Community

Jan 29, 2013 -- 9:32AM, Shintsurugi wrote:

Q358: This has been asked a few times before, but with the release of the Barbarian, I think I need some clarification?

When do Martial Dice regenerate?

The Barbarian class states that "You regain your spent martial damage dice at the start of each turn, whether it’s your turn or someone else’s."

While the Fighter class states that: "When you spend a martial damage die, you cannot use it again on the same turn."

By this logic, it seems that the Barbarian regenerates his martil die MUCH more often than the Fighter class, even though they both have the same pool. Is this supposed to be a difference between the classes?

Thanks! 

Ha, they cleaned up the wording for the Barbarian, but forgot to amend the Fighter.

They replenish every turn.

Jan 29, 2013 -- 9:52AM, dbmoore wrote:

Q359: Since there is no distinct rule about attacking while not being seen can we assume that they meant for the invisibility rules to cover that? AKA there is nothing that states that there is any effect of attacking while you are heavily obscured from your target (let’s say in darkness) but there is the statement regarding an invisible creature:

"An invisible creature is impossible to see without the aid of magic or a special sense. For the purpose of hiding, the creature is heavily obscured."

I feel this covers a creature in darkness just as much as a potion of invisibility. in the current situation (The attackers turn) there is no way short of it creating its own light source or walking into the light of suddenly becoming visible unless the target has darkvision (special sense) or detect undead or True seeing active (both magic senses).

Under the rules for Heavily Obscured it reads:

A heavily obscured area typically contains darkness, opaque fog, or dense foliage. A creature in a heavily obscured area is out of sight

So to me regardless of how you are not able to be seen (darkness, dense foliage, or invisibility) you have advantage on the target, assuming you can clearly see them and other factors aren't at play. Am I right with this rules extrapolation?

I think you are correct. Not seeing the opponent is practically the same as him being invisible - but Plaguescarred or Fluxpoint can probably answer it with more certainty.

I just want to say since you mentioned it  (and since I have asked several similar questions a while back ), that the rules for Stealth and the 'Hide in Shadows' feat make for a very overpowered combination. 'Hide in Shadows' in essence allows you to be practically invisible when you would be 'lightly obscured' and that results to a rogue being practically invisible at will. 

- 'Lightly Obscured' applies to dim light  and that means after sundown and in most dungeon conditions a rogue is practically invisible.
- You only need to make one roll for the entire duration of hiding - that means that the player is going to roll until he gets it just right and then move like he has a ring of invisibility.
- Most NPCs or monsters aren't able to notice you since even an average 1d20 + DEX score + 1d6 Skill result more than covers what  most NPCs or monster's 1d20+WIS roll can achieve. Even then, they only get one such roll since multiple WIS checks require active searching.
- You move at full speed when moving silently so there is no need to ever 'switch invisibility off'. 

In my table this has created a First Order Optimal Strategy, and currently two players (rogue/wizard) think the best thing they can do is hide /attack from the shadows/hide again. To this I must add that hiding this way totally ruins suspension of disbelief. I hope they fix it in the next packages.