Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 181 to 210 of 230
  1. - Top - End - #181
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Kurald Galain's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta View Post
    Q54Should all of the targets be declared at start and dice rolled at once? Does a player get to declare targets and roll one die at a time, giving him/her the chance to move on to a new target if the first has been killed?
    We play with the latter. That said, I don't recall this being explicitly stated anywhere. It just feels wrong to demand that e.g. an archer declare the target of his second arrow before shooting the first one.
    Guide to the Magus, the Pathfinder Gish class.

    "I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums. I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that." -- ChubbyRain
    Crystal Shard Studios - Freeware games designed by Kurald and others!

  2. - Top - End - #182
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    A54: It's not very clear, but I think the targets must be declared before the resolution of the attack. So, with Twin Strike as example, you must declare if you are attacking the same target twice or two distinct targets before any roll.

  3. - Top - End - #183
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Dimers's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Also A54

    In some cases, you must resolve them sequentially, not all at once. For example, an area power that slides each target it hits -- you have to know where one creature ends up before moving another creature, because the first one might block (or free up) a lane of travel for the second and third.

    Since I've seen no hint that some powers are not resolved sequentially, I've always played that they all are, any time it matters. Roll one, adjudicate, roll another, adjudicate.
    Avatar by Meltheim: Eveve, dwarven battlemind, 4e Dark Sun

  4. - Top - End - #184
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Meta's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Awaiting Reincarnation

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Interesting. Given the sheer number of times this comes up in a game I would have thought it would be spelled out somewhere.
    Szilard has all of those sweet trophies for a reason. Awesome avatar is his handiwork.

  5. - Top - End - #185
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta View Post
    Interesting. Given the sheer number of times this comes up in a game I would have thought it would be spelled out somewhere.
    Attack is one of those funny areas where they do strange things:
    Use the word to mean multiple things - attack can mean the act of attacking, an attack power, an attack line, or an attack roll.

    So it is a little unclear when they talk about attack what they specifically mean when referring offhandedly to the last 3 options...
    Last edited by MwaO; 2017-06-05 at 11:21 AM.

  6. - Top - End - #186
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2013

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    The implication of the Rules Compendium (pages 214-215) is that you need to choose targets all at once (step 2, after choosing the power). But the same set of instructions seem to imply separate damage for all targets, when we know that there's only one damage roll on bursts/blasts, so it's a little unclear.

  7. - Top - End - #187
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by masteraleph View Post
    The implication of the Rules Compendium (pages 214-215) is that you need to choose targets all at once (step 2, after choosing the power). But the same set of instructions seem to imply separate damage for all targets, when we know that there's only one damage roll on bursts/blasts, so it's a little unclear.
    Except we don't actually know what they meant by 'making an attack' because there are 4 separate definitions...

  8. - Top - End - #188
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3



    Q55: I found this image in a blog, but I think it is worng, isn't it? The bottom-middle square, and the ones in left-middle, should have just "cover", since the bluish line hits 2 of the square's vertices. Also, the green square hit by the pink line should have "Superior Cover" (only one vertex is hit). Or am I wrong here? Thanks.
    Last edited by Marcloure; 2017-06-13 at 11:48 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #189
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    A55:
    I am assuming here that the black lines on the diagram represent blocking terrain. In that case, the diagram is correct. For both squares in question, there is simply no line of effect to the square. Touching a corner or side of the square is not sufficient to give line of effect: "Line of Effect: A clear line from one point to another point in an encounter that doesn't pass through or touch blocking terrain. Unless noted otherwise, there must be line of effect between the origin square of an effect and its intended target for that target to be affected."

    The confusion might be caused by this statement in the rules for Cover: "A line isn't blocked if it runs along the edge of an obstacle's or an enemy's square." It's best to bring this line into consideration only if you otherwise have line of effect to the square in question. For example, this clarification applies to the square to the left of the bottom square you were asking about. The blocking terrain near the bottom does not block the two corners in question because you can easily draw line of effect into that square from the origin square.

  10. - Top - End - #190
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Then is it even possible to have three lines blocked and yet have line of effect?
    And then, shouldn't the leftest yellow square near the pink line also be safe?
    Last edited by Marcloure; 2017-06-13 at 11:57 PM.

  11. - Top - End - #191
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Then is it even possible to have three lines blocked and yet have line of effect?
    And then, shouldn't the leftest yellow square near the pink line also be safe?
    I'm moving this discussion to its own thread. See my response here.

  12. - Top - End - #192
    Troll in the Playground
     
    georgie_leech's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Then is it even possible to have three lines blocked and yet have line of effect?
    And then, shouldn't the leftest yellow square near the pink line also be safe?
    It's possible to have LoE even if all corners are blocked. For instance, an arrow slit.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grod_The_Giant View Post
    We should try to make that a thing; I think it might help civility. Hey, GitP, let's try to make this a thing: when you're arguing optimization strategies, RAW-logic, and similar such things that you'd never actually use in a game, tag your post [THEORETICAL] and/or use green text
    Quote Originally Posted by Lvl 2 Expert View Post
    So a ranger is like a Bachelor of Applied Druidology.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Jake View Post
    What's the word for 'fear of being eaten by a mounted bear in half-plate' again? Because that's the one I have.

