RPGWW

Questions!

1. The Bear Warrior Prestige Class from Complete Warrior says, in the first paragraph of the description of the Bear Form (Su) ability, "the only limit on the number of times per day he can assume a bear form is the number of times per day he enters a rage or frenzy." However, in the third paragraph it says he can assume bear form once a day at first level, then in the fourth paragraph it says two per day at 5th level, and then it says 3 per day at 10th level. The Bear Warrior table doesn't say anything about the number of times per day he can go bear. So which is it, the number of rages or 1/day at 1, 2/day at 5, 3/day at 10?

2. Are the rules for the Fullblade in the Arms and Equipment Guide 3.0 kosher for 3.5? If so, what is the Strength requirement to get Exotic Weapon Proficiency: Fullblade?

3. Wild armor only helps Druids with Wild Shape, right? Not Wizards with Polymorph, or Bear Warriors with Bear Form?

4. Why is it that, despite having no Constitution score, constructs and the undead have bonus HP in addition to HP from their Hit Dice rolls? Also, why is it that, despite having no Intelligence score, Skeletons are given the Improved Initiative feat?

5. Why does the Toughness feat suck so much ass?

6. Can someone give me a copy of the Weapon Master PrC?

NOTE: Still not back yet, sorry. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

1. I don't know. Pick one and be consistent. If it explicitly gives you numbers, I would use those, especially if they're on a table.

2. GM's rule. I would imagine 13, if there is one, because that's the STR requirement for one-handed bastard sword and similar weapons.

3. Right. That's why it's called wild armor and is adorned with nature patterns.

4. They take the Toughness feat, potentially multiple times. Intelligence has nothing to do with initiative or the Improved Initiative feat. Unintelligent creatures are not vegetables, they're just unable to think or reason. They still have the "initiative" to kill things or eat them. Consider oozes.

5. Because it does. Epic Toughness is comparably even worse. Pick a better feat. At level 1, Toughness is actually pretty good, especially for a wizard or sorcerer--on average, Toughness nearly doubles their hit points! Unfortunately, it quickly becomes useless, so it isn't really worth a feat slot.

6. No, get one yourself.
<p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

4. Gelatinous Cube <p><div style="text-align:center"></div></p>

1. Fair enough.

2. Hn. I see where you're coming from, but there's great potential for abuse if I make the requirement any less than 17. Otherwise, you could go up from greatsword to fullblade by spending one feat, and that feat would give you more damage on average (I think) than Weapon Specialization, and you don't have to be a fighter to do it. At least this way, you have to be paying at least some attention to STR to be able to use such a ridiculous weapon.

3. Fair enough.

4. Err...actually, it says in the Monster Manual that creatures with no Intelligence scores can't have feats or skills (MM 3.5 page 301, asterisk on the Skill Points by Monster Type table). That aside though, I guess the feats listed for the undead (Toughness for Zombies, Improved Initiative for Skeletons) are supposed to be bonus, though they aren't listed as such. I still don't get why animated objects have bonus HP, though. (EDIT: That's because I didn't look at Construct Traits in the appendix before now. Hee hee.)

5. Have you seen Improved Toughness from Complete Warrior? It's a much better feat. Basically, it's one extra point of HP per current hit dice, plus one for every levelup after you take the feat. It's still not great, but at least it scales a little better.

6. :( <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=spleeninfinity13>SpleenInfinity13</A]&nbsp; at: 10/13/05 19:34

3. I don't even remember how much damage the fullblade does. But if it's the same as the one in Sword and Fist, meaning that it deals 1d12/19-20 x2, then it is strictly inferior to the 3.5 greatsword, which deals 2d6/19-20 x2, increasing its average damage to 7 from 6.5 and minimum damage to 2 from 1. So why is it so awesome, exactly, and why in the world would it require STR 17 to wield if you're declaring such for balance reasons?

4. Bonus feats ignore all prerequisites. If you read the MM 3.5, where "skeleton" becomes a template creature type, you will note that they gain bonus feats. The ignoring prerequisites, logically, includes creature type. And yes, you didn't read the book.

5. That is a little better, but still probably not worth a feat slot unless you're a fighter and swimming (potentially drowning) in feats. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

3. Wrong Fullblade. This one does 2d8 damage (like a Large bastard sword).

Now, a fun rationalization for why a Medium creature should be able to wield a Large bastard sword!

