possibly a creation of Wickett rather than WotC. ...and then my suspicions were found true. Hah!

And how about Expeditious Dodge, for that matter?

I love it! I take it you like light-hearted campaigns, of course. In "serious" groups people with sticks up their bums may look at you scornfully. You can offer to pry out the sticks with your war spatula, though. :]

I like argument "A". It can be understood at a glance, without re-reading it.

I'd change the Arcane Trickster's cleric spell progression so that it skips levels 2, 4, 6, and 8. Leave the progression at level 10, to encourage loyalty through all ten levels. Seriously, this class is pretty close to being a cleric/rogue gestalt, and then includes some cool abilities...

Feet golems, you say?

I don't see any concrete rules about the benefits or mechanics of hiding. Heck, there isn't even a definition of "hiding" or "hidden" in the glossary. So, if one happens to be a Game Master at a table using the Dungeons and Dragons rules, one has to apply one's own judgement to the situation...

So, for BAB, did you spread out the changes, or just use the d20-based values and multiply by 5?

I'd say a feat for a familiar is QUITE fair, since the classes with familiars tend to be feat-starved, and familiars are often the focus for additional feats to improve them, so you are almost granting 2 feats. I would also add the addendum that the bonus feat much stick to a certain list, as...

Okay... so he wears two Large sets of brass knuckles, gauntlets, etc... If you want to obey the letter of the law, fine, but it won't actually hinder a Goliath monk.

The shadow arrows dissolve in sunlight or magical sources of bright light, and can only be fired once per round. It could still be a pretty nice bow for firing normal arrows, but the shadow arrows have the strict limitations that make them less than uber. A full-round attack would then include...

A few possible sources of concern that I noted: The Con bonus is an enormous boost for a barbarian. More of those lovely, lovely hit points that barbarians rely on for survival... and longer rages, too! The bonus to attack from being Small, without an accompanying Strength penalty, means...

I've never seen a character with one. I think it's because I've never been in a campaign past 12th level, so nobody ever had enough money to buy everything cheaper that worked toward their goals, before getting to the Ioun stones.

I just noticed how cheap the CS accounts are. Mine's just now been purchased.

Familiars stay in the casters' pockets/backpacks/bags where they provide Alertness and a small stat bonus. Those are their functions, nothing more. (In my experience, at least)

Why is this combo so powerful? When playing a druid, I'd think going straight druid would be the most effective. I also have very low opinions of rogues for combat effectiveness. Mostly, their sneak attack is so difficult to bring into effect in a party situation.

Dying in combat is not "losing" the battle. Combat as a whole does not hinge on the survival of those individuals who participate, but rather on the survival of the structure of command and support. As such, fighting a completely "lost" battle can be more effective than not fighting at all.