Search results

I'd probably stay with: 0hp? If you decide so, the opponent is disarmed and at sword point instead of killed (or unconscious). Simplest solution. What I don't really get is that the guy says he's a "simulationist". Does he know that disarming an opponent of his weapon, with which he's trying to...

Hope they listen to you!!! I'd like to see Wookies in PHBIII. Seriously, in my gaming career I had a Giff PC. What's the matter?

You could rule that each magic item daily powers can be used a fixed number of times a day, instead of just one. Let's say two, or maybe three, depending on your gaming style. Then you could rule that only one magic item daily power can be used in a given encounter, to avoid nova. This way you...

That's why I explicitly stated that it was how I houseruled, based on what I think was the RAI. I genuinely think that what the power was meant to do was "enlarging" one's "area of flanking" to one square adjiacent to him, in order to facilitate flanking WITH OTHER CHARACTERS, not to make him...

This goes into RAI/house rule ground, but I had already thought of this situation, and I ruled that the "bonus" square MUST always be adjacent to you, not just when you place it, so that if you shift via any means it "follows" you.

I will get it when it will work under Linux.

If the classic FRP situation is only made of 30x30ft rooms and 5ft alleyways, probably it does not. If you're careful enough to design some encounters in larger rooms, halls and palaces, probably it does. Just the mounted paladin, another of the big fantasy archetypes, is fairly restricted in...

Playing a 4e wizard in this kind of setting is like playing a 3e mounted paladin on a barge. Wrong character in wrong place.

Seems to me that the Invoker stands to the Cleric just like in 3.x the Sorcerer stands to the Wizard. The second is "learned", while the first is "innate".

You're right, and I corrected myself about the off-hand removal tweak. Yes, double weapons are intended to be used by non rangers (that's why the off-hand quality). Of course to be able to fully take advantage of double weapons (core material and AV only) the only option is multiclassing into...

I'd say that it's possible to wield a weapon in each hand if they are both one-handed AND the weapon in your off hand is an off-hand weapon (sword + dagger, for example). The feature that lets rangers wield a one-handed weapon as an off-hand weapon would not have sense, if everyone could...

True. Fighter and ranger powers don't require that one of your weapons be off-hand, but the general rules DO. You can wield a secondary weapon ONLY if it's an off-hand weapon (exception: rangers with two-weapon style). It's in the equipment chapter, where it defines what an off-hand weapon is...

Rangers can access all their powers even if they don't choose the two-blade combat feature (which allows them to wield one-handed weapons as if they were off-hand). Archer style rangers would not be able to use their powers with requirement "you must be wielding a weapon in each hand" if double...

I agree. That's why I ruled (I already wrote this in another thread but I'm to lazy to search for it) that I'll have the off-weapon quality of double weapons apply only for rangers. I think this should be enough to keep them more or less balanced for every class.

That's what I would do to, if else, for semplicity sake. The only problem I see with double swords is that they seem not to be designed with the tempest fighter on mind (or the othere way round, as you wish) but only for the ranger. A ranger can wield 2 one-handed weapons without penalties...

The way I see it is that pulls and pushes are caused by some sort of physical force, be it wrestling, impact or whatever. So it's "forced" because there's a struggle between the two creatures, which can be opposed by the defender. Teleportation, instead, it's just an act of will, so it doesn't...

The text says Barbarian's (primal) powers should be called "rages", while they are referred as Evocations in the power writeups? Copy-n-paste errata? Anyway, interesting gimmick of primal power source. Powers last the whole round (or until you use another "rage"), so you have a default feature...

When you roll a natural 20 you hit someone without any regard to their stats, too. A daily power usually is the biggest schtick a character has. It usually always hits (or at least has a minor effect in case of a miss). If you wish, you can assume every character has a "free natural 20", which...

This I agree to a certain point. Not that I see it as a bad thing anyway. Combat has gone definitely towards a board game. Actually, I don't think you can have a tactical combat system without a grid of some kind. Cards are quite handy, and a very practical way of running combat. Well, no...

That's why I usually like so follow your second ipothesis. The way I see it, the powers give you GAME EFFECTS, while they are left vague enough for players and DMs to make up their STORY EXPLANATIONS (the fluff in the power description is just one of the countless explanations). I'll give you...