Search results

As I said, it's done in a joking fashion. But you are completely wrong about how you interpret the podcast. Go listen from 29:40 to 30:10, then. They discuss the Warlord type and grudgingly concede that he might do some healing, like a battlefield first aid kind of way, but overall they make it...

As it turns out, "ages" is about 15 minutes. If you go here and download the podcast: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4pod/20130306 Then skip ahead to about 30:12 to 31:40 or so. The context and summary is that they're discussing absorbing the Warlord into the Fighter, albeit...

I'll try but he said it in a podcast about a year ago. Given the way the WotC website is set up it might take me ages to find it...

I'm not sure where you're going with this but I'll answer just the same. It's not a simple matter of "like" or "dislike" of the game. I already like a lot of what I've seen of Next. I like the ease of character creation. I like some of the class abilities. I like backgrounds. And so on. It's...

I have written the game off? I quite clearly said: "If the final game is really good I will happily play it, I have zero judgment on the final product yet." I have said similar things many times before. If you think I've written the game off, then you haven't been paying attention. As for...

No, that is not what I'm saying. I was using hyperbole to show how your words came across to me. Like, holding up a mirror to you. If you then criticize me for showing you something "rather extreme", well...that's kinda what I saw. That is the point. I have read every Next-related L&L, as well...

I disagree completely. And with that, I'm not sure if we'll be able to have a fruitful discussion about this particular subject. Oh we're playing it like that, are we? Alright: Whenever he slaps me in the face, there's always going to be someone trying to convince me I should be thankful for...

I don't think you're edition warring, I think you've made a polite and well-balanced post. I also agree with you that Next might be more suitable for a larger proportion of players than 4e was. (And also agree that we'll have to wait and see when the game is out for real.) If anything, I wish...

It's a pretty hollow platitude though. It describes nothing. I for one think that in 4e the action flows and the rules serve the gaming group, rather than the other way around. But there are people (you included if I remember correctly) who would strongly disagree with this. The real lesson to...

... Dear god, this brings a meaning to Fire Seeds that I hadn't previously realized yet.

*shrug* I'm not really intent on convincing you of anything, I'm just answering your question about what the rules are. So here goes: First, Fire Seeds is a spell because it self-evidently is. The attack is made using your spellcasting stats (usually Wisdom), not your weapon stats (usually...

(Psi)SeveredHead This is a 5e thread. Judging by the game elements you provided, I think you're answering it for a 3e context instead. Does a natural 20 in a Ray of Frost attack triggers a critical hit? Yes. The How To Play pdf explains in the Attacks section that its rules are for both...

No. Selecting details for the campaign out of the DMG is not part of the "everything is optional" mindset. (Which is the context in which you made the original statement.) I'm also not sure what the PHB has to do with it. Campaign details are handled in the DMG. That's how D&D does things. In...

Uh... yes there is. It's in the 4e DMG, in the Campaigns chapter. Here, let me quote the fragment that is most explicit about this: "You don’t have to take a campaign all the way to 30th level. Ending it at 10th or 20th level can be just as satisfying." There's more to it than just that, it...

If it doesn't matter which 4e book gold dragons were in, then it also doesn't matter which book 3e used to stat out the Big Bad Demons Guys for people to reach on the hack fest ladder.

But gold dragons weren't in the first 4e MM either. So... if I'm understanding this correctly, 3e does a thing you claim to dislike but it gets a pass because it was put in a later supplement. But 4e does something that you dislike and you get to slam it, even though it was put in a later...

See, and that's fine. Like SteveC I like 4e but I'm not under any delusions that everybody should like it as well. If somebody has a certain preference that isn't well catered to by [insert edition or game here], then it's perfectly understandable that they hope another game suits them better...

I don't know about your AD&D experiences, but I've seen high level characters who were pretty much exactly that. I've seen a level 10 paladin quite literally take on seven stone giants all by himself and not only did he win, he did so effortlessly and with barely a scratch on him. I've seen a...

This isn't a 5e forum though. If you go to the main forum page and click "D&D Next" it takes you to the generic D&D forum, it just filters for threads with the Next tag. But it's still a forum for all D&D and this thread is mixed in with all other editions if you go there.

So now you're giving the Fighter a 500 gp splint mail (or 750 banded mail) while still keeping the Rogue at a 10 gp leather? I'm all for comparisons but let's at least make it reasonable. At low level the Fighter might have chain mail, which gives AC 16 (18 with a shield). Note that this...