Search results

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20030906b -Nate

What's wrong with a martial two hander that does 2d6 20/x3 versus the greatsword that does 2d6 19-20x2? It's exactly the same damage output. I think you should make the great mace 1d12 20/x3. no martial weapons should be 20/x2 unless they have some significant advantages over other weapons of...

I don't think that necessarily makes it overpowered automatically. Take a look at the dwarven defender. Same deal. That's actually what I was basing this guy off of. I've played a dwarven defender... they're tough, but they have several glaring weaknesses, and having two dump feats as an...

I just started a Druid with Fiery Burst as well (we're only 3rd level to start), and it's been a huge help. I'll have to look through the spell compendium to see if I can find a 3rd level fire spell to memorize... only 2d6 up through 6th level would be sucky. I also took Spontaneous Healer...

Only applies for multipliers, not divisors, so you take 1/4.

Thanks for the comments, Quartz. I think you may be right about the prereqs, but it is a class with a hefty set of benefits, so I didn't want to make it too trivial to get into. Combat expertise is a good one to move into the class, I may do that. In.... complete warrior? Something like...

This is a PrC I came up with while thinking of a way to make sword and board viable for straight fighter types. It uses as its basis several PHB II feats. It gives improved two weapon fighting abilities, but two levels after you get each iterative attacks, and they only apply if you're using a...

Can you explain what you mean by consecrate damage? And in general, no, there's no defense against holy damage as such. You can't cast protection from energy and choose holy, for example. -Nate

Perfectly legal. For some reason, many people seem to think there are more restrictions on sneak attack than there are. The only thing you have to know is 1.) Are you flanking your target? 2.) Has the target lost his dexterity bonus to AC? If either of those is true when you attack him, you...

I just think it's interesting that the spells that specifically state you increase in size have that stacking restriction right in their wording, and things like polymorph and shapechange, which *could* cause your size to change, don't. So does that mean that polymorph stacks with righteous...

I've thought of that too and like that idea and definitely think it should be the default. It's not much of a boost, though. There's a feat in PHBII called Shield Ward that does the same thing (adds to touch AC), but also adds to your rolls to resist bullrush, trip, overrun, disarm, and...

Giant polymorphed into a halfing casts shapechange and turns into a human, then casts righteous might. What happens? Would it matter if he was turned into a human first, and then a halfling?

Ahh, but see, it does stack for the human, and doesn't for the halfling. That's the problem I have with that interpretation.

Personally, I think that one TWF feat should get you what is currently the entire feat chain, automatically as you become eligible for them. That keeps people from just picking up a second weapon and being awesome with it, but it doesn't really suck away the feats for someone who wants to do...

Halfling (size small) polymorphs into a dwarf (size medium), then casts righteous might, what happens? Human (size medium) polymorphs into a dwarf (side medium), then casts righteous might, what happens? I choose B because I think that the two questions above should have the same answer.

3 things: 1.) You aren't getting 1.5x strength bonus on the shield 2.) You aren't getting 2 for 1 power attack on the shield 3.) This requires using a +1 enchantment on the shield, so you're already unbalancing things by requiring that. What's to keep the greatswordsman from putting flaming on...

(about 2 for 1 Combat Expertise when you are using a shield) I do like the idea, though I think I'd restrict it to light and heavy shields, bucklers being too small to use effectively, likewise, tower shields being too clumsy to use this way. I think it would be nice, because I think combat...

Best answer. I agree 100%. More rules decisions need to be decided this way! :)

It's not necessarily that the fighter doesn't have enough feats (which may or may not be the case), it's that TWF requires him to *waste* feats. I don't want to get into the age old argument, but TWF requires high dex and a bunch of feats just to be equal (not including a -2 to hit on all...

I think it's one of those things that is technically legal by the rules but no DM in his right mind would ever allow it.