Oh man, I made the mistake of looking up some Warlock specific questions on the official 4e forums and came across the 'discussion' about Temporary Hit points... and if the 'source' was the enemy or the ability for stacking purposes.
Oh man, I made the mistake of looking up some Warlock specific questions on the official 4e forums and came across the 'discussion' about Temporary Hit points... and if the 'source' was the enemy or the ability for stacking purposes.
Oh man, I made the mistake of looking up some Warlock specific questions on the official 4e forums and came across the 'discussion' about Temporary Hit points... and if the 'source' was the enemy or the ability for stacking purposes.
Why can't you just ask your DM how to play it?
Because D&D isn't about having fun with your friends.
I believe he is talking about the multiclass ranger feature.
Edit:
Which has an errata that adds this to the end of the text on p 208: "The target you designate as your quarry remains so until the end of your next turn.
Fuck the errata.
Edit: I guess that's not too bad - it stays on par with the other striker damage addons. The same thing applied to the warlock curse would still make it effective, you just have to make sure that its an enemy on death's door - and you have to exercise some caution.
Also, has anyone noticed how fucking awesome intimidate is? If someone is bloodied, you can make a standard action Intimidate v. Will, and they rout. A Dragonborn Brutal Scoundrel Rogue really comes into his own after the first stat bump and you get a respectable dex score, as your Sly Flourish is dealing like, 1d6 + 2d8 + 10, and you get something stupid like a +14 to your intimidate, which is flatly higher than some creature's will scores.
Will Save + 10 (For being hostile) or a DC set by the DM.
I highly doubt anyone's going to run a game where every battle is a fight to bloodied, the intimidate as a finishing move.
Although it makes an great option for those fights where you really don't want to kill the thug. You'd rather cow him and then pump him for more information. I think it makes the skill a lot more useful, but far from "fucking awesome".
I believe he is talking about the multiclass ranger feature.
Edit:
Which has an errata that adds this to the end of the text on p 208: "The target you designate as your quarry remains so until the end of your next turn.
Fuck the errata.
Edit: I guess that's not too bad - it stays on par with the other striker damage addons. The same thing applied to the warlock curse would still make it effective, you just have to make sure that its an enemy on death's door - and you have to exercise some caution.
Also, has anyone noticed how fucking awesome intimidate is? If someone is bloodied, you can make a standard action Intimidate v. Will, and they rout. A Dragonborn Brutal Scoundrel Rogue really comes into his own after the first stat bump and you get a respectable dex score, as your Sly Flourish is dealing like, 1d6 + 2d8 + 10, and you get something stupid like a +14 to your intimidate, which is flatly higher than some creature's will scores.
Will Save + 10 (For being hostile) or a DC set by the DM.
I highly doubt anyone's going to run a game where every battle is a fight to bloodied, the intimidate as a finishing move.
Although it makes an great option for those fights where you really don't want to kill the thug. You'd rather cow him and then pump him for more information. I think it makes the skill a lot more useful, but far from "fucking awesome".
As a DM, I don't have a problem with a player routing bloodied enemies, for them to run off and tell tales of the halfling horror.
If anything, its a plot hook, as paladins on both sides of the alignment divide close in on this terrifying being...
I believe he is talking about the multiclass ranger feature.
Edit:
Which has an errata that adds this to the end of the text on p 208: "The target you designate as your quarry remains so until the end of your next turn.
Fuck the errata.
Edit: I guess that's not too bad - it stays on par with the other striker damage addons. The same thing applied to the warlock curse would still make it effective, you just have to make sure that its an enemy on death's door - and you have to exercise some caution.
Also, has anyone noticed how fucking awesome intimidate is? If someone is bloodied, you can make a standard action Intimidate v. Will, and they rout. A Dragonborn Brutal Scoundrel Rogue really comes into his own after the first stat bump and you get a respectable dex score, as your Sly Flourish is dealing like, 1d6 + 2d8 + 10, and you get something stupid like a +14 to your intimidate, which is flatly higher than some creature's will scores.
Will Save + 10 (For being hostile) or a DC set by the DM.
