Search results

The real issue here is one of frequency, not of certainty. Certainty of outcome has existed in D&D with skills for an awfully long time. Specifically, since the lowest a PC can roll is 1 and a 1 is not an automatic failure on skill checks (since at least 3rd edition), the minimum outcome is 1...

I appreciate the distinction you're drawing between terrain and non-terrain here, and consider it a neat rule of thumb for drawing 'the line in the sand'. However, having said that, isn't the stereotypical cliff an example of something that falls within 'terrain' but about which a creature can...

You'll get me into trouble! :p But subbing up was quite cunning...

Online DM gave some good answers to this question, but one he missed is: move the enemies into the area that the party controller is just about to nuke!

I wouldn't be surprised if the heads were of the Penanggalan's previous victims, their bodies stolen and used by the Penanggalan in its maiden form. Edit: Re-reading the fluff, it doesn't talk about the Penanggalan stealing bodies, so I'm probably way off base here.

Unless I'm mistaken, Shroomy has had some work published by WotC so when he tells you that posting like this is problematic, it behooves you to listen. Even without any special insight into the submissions process, I'm pretty certain that it excludes previously published material and anything...

The last page of the article is a summary page, which among other things notes which powers have had their damage increased.

I'm not sure that makes sense. 'Action Recovery' refers to Calastryx taking turns. 'Multiple Heads' refer to her getting a full turn 3 times per round (at counts 30, 20, 10). Against that background, I don't see how you could possibly interpret Calastryx's stat block the way you have. Yes, I...

What makes you say that? My overwhelming memory of the chamber of eyes is of long strings of 5' wide corridors and chokepoint doors. That poor dire wolf never really got unsqueezed.

Thanks for the replies. Oh, and: Holy :):):):)! Unfinished Business is nasty. Having just come through a combat against a bone naga last night, I dread having PCs turn monster at-wills against me :eek:

While chatting with one of my co-players after a session, he revealed that he's considering playing an ardent in my upcoming Zeitgeist campaign. Upon reflection, I realised that I haven't heard any mention of psionics in Zeitgeist. Any chance someone would like to post a new factoid or...

I know the designers have been playing older editions on 'work time' lately, but producing output for older editions seems strange indeed.

Drammattex: It was part of an anthology of short horror stories, which unfortunately I don't own any more. If I remember correctly, the cover features a black hairy spider. Unfortunately, my google fu hasn't been strong enough to track down either the anthology or the name of the short story :(

Wow. That's disturbing. Reminds me very much of a horror short story I read about a duchess who slept with the devil in return for eternal life, and then ended up buried alive beneath her castle in a half-height cage.

The whole end bit is majorly creepy. Is that from WotBS, or is that Eccles' personal DMing proclivities showing through? Judging by the watermark in the bottom right, it's something from Final Fantasy 14.

That'll work :D

As discussed above, I don't think this is how the 4e treasure economy works. The L+1, L+0, L-1 method is a suggestion for creating a character above level 1. It is not an indication of what a continuing character of that level should have. For example, when a new character joined our game at...

Ouch. If even half of the above is true, this is exactly the sort of game we don't want representing D&D.

Battle cleric options? I'm torn between the need to squee and a feeling of dread that thousands of voices are about to cry out in terror and be suddenly silenced. Think positive, Colmarr. Think Positive. I'd be happy if they only gave me two things: an option to use Strength for Healer's...

I actually wouldn't be disappointed by that, so long as it's a redesign/rebalance rather than just the sort of errata we saw with the Templar. There was a book at the end of 3.5 (Magic Item Cyclopedia?) that significantly altered the pricing of some items. A 4e book that had the same purpose...