Search results

Maybe they mean soap, but I think they mean dispel magic.

You know, explaining why the bard was not acceptable would have been a nice addition to your initial post then, because it fit your stated criteria to a T. :)

Yeah. I mean, duh.

If you change your definition of "bad" for an instant : "The mind flayer looks at you with a look of concentration in its milky white eyes and then all you feel is intense PAIN as you fall to the ground IN PAIN !!!! BWAHAHAHAHA !!! Oh, and while you're down, he takes the opportunity to steal...

And yet you do not need the Run feat to run, it just makes you better at it. If you absolutely needed the Run feat to run, then I wouldn't like it much.

It certainly sounds like it. Moral dilemmas require that the person who suffers the dilemma be informed about it. I'm not 100% sure but it does sound like the paladin's player is in the dark about a whole lot of things. :) At that point, I would certainly hope that the player knew exactly...

It makes sense that concealment negates sneak attacks. After all, you can barely see your target, so it would be hard to stab them in a sensitive spot. What doesn't make much sense, however, is that concealment usually applies uniformly regardless of distance. In the case of the darkness...

I'm not so sure it would be a big success because many D&D players have the financial sophistication of adults, but a budget like a kids'. :)

All UMD will let you do is fool the item into working for you. You don't get any other benefit like actual caster levels, higher stats or feats. For example, you can use UMD to emulate undead turning ability if you are trying to use a magical item which requires it to function, but if the item...

Right, but golems didn't have spell immunity, they had magic immunity.

While it's entirely possible for an assassin character to be good, under the right circumstances, the Assassin prestige class is clearly aimed at a specific type of mystical death-cultist-like assassins who kill for money and not for a good cause. It's house-rulable, of course, but here you go...

lol

Unfortunately, Balgus, you can't shield bash with a buckler. :confused: *goes check* Nope, still can't.

I dub this thread The Lemon Thread !!!

But KaeYoss, all your reasons come down to "because the PHB says paladins are LG". Well, fair enough, but I'm trying to see Helm's point of view in all this. He is the one granting his paladins his abilities. Why would he withhold those abilities if his champions act Lawful Neutral ? That...

Maybe he could just travel further back and convince the paladin's mother to use birth control... ...hey... ...OMG ! The paladin is the baddies father !!! :eek:

Re: Re: I say... This still doesn't change the fact that Helm holds his paladin to a higher moral standard than he holds himself. Or, if you prefer, a different moral standard. Presumably, Helm thinks that neutrality is better than goodness or else he would be LG. So why would he require...

If you are fighting in a restrained area (i.e. most of the time), you also take up a 10' wide space, so it may divide the firepower the party can bring to bear by two.

You're right, but that is only because neutral Forgotten Realms gods are actually good, if you check their ethos in the FR godbook. Sometimes I think that the authors thought that neutral meant "not nice" or something. Probably to make their clerics viable in good groups. Ideally, neutral...

Not to mention improbable.