Search results

Rosa peers at Hightower. "Well, if we retrace our steps, we'll get to take out anyone who was tracking us, plus we'll know if they had the wherewithal to track us. I agree it's a bit of a shame about the lost time, but in times like these caution is best." OOC: Spot (1d20 9=12) Didn't we...

Yes, those are good. It's unfortunate that you got a character with shoddy workmanship. I would not multiclass it any more; try to enter some rogue/cleric PrC like Iterant Wanderer of Yondalla, or perhaps one of the C. Scoundrel PrCs. This is so horrible it defies description. Int should be...

Well, certainly not 300, but if the character was already low on hit points and got critted by an ogre or hit by a raging barbarian, that could easily be too much damage for Close Wounds to handle. Don't forget that at 7th character level, 4th level save-or-dies start! Good idea. Wait, I...

Per 3.5 RAW, I think that is right, but it contradicts earlier editions of the spell. I would compromise by just having it act on the players' turns.

I'm not familiar with Close Wounds, but given that it's a 2nd level spell, I'm guessing there's a limit to the amount of damage it negates. If the death is: 1. Due to an amount or type of damage that Close Wounds will not mitigate enough to avoid death (Vile damage) 2. Due to something other...

An illusion does not disappear just because it was interacted with (barring specific defensive spells like mirror image.) It just ceases to be real to whoever made their save. (Quasireal illusions revert to their fractional reality.) In the bridge example, there is a paradox: we can easily...

I wouldn't use it as a trap. The initiative thing is wholly unnecessary. I would have it trigger whenever someone walks into the area, just as if they walked into a wall of fire.

WotC was worried that they gave too many options, too many choices, and that making an acceptable character was a labyrinthine process full of obscure feat and class selections (to be fair, it was, if you gamed with powergamers.) So they streamlined it. In streamlining it they took away a lot...

Lost, I think you and Derren are at cross purposes. It seems to me that he does not want to use skill mechanics. He does not want someone who can resist skill-based social manipulation resisting his efforts - he would rather work off of Will saves. This is a fundamental part of how the...

Yes, this is exactly the sort of thing I'm leery of. You can't really call something a double or triple threat unless it can actually perform roughly as you would expect for its level. At 21st level in 3.x, it was entirely feasible to have 9th level spells, epic spellcasting, the ability to...

I thought of that more as a reward for spending a lot of time in character building. But that's not how actual builds were done once the fine-tuned PrCs came out. You would go Wiz 4, Fighter 1, Spellsword 1 dip to pick up saves and ignore 10% ASF, then into some other PrC that was better than...

Can you reconcile those two statements? I can understand that, using 3.x terms, you can be a competent fighter without having all the fighter bonus feats, as long as you have decent BAB and maybe burn some spell slots to give you an attack/damage bonus. But I can't see the converse being true...

They were usually considered very well-trained.

What part of that is "arcane?" :uhoh:

Welcome to the boards.

I can't agree with this at all. The ability to play a double or triple threat character was one of the most entertaining aspects of 3.5. Thus far, my understanding is that a 4E character can play at doing this, but lacks actual competence in anything outside his or her original field.

What are her domains? It sounds like it would be best for her to just run around casting healing spells - and that seems to be the intent of the DM as well if he/she is the one responsible for the build.

I don't think strength bonuses apply to touch spell damage. If you were to use an unarmed strike, then your strength bonus would apply to the unarmed strike damage and you would also trigger the touch spell when you hit. It's probably not something you want to do unless you're a monk/cleric...

Yeah, there's no point in using a level 10 to TPK level 1s. That doesn't prove much. The ideal situation is the converse - when you can use a level 1 monster to TPK level 10s.

Welcome to the boards. The OP said he could build any concept that could be done in 3.x. Submitting classic archetypes like the warrior/wizard is well within acceptable topics. Anyhow, here are my own. I would like to see some triple threats built in the 4E system (Actual threats. Half the...