Search results

An even weirder part is that sometimes even if you have adept levels you might prefer to have the maneuver as a separate 1/encounter ability, but that doesn't seem to be a possibility, even if you take a non-adept class at the same level you're taking the feat.

As a warblade you get, like, 4 readied maneuvers. Do you really want to spend one of them on better Fortitude saves? I can see taking the one that replaces a Will save with Concentration, 'cuz Will saves are a big weakness for characters such as warblades... but Fortitude? I dunno. What...

I think you could maximize a dispel magic, but all it would do is make affected magic items be suppressed for 4 rounds instead of 1d4. Prooooobably not worth the +3 spell levels.

The spiked chain is kinda silly, but that doesn't bother me so much. It just bugs me that it's so much better than polearms for reach builds. If 4e keeps the spiked chain but buffs polearms to being balanced with it, so that a player can choose either one without sacrificing optimization...

Because typos happen, and sometimes the writers' actual intent is pretty obvious despite them, and some of us prefer to go with what makes sense and is clearly intended rather than slavishly follow the printed text. Being a stickler for the exact written rules doesn't make any more sense than...

Yes, a solar can parry an asteroid. But fixating on that is misleading and disingenous. The same Solar who can parry an asteroid can still be taken down by a couple dozen plain-mortal archers. Stopping a single attack, no matter how powerful, is easy in Exalted. This is a deliberate design...

That... has to be a typo. Why on earth would it work in light armor but not in no armor? Especially when there's a no-armor class variant suggested right there in the writeup? Anyway, even aside from that point I'd agree that they don't stack.

Maybe brains are addictive. Do rings of sustenance prevent withdrawal symptoms?

This is my guess too, based on the new go-to god for paladins being a dragon.

It's not intended to be heavy on detail. I like Mazzanoble's writing, but it occurs to me it may have been a bad idea to debut her column during the 4e preview period. People are so busy dissecting every bit of text that comes out of WotC for 4e information that it's harder to appreciate a...

Yes. Although I'm also reminded of Oberyn's fight with Gregor Clegane...

Oops... I was going to say something about high Dexterity in there, but I guess I forgot it. The thing is that having a really high Dexterity is going to detract from your other attributes, such as Strength, and compensating for that loss is going to cost a lot more than compensating for a...

Hooray for hexes! The group I joined recently uses hexes just because the GM has a really nice hex mat and no square mat. I don't have a huge amount of play experience with it yet, but there haven't been any issues so far using hexes instead of squares.

Wait, what? That doesn't make any sense. Enhancement bonuses cost the same whether they're on a chain shirt or full plate, and bracers cost the same as an equivalent enhancement bonus, just without the armor. A +2 chain shirt is about three times the cost of ordinary full plate and still...

I suspect that 4e will support lightly-armored swashbuckly warriors better than 3.5 can, by either multiclassing fighter with rogue or ranger or just building the character as a rogue or ranger in the first place. Now, such a character will play differently than a standard fighter - more...

Um, all that Mearls implied is that paladins will have some sort of magical abilities. Smites are magical abilities. There's no more reason to think that paladins will have spells then there was a week ago.

You can take PrCs, but only one PrC per level - i.e., you can't progress in two PrCs at the same time on the two sides of the gestalt. And the GM is advised to disallow PrCs that are intended to combine two normal classes, like mystic theurge or eldritch knight. The gestalt rules were printed...

"expected to" and "must" are not the same thing at all. Fighters in 3.5 are expected to wear heavy armor too.

Anyone who needs the entire class reprinted verbatim under a different name to justify changing the alignment requirement needs help... And that doesn't address the point of what happens when an evil assassin becomes non-evil, anyway.

So, wait... an assassin who has a change of heart and repents his evil ways can't keep using the abilities he learned as an assassin for good causes instead? Atoning for his misdeeds means he forgets how to cast feather fall? Really?