Search results

  1. Cedric

    trying to figure out my RL alignment

    You and most of the people around you are neutral good, to my thinking. If you... Mostly pay your bills (but skate on a few) Show up at work (but take a sick day now and then when you aren't sick) Pay your taxes (but try to squeeze out a little extra refund when you can) Mostly obey traffic...
  2. Cedric

    Question About Combat in 1e

    Gah..haven't thought about this in years. I can't tell you what the book says, but I can tell you what we did. Melee Attack Roll d10 initiative. Subtract your reaction adjustment for high dex. Add your weapon speed (-1 per + of the weapon to a minimum of 1) Minimum is 1 That's when you get...
  3. Cedric

    [Meta-Troll]

    I don't care what you people say...Magic Missile is unbalancing. Automatically hits? No Save? Ridiculous...should require a ranged touch attack or a save for half damage.
  4. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    If Custserv ruled against the FAQ, I would accept the ruling provisionally, but request an update to the FAQ. If it wasn't forthcoming within two updates, I would request again. If nothing changed, I would revert back to the FAQ. Typically, I don't read the sage or RotG articles, so I would...
  5. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    The FAQ is an official document, labelled as such by the publisher. It is complete with all of the necessary revision information, publishing info and legalize to establish its legitimacy. Just because you find an error or errors in the document, you cannot disregard the official nature of the...
  6. Cedric

    [Meta-Troll]

    This lengthy, intelligent discourse and unified community agreement makes it clear to me. Monks can take INA.
  7. Cedric

    A question about swords

    Vanadium, (along with a few other trace elements like Molybdenum and Niobium) are carbide forming elements. Even in very small quantities they force the creation of carbide bands in the steel. This "banding" creates a layered steel effect that disperses stress and makes the blade stronger...
  8. Cedric

    A question about swords

    You can bet it'll be somewhere in that neighborhood or a bit more. But he does do excellent work. He's not the 'best'..but he is very, very good. And unfortunately, the best aren't really hireable, at least not for commission work unless you have enough $$ to convince them to take a job anyway...
  9. Cedric

    OOTS 354 is up... and I feel old now...

    Hah...excellent.
  10. Cedric

    A question about swords

    For those who are in the market for an economical sword, I would recommend looking up Angus Trim... http://www.angustrimdirect.com/index.html He makes excellent, "battle ready" swords, designed for cutting and regular use. However, he's not a smith, he doesn't forge blades (which takes quite...
  11. Cedric

    A question about swords

    They had a schism (falling out if you will), with a lot of the rest of the sword industry over their Techno Wootz Damascus. A few people on forums and in reviews were honest about what they thought of it, and Angel Forgery went off on them. (huge paraphrase there). However, it had nothing to...
  12. Cedric

    A question about swords

    Some of the common sword myths were brought up, but most of them have already been refuted by people who've gotten the details right. I'll add a few things... Typical weight for a "heavy" two handed sword designed for battle use...5 lbs. Typical weight for a "longsword" equivalent...3 lbs...
  13. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    I do accept the rule on feinting, because it's in the FAQ (I think it's wrong, but I accept it). Additionally, I am dispatching an email to WotC to have it reviewed.
  14. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    Ok, I can see now why people feel the FAQ has mistakes in it (and I would agree). However, finding mistakes in a document does not (as much as we would like it too) provide grounds for dismissing the document whole cloth. There is a process to write Cust Serv and request that perceived...
  15. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    Oh...I fully realize that the rules originally had it listed in multiple places as a Standard action. However, it's clear to me from the logic of what it is and how its used, as well as from the revision in the FAQ, that Feint is a move action. But, then again, I'm of the opinion that the...
  16. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    From the text I bolded, it seems to me it was meant to be a move action. Or am I missing something? I'm not above being dense, it happens, so I'm honestly asking for someone to lay it out for me so I can see what I'm missing. I just thought if you bluffed as a standard action, you couldn't also...
  17. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    Ok...I fail to see your point. A feint should be a move action. What would you have it be? A feint is a mock blow to distract your opponent for the purpose of landing an immediate attack from another direction. Sounds like a move action.
  18. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    That would mean more if it was 73% on one side of the argument, but it's not. It's almost 50% saying yes...almost 24% saying no...and another chunk saying both arguments have vaildity. Furthermore, the question in this poll never asked, "Do you understand how someone could find ambiguity with...
  19. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    Hehe, if other people can argue the meaning and use of the word "effects"...and also argue that Humans can't take "Monster" feats (despite them being labeled as [General]) because they aren't monsters... Then I can certainly point out that there is no published hierarchy and, using reasonable...
  20. Cedric

    Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

    Since the FAQ is a centralized document that houses clarifications of intent and alterations of function for the rules of every other publication, I consider it to be a Primary Source. The Primary Source statement in the preface of the errata does not address what place in the rules Hierarchy...
Top