Search results

What really interests me is how split the votes are among all the choices. None of the choices, and no set of choices, really dominates. I could honestly care less. They'll do whatever they do, and I'll buy it, and I'll complain about what I don't like, and we'll all introduce house rules...

I am looking forward to seeing this. Possibly a little of this plus a little of that will turn into "the best really most awesomest" indeed. Dave

But, this doesn't really capture the solution to the problem. A wizard can get awfully tired of facing tons of things that have +15 Ref saves, take no damage from his spells, and then cut him to ribbons after they approach him unharmed. I don't know that the original solution is the way to go...

If you're really committed to this idea, maybe require a chain of feats. Feat 1) For each -2 to attack, you gain +1 damage, cannot get the "plus" above +5 Feat 2) For each -2 to attack, you gain +1 damage, cannot get the "plus" above +10 Feat 3) For each -2 to attack, you gain +1 damage, no...

I keep trying to get more ENWorld contributors to write for the magazine. I'm glad that some of you read it, but, frankly, with the quality of material over here, I'd like to get more writers. If anyone is interested, the submission links on the KA website will get to me. Dave

Everyone, Knowledge Arcana continues with its 60+ page format. Issue 7 was a D&D themed double-sized issue, and now, with the 8th issue, we're sticking to the larger page-count. Enjoy! Dave

I have found it convenient to stick to the rules as they are, and let individual players, in specific cases, make requests and then work with those requests as they come up. It requires a lot less planning on my part (thereby saving countless hours of work likely to go unnoticed). So, if a...

This all makes me think that a rogue-like class would be best build using something similar to the feats and talents system of d20 Modern. Dave

My intention with the phrase "items that are owned by you" was to eliminate things like accidentally rusting an ally's sword. Unless that ally gives the sword to the cursed individual, the sword isn't owned by the cursed individual and so won't be subjected to the curse. And, my parenthetical...

I don't know that I like the Archery combat style option for a rogue. The two-weapon style seems good for the rogue. I'd probably build a new class and offer that as an alternative, instead of just do the swapping as you suggest. But, the d6 and the good Ref saves seem a great place to start...

It was entirely ad hoc, I was too busy thinking about the rest of the curse to worry about the rest of what I was typing. I'll change the original post as this is the second comment about this point. Thanks. Dave

I love these spells. I don't know how balanced they are--higher levels might be needed, but they're very fun (and in the case of the zombies, very juicy). Dave

I know, I was just thinking of those odd-ball monsters that have 36 HD but are only CR 15, or whatever. Dave

Thanks for the clarification Nifft--I've changed the original post appropriately. If this spell could affect any metal, then it would be grossly overpowered. (And, yeah, fey and druids might just come to love a spell like this.) It would be a curse that's out of the question for low-level...

Edit: Some minor changes have been made, so a few of the following posts won't be entirely accurate regarding certain points. How outrageous would this curse be? (As per the Bestow Curse spell.) You have a rusting touch. Each iron (or iron-composed) item you own that you touch takes damage...

I like the overall idea. I'd fear that this class could be min/maxed even more than the cleric though. Still, it's certainly worthy of consideration. Dave

Yep, some of the obviously broken ones have already been mentioned. I should have asked the reverse question. Which feats would you allow to be taken repeatedly, that are currently not allowed in this fashion? Regarding the post about a fighter taking Iron Will twice--I agree that this isn't...

I've been thinking of something like this. Haven't decided yet. Maybe one point of Con per hit-die-max (rounded down, minimum of 1). So, a cleric with 3 hit points and a 15 Con who takes 20 points of damage takes, instead: a) 3 points, dropping his HP to 0 b) 1 point of Con per 8 hit points...

Which feats, in your view, that currently do not allow stacking, would not be broken if stacking were allowed? For example, in a campaign I've been running since 3.0, I've allowed the three saving throw feats to be taken multiple times and having the effects stack. But, in all that time, and...

I like a lot of what's posted here. Here's one more: "once a class-skill, always a class-skill." A friend of mine who DMs a somewhat historical campaign uses this, and he does so to encourage flavor-based multiclassing. Dave