Search results

Character concepts that don't fit into neatly predefined buckets don't belong in D&D! In my day, all Dwarves were the same! More seriously, the point of a class-n-level based system is the pre-defined buckets. Unless the buckets are exceptionally broad (and I liked the Smart/Tough/Fast hero...

I blame my puppy. I was distracted. Bad puppy.

What he said. With the DDI, I will actually read Dragon again (which I haven't since '89) and will actually read Dungeon (for the first time ever)

No it won't. It'll be 8 7 9. Your thinking of 7th of September next year. Sheesh. ;)

That may not be true... Do I get my opinion? Dictionaries do not define a language, they are a snapshot of it. They are the map, not the territory. It doesn't say what the language should be, just what it currently is. If everyone in the UK pronounces 'government' without articulating the...

As for the half-n-half rule for two energy types, it's irrelevant except in the case of immunities and resistances. Immunity = 1/2 damage, resistance = -resistance upto maximum of half. Seems simple to me.

Sorry, should have explained - first example is from BECMI not 3.5. I thought that references to "grand mastery" and "smash" would have shown that, as neither appear in 3.x Damage wise, I'd say so. That's just going off WOTC CharOp boards tho' As I said, a PA frenzied etc.. can be doing 200+...

This simply isn't true. Unless you are only counting OD&D, AD&D 1 + 2. Because in BECMI and 3.X, melee combatants could way outstrip the amount of damage done by wizards in every practical sense. Let's take two examples. 1) A fighter who is a grand master in the sword using the smash and...

I just assumed that the Ogre's weren't 8th level but instead were 5th level... Example works fine then.

I'm getting the feeling that "People will dump stat CON" is 4e's version of "The monk is so broken" True, but not in the way you think.

Are you bringing realism into a discussion about if Int should add to AC? ;) For what it's worth, there are a good dozen or so ways in 3.5 to add Int to AC (starting with the Duelist in the DMG). It's not entirely new. Think of it like parrying and pre-emptively ensuring you are covered as...

But smart enough not to get into fights nu?

Magic Missile is mostly unchanged, wrong target. Mirror Image, however got some actual mechanics in 3e (unlike 2e which only told you how many images there where and that it was impossible to tell them apart). Displacement isn't even in 2e, and I don't think it was in 1e or Basic D&D.

Disagree, sorta. 1e->2e was less severe, 3.0->3.5 was less severe, Holmes -> BECMI was less severe. But those? Those weren't really edition changes. Those were mostly just revisions. So out of 'real edition changes' it's not that severe. Maybe I'll go off and write up the 'major changes'...

That's an epic rogue, though - not an epic wizard surely?

I moved from BECMI to AD&D and back again. Then to 3rd. The Crunch differences between 3rd and 2nd are larger at this point. (Unification of Attributes, total reworking of saves, Feats, Unification of XP, removal of set XP values etc.)l The difference between BECMI and AD&D fluff wise? Way larger.

The armour page explicitly states you can add your dex or int modifier to your AC - not add your Reflex save. So, the +2 reflex shouldn't effect the AC at all. http://www.flickr.com/photos/benimoto/2307597095/sizes/o/ "When you are wearing light armour you add your intelligence or dexterity...

All power sources, as seen, appear to have differing risk/reward qualities associated with them. Martial Daily attacks are 'Reliable', Arcane looks riskier, divine appears to be in the middle. Displacement, for example, as an encounter power could be riskier than using (say) "Roll with the...

No, but in my opinion, it should be. Obviously, D&D has never really had risky magic. But when asked "Why should magic be riskier?" the answer is "because it's magic".

Because it's magic.