Search results

I've heard of crunch-heavy books but this is ridiculous.

I'd be careful about changing blast rules based on physics. If 4e followed physics, blasts and bursts wouldn't be squares, euclidean geometry would apply, and gelatinous cubes couldn't be knocked prone. Also, if you allow a dragon to do this, why can't a Wizard use Thunderwave from the back...

Heh... is this the opposite of damning with faint praise? "Blessing with soft criticism"?

I don't really see how 4e inhibits role-playing any more than any previous edition.

I don't think there's any need to play this passive-aggressive game. Please, tell us how you really feel about 4e.

But 4e is D&D. It may not be what you think of as D&D, but to someone like me, it is more D&D than any previous edition. If we're going to mythologize D&D as some kind of abstract ideal, then it's just as valid for me to say that only 4e is true D&D as it is for you to claim a previous edition is.

I don't really get the point of your parody. D&D would suck if it used CoC rules. CoC would suck if it used D&D rules. The games appeal to different tastes.

Not on a worksafe board.

I voted for the Shaman and the Bard... I guess I'm just not that into leaders.

I don't really see the point of hiding information from the players. If you're the kind of DM that fudges things, you should let your players know that. It seems like most of the issues presented are issues of trust between the DM and the players, and if those are there hiding information isn't...

All but two of the party died when we did this encounter, and we had a 6-person group. Of course it didn't help that the Wizard charged in ahead of everybody.

You need one dagger for each attack. See the rules for ranged weapons on page 270 of the PHB.

That's specious reasoning. Something being immensely popular does not mean aspects of it cannot be criticized or improved upon. I think it's safe to say that while D&D has always been popular for lots and lots of reasons, balance between classes, across all levels, has never been a...

I'm not sure I even want to know what Spidergoat nuggets are.

I realize it's always been a popular term, but I didn't understand how many people actually meant "sacred cow" in a literal way. I think the idea that WotC has a duty to hew to some divine, bovine mandate is absurd. The older editions of the game will not cease to exist. I think, as a newer...

I agree with most of what he has to say, which is why I like 4e.

This is reminding me of 3.x arguments like "the Cleric isn't overpowered because I can still have fun playing a fighter." Well, sure, but that's not what people are arguing. The point is that any character without this feat simply won't be as efficient as those that do. That's all that needs to...

How about this feat instead: MATH EXPERTISE Prereq: You don't want to suck. Benefit: You get a +1 bonus to attack rolls at level 5. At 15th level, this bonus increases to +2. At 25th level, this bonus increases to +3. You get a +1 bonus to non-AC defenses at level 5. At 15th level, this bonus...

Well, it seems like there are a million ways they could have fixed the math problem, and they went out of their way to choose the worst one possible. It's pretty amazing actually.

What I don't understand, if they just wanted to sneak in a math fix, why not just make the feat apply to all attacks, whether with an implement or a weapon? I mean, it's a must-have anyway, why make it so that it just screws over melee Clerics, melee Rangers, and Staladins?