Search results

"Anno post casum stellae" would be "The year after the fall of the star" "Anno post cometam" would also work - "cometa" can be used for a meteor or falling star, not just a comet. Also, not that "anno" is dative - it means "in the year," not just "the year." The nominative form is "annus."

I think the main point of the rule is that if I can move, say, 60 ft. with a double move, and I make a jump check that let me jump 65 feet, I can't carry that extra 5 feet of movement over into the next round. This makes my speed an effective limit on the distance I can jump and also prevents...

To be fair, by the time they hit level 29, most wizards will probably have Spell Accuracy, and even a 20 Wis would let you omit all of a typical party.

I'm not sure I agree. When you use a spell, you're attacking with the spell. The implement just aids that. Note that you don't need an implement to use a spell.

You could use "civitas" instead of "urbs" if you like the sound of that better. Just calling it "Thronus Novus" would work,too. If you like, you can leave the "h" out and spell it Tronus(i). That would be more like a medieval spelling.

Well, the Rabble's stat bonuses are definitely an error - they're missing the +1 they should get from being level 2. Other than that, he looks closest to a level 2 skirmisher, only he's taking a -1 penalty to attack and Fort, and a -2 to Init, Ref, and Will because he's got low stats (the...

In most cases, I think it works fine if the base monster is already relatively simple. Just follow Mengu's formula (1 hp, min damage, dump encounters or recharges unless they're really important to the theme), and you'll end up with a pretty reasonable minion. As far as reverse-engineering...

I don't have my books with me, so unfortunately I can't help with the specific minions. If no one's answered yet when I get home this evening, I'll take a look and see what I can do. I haven't tried to reverse-engineer minions based on the numbers in the DMG. However, I did do a quick...

If they're rolling multiple dice, I think it's a little more accurate to treat it as if they'd rolled minimum (i.e., all ones) than if they'd rolled a 1. For example, the zombie rotter is a level 3 minion that does 5 damage with its slam. It's got +2 from Str, and +1 from being level 3, so...

Oh, I agree they could have made it much easier. I'm just pointing out that, given that the rules require a judgment call, in most cases it's not going to be that difficult to make one. The hardest ones seem to be powers where there's a keyword that isn't obviously tied to any effect in the...

Right, this is clear. Well, if fire is the only keyword, then the dazing must be the result of the fire. So, p. 282 of the MM should apply, and the target wouldn't be dazed. This seems pretty clear, too. Again, this seems pretty clear. He's immune to the damage because it's fire. There's...

Yes, but the PHB section on keywords makes it pretty clear that a keyword might only apply to a specific "subsection" of a power. So, a creature might be immune to some, but not all, effects of a power. A very clear example of this is Prismatic Spray - a creature immune to poison would ignore...

I pointed this out in the other thread, too, but I also don't see anything that says that truesight would make you immune to illusions. It's not like 3e truesight - according to p. 283 of the MM, it just gives you the ability to see invisible things. Well, the issue here is deciding what...

You're thinking of 3e truesight - in 4e, it just gives you the ability to see invisible creatures and objects (MM, p. 283). So truesight shouldn't have any effect on these illusions.

My worry with just adding the powers would be that getting a daily and an encounter (possibly more than one, depending on level) from a class template seems like it would be at least a slight upgrade in power, assuming the monster uses these instead of whatever it normally has as an at-will...

No, you've got it all wrong. Dual-wielding a mace and a sickle is the epitome of subtlety. That seems like an obvious choice for a Str-based cleric. If you're going to go that route and still want to multi, grabbing some of the str-based paladin powers might work.

Yeah, unless you're multiclassing into ranger or warlock, it seems like in most cases taking a paragon path from your other class will be more effective than doing the paragon-multiclass thing. In most cases, I don't think getting another class's at-will will be worth what you give up for not...

Yeah, it seems if you want an archer cleric, that's not really an optimal build in 4e. On the other hand, you might be able to do an effective build with a Str-based cleric multi'd into a dual-wield ranger. Wis as your second ability would even benefit some of the ranger powers...

Thanks, that seems like a good starting point. I guess what I'd like is a clearer idea of how much adding options, versus raising the numbers, adds to a creature. I'm not sure I have a good sense of that yet.

I realize that adding more HP and raising defenses and saves wouldn't work for solos, but what if I want to add the powers from a template (I'm thinking specifically of class templates here)? If you just add the powers, it obviously increases the power of the solo, but how much? I suppose...