Search results

Everything is balanced if it costs enough. I'd suggest that at 25 no one would have objections to unlimited buys not even the most stalwart person against the proposal. For me personally, I'd still be thrilled to buy dodge at 15 on a Fighter at unlimited purchases.

Since huge columns are a problem, what is your proposed solution for them?

If you are running out of spells as a 12 column caster then you are a really really bad scholar and your data isn't relevant.

Pay no play is awful for the game.

Why is having a huge column not a problem but swinging damage a problem? This is the question constantly unanswered.

I used this level of build because another individual used Fighters swinging for "50s all day" as the reason for nerfing Fighter scaling in another thread. This sort of comparison works very well at 30th level too though it gets worse because high level scaling is what makes Fighters and...

Both formal magic levels and spells count towards wand charges in 2.0. Characters of this level of build are considered "inevitable" as a reason for scaling down Fighter and Rogue damage. As far as people that only buy spell levels, this is quite common in our chapter, even more common than...

I'm going to cross post this here because the subject of wands, and per day abilities keeps coming up like these are somehow actually limited at high levels. A Fighter swinging 50s is certainly horrible for the gap between the new players and the old players. But assuming all that Fighter did...

I should *ALSO* note that the way Fighter abilities are designed, they don't do anything to casters in many cases. Disarm is good against Fighters and has no effect on casters. Parry is good against Fighters and has no effect on casters. Shatter is good against Fighters and has minimal effect...

I should *ALSO* note that Fighters are locked in on their per day choices. No variability, no changing based on circumstances, no tailoring their abilities to the fight at logistics. Scholars can mix and match and have significantly more combat flexibility and utility. You are assigning blame...

I don't understand this argument at all in the context of the rules as proposed. A Fighter swinging 50s is certainly horrible for the gap between the new players and the old players. But assuming all that Fighter did was pick up Weapon Profs that costs 720 build. A Scholar with 720 build...

I like this idea because it is a big boost to new players. I dislike this idea because it hurts pure rogues and fighters and is a big buff to templars, scouts, and adepts. I like this idea because it doesn't nerf melee classes quite as much. I dislike this idea because it still scales...

Thats makes it 4 that don't and 3 that do then :)

I know 4 of them don't and 1 of them does. :)

This sounded super cheesy to me as well. I can understand dropping your weapon behind you or to the side so it doesn't get stepped on and broken, but deliberately using the charging rule to make your weapon immune to being picked up reeks of poor sportsmanship.

I think this skills could be recreated in a Boffer setting, they just haven't been. All nerf and no new utility.

Not only is it not obvious, what you have stated is incorrect. A quote from Mythic's explanation of the [0.9] Flurry Rule: "You can attack multiple opponents 3 times each. Attack one, then switch your target and attack 3 more times, rinse and repeat. It's usually the monsters that are ganged...

Are you buying lots of critical strikes? I don't see how this is possible otherwise.

I'd love to see DATA on these questions. How many of different classes are played actively in different chapters and at what levels?

For me personally, I answer this question by asking "If I was going on a module what is the one class I couldn't go without?" the answer for me every time is an Earth Scholar. Maybe our chapter doesn't have the itemization issues of other chapters, but I can't imagine not taking someone for...