I highly doubt anyone's going to run a game where every battle is a fight to bloodied, the intimidate as a finishing move.
Although it makes an great option for those fights where you really don't want to kill the thug. You'd rather cow him and then pump him for more information. I think it makes the skill a lot more useful, but far from "fucking awesome".
As a DM, I don't have a problem with a player routing bloodied enemies, for them to run off and tell tales of the halfling horror.
If anything, its a plot hook, as paladins on both sides of the alignment divide close in on this terrifying being...
That's the best way to play it.
I apologize for jumping on you. If you ever go over to the horror that is the 4th Edition boards, you see kids jumping all over intimidate as the "Iwin" button for the new edition.
The people at the Wizards of the Coast message boards like... forget DMs exist or something.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
ENWorld is like this too. There were a bunch of guys complaining about the 20% sell rule. The responce was "if you don't want to sell it at 20% then its a skill challenge(along with likely RP time) and the extra wealth will be deducted from future rewards(so you meet your wealth by level guidelines).
They would not accept that, they said it was "un-economic"
Goumindong on
0
Options
DVGNo. 1 Honor StudentNether Institute, Evil AcademyRegistered Userregular
So the PA DND podcasts episode 6-8 thingies just came up on the feed but none of the links seem to work for me, it the same for anyone else?
You'll notice they are future dated. Chances are they won't be downloadable until those dates.
Mine don't appear to be, could you post the dates on yours here, please? I've never played D&D but I really want to now having heard these podcasts.
Episode 6: Penny Arcade
Friday, July 04, 2008 12:30 PM
The folks at Penny Arcade sat down with R&D's James Wyatt to play 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons. Part 6 in a series.
Media files
DnD_PA_Episode6.mp3 (MPEG Layer 3 Audio)
Episode 7: Penny Arcade
Friday, July 11, 2008 12:30 PM
The folks at Penny Arcade sat down with R&D's James Wyatt to play 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons. Part 7 in a series.
Media files
DnD_PA_Episode7.mp3 (MPEG Layer 3 Audio)
Episode 8: Penny Arcade
Friday, July 18, 2008 12:30 PM
The folks at Penny Arcade sat down with R&D's James Wyatt to play 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons. Part 8 in a series.
Media files
DnD_PA_Episode8.mp3 (MPEG Layer 3 Audio)
The people at the Wizards of the Coast message boards like... forget DMs exist or something.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
ENWorld is like this too. There were a bunch of guys complaining about the 20% sell rule. The responce was "if you don't want to sell it at 20% then its a skill challenge(along with likely RP time) and the extra wealth will be deducted from future rewards(so you meet your wealth by level guidelines).
They would not accept that, they said it was "un-economic"
brb i am going to take a melon baller to my eyeballs
Pony on
0
Options
UtsanomikoBros before DoesRollin' in the thlayRegistered Userregular
Will Save + 10 (For being hostile) or a DC set by the DM.
What is a "Will Save"?
Have Wisdom, will save?
(I'm sorry, I wanted my blue dot on the thread)
EDIT: A forum for RPGs or any flexible player-resolved social game is going to be filled with grognards screaming much like a PTA meeting; every two-bit opinionated twit and pussfuck is going to stand up and declare THINGS ARE NOT BEING DONE THE WAY I WANT THEM TO AND MY OPINION IS VERY IMPORTANT. Nobody who is content or indifferent is going to add to the discussion, let alone waste time dealing with the ones who are talking.
The people at the Wizards of the Coast message boards like... forget DMs exist or something.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
They complain that 4th Ed is too much like a video game in one post, then demand that it be played like one in another...it's harrowing to venture into that vile chasm.
The people at the Wizards of the Coast message boards like... forget DMs exist or something.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
They complain that 4th Ed is too much like a video game in one post, then demand that it be played like one in another...it's harrowing to venture into that vile chasm.
Why do you think I spend my time with you nice people? Go back to the other thread, there's all the screaming and hair-pulling of other boards, but with added real actual conversation that was helpful to me.
EDIT: So, yes, really, I'm using you for my own edification and amusement.
