Search results

Hah, in all honesty if there hadn't of been a CustServ quote (albeit wrong), I wouldn't have even given that interpretation of the rules a moment's thought. It was only the CustServ quote that made me doubt and wonder if I had missed something. I should have known better.

4E also doesn't do well in creating player characters that want to be accountants, city engineers, blacksmiths, or fletchers. However, it works flawlessly for turning NPCs into those things, without actually having to reference any rules or construct them using special classes.

Wandering monsters and random encounters. For every room explores, roll for an encounter. This way he still gets the freedom to explore as much as he wants, but that there will be a certain amount of attrition involved. I don't know what edition you are playing though. In 4E, this would...

Though house rules are not unique to D&D or role-playing games in general, I think that it's deeply ingrained in the culture of D&D and has seeped into the RPG culture in general. I think it's largely due to the origins of D&D. D&D was treading new ground when it first arrived, and it really...

I also want to add my half-hearted support for Multi-classing. I don't think it's as bad as a lot of folks make it out to be, but it is a little lacking. It's great if you just want to have a tiny bit of dabbling in another class, and the first feat is typically a bargain for what you get...

It doesn't do a good job of balancing desirability between say combat oriented Utility powers and non-combat Utility powers. I think I'd kind of have preferred to keep them in separate pools to encourage more players to have fun non-Combat utility.

It seemed that this was specifically in regards to the power Winter's Grip. I don't know if this was a made up response, misquote, a bad call from CSR, or what. I think I'm with the rest of you though that this is wrong. I couldn't find anything to suggest that it was correct, but wanted it...

I saw this thread, Minion Question on the WotC forums that said: Now, I've never played it like this, and have never heard such a thing before. I tried finding a second source to back this up, and I can't find anything from the PHB, MM, DMG, or even Google! Has anyone else ever heard of...

Seriously, do you realize how many little notes and rules have been added to a lot of simple spells over the years to prevent them from being abused by "creative spellcasting"? Take the simple level 1 spell Enlarge. In 2E, the text "the spell cannot be used to crush a creature by growth" was...

Really? Most wizards I saw played in 3E tended to keep lots of spells on scrolls, and just pop out the scroll that they needed. They'd always have a stash of the utility spells on scrolls whenever possible. What environment is a wizard not good in, aside from anti-magic zones?

Skill in what? Roleplaying? Character building? Tactical decisions? Problem solving? Being a good storyteller? Being a good peacekeeper and organizer? D&D is not like playing Risk or some other game. There are so many elements to the game that it's just about impossible for someone go be...

I'll definitely agree here. My first exposure to D&D was when I bought used copies of the AD&D PHB, DMG, and MM. I played 2E for years, and then 3E. After 3.5, my play became much more rare. However, I'm also a fan of 4E, and feel that in many ways it kind of feels like many of the things I...

I'm not sure what you are suggesting here... that the DMG shouldn't waste space with stuff that is useless to people who are experienced enough that they don't need the DMG? Not really, because otherwise it's all a matter of what actions *you* think should have been explicitly defined, which is...

I'm going to have to disagree. I think P. 42 is a work of beauty, because it gives some very easy to understand principles on how to break down an action for what it really is and how to interpret that into a resolution. I think giving a DM good insight to allow them to resolve countless...

You're right, they would vastly increase the utility, versatility, and *power* of ritual casters. What some consider "creative spell casting", some consider cheesing or breaking an encounter. It's obviously an intentional choice to make many effects less broken and take spells that they...

I do want to add, that there are a few things that bug me about 4E... though it's not really 4E's fault. The Combat powers work so well and are so interesting that many people get caught up in the combats and forget the game has a lot more to offer. Too many players in 4E seem to get too...

I strongly disagree with the phrase "systematic flaw". It seems to imply that it's an objective fact rather than a matter of taste, or that it was oversight or lack of planning. It may not be your taste, but these were clearly intentional design decisions with specific reasons behind them...

I might also add... that the consequences for a monster fumbling and accidentally killing himself or an ally, or breaking their weapon are amusing. However, when these happen to a player due to some dumb unlucky dice roll, it feels cheap.

First of all, statistically speaking, introducing more randomness favors the underdogs. The typical D&D encounter is designed to be challenging to a player, but with the player expected to win, making the monsters the underdogs. Therefor, adding additional randomness like fumbles (or more...

Still, it really isn't that big of a deal is it? It's against just the next attack. A single area spell could potentially strip the party of the bonus. Leaders have some powerful party defense abilities. I'm glad that 4E made healers interesting enough that people actually want to play them...