Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bryan898" data-source="post: 2674936" data-attributes="member: 9085">Yes, a balor would decimate the monk as I said before.  Also, gate is a powerful spell as I admitted before.  However, the chance the monk has revolves around acting before the wizard does, as high level battles often come down to winning initiative.Actually no, I haven't.  So instead of assuming that everyone has read that and being a jerk if someone doesn't take it into account, you could have been polite and pointed out the thread the first time around.  Then I could have read it and politely taken back my previous statement about creating items, assuming I agree with the thread.It's not what I'm proposing, these were the terms and conditions of the contest as stated by the creator of the thread.No I haven't yet, but could and possibly will.  However, 11,000 gp per wand to stop what is one of the most effective spell combinations against the monk isn't much.A.) The purpose for the Luckblades is the +1 to saving throws, not to reroll the miss chance on an attack.B.) I'm not ignoring wish nor contesting the use of it.  I was implying that if wish is allowed in this debate it should be to the terms allowed in the PhB.  What I am contesting is using it in terms of the more powerful abilities that are under the DM jurisdiction, those that go above and beyond the power of those listed, such as the example I stated of wishing the opposing wizard forgets all his spells.C.) To cast Wish in this example fight, it would need to start at least +5000 XP above 20th level, or the Wizard would need to start at 19th level with enough XP to be 20th level.  The reason for this being that one cannot cast a spell with an XP component if the required XP would drop him a level (page 174 "XP Cost", PhB).This was in reference to Forcecage.  Yes, I do believe it is cheese, and should have gone the way of most no save spells in the 3.5 change (Harm, Imprisonment, others).  However, I simply stated my opinion, but continued to argue strategies against Forcecage and take it into account as a viable strategy for the wizard to take in this exercise.  I in no way said that Forcecage should be disallowed, and was simply stating an opinion, not making an arguement on it.Quote referred to Greater Metamagic Rod of Quickening.  Once again, simply opinion, I still took into account the existence of the Rod in Core rules, and its effect on the duel.  I didn't argue for it to be disallowed, nor did I not take it into effect in stating strategies against it.Once again I had not read the En Worlds thread on establishing what is core or not about item creation.  However, I was merely making a point that the monk could get access to an Anti-Magic Field, which he still can through a ring of major spell storing if he chooses to go that route.As to the others calling me out- that was in reference to the AMF item stated above.  The decision that item creation rules weren't core as decided by EN World (if such a decision is theirs to make and not WotC), had not been brought to my attention as of yet.You accuse me of using my house rules to justify my arguement for the monk, however the only presumbly house rule item or rule I used was the AMF item, which was admittedly brought up due to a lack of knowledge about about a different thread.  The other's were simply stated opinion, and in no way shaped my arguement as what I put as banned in my campaign I still put strategies out that took them into account.  Now if you wish to debate, how about we get back to the thread topic and discontinue our hijack?</blockquote>

Verification