Questions about/Problems with PHB II

[Lorehead]

This (might) be a dumb question - but under the Druid's "Animal Companions" entry on page 41, there is the denoter "A" which says "See D&D v.3.5 Accessory Update for new statistics".

Anyonw know what this is?

Yes. This notation means that the original monster appeared in a 3.0 sourcebook and that the player should download the updated 3.5 stats from the official site. The monsters which don't have this note presumably haven't changed between editions.

 

[Nyaricus]

Yes. This notation means that the original monster appeared in a 3.0 sourcebook and that the player should download the updated 3.5 stats from the official site. The monsters which don't have this note presumably haven't changed between editions.

Holy Threadcrapping! I've never seen that link before!

Thanks man

This is Loren Davis, I presume?

 

[Ebony Dragon]

What's with the short duration spells lately? Between Tome of Magic and now this, WotC seems to be creating lots of spells with 1 round or 5 round durations, etc.

Spells with swift action casting times? That would probably be the reason why their duration is so short.

 

[woodelf]

No problem. As I mentioned in another thread, a lot of peope--myself initially included--missed those. They sort of blend in with the sample NPCs, so on a skim they don't look like a seperate list.

I didn't look closely enough to notice this, but, why can't WotC learn and fix their layout? It's been nearly 6 years since the D&D3E PH, and they are *still* using the same idiotic layout style that does several things to not only fail to make it easy to read, but actively work against easy reading? [/rant]

Ok, i now return you to your regularly-scheduled productive thread.

Oh, on the praise/complaint front: PHII should've been the 4th or 5th book published for D&D3E, way ahead of splatbooks and the 6th monster book and so on. It's got some really awesome content. Specifically, it provides (1) some very useful RPing advice for the beginning group, something that is sorely lacking from most D&D3[.5]E products--with the possible exception of DMGII; and (2) lots of content that doesn't overlap with that in the core books--it's new sorts of content, unlike the splatbooks and monster books and spell books and so on, which are, for the most part, more of the same sort of content as the core rulebooks.

 

[Balord]

Just got the book and really like it so far. I do have one problem concerning the alternate fighter abilities you can choose instead of fighter feats at levels 6, 12, 16.

------------------------
ELUSIVE ATTACK

You know that the key to winning any fight is not getting hit, so you trade offensive power for a steadier defense.

Level: 6th.

Replaces: If you select this class feature, you do not gain the fighter bonus feat at 6th level.

Benefit: At 6th level, you master a technique of combining offense and defense. As a full-round action, make one attack at your highest base attack bonus. Until the start of your next turn, you gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC. This bonus improves to +4 at 11th level and to +6 at 16th level.

COUNTERATTACK

Every offensive move creates an opening for a counterattack, and you know how to exploit this facet of combat to its fullest.

Level: 12th.

Replaces: If you select this class feature, you do not gain the fighter bonus feat at 12th level.

Benefit: At 12th level, you learn to hold back some of your offensive prowess to enable a potent counterattack. As a full-round action, make one melee attack at your highest base attack bonus. At any time before the start of your next turn, you can use an immediate action to make a melee attack (using your highest base attack bonus) against an enemy that attacks you in melee.

OVERPOWERING ATTACK

You never waste time wounding your opponent, instead concentrating on delivering one solid strike.

Level: 16th.

Replaces: If you select this class feature, you do not gain the fighter bonus feat at 16th level.

Benefit: At 16th level, you can focus your attention in combat to deliver a single deadly attack. As a full-round action, make one attack at your highest base attack bonus. That attack deals double damage, as do any other attacks you make before the start of your next turn.
-------------------------------

These 3 options, when used in conjunction with each other, are much more advantageous to the Two-Handed weapon fighter than they are to the Two-Weapon fighter, thus further cementing the Greatsword wielder as the supreme melee combatant.

 

[Balord]

(Continued from my last post)

It would have been nice if Two-Weapon fighters were allowed to make 1 attack with EACH weapon (TWF attack penalties being applied normally) when using these alternate Fighter abilities. What do you think?

 

[Nightfall]

A) Why would I take offense? I didn't write it.

B) I like it better than the mage blade, for a variety of reasons. I prefer the idea of a "fighter-mage" concentrating on combat/melee-based spells. And I'd suggest that if you don't think the duskblade is a "decent" spellcaster, you haven't read the spell list thoroughly enough.

Well just saying in general.

I understand your concern but I always felt if you're a fighter-mage, you can fight as well as a pure fighter AND cast spells as good as any other mage. See Lythande or some other Thieves World guys. I might have missed the spell list since I only skimmed through the book Ari. I didn't buy it. (no cash.)

 

[Kurotowa]

These 3 options, when used in conjunction with each other, are much more advantageous to the Two-Handed weapon fighter than they are to the Two-Weapon fighter, thus further cementing the Greatsword wielder as the supreme melee combatant.

Those three feats cannot be used in conjunction with each other.

All three of those are used as a full round action, not with a full round action. Some feats or class features activate automatically with an attack, like Sneak Attack and Combat Expertise and Power Attack. These are not like that, instead they're like Manyshot and Whirlwind Attack. They are each a full round action that has the effect of allowing one attack and a special effect. You can only ever do one of those in a given round.

 

[Nightfall]

Which proves once again, some times people need to read the wording closer.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Those three feats cannot be used in conjunction with each other.

Interesting. You can't use Combat Expertise with any of those options, either.

I understand your concern but I always felt if you're a fighter-mage, you can fight as well as a pure fighter AND cast spells as good as any other mage.

Not if you're the same level, surely?

Are you suggesting there should be a FMage base class, such that a 10th level FMage class fights as well as a 10th level Fighter and casts as well as a 10th level Wizard?

I can see a 15th level FMage fighting as well as a 10th level Fighter and casting as well as a 10th level Wizard, but when the levels are equal, the specialists should be better than the generalists within their own speciality.

Lythande might be a fighter and a mage, but if she beats a straight fighter in a non-magical fight, it's because she's several levels higher than he is. If she outcasts a straight caster in a magical duel, it's because she's several levels higher than he is. If she comes up against a caster who's been practising magic just as long, but who kept practising magic every time she did sword drills, he should be better than she is at casting!

-Hyp.