Search results

We've only just entered the Tabernacle of Worms. I don't have superior invisibility, and I don't think I'll get it. I do have AC in the 60s thanks to shapechanging into a pit fiend, and the melee guys aren't far behind, polymorphed into giants. We also have two celestials along: poor Angelica...

Yes. Laughing and shouting all the time, even a round of applause (when the goblin hexer used his "sacrifice a minion to get out of a ranged attack" ability).

It would seem it this trilogy of adventures has a lot to recommend it, especially for my group: it takes PCs from 4th-16th, which is just a bit outside the "sweet spot" at the extremes; we started Cormy: The Tearing of the Weave and the story seemed impressively Lovecraftian before the DM flaked...

The DM didn't scale anything down, and it turns out you're right. :) A bit strange, that, for a demo dungeon in the DMG. Who are they expecting to play through this, tactical experts with years of experience at 4E? Or a fighter with the wizard multiclass feat that casts Scorching Burst from 10...

I played my first 4E game yesterday (the sample dungeon from the DMG), so here are some impressions. We had a half-elf charismatic rogue, a tiefling infernal warlock, a tiefling tactical warlord (the additional KotS character from the WotC site) and a human two-handed fighter. There were only...

Does that mean the warlock had 13 hp? He'd need to have Con 1 for that. Did you by any chance misread "Hit Points at 1st Level: 12 + Constitution score" for "... Constitution modifier"?

Well, audio only, as I've said. There's this, however, from some previous session: our DM (from the Eberron game) and me.

Who would that be?

As it happens, I've just listened to about 15 minutes of a recording of a session I ran the day before yesterday (audio only). Man, did we sound like inarticulate dorks.

I read the subject as "... ornamental surgery".

I don't have the book in front of me, but I remember that the flavour text made me expect it would be a minor action, and that as a minor action it seemed reasonable compared to the other powers. Maybe we should wait for further "updates".

Doesn't Hunter's Quarry only apply once per round?

28 is the absolute maximum stat possible. I don't think many rangers will have that in Wis. Also, for melee rangers with Wis rather than Dex as their second stat, doesn't that mean their AC is really crap?

It was my impression that he should be better at dealing damage. After all, the fighter is better at avoiding damage, suffering damage and keeping enemies tied down.

Cruel Reaper is an encounter Fighter Attack 27, Wandering Tornado is an enocounter Ranger Attack 27. Cruel Reaper deals 2[W] + Str within burst 1, lets you shift 2 squares and make a secondary attack within burst 1 that deals 2[W] + Str. Wandering Tornado deals 1[W] + Str within burst 1, lets...

Why worry about it? It's just numbers, innit? It's equally cool looking if they're just using their crappy basic attack. Or do you care about the numbers that the ranger's two-weapon abilities will get you?

He'll be much better than a ranger. Which was quite the point of what was said: staff is a crappy weapon for the 4E PHB ranger, since it's neither a ranged weapon, nor is it two weapons.

How do they do this? In my experience, the powergamers get themselves the largest numbers, which makes everyone else feel like their characters are overshadowed, but that's just me and the people I play with, who care about numbers. How come you made that house rule? If your players don't care...

Saying that options don't need to be at least roughly equal because some people don't care about numbers just ends up punishing people who think they don't care about numbers. Such people will make a Str 11, Dex 17 rapier-wielding fighter or an even-split multiclassed rogue/cleric of Olidammara...

You responded with "Uhhhh... yes he can?" to my comment that a ranger wielding a longsword in two hands for +1 damage can't use his TWF-or-archery powers. Which in fact he can't. So I maintain that you do need to read more carefully.