Search results

Interesting. On first read-through, I like it. Will give this more thought and detailed commentary later. I suspect it will go well with the "Trapmaster" rogue design a few of us were working on a while ago. Speaking of which, I really need to type up what we had, PDF it, and post it. I suspect...

On a similar topic, but with less modification, I'd been wondering about the idea of letting players pick two powers at each level, much like a Wizard's spellbook. The idea, then, is that, when you use a Level 5 Daily power, you've used them both ... but now you're more likely to pick two that...

Oh but of course - thus the tongue, the cheeky spelling of "Luv", and the shortening of your name to an informal/friendly nickname. Somebody cleverer than I really needs to solve the age-old "conveying tone of voice in text communications" problem!! . TS, I definitely agree, "Skirmisher"...

My suggestion is, set DC's for most things according to your expectations for how difficult something should be, rather than "by the book" or "by the errata". When in doubt, leave the "set" PHB things alone - I mean, there's some Heal DC's of 10 in the PHB (gift Second Wind?), which you really...

:lol: Busting up laughing. My fighter has a pet rage drake. I made the mistake of asserting that I wanted it right after the DM got a puppy. Said puppy's best misbehaviors have inspired about four sessions' worth of cleaning up after whatever trouble an almost-grown immature rage drake gets...

:D My party are currently doing battle in a zone of intense Wild Magic, such that: On a natural 20, :area:!! - all spells have an effect one square larger in each direction than expected, and target "all creatures". On a natural 1, spells have a random location and effect, and target "all...

Incidentally, if one wants to depart from RAW a bit, its perfectly valid for a DM to declare that "X can be used as a Y" for your game. In my game, there's a paladin, whom I gave a +1 Sword with some cool mark power .. and decided "Oh, yeah, I want that to be able to function as a Holy Symbol...

Right, guys, but the question is about magic items, not the expertise feats. The answer is this: For most characters, you'll want a primary weapon/implement, a neck-slot item, and an armor-slot item. Some classes will want a secondary weapon/implement, true. However, the other magic items...

Similarly, there's a paragon tier feat whose name I've forgotten that basically applies a -5 modifier to area attack rolls against your allies .. for those whose favorite powers target "All creatures in burst", this should be their first paragon feat!

Yep - incidentally, this is the "nerf" for those who find a Ranger's Twin Strikes power to be overpowered. A good DM should allow it to shine in most cases, but can give some of his bosses a "resist 5" to put more emphasis on "big wallop" attacks against them.

Yeah, I'm with korjik, et al, in the way I tend to play this. As I said in that other thread - thanks for the link, Mort - I tend to divide my monsters, mentally, into about four categories. (* - in the other thread, I said three, but DracoSuave convinced me there's a fourth.) 1. Wise...

I have two new-to-role-playing players out of four in my current campaign, they're having fun, though they were a bit overwhelmed at the options at first. The one item I didn't see on your notes was "Look, just tell the DM what you want to do, and let him figure out how it works." Once my two...

Yep, background effect: low-light-vision sounds like a well-balanced approach for this. If you do play it that way, I wouldn't even adjust the feat in question; leave it as-written for any other Dragonborn character, and leave it underpowered for our hero. If he wants an optimized "Perception"...

:D I think I understand you better, then - I'd been misunderstanding you, across several threads, as being a strict constructionst, rather than trying to grasp and understand the constructionist RAW argument as a theoretical approach. Apologies if I've been confrontational to you, personally -...

Ahh, simulpost. We're saying much more the same thing than I thought we were. I don't want all monsters to know the effects of all marks, all the time ... But similarly, I don't want all monsters to not-know the effects of any mark, ever. Sorry for belaboring the point unnecessarily, above.

Right: the DM has to be good enough to separate "What this monster knows" from "What I know". But that's a given for the game, in general. The same is true for just about anything role-playing-wise: the player has to be able to identify what he knows but his character doesn't, the DM has to...

:p Luv you too, Rache! More seriously, I'm not claiming that it came fairly easy to me, but that it turned out that precision isn't as important for monsters as it is for player-character powers .. .. and heck, we all know PC powers aren't created equal, either. :D So, my point was just...

This. It seriously feels like RAW started with a 2-D miniatures wargame mechanic, onto which "flying", and 3-D in general, were just tacked on. (Rather than built in from the get-go.) Admittedly its very tough to represent 3-D in 2-D, but I don't think the RAW does it very well. So, I'd...

Hmm, DracoSuave, I threw exactly that situation at my players on Saturday, and adjudicated it differently. For purposes of Charge, I didn't interpret it as a "Pull" mechanic, and I interpreted a square with a wall to be not-a-consideration for the characters. In other words, as you came to a...

<class="grumpy old man voice">We should just ban race tournaments.</class> ;)