KrataLightblade on
LEVEL 50 SWORD JUGGLER/WIZARD!
0
Options
Kane Red RobeMaster of MagicArcanusRegistered Userregular
I believe he is talking about the multiclass ranger feature.
Edit:
Which has an errata that adds this to the end of the text on p 208: "The target you designate as your quarry remains so until the end of your next turn.
Fuck the errata.
Edit: I guess that's not too bad - it stays on par with the other striker damage addons. The same thing applied to the warlock curse would still make it effective, you just have to make sure that its an enemy on death's door - and you have to exercise some caution.
Also, has anyone noticed how fucking awesome intimidate is? If someone is bloodied, you can make a standard action Intimidate v. Will, and they rout. A Dragonborn Brutal Scoundrel Rogue really comes into his own after the first stat bump and you get a respectable dex score, as your Sly Flourish is dealing like, 1d6 + 2d8 + 10, and you get something stupid like a +14 to your intimidate, which is flatly higher than some creature's will scores.
Will Save + 10 (For being hostile) or a DC set by the DM.
I highly doubt anyone's going to run a game where every battle is a fight to bloodied, the intimidate as a finishing move.
Although it makes an great option for those fights where you really don't want to kill the thug. You'd rather cow him and then pump him for more information. I think it makes the skill a lot more useful, but far from "fucking awesome".
As a DM, I don't have a problem with a player routing bloodied enemies, for them to run off and tell tales of the halfling horror.
If anything, its a plot hook, as paladins on both sides of the alignment divide close in on this terrifying being...
Indeed, intimidate seems like it could be moderately useful, especially inasmuch as information gathering and trying to keep casualties down are concerned. Of course, it helps if one doesn't roll a three on their check.
The people at the Wizards of the Coast message boards like... forget DMs exist or something.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
They complain that 4th Ed is too much like a video game in one post, then demand that it be played like one in another...it's harrowing to venture into that vile chasm.
Which is why I'd like to ask a question here.
Right now the only stealth ruling I can find is the ones based off aillies and cover.
My question:
I'm gathering that since the stealth rules have changed, that the scenario I'm about to describe is gone.
**During combat**
A monster, a fighter, and a rogue.
**The room**
A 5 x 5 room with a door on the north wall, which is closed. The monster is in the middle, the fighter is at the south end of the room and the rogue is behind the door. The monster has been firing crossbow bolts at the prone fighter.
The rogue walks to the door and opens it and makes a stealth check vs. perception roll and succeeds.
Does the monster see him?
or........................
The rogue walks to the door and opens it and makes a stealth check vs. perception roll and succeeds. Uses his standard action for another move to get behind the target, making another successful stealth check.
He burns an action point for another standard action and makes an attack, followed by a stealth roll, succeeds.
Edit: I guess that's not too bad - it stays on par with the other striker damage addons. The same thing applied to the warlock curse would still make it effective, you just have to make sure that its an enemy on death's door - and you have to exercise some caution.
Also, has anyone noticed how fucking awesome intimidate is? If someone is bloodied, you can make a standard action Intimidate v. Will, and they rout. A Dragonborn Brutal Scoundrel Rogue really comes into his own after the first stat bump and you get a respectable dex score, as your Sly Flourish is dealing like, 1d6 + 2d8 + 10, and you get something stupid like a +14 to your intimidate, which is flatly higher than some creature's will scores.
You pretty much have to use the errata unless you want absolutely everybody to make sure they qualify for Warrior of the Wild. Hell, just the extra d6 in all fights against Solo monsters probably justifies it, nevermind that it will almost always do a few points of damage every round in every fight.
The people at the Wizards of the Coast message boards like... forget DMs exist or something.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
ENWorld is like this too. There were a bunch of guys complaining about the 20% sell rule. The response was "if you don't want to sell it at 20% then its a skill challenge(along with likely RP time) and the extra wealth will be deducted from future rewards(so you meet your wealth by level guidelines).
