Search results

I'm afraid you're mistaken; there is no such example. 1st Ed. assassination is a sub-category of backstabbing, which had to be a melee attack (per 1st Ed. PHB p. 29: "if this fails, normal damage according to weapon type and strength ability modifiers still accrues to the victim").

No, it did not. The status is exactly the same in 3.0 and 3.5.

No proof. This one requires interpretation of intent. Namely, there's lots of evidence throughout the rules that a touch attack spell is meant to count as a melee weapon.

In PHB Ch. 9 there's a list of steps for "Experience and Levels: Level Advancement". Step 7 is "Feats:... you gain one feat of your choice." WOTC designers have said that this needs to be interpreted strictly; you actually gain the feat at that moment, not a "feat slot". There are details re...

Because that's not what "Local" means. If the skill were called "Knowledge (demography & folklore)" then I would agree with you, and maybe it should be, but it's not.

I agree: create magic items, not invent new magic items. Very different. The latter requires invocation of the "Variant: New Magic Items" (DMG p. 214), just for starters. I disagree. The crafting feats specifically refer the user to the DMG, for example: "See the Dungeon Master's Guide for...

Very common point of argument. You're right that the rules don't explicitly say that you need to pick one area for it. But, lots of DM's (including me) run it that way, because, hey, by the name itself it has to be "Local" to something.

This common response (House-Ruled item) should not be allowed by the DM, because it intrinsically breaks how Epic spells were designed & balanced. Same for the also-frequently-called-for use-activated cure light wounds and true strike wish-list items...

What you'll see in the 3.0 Conversion Manual is that for total level, you should take class #1 and add one-third the level from any other classes. Thus, this PC should be converted to total level 13 + 4 = 17. Therefore, some options are Clr9/Wiz8, or Clr13/Wiz4, or Clr4/Wiz13. If you use...

Looks to me like "no", the rules restict a pinner to damage by grapple checks only.

Actually, this is from the 3.0 SRD: For what it's worth, this thread has convinced me to allow coup de graces with inflict wounds spells (which is not what I thought when the thread started).

He is not right. The progression is as listed, +6/+6/+1. The primary attack form (claw) is +6, the secondary attack form (bite) is -5 from that, for a resulting +1.

Agree, that's a single bolt.

In all seriousness, for my last campaign we were using: - Bluff for "one-night stands", and - Diplomacy for "courting for marriage".

Start out Hostile. Consider the movie The Fugitive, when Harrison Ford pleads that he's innocent. A successful check makes the difference, as he is apprehended, of Tommy Lee Jones' early response of "I don't care!", to his late response of "I know!".

Why do you say that? At any level, anyone can spend 2 skill points and gain 1 rank in the skill (hence one new language).

No. There is no such penalty in the core D&D rules.

Everything the DM did was correct by the rules. None of your objections have support in the rules. In fact, in my PHB, "an evil sorcerer's wand" is actually the example given for using the "strike a held object" rules. From the (3.0) SRD, taken from the DMG: - Sizes are in PHB Combat chapter...

My reading is "yes", you can do that. You tumble "as part of normal movement". You can draw weapon, if you have a BAB of +1 or more, "with a regular move". Same kind of movement, no rule that says one excludes the other during that movement. Nothing in the rules makes any distinction between...

I'm afraid I'm looking at the 3.0 PHB, where that line does not exist.