Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1202448" data-attributes="member: 10201">You can't, or, at least, not easily.  That's the problem, IMHO--whatever advantage init gives you is too front-loaded (and possibly also too insignificant--though i'm apparently in a minority of one on that part, so feel free to discount it).Attack: one attack, period.  Full attack: anyone can pick up a 2nd weapon, but i should've said 1 to 5.  Oh, wait, creative math on my part: 20 divided by 5 is 4, not 5.  So, 1 to 4 extra attacks (two weapon or double weapon, +20 BAB), without using feats.No, swashbuckler is just a convenient shorthand for the general class of warrior i'm talking about: those who favor mobility (and maybe precision) over power.  And my point about monks is that the whole *point* of the martial artist archetype is, IMHO, phenomenal physical control--that should include acrobatics, mobility, dodging, etc.  I have no problem with being able to build a mobility-based warrior with fighter, i just think that it should be easier, or turn out better, with a monk.I might just try that, as a thought exercise.I never said it was.  Look at the casting time of the spell, it functions as a modifier to init, just like weapon speed does.  But, clearly, it is a duration (by definition).  So you must be casting the spell for X segments, ending on the segment the spell goes off.  IOW, you start casting the spell on your original initiative (roll + dex mod), and finish on your adjusted init (roll + dex mod + casting time), and if you get hit anywhere in that range, it's while casting the spell. Don't feel like digging the rules out, much less searching through them, so i don't know if this is a standard rule, an official optional rule (in the PH/DMG), a rule from one of the "Complete..." books, a rule from Dragon, or one we came up with on our own.Hmmm...now that you put it that way.  I dunno.  Perhaps it'll only be fixed [to my satisfaction] with a whole new system--the freeze-frame effect needs to be lessened or eliminated.Huh.  I don't see an immediate flaw in that--it's not perfect, but it *is* a reasonable approximation of what i'm talking about.  Actually, that's where i see one of the flaws in the selection of feats in the core rulebook: they're too ordinary.  I think feats should be special, not just doing something a bit better, but doing some cool and fun that you otherwise can't do.  And, the flipside of this is that if it's something you should generally be able to do, you shouldn't need a feat to do it (though i can see some latitude for feats that overcome penalties).</blockquote>

Verification