They would not accept that, they said it was "un-economic"
My major problem is the ritual selling rules. It's basically retarded to have an item be a guaranteed loss to make (at least make it sell even if you don't want to encourage a ritual printing press). It doesn't help that I am an economics major.
I disagree with the idea that future rewards should be penalized if you really want to succeed at a skill challenge to sell an item. I understand that it has balance ramifications, but OTOH, the DM could probably convince the players to put it in a gold sink like a mount, or a keep, or something.
Anyone done any thought on firearms in D&D 4th? I ask because I was considering using Freeport as part of my setting idea, and that has guns. They're not essential and easily discarded, but hey, why not?
Anyone done any thought on firearms in D&D 4th? I ask because I was considering using Freeport as part of my setting idea, and that has guns. They're not essential and easily discarded, but hey, why not?
If you do them realistically they will suck and nobody will use them. So pick some weapon stats that look about right with the rest of them and call it a day, possibly adding it to the allowed weapons for Rogue/Ranger powers.
Though it's a shame that magic items are daily powers....setting up firearms as Encounter Powers would actually be fairly non-stupid and mildly realistic.
Anyone done any thought on firearms in D&D 4th? I ask because I was considering using Freeport as part of my setting idea, and that has guns. They're not essential and easily discarded, but hey, why not?
Firearms are talked about like everywhere.
They are talking about firearms in D&D on the My Little Pony and Elect Obama websites.
George W. Bush and Bill Clinton are discussing the matter right now.
Terrorist organizations are saying "Durka durka jihad guns in 4e durkadurk!"
Anyone done any thought on firearms in D&D 4th? I ask because I was considering using Freeport as part of my setting idea, and that has guns. They're not essential and easily discarded, but hey, why not?
If you do them realistically they will suck and nobody will use them. So pick some weapon stats that look about right with the rest of them and call it a day, possibly adding it to the allowed weapons for Rogue/Ranger powers.
Though it's a shame that magic items are daily powers....setting up firearms as Encounter Powers would actually be fairly non-stupid and mildly realistic.
Hmm, guns as an encounter power. That's an interesting idea. Though, like Crossbows, I can just say Powers ignore reloading time. Multiple shots with a flintlock can just be described as our Gun-Toting Ranger Pirate carrying a lot of guns.
Hmm, guns as an encounter power. That's an interesting idea. Though, like Crossbows, I can just say Powers ignore reloading time. Multiple shots with a flintlock can just be described as our Gun-Toting Ranger Pirate carrying a lot of guns.
Well yes, but if they reload as more than a "Move (Minor)" they're going to cramp pretty much anybodies style. Multiple attacks with reloadable weapons are just assumed to work as part of the power.
Anyone done any thought on firearms in D&D 4th? I ask because I was considering using Freeport as part of my setting idea, and that has guns. They're not essential and easily discarded, but hey, why not?
If you do them realistically they will suck and nobody will use them. So pick some weapon stats that look about right with the rest of them and call it a day, possibly adding it to the allowed weapons for Rogue/Ranger powers.
Though it's a shame that magic items are daily powers....setting up firearms as Encounter Powers would actually be fairly non-stupid and mildly realistic.
Consider Magic Items a finished commodity. Now consider the market for Magic Items.
With almost no demand, why bother to supply? You're not going to turn a profit.
The 4e rules basically attack the loopholes munchkins, metagamers and rules lawyers have been abusing since 3.x dropped. They simplified to the point where it is literally impossible for your character to suck unless you don't play the class' role and attacked the wealth system like it was a wolf in the flock. My munchkin freaked out when I asked him how many coins he was carrying, and he replied, and I pointed out that he's carrying an additional 13 pounds of coinage, which puts him past his light load limit.
The game is brutal in its efficiency in ruining the favorite vices of munchkins, and now he constantly asks me how he can get more experience. Since the only variable experience (in my campaign) is either solo kills (which he never gets because of the Ranger) or role-playing, he's constantly asking how to get more RP XP. Which a couple of the guys have tried to point out is the obvious sign on the obvious station on the obvious train to Obviousville. He'll learn. But in the meantime he will whine and complain and gripe every time I shoot down one of his "ideas."
