Search results

I think I see where some of the confusion may be coming from. Some people seem to think that you take Wizard Training once and then can freely select Wizard powers for the rest of your career. I thought you take Wizard Training and point at a particular power, and that power is added to your...

Not at all. Powers aren't the only thing that comes with a class. If you look at the SWSE system, you have these "talent" things that represent abilities you gain. Wizards would have metamagic talents; Fighters have their weapon specializations; and so on. The powers you get from Class...

I dunno about body, but a thing that lacks animus could be something like a demilich -- a creature with powerful mental powers or whatever, but no ability to move.

Why do you say so? It actually makes a lot of sense to have two methods -- we've heard about class training feats, but... can you really imagine that they'd take a step backward into a system where your 1st level class selection IS YOUR CLASS AND YOUR ONLY CLASS until you die? No, no, no. The...

"Grognard" refers to anyone who resists change just cause it IS a change. It doesn't have anything to do with any particular edition, or even any particular game.

QFT. A ton of the 3.x modules are big dungeons or a very thin storyline wrapped around a series of dungeons (RttToEE, I'm looking at you). I'd much rather spend gametime on a more interesting story with some real goals and skip over the hours of "The passage splits here, left and right..."...

All of those are awesome, though I would have said "Deck of a couple things" instead. Patio, though... I see what you did there. Because, see, it's not a deck. Haha. The book of literacy seems like it'd work, though -- it's a relatively thin book with bright colors and thick paper that, if...

While diagonals may count 1 for movement, I think shapes will still use the same designs as always. In other words, a fireball won't be a square, it'll be a pixellated circle. I don't think anyone calculates fireballs on the fly anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

All of them, really, but I'm really interested in the Rogue and Warlock to start, with Ranger and Fighter and Wizard in a secondary position.

I wouldn't have put it that way, but yeah, I guess so.

This isn't really a good thing. It's called the specialization problem. A character who is specialized finds no challenge in something that a non-specialized character can't even do. This isn't balance. It's the opposite. When a group contains only a single specialist in a particular area...

Wow, really? I'm shocked. The most common place I see this is in the rogue/cleric or similar who says, "They have the same progression, so I'll just use one of the tables and look up the BAB for my character level." But I have also seen people wanting to count the half-BAB from a wizard level...

I'd like to call for a little restraint -- there's no proof that the DDM rule (which is specifically meant to play a bit more "boardgamey" than D&D) is going to be reflected in 4e. At least that's what I'll keep telling myself until proved otherwise. :uhoh: There does seem to be a precedent...

That is not my understanding of the system. From what i've heard, it sounded like you can full-on multiclass, or take the Training feat for a much smaller, more limited multiclass. Training, then, allows a Rogue to have one or two spells at his disposal, while multiclassing gets him some...

You don't really have to look up the table. Unless dividing by 2 in your head is really a problem. My understanding is that that 1/2 level sort of applies across the board -- to skills, to attack, to defenses, etc. -- so it's not so much a problem. Then it's not stacking. "Stacking math"...

I'm not a HUGE fan of the UA weapon groups, largely becuase some of the groups are too big and others too restricted. Claw Weapons and Flails are stupidly small groups, while Maces and Clubs is huge (why is a club not a basic weapon, anyway?) and Swords is very broad. Add in the fact that the...

Ummm... how so? It's actually much simpler using the SWSE defense method (which I strongly suspect is how attack works in 4e, too) -- Everyone gets the same 1/2 progression, and then you add a number based on your class selections. If you have more than one class, you use only the best bonuses...

Well, I dunno if this helps, but in SWSE, charging is a standard action; you move at least 2 squares (and no more than your speed) in a straight line and then attack. It works just like in 3.x, except you can only charge half as far -- but you can take a move action before it, and you can move...

Well, maybe, assuming he has weapon focuses or whatnot -- which isn't guranteed, he could just as well be a pally or a ranger or something and lack the necessary feats. However, that's not the point. The point is that a guy who has no logical reason to have trained with a rapier is proficient...

Well, or it goes the other way through negative reinforcement -- people who are clumsy tend not to get into jobs that require agility; smart people often get into professions that require intelligence; and so on. There's training, but also that most people go with their natural talents...