A Medium creature, with special training, can wield a Medium bastard (or "hand-and-a-half") sword in one hand with no penalties. A bastard sword sized for a Large character, then, would be a "three-handed sword". If you can train one of your hands to wield a sword 1.5 times normal size, you should be able to train both to do the same thing. Thus, Fullblade! My friend Henry (the twink) loves this thing.

4. It doesn't say "bonus" anywhere in there. And it's not my fault they hid the Construct stuff in the Appendix.

5. Yes, or if you have a Con penalty and a small Hit Die. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

What is a fullsword? If it's just a large sword, than why is it called a 'fullsword'? :(

It's actually a hollow blade filled with smaller swords.

The proper name is "Sword full of swords" which popular usage cut down to "Full of swords" and then further cut down to "Fullsword" overtime.

I can dig that.

The mercurial greatsword is better.

I want one made of glasssteel, just so it looks like I'm chopping people up with a giant thermometer. <p>-----
Do not taunt Happy Fun Zemyla.

<span style="font-size:xx-small;">I think boobs are the lesser of two evils. - Inverse (Pervy)
Dammit, Dan, I'm not dating a damn NPC! - OOC Will (Will Baseton)
Of course! Anything worth doing is worth doing completely wrong! - Travis English
Ultimately, wizards and clerics don't say, "Gee, I want to become a lich because weapons hurt less and I don't have to worry about being backstabbed; that whole 'eternal life' thing is just a fringe benefit."-Darklion
But this one time I killed a walrus with my bare hands, and I suddenly understood spherical coordinates. - KnightsofSquare
Also, when you've worked a 36-hour shift as an intern you too just might pour yourself a catful of coffee and sit down to cuddle with your travel mug. -eirehound
</span>

Adventurers! | RPG World World | The Phantom Lord's OT Board mkII | Indie Madnesse | Brotherhood of Elitist Bastards</p>

The concept of the mercurial sword is dumb :( I mean, it'd be so hard to swing well~

The average damage of the fullsword is 9. The average damage of the greatsword is 7. Hypothetically, it's exactly as good as weapon specialization. Since you have to use it in two hands no matter what, I really think STR 17 is excessive. Chances are that anyone who wants to spend a feat to wield a weapon like this is going to have (or wish they had) STR 17. For most characters, it won't be worth the feat when they can use a greatsword instead.

Plus, while it's true anyone can take it (even without Fighter level prereqs), why are most of those people going to waste a feat slot on something like this? Most of them don't get enough feats anyway. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

Maybe they just want a character with a big dumb sword.

Yeah, but a Fighter can use a Fullblade and take Weapon Specialization and then Greater Weapon Specialization, thus getting more damage per hit than ever the gods intended mortal man to get.

I still prefer a Monk's unarmed strikes, especially in 3.5. The damage progression in 3.0 is kind of dumb. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

Of course,as Taniath proved, nothing deals as much damage as a templated Arcane Duelist wielding a longspear.

If by "more damage than God ever intended" you mean "an average of two over a fighter who takes this in addition to opting for other weapon-specific feats," then yes, the fighter in question does disgusting damage.

It's still nowhere near as good as you make it out to be, especially if for some reason the character can't get his hands on a good fullblade. How common are enormous swords like that going to be produced by any humanoid race except for ogres? <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

IMO, as far as twinking for damage goes, it's pretty lame. And, as Brian points out, you spent a feat on something that essentially ISN'T doing anything for you that you.

But then generally I find that Exotic Weapon Proficiency is only really good when you have a specific weapon/feat combination in mind that maximizes EVERY aspect of that specific weapon. Otherwise? Its meh. Not as useless as Toughness, but then what IS?

Skill Focus (Use Rope). <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

Speaking of Feats, anyone know a good source for Fighter feats? Or stuff along the lines of 'Improved Disarm'?

I think Weapon Specialization (Bolas) is probably worse than Skill Focus (Use Rope). The way I figure it, if you're using a bolas, it's not for the damage it can deal. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

How's about Greater Weapon Spec (Net)? This would require you to have already purchase a weapon spec in a weapon that, to start with, doesn't even do any damage.

- Blackwind.

Yeah, but as a Dungeon Master, I'd adjudicate that it's not a real feat to begin with. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

skill focus (diplomacy) lolz <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

I think I gave an NPC that feat once, actually. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

What about Direction Sense?

Intuit Direction is now covered by the Survival skill in 3.5. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

Ah, so maybe a Fullblade would be useless, but it does see limited use (if only for the Oversized Anime Sword look) in conjunction with the Monkey Grip feat, allowing yourself to wield a large fullblade. Due to how the dice work with size increases, IIRC, damage goes up from 2d8 to 3d8. In other words, it hurts. More.

Though dual-wield critwhoring (Thinblade and Lightblade with Improved Crit) could possibly outdo that in terms of damage per hit, assuming one has the same STR mod at the same level:
L16 Fighter, 18 STR
Large Fullblade, Improved Crit, Monkey Grip: +14/+9/+4/-1, 6+3d8 (9-30, 19.5 average, 17-20 threat, x2 crit) Average damage, crits and misses not counting, of 78 damage, 20% chance of threat per attack.
Thinblade main hand, Lightblade off-hand, Improved Crit, all TWF feats: +14/+14/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1, 4+1d8/2+1d6 (5-12, 8.5 average, 15-20 threat, x2 crit/3-8, 5.5 average, 15-20 threat) Average damage, crits and misses not counting, of 50.5 damage, 30% chance of threat per attack.

In actuality, shown here, it is shown that for the penalties, the Large Fullblade does better in terms of damage potential, especially in relation to enemies with damage reduction. However, one threats 1.5x as much with the latter setup, and this does not count other feats applicable to the latter, such as the Two-Weapon Defense series, Off-hand Parry, Double-Hit, and other such things that heavily benefit from the high inherent DEX requirement of Greater Two Weapon Fighting anyway, allowing one's AC to skyrocket. I don't count the actual possibility of critting on a threat, if only because one can pump Power Crit to make sure any threat becomes a crit no matter what, and AC varies from enemy to enemy.

And Dan loses on the simple count of chargewhoring, and continues to lose until he finds something non-lame to focus on. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

Why not just Monkey Grip a large greatsword? And if I remember correctly, Monkey Grip applies a -2 penalty to attack rolls when wielding an oversized weapon.

Also, since IIRC fullblades were created before the weapon size designations, we're using somewhat incompatible data here. Plus, I would like to see you hit anything at level 16 with a +4 attack bonus, much less a -1. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

There's still the style factor. Looking stylish while you kick ass (or get your ass kicked, for those who are unlucky) is a very, very important thing. Thus, it's worth the feat.

In my opinion, anyway. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

I told Henry he can't use the Monkey Grip feat with a fullblade, even though he wanted to. Between Monkey Grip, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Fullblade), enlarge person, Weapon Specialization (Fullblade), the Half-Dragon template's STR adjustment, Power Attack (as it applies to two-handed weapons), the flaming weapon ability, and a +2 enhancement bonus, that's...actually, I have no idea how much damage that is. Something like 5d8+god, right? Not in my game, dammit. Fucking twink.

Doug: I think your math is wrong, with the Fullblade guy. It should be a +18/+13/+8/+3. You forgot to take into account the guy's 18 (+4) Strength (or, perhaps, you forgot to give him Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Fullblade)). Of course, there's no good reason for this guy not to also have Weapon Focus (Fullblade), Greater Weapon Focus (Fullblade), and an enhancement bonus on his sword of anywhere from a +2 to a +5, making his first attack somewhere between +22 and +25. This is assuming he's going into battle without at least gauntlets of ogre power. A belt of giant Strength is far more likely, giving him another +2 or +3 to his rolls. All in all, this guy really ought to be fighting with a bonus much closer to a +29 than to a +14, which is quite ample for level 16, even at its lowest attack bonus of +14 on the fourth (or, as I often refer to it, "ass") attack.

Also, why not dual-wield the same type of 18-20/x2 weapon, and then only have to take Improved Crit once? That's what my friend's Swashbuckler/Rogue did. I don't know if having a rapier in each hand was a popular way to fight at any point in time, but it works pretty well in D&D. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=spleeninfinity13>SpleenInfinity13</A]&nbsp; at: 10/16/05 23:32

Because that would minimize the potential damage output to attack penalty ratio. On the one hand, two lightblades would still keep a -2 penalty, but as they're light and only do 1d6 damage...it's not that good. Kinda like dual-wielding rapiers, but minus the issue of them being one-handed weapons. On the other hand, you could dual-wield thinblades, getting a better damage output, but an additional -2 penalty to your attacks.

And while I admittedly excluded STR bonuses on Base Attack unintentionally, I was NOT counting any OTHER equipment, feats, or bonuses that may have (likely) been used by that point--just the bare minimum.

Also, you haven't seen twink until you've had Dan rub his chargewhore in your face for a week. Kwitcherbitchin. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=namagomimk0>NamagomiMk0</A] at: 10/17/05 2:51

Even then, you haven't seen twink.