I definitely like not having to worry about munchkinism.
In my Silent Horizon campaign, I've pretty much just assumed 10 events/encounters, on average, are one level, because frankly it's annoying having characters leveling past each other. As it stands, all it takes to ensure that the players work together and care about each other's play is the fact that if they don't they will get viciously beaten by the encounters I send at them.
The rogue become suddenly generous and cooperative after being dropped to -9 hp on round 1. :P
Anyone done any thought on firearms in D&D 4th? I ask because I was considering using Freeport as part of my setting idea, and that has guns. They're not essential and easily discarded, but hey, why not?
If you do them realistically they will suck and nobody will use them. So pick some weapon stats that look about right with the rest of them and call it a day, possibly adding it to the allowed weapons for Rogue/Ranger powers.
Though it's a shame that magic items are daily powers....setting up firearms as Encounter Powers would actually be fairly non-stupid and mildly realistic.
Consider Magic Items a finished commodity. Now consider the market for Magic Items.
With almost no demand, why bother to supply? You're not going to turn a profit.
The 4e rules basically attack the loopholes munchkins, metagamers and rules lawyers have been abusing since 3.x dropped. They simplified to the point where it is literally impossible for your character to suck unless you don't play the class' role and attacked the wealth system like it was a wolf in the flock. My munchkin freaked out when I asked him how many coins he was carrying, and he replied, and I pointed out that he's carrying an additional 13 pounds of coinage, which puts him past his light load limit.
The game is brutal in its efficiency in ruining the favorite vices of munchkins, and now he constantly asks me how he can get more experience. Since the only variable experience (in my campaign) is either solo kills (which he never gets because of the Ranger) or role-playing, he's constantly asking how to get more RP XP. Which a couple of the guys have tried to point out is the obvious sign on the obvious station on the obvious train to Obviousville. He'll learn. But in the meantime he will whine and complain and gripe every time I shoot down one of his "ideas."
......this has what to do with firearms and how they should be translated to 4th?
I mean it sure is fun to tell other people they are having "Bad Wrong Fun" and you are superior to them but you might want to read what you quote before you move on.
I myself would run the hell the other way from a game that awarded individual XP for kills. D&D has been a group game since it's inception and has negative consequences on the group dynamic.
I just happened to quote the wrong post. Too lazy to fix it.
Solo kills imply that the character is separated from the rest of the group; which happens when you're the scout or the character is apt to wander around looking for trouble.
I just happened to quote the wrong post. Too lazy to fix it.
Solo kills imply that the character is separated from the rest of the group; which happens when you're the scout or the character is apt to wander around looking for trouble.
Yes, so you reward that character's extra play time and extra spot light time with extra XP. Scouting falls into the "Sensible real world tactics that do bad things in the game", like economics and realistic physics.
I need some input on Stealth in combat (yes, The Beast of 4e...)
Say I have a kobold that is trying to make a ranged attack from behind cover. He rolls a Stealth check as part of his attack action. If he beats his target's Perception, he as Combat Advantage, correct? Now, which Perception am I rolling against? The passive Perception, or do I ask the player to make an active Perception check in the middle of combat, without knowing why?
Reverse situation; the PC is attacking with range from Cover. His Stealth is vs the monster's passive Perception or active?
Does the target only get to make an active Perception roll on their turn, after they have already been attacked?
Hmm. I kind of want to make someone who will be hit very infrequently without having an absurd AC due to heavy armor.
Fey pact warlock? Eyebite for invisibility to whoever you're attacking, and lots of tricksy effects on your other abilities.
Pah, screw eyebite. Halfling Warlock trained in Stealth with Skill Focus and all that and just be the Predator. All always concealed and always hiding and just being briefly aware of where you are when you're blasting somebody into death.
Posts
Why can't you just ask your DM how to play it?
Because then you might be wrong.
Because D&D isn't about having fun with your friends.
That'd be silly.
Will Save + 10 (For being hostile) or a DC set by the DM.
I highly doubt anyone's going to run a game where every battle is a fight to bloodied, the intimidate as a finishing move.
