Search results

I think the real issue here is that a new book came out with new rules. In our campaign, our DM allowed us to alter/tweak our characters when the splatbooks came out. I see this as the same type of thing. Allowing someone to change their character a little shouldn't effect the game much, and...

I think several posters in this thread need to throw back several chill pills with a tall glass of your favorite liquid. Are differences of opinion over a GAME really worth resorting to insulting each other like this? It just seems really petty to me. No offense to anyone intended, which is...

You could throw 2 daggers without needing quickdraw. I would say transferring a dagger from your offhand to your primary hand would be a free action. The feat Two-weapon fighting doesn't help with ranged attacks, but Ambidexterity would. That's if your DM wants to rule that you can't do the...

Why play a straight barbarian? Well, there's an epic feat that lets you IGNORE the hardness of weapons when sundering while raging!:eek: So, basically, a 21st level barbarian could destroy ANY weapon in the game in 1 strike probably, provided his weapon's enhancement bonus was high enough...

Yeah, I know what the spell says, but I still disagree. "Normal Speed" is flavor text imo. Does it make sense to you that someone wearing boots of S&S who always (almost) moves at double speed suddenly and inexplicably can't move at double speed (halved of course) when moving towards a hiding...

I'm not totally sure, but I think it was referring to someone hidden, firing off an arrow, and then rehiding. However, if you weren't hidden, you could still try to hide...they would just know where you were (this assumes you had a place to hide in the first place). Of course, you could have...

Correct. In Song and Silence, it gives a -20 penalty to hide after making an attack. I think it uses ranged attacks in the description, but that's because hiding in melee is not usually an option right? So, there's your precedent.:D

Ok, so it's fine that "the most powerful class in the game" can use wish to make themselves more powerful (by wishing for extra spells), but other classes can't wish for feats? That sounds contradictory to the importance you put on balance to me. Why is wishing for feats grossly unfair...

This was pretty funny for all involved but me. As our party was leaving town one day, we were waylaid by some assassins and various other creatures. We were around 7th level. As we were we getting attacked by several assassins, rogues, and a few giant spiders, a wizard was dropping fireballs...

Hey thanks for posting the SA rules. I had no idea flanking helped SA...or dex denial either.:rolleyes::D I concede your opinions...now let me explain my temporary insanity.:D I was looking at it from this perspective. If you attempt a SA on someone, and the creature is immune, then it's not...

Yes, but as written, it does! So, if they didn't want to cause confusion, they should have added a simple line to state that creatures immune to sneak attack are also immune to the effects of this feat. They don't have to reprint the entire section from the PHB on SA.:rolleyes: I am just...

Again, the wording of the feat does not imo imply this. Feats sometimes change normal rules, so imo you are making an assumption. I agree that it should work like you suggest, but according to my reading of the feat, it just says ANY AoO you make is a sneak attack. Upon further thought, it...

This is seriously annoying. I cannot post and I can't figure out what is going on. I have tried everything you suggested and it hasn't helped. Any other suggestions? It works fine at home, but not at work.

I'm not sure why my post disappeared, but I'll try to retype it. OMG!:eek: This is absurdly powerful. But, I have a feeling rogues will be the weakest combat epic class because sneak attack will be rarity. Anyone care to count the number of epic monsters that are sneak attackable?

The wording of the feat tells me you can sneak attack anything under the sun. Would I play it like that? No, because it doesn't make sense. But that is what the feat implies to me.

Is this really as nasty as it sounds? Taken literally, it sounds like you can sneak attack ANYTHING, even those immune to sneak attacks.

Well, point taken. A human monk with this feat and WWA would only have like 2 feats left. Then again, I think WWA is a waste too because of the feat prereq. For those who don't though, it does complement better than dodge does. [b] I also never said you said that.:D However, I feel that...

Exactly right, but not everyone uses a point buy system. My monk had a 19 wisdom at 4th level. I rolled well.:D I still say wisdom is the best attribute for monks, so if you roll a 17 or 18 or get a periapt of wisdom, a 19 is quite simple to achieve. Monks are already screwed by the lower...

I meant to mention this before, but forgot. This feat is in the fighter/monk splatbook. Wisdom is the main attribute for monks. Monks are melee combatants primarily, not spellcasters. Since monks do not get uncanny dodge, this feat is perfectly acceptable for them. If you play a monk who...

Just realize the if you allow #2, you are making clerics that much more powerful, for I can't see ANY clerics turning down this feat. As if clerics need any help being more powerful.