|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 3:25PM
#211
|
|
|
Tanus, if you're around and about, one small question. What does the X/Y of ranged weapon distances stand for? Is the 'Y' range the one that can be reached if the weapon wielder sacrifices the movement action (for better aiming), or something else?
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 3:38PM
#212
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2006
|
Tanus, if you're around and about, one small question. What does the X/Y of ranged weapon distances stand for? Is the 'Y' range the one that can be reached if the weapon wielder sacrifices the movement action (for better aiming), or something else?
I think can answer that. X is the normal range (as in no penalty) and Y is maximum range. I don't remember where I read that but I'm pretty sure that's what it means.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 3:43PM
#213
|
|
|
I think can answer that. X is the normal range (as in no penalty) and Y is maximum range. I don't remember where I read that but I'm pretty sure that's what it means.
I figured that, but was wondering how the game distinguishes between the two. The DDXP character sheets didn't mention any penalty for taking a maximum range shot. So maybe there's some other condition that applies when going for the Y-range shot that isn't there for an X-range one.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 3:58PM
#214
|
Date Joined:
Aug 16, 2007
|
Sorry if this has been asked, but do you remember the listing for the Gods? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 6:18PM
#215
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2006
|
Sorry if this has been asked, but do you remember the listing for the Gods? Thanks.
Unless it's changed again, the list is as follows:
Bahamut- honor, justice, protection
Tiamat- lies, greed, vengeance
Bane- war
Asmodeus- evil, devils
Corellon- magic, eladrin
Sehanine- full moon, elves
Lolth- new moon, drow
Gruumsh- orcs I suppose
Moradin- mining, the forge, created dwarves
Kord- strength, athletics, storms
Vecna- secrets and undead
Pelor- the sun, community, farming
Raven Queen- fate, death, winter
Zehir- night, snakes
Torog- mentioned as an evil god
Ioun- knowledge
Avandra- change
Erathis- civilization
Melora- wilderness
Tharizdun- madness (the chained god)
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 8:33PM
#216
|
Date Joined:
Sep 23, 2004
|
Ok, multiclassing is done entirely through feats. You take one feat to multiclass and gain a power from that class, and then take additional feats to take more powers from the class.
Epic fail. If this is true, it may be enough for me to skip the edition all together.
Rituals are obtained by buying ritual scrolls or ritual books. Ritual scrolls are consumed after one use, books teach the ritual to you permanantly. All rituals seem to have a casting time of at least 10 minutes, require a material component, and require the use of the ritual casting feat (which wizards and clerics get for free at 1st level) Most of the divination spells in 3.5 are now rituals as well as some of the old illusion spells.
Fail. This is not going to go over well with my group.
I still want to review the books before making my decsion, however for the looks of things i may want to start in on my 3.x house rules....ah well I like the idea of having a completely self contianed home brew relm, with out having to worry about future releases. As well pathfinder looks interesting.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 13, 2008 - 9:46PM
#217
|
Date Joined:
Aug 26, 2005
|
multiclassing through feats
Epic fail. If this is true, it may be enough for me to skip the edition all together.
3rd Edition multiclassing was a system that forced many classes to dilute themselves and spread out their abilities (ranger, for example,) and still managed to be broken in its ability to create overly-powerful characters (2-level psychic warrior dip?) and utterly powerless combinations (what good is it for my 10th level fighter to take a level of wizard now? Magic Missile is underpowered against CR 10 monsters, Sleep doesn't work on anything he faces any more, and so on.)
The feat system they've described in the previews apparently avoids both of those problems by letting classes steal individual abilities from the other classes at appropriate levels, without ever diluting what it means to play a non-multiclassed character.
rituals
Fail. This is not going to go over well with my group.
What's so upsetting about this? It's essentially the same as a wizard in 3.5 either buying a scroll for a 1-time use of a utility spell, or paying to scribe it into his spellbook permanently. All this does is separate them from the pool of spells you use to fight, so the wizard doesn't have to screw himself over because he had to prepare 3 Teleport spells to get the whole party to their destination and now he doesn't have any spells of that level left to use in a fight.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 14, 2008 - 3:28AM
#218
|
|
|
Epic fail. If this is true, it may be enough for me to skip the edition all together.
Fail. This is not going to go over well with my group.
Let me quote something from Enworld on Multiclassing.
D&D is a class based system. If you take away the class, you don't have a system. Multiclassing is equivalent to being half, or worse, of a character.
In 3.5, Multiclassing was horrible. Multiclassing, by the way, involves Exp Penalties and ensuring you aren't too far apart in class levels. Prestige classes are not multiclassing.
Fourth Edition, as true to making life better, decided that Multiclassing as we know it will break, and would ruin the game (As it had many editions before it.) It's, instead, given us the illusion of multiclassing, so we can be happy without breaking our little characters into something unbalanced and under privileged.
I applaud Wizards for their work.
It makes sense.
If 3.5 you had to multiclass for many reasons if you wanted aspects of two or more classes. (duh.) What I mean is this: In 3.5, BAB didn't scale well. A wizard's BAB was horrendous compared to a Fighter. But that's all the fighter really had. In Fourth edition everyone has the same BAB, so it transfers over better.
A wizard may actually be able to hit something now. Also, the math doesn't immediately break down because the Wizard has half as much BAB than a meleer, but has to hit touch ACs, which usually sucked at higher levels, but then saves didn't really work after level 10, but... etc etc.
Now it makes sense. All a wizard needs to be more fighter-ish is some skills, some Armor and maybe a weapon.
You don't need to multi class in Fourth Ed unless you need the powers for concept reasons.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 14, 2008 - 4:25AM
#219
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
If this is true, it may be enough for me to skip the edition all together.
Go for it, I am a firm believer in playing whatever edition floats your boat – I would rather play Basic D&D than 3rd Ed at this point, well, certainly DM.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
May 14, 2008 - 6:40AM
#220
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2003
|
The feat system they've described in the previews apparently avoids both of those problems by letting classes steal individual abilities from the other classes at appropriate levels, without ever diluting what it means to play a non-multiclassed character.
I'd say getting those other powers (without the synergistic class features the original class has) while losing powers of your own class is diluting things a bit.
cheers
|
|
|