Although it makes an great option for those fights where you really don't want to kill the thug. You'd rather cow him and then pump him for more information. I think it makes the skill a lot more useful, but far from "fucking awesome".
As a DM, I don't have a problem with a player routing bloodied enemies, for them to run off and tell tales of the halfling horror.
If anything, its a plot hook, as paladins on both sides of the alignment divide close in on this terrifying being...
That's the best way to play it.
I apologize for jumping on you. If you ever go over to the horror that is the 4th Edition boards, you see kids jumping all over intimidate as the "Iwin" button for the new edition.
They act like if they find an exploit in the rules nobody can stop them until a patch (errata) makes it so they can't.
What is a "Will Save"?
ENWorld is like this too. There were a bunch of guys complaining about the 20% sell rule. The responce was "if you don't want to sell it at 20% then its a skill challenge(along with likely RP time) and the extra wealth will be deducted from future rewards(so you meet your wealth by level guidelines).
They would not accept that, they said it was "un-economic"
Episode 6: Penny Arcade
Friday, July 04, 2008 12:30 PM
The folks at Penny Arcade sat down with R&D's James Wyatt to play 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons. Part 6 in a series.
Media files
DnD_PA_Episode6.mp3 (MPEG Layer 3 Audio)
Episode 7: Penny Arcade
Friday, July 11, 2008 12:30 PM
The folks at Penny Arcade sat down with R&D's James Wyatt to play 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons. Part 7 in a series.
Media files
DnD_PA_Episode7.mp3 (MPEG Layer 3 Audio)
Episode 8: Penny Arcade
Friday, July 18, 2008 12:30 PM
The folks at Penny Arcade sat down with R&D's James Wyatt to play 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons. Part 8 in a series.
Media files
DnD_PA_Episode8.mp3 (MPEG Layer 3 Audio)
brb i am going to take a melon baller to my eyeballs
Have Wisdom, will save?
EDIT: A forum for RPGs or any flexible player-resolved social game is going to be filled with grognards screaming much like a PTA meeting; every two-bit opinionated twit and pussfuck is going to stand up and declare THINGS ARE NOT BEING DONE THE WAY I WANT THEM TO AND MY OPINION IS VERY IMPORTANT. Nobody who is content or indifferent is going to add to the discussion, let alone waste time dealing with the ones who are talking.
these same people shit a kitten in rage over things like d20 modern's wealth system.
if it's not simulationist and absolute, they lose their fucking minds.
Sorry, it was a colloquialism. Think of it as added "Flavor Text".
They complain that 4th Ed is too much like a video game in one post, then demand that it be played like one in another...it's harrowing to venture into that vile chasm.
Why do you think I spend my time with you nice people? Go back to the other thread, there's all the screaming and hair-pulling of other boards, but with added real actual conversation that was helpful to me.
EDIT: So, yes, really, I'm using you for my own edification and amusement.
Indeed, intimidate seems like it could be moderately useful, especially inasmuch as information gathering and trying to keep casualties down are concerned. Of course, it helps if one doesn't roll a three on their check.
Which is why I'd like to ask a question here.
Right now the only stealth ruling I can find is the ones based off aillies and cover.
My question:
I'm gathering that since the stealth rules have changed, that the scenario I'm about to describe is gone.
**During combat**
A monster, a fighter, and a rogue.
**The room**
A 5 x 5 room with a door on the north wall, which is closed. The monster is in the middle, the fighter is at the south end of the room and the rogue is behind the door. The monster has been firing crossbow bolts at the prone fighter.
The rogue walks to the door and opens it and makes a stealth check vs. perception roll and succeeds.
Does the monster see him?
or........................
The rogue walks to the door and opens it and makes a stealth check vs. perception roll and succeeds. Uses his standard action for another move to get behind the target, making another successful stealth check.
He burns an action point for another standard action and makes an attack, followed by a stealth roll, succeeds.
Sneak attack?
My major problem is the ritual selling rules. It's basically retarded to have an item be a guaranteed loss to make (at least make it sell even if you don't want to encourage a ritual printing press). It doesn't help that I am an economics major.
