The Gaming Den

To me, Elemental Wild Shape means you can become any of the 4 basic Elementals. Even ignoring that, alter self explicitly denies templates, and neither polymorph , Wild Shape, nor Elemental Wild Shape explicitly grant them. [br][br] "At 16th level, a druid becomes able to use wild shape to chan...

1072248225[/unixtime]]I've pointed out that that quote is out of context how many times? [br][br]Including this one? Once, AFAIK. ;)[br][br]Really, the quite is just there because it show exactly the point when debate has ceased and arguing begins. Neither party in the quote is going to be able to ...

The problem is they some spells get the [Evil] descriptor because they're inherently evil, and some get it because of the flavor text. That's what hapened with deathwatch . A lot of people don't like that. That's why BoVD had it as a variant rule.[br][br]Basically, deathwatch ends up being evil beca...

Here's an excerpt of my WotC .sig:[br] Tony Vargas: At some point, what's 'reasonable' has to win out over literalist interpretation... [br] Frank: No, it doesn't.[br][br]You have a fundamentally different approach to rule interpretation that Tony (and I) have. Neither of us is wrong. They're just d...

Most spells in BoVD deal unholy or vile damage, or conjure hellfire (must access the lower planes to function). Same reason unholy blight is [Evil]. Not [Evil] because of intent. [Evil] because they magick the force of evil.

1072129984[/unixtime]]The difference is that if I say "but allows access to the elemental type" then I am only overriding the type restriction.[br][br]However, if I say "but allows you to become a creature which has the elemental type" then I am overriding any and all restrictio...

Negative energy burst isn't [Evil].

1072073417[/unixtime]] 1072061881[/unixtime]]Key word: implies . Not equals . [br][br]:bored:[br][br]Then the alignment system is based on nothing more than implications and hints? That's not exactly a strong point for it. [br][br]No, it simply means that while good and evil are absolute concepts i...

Key word: implies. Not equals.

1072057670[/unixtime]]This is an irellivant question that slowed down your game. The proper question is "how many points of AC, do I get from this object of cover? [br][br]That is what they're asking. I didn't post the first thing say'd say or think (i.e., "this object is this degree of c...

1072005552[/unixtime]] Don't see where you're getting this one from. [br][br]The definition of the Incorporeal subtype. [br][br]Yeah, I looked in the MM after posting and found it. I have no idea what monkey was hired to type that out. Quite obviously, he was on crack and McDonaldland Cookies.[br][...

1071193023[/unixtime]]* Incorporeal Creatures can not walk through walls. [br][br]Don't see where you're getting this one from. DMG p295: "[Incorporeal creatures] can pass through solid objects at will [...]".[br][br] * Command Plants and Control Plants have switched. [br][br]Thought this...

1070504545[/unixtime]]But since in the 3.5 rules Karma Beads stack , and have a listed cost of zero gp - I regard Cleric cheese builds in 3.5 rules to be a trivial piece of powergaming at best. [br][br]You're assuming that because no cost is listed that the cost to create is 0. That's quite a leap ...

Meh. While it's fine for a trivial fact, I remain generally unconvinced that semantic differences equate to design intent differences. There are a number of PrC with "Divine Grace" that are semantically identical to Ancestral Favor or Kami's Grace.[br][br]Generally, I like the idea present...

While technically legal, the entire concept is so immensely stupid that it fails my basic sanity check.

So you're relying on the fact that Diehard uses a primary game rule of -1 to -9 = dying and -10 = dead being the result of them actually wanting it to not work if -10 != dead?[br][br]If you move where "dead" is and how big "dying" is, it's logical to readjust Diehard accordingly....

Vrocks are feinds. They aren't just evil-aligned. They are evil, just as you and I are flesh and bone.

If it's your quest to destroy all iron and you meet an intelligent iron golem, do you strike up a conversation or strike the creature down?

Fair enough.

(But you still haven't given a reference page, silly boy.)

Figures it would take magic to get some frigid chick to sleep with ya.

I still don't see your reference, Frank. All the item creation feats clearly say "To [craft this style of item] you must spend 1/25 of [the item's] total price in XP [...]" (emphasis mine).[br][br]The word "you" is pretty self descriptive and explicit about who does the XP paying...

Hey, look! Another place to avoid WotC board dumbness!

Already hav an Associates in Computer Networking. Currently double-majoring in Computer Science and Information Technology. IT is what I like and what I want to do, but CS is more widely respected and more generically useful.

If Ragedeath is your primary concern, I'd think it would be easier to just say the hit points granted by the Con increase from Rage are temporary hit points instead of the normal real hp. [br][br]Survival Instinct just doesn't seem that great, seeing as you still bleed and are still limited to parti...

IMX 3.0 haste made the game terribly not fun. At some point, everybody just has it. 'Cause you're gonna lose if you don't. Take a look at City of the Spider Queen. Every spellcaster has haste , and most non-spellcasters of merit have some way to get it. The spell fails the 3.0 feat test. It becomes ...

The easiest way to do it is to just use your type's HD for ECL levels. So drow get 2 *cough*1*cough* humanoid hit dice, tieflings get 1 outsider hit die, etc.

Edit: M'kay... not irritated, but whateva.