Search results

EW talks like a friend of mine. He won't play 4e anymore and has never really cared for D&D in general. It's a bit different for him but in a similar vein. He doesn't like that the GM determines the "DC" for combat. By that I/he means that as DM I get to pick what monsters the party will...

What makes you think 3.5 is ANY different really? This is a quality of ALL versions of D&D. It's varied a bit to be sure, but the fundamentals have been there all along.

Pretending for a moment that you are correct, it could explain why CB works like it does. Since a "staff implement" is a ONE handed item if you hold it "two handed" then you are indeed "wielding" a staff implement in each hand individually (without the benefit of Staff Fighting). That said we...

So how do you feel about scaling attack/defenses as the measure of that "badassness" so that a 1st level fighter just can't hit Lloth or does damage/HP scaling work better for you (or both)?

It seems you can't apply your adjectives correctly. I am holding a pen in each hand. Each (dictionary.com) adjective: every one of two or more considered individually or one by one You have more than one hand so when you say "each hand" you are describing two. That does not therefore imply...

Try this easy exercise at home. Get an object (I'll use a pen) and hold it with both hands. Ask yourself two questions: 1. What am I holding in my left hand? (A pen) 2. What am I holding in my right hand? (A pen) Each end of said pen probably has some different attributes...such as you can...

I'm wielding a staff implement in my left hand and I'm wielding a staff implement in my right hand. I am wielding "an" implement in "each" hand. It just so happens that it is the SAME implement. As frogger said. If you want to go with that phrase meaning you have to be wielding two weapons...

You play your way and I'll play according to RAW and CS. I'm obviously not going to convince you.

And the normal rules allow me to wield it "in each hand" as a double weapon. It doesn't suddenly stop being an implement because of that. What I really want to know (since there is no rules text for it) is if CB is as intended or not which allows you to wield a staff with two hands and take...

What possible gain could there be from this? The rules don't say this and even if we were to play along with your hypothetical, you still wouldn't be able to apply that logic back onto the Staff (weapon group)/Staff (implement)/Quarterstaff debate. It doesn't matter what the stats are for the...

No. It is ONE weapon with two blades on it and a single area to grip the weapon in the middle. Apparently you can't read. It is really simple. DIS: "You must be wielding an implement in each hand". No where in that rules quote does it say you must be wielding TWO IMPLEMENTS. I have already...

I have to reiterate AGAIN. DIS DOES NOT SAY YOU NEED TWO STAFFS. ONLY THAT YOU BE WIELDING AN IMPLEMENT IN EACH HAND. THIS IS NOT THE SAME. It is no different than Two-Weapon Fighting which says "you must be wielding a weapon in each hand". Would you use the same logic on a double weapon...

Are your PC's pregens or custom built by the players? If custom you might have an optimization problem like I have in my game where combats are hard because your party isn't doing the expected damage.

Sorry about that...I was looking back and forth between them all and I must have read the wrong one. What I meant was...equal to (not untyped) because it's an item bonus, but this usage clearly only refers to the quantity. My general point is that in every instance of "enhancement bonus" it is...

My contention is just the usage of the phrase "enhancement bonus" anywhere you find it in the rules text. I've contended that it takes on the meanings of quantity and type discretely. For example if you look at PHB p 275 it talks about bonuses and penalties at the bottom and, among others...

If your DM runs adventures where you can achieve goals this way then he/she is probably doing something wrong. The ritual is to be performed at midnight tonight and you must save the princess before they kill her. There is an army on the way and they'll arrive later tonight. Go and slow them...

What I am getting is I'd like to see errata so that the CB implementation of "Inherent" become the actual rule...something like "With inherent bonuses you can treat any weapon or implement you are wielding as having an enhancement bonus (based on your level)" so that it doesn't break game...

I'm with ya. The game shouldn't be about your "stuff", but about the characters and what THEY can do. I like the concept of "Inherent", but it seems like it is a little rough around the edges.

Just a consideration: This disagrees with the CS ruling found on page 2, but of course that ruling is about a year old. The question becomes did they intend for the outcome that they got the way you present it. I still contend that DIS grants an untyped bonus equal to the enhancement bonus of...

Perhaps you weren't paying attention when I quoted the PHB errata that directly contradicts your assertion. Staff implements are BOTH implement AND weapon. And really as I was corrected above by KingReaper: Staff Fighting only applies to Quarterstaffs so the corrected chain looks like this: