Search results

Of course they are required! You MUST buy them, so start saving money now. I suggest that you see if there is any place nearby that will purchase your blood plasma or spare organs for extra cash.... :D

It makes more sense to me that a difficult maneuver like Blinding Strike would be more difficult to do--meaning that there are penalties to hit--than it does that a rogue would only be able to try the maneuver once a day.

I like the way he implimented combat maneuvers for 3rd edition. They are fun and seem balanced to me in practice. I don't like what I've seen of the way such maneuvers are implimented in 4th edition. They seem artificially and illogically limited. What's with the "Er"?

Well, I always considered that it was because the monk (or fighter) didn't have enough chi to do it more than X times a day. As a fan of Iron Fist, the Marvel comic martial artist whose powers work in a similar way, I never had a problem with this kind of limitation. Well, you do always have...

It still is a great game. The coming of 4e doesn't change that one bit, even if it may improve play in some areas.

I do not modify encounters in my games to "short circuit" any of my player's abilities, unless it makes sense in the game. For example, the party's monk kept jumping on the backs of large creatures in order to pummel them from a vantage point they couldn't reach--a logical tactic. He used in...

Yes, there is. For such "stunting" I use the rules from the Book of Iron Might in my D&D 3.5 games. This book offers a wonderful system for judging a lot of combat maneuvers, like flinging sand and hamstringing, without artificial restrictions like "once a day" powers.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. The problems that you describe in your post with my approach would never happen in my game. Listen to what you're saying, really. Imagine that we are playing a game of Call of Cthulhu or d20 Modern or Spycraft or Top Secret or whatever. Does every...

Sure. But it does so by sacrificing sense. If a monk has a pouch full of sand, how does it make sense that he can only try to throw it in someone's eyes once a combat or once a day? I would rather remove restrictions and risk unbalancing the game than resort to such heavyhanded, nonsensical...

Unfortunately, this is not the case for many, many trailers--maybe even the majority. The philosophy these days seems to be to give the audience as much info as possible, including important plot developments, in order to show them exactly what they're getting into by going to see the film.

What's third edition got to do with it?

So, Shadewyn, are you saying here that you have the professional knowledge of a major coporation? If not, then your response doesn't seem to make any sense.

"The reality is that my R&D team didn't start seriously discussing the notion of the next edition of D&D until sometime in early 2005. That's when we began to examine different scenarios for how we might approach the process." --Bill Slavicsek, Wizards Presents: Worlds and Monsters Last time...

Don't be a hater.

Why does Paizo have to increase its customer base significantly?

Ahh! Now we finally know what's up with the dragonborn. Those weren't females after all, just experienced adventurers with overdeveloped glands....

Even more amusing.

Amusing.

Good enough for 4e! :D You do realize that the Pathfinder game is incomplete and that this document is just the first of many revisions...right? The other classes will be detailed later. This is a work in progress.