Search results

As hilarious as this may be to some, I don't think ANYONE in the thread has said "there is only one way to do it"

I agree with everything substantive KD just said.

Call me a troll all you want, the fact of the matter is you and I disagree and you are unhappy about it. KD and I think that telling the players which enemies are minions and which are not is near enough to telling the players "this guy is weak to fire". I believe that's information best left...

I'd like to point out that not only is that not an insult, He didn't even say it. He said something along the lines of "If you plan on telling your pcs everything about their foes you might as well spoon feed them the entire combat" I tend to agree.

the problem with the "necromancer" idea as you see it, is that battlefield control is already one of the most important things in battle. If you could summon more than 3 or 4 of these minions and they all took one 5X5 square then you could just give everyone flanking all the time, make some...

$%#@ physics i am conan!

What it comes down to then is that we have differing views on what is more plausible: I think making no sound while moving 5 or 10 feet (at least not enough to be detected by someone about 45 feet away from you) is more plausibly an unconscious action (one you would not have to actively roll...

All I'm against is actually TELLING your players they are minions. I myself, actually try to use fewer and different types of minions to spice things up a bit. Players imo shouldn't be using dailys right of the bat anyway.

And yet the idea that they could unconsciously be quiet while invisible seems more than impossible. And quite frankly I would call being invisible then someone going "Oh there he is 40 ft west from me and 15 feet north" without any special way of seeing invisible things is not entirely...

Artoomis you are now my coolguy of feburary 2010 for giving me the perfect solution to this situation and others where applicable.

In my head, saying "these are minions, these aren't" takes a huge amount of strategy out of the combat.

See maybe this is a group to group issue, but I feel like the response of my group if I treated them as you would yours, would be something like "so how often can we use this?" I want to be the kind of DM that allows these kinds of things, but keeping out unbalancing options has always seemed...

HE'S IN SQUARE B7 BOSS! HIT, Aww, you sunk my battleship.

I'm curious how you solve the problem that you just gave anyone with a spare 400 g (10 g each) an incredibly powerful at-will?

Non-AC Defenses

Awesome stuff like this only works once in my campaigns. Giving everyone who buys a bunch of inexpensive consumable item an extra at-will that immobilizes (save ends) and does a fair bit of damage just don't seem balanced. Id give it to them when they first thought of it, and then let them know...

Heroic invisibility: predator style Paragon invisibility: normal invisibility (by my definition) Epic invisibility: Something better that I haven't come up with yet but its irrelevant to the discussion. It really isn't that complicated. Why call something invisibility when it isn't?

How about minor invisibility, invisibility and major invisibility.

1. I would to. But if WOTC's only definition of an axe was that, I would have a problem with that. Two completely different things. 2. Predator does not have invisibility. Predator has "stealth mode"

then thats not invisibility. If their definition of an axe was a vaguely sharpened Metal Boat Oar, I would have the same problem.