Search results

The biggest problem with BAB is multiclassing. It makes it very difficult to play a fighter/mage if every level you sacrifice a +1 to attack. How do you attack with a sword if you can't hit the monster's defenses? If you were allowed to keep fighting lower level monsters it isn't really a...

Yes, this is what Gnomes should look like. Or like Whizbang Dustyboots avatar picture. Or like this: I don't think anyone disputes that they should look like the classic image of gnomes that have stepped out of a fairy tale. But aside from being a little bit dwarfish looking, and having...

I don't particularly see that as a problem. High Elves get a free cantrip, so I don't see why the drow's cantrip can't be darkness or faerie fire, picking up both with a feat. Drow aristocrats had levitation, but that seemed to be from their house insignia. Duegar's invisibility and giant...

I don't know, sometimes a law is so bad that you can't call someone good, even if they are lawful, if they obey it. Like, you must shoot all insertminority-ites on sight or turn them into the authorities for arrest and extermination for example.

What the OP is describing (removing a few spell slots but not HP) are a grand old tradition in the game going back to 1e. They are 0-level characters, and sometimes it is fun to start with characters that are apprentices to their class, or haven't decided what their class is yet.

See I think that what you are describing there in your unified theory of gnomes could all fit under the dwelvish magical gnome variant. Illusion magic has always been compatible with fairy magic. I think tinker gnomes are a bit more extreme than traps turned into swiss clockworks though...

I guess there is an appetite for the traditional rock gnome as well, which surprises me. I figured that since dwarves can now be wizards and bards and what not (and racial restrictions will not come back in), that the "like dwarves but magical" would have pretty much been made redundant. If...

I wonder... is the phrase lex malla, lex nulla (a bad law is no law... St. Thomas Aquinas)... Lawful Good, Neutral Good or Chaotic Good?

I think that both can be made into two subraces that both groups will appreciate. After all, we already have kender (lightfoot halflings) and hobbits (stout halflings) and there is much rejoicing. I think dwelvish illusionists and/or bards with a fey origin and secret lore would work well for...

I thought it was to represent the bonuses halflings have gotten to slings and thrown weapons since 2e. Oh, and this strip:

There has to be True Neutral in D&D Next. Otherwise, how else would new players know why the Druid card when played in 3 dragon Ante makes the weakest flight win the pot instead of the strongest flight?

I can't agree with the notion that ability scores shouldn't matter for skills. Natural gifts have to matter, otherwise it doesn't make sense. You can't have imbeciles good at lore checks, or fat and/or weak men good at running, jumping and climbing. I also don't like a strict skill system...

I was kind of wondering if the answer was obvious enough that playtesting wasn't necessary. Sometimes I miss the obvious.

I thought that was items that allowed characters that do extraordinary things that bothered people, rather than scrolls and potions. Maybe I should do a poll about it.

I don't mind the many lores problem, because it gives me an excuse for characters to go find Sages. I mean I can't just throw obscure lore at them in exchange for a skill check, but I can tell them to trace glyphs with charcoal and parchment for later. The physical skills are probably...

As I like to meet my Characters rather than specifically craft them, I rolled up a series of ability scores in order. STR - 7 DEX - 13 CON - 18 INT - 15 WIS 13 CHA 11 Since I had a low strength score and a high Con score, I decided to play a halfling. (With a human it doesn't really make...

Well, if that actually happens, I'll be one happy camper. I've always thought that rogues can be sneaky in combat, but what really matters is that they cheat and fight dirty.

I'm against encounter powers for spells simply because that means I'd see the same spells show up over and over again at the start of the encounter. If we need spells that can be used frequently, just make scrolls cheaper to inscribe for these lower level and lower power spells, or allow them...

Anything that makes the math simple and quick is excellent in my opinion. That's why I liked 4e's weakened condition rather than draining the strength ability score.

Oh? Eh, the rogue is already too much of an assassin for my taste, don't push it even farther that way. So I would find that controversial. I like the rogue as a dungeon troubleshooter, so just letting them succeed on basic skill checks works very well for me. Now if a rogue can succeed on...