Search results

Uh... you can still improvise an action with a fighter reasonably well? Just because you don't have a maneuver called "Push" doesn't mean you can't push an enemy into the reach of another ally... -YRUSirius

If it makes sense to my players (and it doesn't unbalance the game for some players) that's all I need. -YRUSirius

I'm just remembering a scene in The Fellowship of the Ring, where Aragorn "parries" an orc arrow in the last battle scene to defend Boromir, right? :) -YRUSirius

No, no, Garthanos' example was more in the vein of 3E's cleave and greater cleave. The first enables you to make an additional attack if you strike someone down - the only restriction: you can only do this once per round. Greater cleave removes this restriction. The individual attack doesn't...

Letting the players roll ALL the dice is pretty easy with spells etc. IIRC the first playtest had the spellcaster roll not only their magic attack for their spells against the opponents' AC (using their magic ability) - the playtest also had them roll their magic attack for spells where the...

Well, I'll playtest the game with my houserule and will see how my players will react to it. :) -YRUSirius

It's not as if the players lose an attack roll versus the ACs of the monsters - no, they gain a defense roll versus the "attackclass" of the monsters! :) They keep attack rolls - and gain defense rolls/armor rolls. The DM loses attack rolls and defense rolls. But hey, it's easier for him. :)...

So Legolas never protected Gimli or someone else from the fellowship by distracting an enemies blow by going inbetween? -YRUSirius

If you can parry an attack that is meant for you, then you can parry an attack that is meant for someone nearby (by distracting the attack). If a sharpshooter can learn to defend themselves, they can learn to defend others. I just don't see the big difference between the two features. -YRUSirius

So what about Parry then? Why should a sharpshooter be able to parry? In my eyes Parry and Protect are nearly the same feature. Both negate damage. Parry negates damage on yourself, while Protect negates damage on your allies. A combined Parry/Protect class feature would be like a "heal light...

Well I don't feel thar negating damage on anyone is too complex. -YRUSirius

And while we're at it, merge the maneuver Protect with the class feature Parry. Parry can now negate any melee damage to yourself or to any ally nearby. If you're using a shield you can even negate ranged damage. -YRUSirius

Have fun finding that belt of storm giant strength. :) -YRUSirius

There is no DM fiat. He IS the master of the game, goddamit. :D -YRUSirius

Just DM a few D&D Next sessions and you'll automatically start using attribute checks instead of skill checks. You don't ask your players to make skill checks - you ask them to make attribute checks. Only then players will tell you that they have skills that they could use for these checks...

And here's another picture of the Fire Giant: :D -YRUSirius

There are no skill checks in D&D Next. -YRUSirius

The Forgotten Realms will be the core setting. This could mean that the Forgotten Realms gods will be mentioned in the core books for example. -YRUSirius

That's brilliant, gyor! :) -YRUSirius