Search results

So skip it in the PC version. check the MM entries of PC races, they're not identical. The NPCs of a race can and often should have different stats than the PCs of a race. Make the PC version work. Make the NPC version work. Don't sweat the differences.

When you listen to the designers they talk about design, which implies rules. Not all the rules are spelled out explicitly in the books, but most of the rules are very easy to see implicitly. Such as the basic rules that every race follows, with very few exceptions. While there may be times...

Any further racial powers should be done with feats and PPs

It's very hard to compare when you break so many design rules. Do you really need three + stats? Here's a stab at it Pantherfolk (definitely a placeholder name) Average Height - 5'7" - 6'0" Average Weight - 130 - 180 lbs. Ability Scores: +2 Dexterity, +2 Strength Size: Medium Speed: 6...

:eek: no racial penalties skill bonuses at +2 No dark vision for PC races No daily powers, just one encounter power

have one of the kobolds defect and help the party.

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=16102701#post16102701

TWF rangers are the top damage dealers in the game. Archers have the advantage of range, it balances out fine.

looking good.

sure, pretty lame for a cleric but for a paladin...

given normal serving sizes they're all identical. -_- epic fail I'll go now

unless they're having drinking contests the skill doesn't really matter. It's the effects that matter.

if there are any girls I want to hit on them

You'll shoot your eye out. but seriously, what's the benefit? 4E is flexible enough to support character concepts.

no. warlocks are supposed to move, a lot. As in, every round. anything that gives you temp HP.

the dragon is indeed a party killer. The best tactic is to run away.

not possible. which isn't to say it can't be done, just that it would have to be completely rebalanced if you want balance. The real questions are: What would a point based system improve? What would a point based system break? Are the benefits worth the costs? I'd say no. I think...

When you intimidate a monster it's out of the combat, ergo when a monster intimidates a player, he's out of the combat. I don't think that's at all an odd rules interpretation. The problem is normally the best a monster can do to a player is reduce him to dieing. It's very hard for a...

yep. Crunch wise there's absolutely no problem with armored characters wearing armor all the time. Simply put, they're balanced that way. So there's no need to touch the crunch at all.

DMG p42 is much cooler than generic + to hit. Just let them stunt.