Search results

Short answer: no.

Reach is useful b/c you don't have to move, sometimes you can't move, sometimes you don't want to and sometimes you don't want to stand in that nasty aura. Reasons are manyfold why you would want to have reach. In the case of most Warlords it is that their attack powers have a reach of "Melee...

I think you mean Polearm Flanker (PHB3) for flanking with reach weapons and Hafted Defense is in PHB3 as well both are heroic tier feats. Not that many feats but then again not the full polearm shenanigans' power/coolness. But it would definitely suffice to make Great Spear a great choice...

I won't take the challenge but you should allow every build a class has. And you should tell us at which level you want the party to be good and many many things more.

Your comparison is flawed just b/c the monk seems to be or is better at level 1 says nothing about level 5/11/16/21/... Make the comparison at all those levels using a variety of builds for all striker classes to prove that what you showed us at lvl1 is true for the rest of the game. I even...

Not easy to answer... Heavy Blades have the nice +3 prof. bonus you can wield a shield for increased defenses. If your DEX is 15+ you can use HBO to use your at-wills on OAs. Check out Blade of the Eldritch Knight (AV2 P114) it grants you reach 5 for standard action attacks. A Great Spear is a...

Yes, sounds somehow reasonable as well to deny the buffs for the second target. But I think you should read the Surpreme Inspiration buff as giving Inspiring Word two targets. Therefore, the buffs to Inspiring Word should apply to the second target as well. If you want absolute proof/evidence...

Things like Versatile Expertise I guess. But then again that's perfectly ok at my table.

That's exactly why I put the EDIT part into my last post. Of course, the reason to disagree is the "order part". And just from reading the RAW you cannot say who is right or wrong. If we get a CS answer that is pretty much useless b/c at least 50% of the people are going to say CS has no idea...

Ok seems we still agree on disagreeing. I try once more to get my point across. Above is the complete text on sneak attack (SA) from the update. Lets take just the part that tells us when we are allowed to apply SA. So you want to use your SA to kill that pesky monster faster, but how do you...

I believe your still wrong, let me explain why. I say: 1) Check if you have CA 2) Attack roll and if you hit proceed 3) After you roll damage and if 1) was true before 2) happened you can now choose to use your sneak attack Whereas you say: 1) Attack roll 2) Check for CA 3) on a hit you can...

If you want it expressed like a mathematical formula try this: x = number of combatants (enemies, allies, you, whatever) in an encounter y = max. number of OAs per round y = x - 1 (-1 because you can't use an OA on your own turn)

I like your explanation. But I didn't need one to begin with. We will see how others think about it and to what extent they agree.

If you like to word it like this, Follow Up Blow was hit by the big nerf-bat.

This directly contradicts the latest update and the answer I gave depending on it. The updates states that you must have CA when you hit with a power to apply sneak attack damage. I can't find rules text that supprots your interpretation. But you are right regarding this, you roll sneak attack...

firesnakearies you are probably right with your interpretation of the intention of the power. And I would probably allow to add the sneak attack damage to the damage roll even if you had no CA when you made the attack roll. The point is one question is what is RAW and another is would be RAI...

I'm sure it wouldn't have taken longer b/c in 3.x we had crit multipliers of up to 4 (right out of the box - PHB) and power attack. Which on any crit could lead to ridicolous amounts of damage. Nevertheless, I still support the 4E subdueing rules. :cool:

An example against your reasoning is the following: Fighter + Marked Scourge The fighter attacks an unmarked target, according to combat challenge he can mark it on a hit or miss but there is the agreement (ruling) that marked scourge works not on the marking attack only on following attacks...

No not necessarily. I regularly play with players (some since AD&D 2nd) that have never mastered any of the systems, have never built a strong char on their own or have a knack for tactics. Even if you give them a strong char-build they wouldn't be able to "abuse" it. Depending on player skill...

W/o special powers/feats/etc. it is still once per round. But the question was never if he could deal sneak attack damage more the once a round. Thanks for clarifying this. I know they are different but an OA behaves rather immediate interrupt like regarding interrupting triggering actions...