Twink is when you decide to play a kobold psion. <p>-----
Do not taunt Happy Fun Zemyla.

<span style="font-size:xx-small;">I think boobs are the lesser of two evils. - Inverse (Pervy)
Dammit, Dan, I'm not dating a damn NPC! - OOC Will (Will Baseton)
Of course! Anything worth doing is worth doing completely wrong! - Travis English
Ultimately, wizards and clerics don't say, "Gee, I want to become a lich because weapons hurt less and I don't have to worry about being backstabbed; that whole 'eternal life' thing is just a fringe benefit."-Darklion
But this one time I killed a walrus with my bare hands, and I suddenly understood spherical coordinates. - KnightsofSquare
Also, when you've worked a 36-hour shift as an intern you too just might pour yourself a catful of coffee and sit down to cuddle with your travel mug. -eirehound
</span>

Adventurers! | RPG World World | The Phantom Lord's OT Board mkII | Indie Madnesse | Brotherhood of Elitist Bastards</p>

That thread gives me pains in places that don't even exist. <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

HEY NEW QUESTIONS!

I know a magic arrow's enhancement bonus does not stack with a bow's enhancement bonus (unless it is larger, of course). But what about magic abilities (like flaming) on the arrow? Would a +1 arrow of frost fired out of a +5 longbow retain the frost ability and have an extra +5 on attack and damage? What about a +1 arrow of outsider (evil) bane fired out of the same bow? Would it be a +7? <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

You know, I used to have all kinds of questions like this with my D&D group... until I was able to subscribe to a very simple and effective policy:

When you encounter any rules in D&D that have a somewhat unclear meaning and you are unsure as what to rule... choose an option that screws your players over.

So in other words... my answer to your question is: Too many arrow buffs cause the damn things to immediately do a U turn after firing which then causes them to lodge into firing players eye.

I already answered this in IM: You use the better of any two sets of bonuses. They never stack. A bow applies its enhancements to its ammunition as long as they are not already shared by the ammo in question.

So a +1 arrow fired from a +2 flaming bow becomes a +2 flaming arrow. A +4 arrow fired from the same bow is a +4 flaming arrow. A +1 icy arrow fired from a +1 bow of shock is a +1 icy arrow of shock. Etc.

This is balanced by the fact that 50 magic arrows costs as much as the magic bow, so if you want arrows with +5 worth of enhancements on them and a bow with +5 worth of different enhancements, you're paying over 100,000 GP for 50 uses of whatever trick you're trying to pull. <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>

If you notice, the question on the board predated our conversation.

I got tired of waiting for you to notice the thread, so I took a proactive step and went online.


I still don't think you answered the Bane question, though. Would a +1 arrow of Bane:Dragon fired out of a +4 bow behave as a +6 magical attack against a dragon, or would it act like a +3 arrow out of a +4 bow, and thus still be only +4? <p>-_-___-___-___-_-

"Even if you have lots of hit points, a dagger through the eye is a dagger through the eye."
-Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v3.5, page 145

"I don't know who's a bigger fool: Him for going, you for following, or me for not leaving you both."
-Demona, Gargoyles (Episode 11: Long Way to Morning)</p>

Goddamnit Spleen; His Knighthood, Sir Grunk already answered your question.

Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=capntastic>Capntastic</A]&nbsp; at: 10/27/05 10:30

You're missing something, Spleen.

In D&D, mods don't stack. EVER. As a GM I'd proably pick whichever one serves MY purposes at the time. And assuming I'm NOT being a total ass, then I'd choose to use the arrow's mods. And if your player really DOES think they "Deserve" a +10 mod for having both the bow and the arrows of Awesome... then they also don't mind if one of those damn arrows turns right around in mid-flight and impales their eye. I mean, it'd be totally sweet, right? >:P <p><span style="font-size:small;">

---

Currently idolizing - Roger Bacon, Shadow Hearts
Likes : Forbidden magics, Determined people, His teacher
Dislikes : Stupid people, Church officials, People that prey on the weak
Method of Destroying the World : Feh. God can do it for me. >:{
Becomes Super Powerful When : ... well F***. When ISN'T he?</span>

"Lunatic? The sages of EVERY age were called that! Let HISTORY decide whether my actions were good or bad. For now, we must forge ahead!"</p>

+6--the +1 arrow of bane becomes a +4 arrow of bane (because you apply the better of the two modifiers). <p>

---

<div style="text-align:center"></div>

</p>