I disagree with the idea that future rewards should be penalized if you really want to succeed at a skill challenge to sell an item. I understand that it has balance ramifications, but OTOH, the DM could probably convince the players to put it in a gold sink like a mount, or a keep, or something.
Though it's a shame that magic items are daily powers....setting up firearms as Encounter Powers would actually be fairly non-stupid and mildly realistic.
Firearms are talked about like everywhere.
They are talking about firearms in D&D on the My Little Pony and Elect Obama websites.
George W. Bush and Bill Clinton are discussing the matter right now.
Terrorist organizations are saying "Durka durka jihad guns in 4e durkadurk!"
Hmm, guns as an encounter power. That's an interesting idea. Though, like Crossbows, I can just say Powers ignore reloading time. Multiple shots with a flintlock can just be described as our Gun-Toting Ranger Pirate carrying a lot of guns.
Save the encounter power style firearms for multiweapons and hand cannons.
With almost no demand, why bother to supply? You're not going to turn a profit.
The 4e rules basically attack the loopholes munchkins, metagamers and rules lawyers have been abusing since 3.x dropped. They simplified to the point where it is literally impossible for your character to suck unless you don't play the class' role and attacked the wealth system like it was a wolf in the flock. My munchkin freaked out when I asked him how many coins he was carrying, and he replied, and I pointed out that he's carrying an additional 13 pounds of coinage, which puts him past his light load limit.
The game is brutal in its efficiency in ruining the favorite vices of munchkins, and now he constantly asks me how he can get more experience. Since the only variable experience (in my campaign) is either solo kills (which he never gets because of the Ranger) or role-playing, he's constantly asking how to get more RP XP. Which a couple of the guys have tried to point out is the obvious sign on the obvious station on the obvious train to Obviousville. He'll learn. But in the meantime he will whine and complain and gripe every time I shoot down one of his "ideas."
In my Silent Horizon campaign, I've pretty much just assumed 10 events/encounters, on average, are one level, because frankly it's annoying having characters leveling past each other. As it stands, all it takes to ensure that the players work together and care about each other's play is the fact that if they don't they will get viciously beaten by the encounters I send at them.
The rogue become suddenly generous and cooperative after being dropped to -9 hp on round 1. :P
......this has what to do with firearms and how they should be translated to 4th?
I mean it sure is fun to tell other people they are having "Bad Wrong Fun" and you are superior to them but you might want to read what you quote before you move on.
I myself would run the hell the other way from a game that awarded individual XP for kills. D&D has been a group game since it's inception and has negative consequences on the group dynamic.
Solo kills imply that the character is separated from the rest of the group; which happens when you're the scout or the character is apt to wander around looking for trouble.
Ranger, 18 dex, Hide armor, two weapon defense gets you what? 19 AC?
Edit: 18, which is still as good as most fighters, and only really beaten by someone wearing plate and using a shield.
Yes, so you reward that character's extra play time and extra spot light time with extra XP. Scouting falls into the "Sensible real world tactics that do bad things in the game", like economics and realistic physics.
Say I have a kobold that is trying to make a ranged attack from behind cover. He rolls a Stealth check as part of his attack action. If he beats his target's Perception, he as Combat Advantage, correct? Now, which Perception am I rolling against? The passive Perception, or do I ask the player to make an active Perception check in the middle of combat, without knowing why?
Reverse situation; the PC is attacking with range from Cover. His Stealth is vs the monster's passive Perception or active?
Does the target only get to make an active Perception roll on their turn, after they have already been attacked?
Essentially if you know people are trying to kill other people in your immediate vicinity you start paying attention really quickly.
Fey pact warlock? Eyebite for invisibility to whoever you're attacking, and lots of tricksy effects on your other abilities.
Gamertag: Cunning Hekate // League of Legends: FeroxPA
Pah, screw eyebite. Halfling Warlock trained in Stealth with Skill Focus and all that and just be the Predator. All always concealed and always hiding and just being briefly aware of where you are when you're blasting somebody into death.
Tiefling+Eladrin+Roguelock=