  13. - Top - End - #193
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Arkhios's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Q56
    Is there any Sorcerer type that benefits from high Intelligence as a secondary score?
    My 5th Edition D&D Homebrew:
    Writing blue text written in cursive/italics is me being sarcastic or lighthearted, thus not intentionally offensive.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    So,

    "<game that I dislike> will break down when people try to optimize it, whereas this will never happen in <game that I like>."

    I think I've heard this argument now for every conceivable D&D-related pair of <game>s.

  14. - Top - End - #194
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Arkhios View Post
    Q56
    Is there any Sorcerer type that benefits from high Intelligence as a secondary score?
    A56
    No. None of the sorcerer build options offer any class features that care about your Intelligence (ignoring hybrid/multiclassing, of course).

  15. - Top - End - #195
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by tiornys View Post
    A56
    No. None of the sorcerer build options offer any class features that care about your Intelligence (ignoring hybrid/multiclassing, of course).
    Sorcerous Vision, the paragon tier feat, does benefit from a high Intelligence. But that means sacrificing damage to get there.

  16. - Top - End - #196
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Arkhios's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Q57
    Is there any official way to treat mace as a light or heavy blade so that you could benefit from Swordmage Warding while wielding a mace (or a Battlefist which belongs to the mace group)?

    (I know there's the Street Thug feat for rogue, but RAW that only applies when a power requires a light blade. I'm also aware of the Dynamic Weapon which, I think, could be used to transform the Battlefist into an Armblade or some such.)
    Last edited by Arkhios; 2017-06-26 at 07:28 AM.
    My 5th Edition D&D Homebrew:
    Writing blue text written in cursive/italics is me being sarcastic or lighthearted, thus not intentionally offensive.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kurald Galain View Post
    So,

    "<game that I dislike> will break down when people try to optimize it, whereas this will never happen in <game that I like>."

    I think I've heard this argument now for every conceivable D&D-related pair of <game>s.

  17. - Top - End - #197
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    A57
    No. Or at least, I see nothing applicable in the Compendium when searching both Mace and Blade keywords.

    Dynamic Weapon looks like the best way to make use of the Battlefist as a Swordmage, but the interaction between Dynamic Weapon and a Battlefist is weird so talk to your DM before going this route.
    Last edited by tiornys; 2017-06-27 at 08:39 PM.

  18. - Top - End - #198
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Q57

    What source material is refered by W&M? I saw it in the Points of Light wikia, but I have no idea what it stands for.

  19. - Top - End - #199
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Dimers's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    A58

    It's "Worlds and Monsters", a preview book before 4e came out in the format we know now. The other preview book was R&C, "Races and Classes".
    Avatar by Meltheim: Eveve, dwarven battlemind, 4e Dark Sun

  20. - Top - End - #200
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Q57 Does this power also removes insubstantial / the resistance granted by the insubstantial property?


  21. - Top - End - #201
    Orc in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Q57 Does this power also removes insubstantial / the resistance granted by the insubstantial property?

    A57

    I think the "best" interpretation by RAW is that it removes insubstantial some of the time. The glossary entry for Resistance says that, "Resistance appears in a stat block or power as “Resist x,” where x is the amount that the damage is reduced, followed by the type of damage that is being resisted." Insubstantial is often listed in a stat block as Resist insubstantial, and in cases like this I believe the power does remove insubstantial. However, Insubstantial itself is not defined as a type of resistance, and powers often grant it by simply saying things like, "While in this form, it is insubstantial...." In instances like this, I do not believe the power removes insubstantial.

    In summary: if insubstantial is granted to a creature in the Resist line, then the power removes it. Otherwise it does not.
    Last edited by tiornys; 2017-07-30 at 05:46 PM.

  22. - Top - End - #202
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ThePurple's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Shameland (4e Forums)

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by tiornys View Post
    I think the "best" interpretation by RAW is that it removes insubstantial some of the time.
    By RAW, Insubstantial is a trait that is factored in at a different time than resistances and immunities (from the half damage note "When a power or other effect deals half damage, first apply all modifiers to the damage, including resistances and vulnerabilities, and then divide the damage in half (rounded down)." combined with the description of Insubstantial "When a creature is insubstantial, it takes half damage from any damage source, including ongoing damage. See also half damage."). The fact that it is mentioned on the Resist portion of an NPC's entry is simply a method to ensure that people remember it and that it takes up way less space. Pre-MM3, it was mentioned separately as a trait but it becomes kind of onerous when you have to include the same entry over and over for the *same exact thing* especially whenever the keyword already exists to explain it.

    For more evidence, check out the wording of "resistance" and "immunity" which both refer say that it has to refer to a specific damage type and a specific amount (you don't get "insubstantial all" or "insubstantial fire" like you do with resistances and immunities; it's just "insubstantial").

    From a gameplay perspective, the reasoning is pretty simple: creatures that are constantly insubstantial tend to have their hp significantly reduced compensate for it (Raaig Crypt Lord is a level 14 soldier with 96 hp and insubstantial; MM3 math would put a level 14 soldier at 140 hp). Getting rid of insubstantial is *way* more potent than getting rid of resistances or immunities (which are only really useful against hyperspecialized opponents that deal only a single type of damage).
    4e Homebrew: Shadow Knight
    roll20: Kitru

  23. - Top - End - #203
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Aug 2017

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Q58

    Could someone please elaborate on the arcane power "Cave Sight?" Particularly, can you see all the creatures in the rooms that you see, or just layout? And, do you allow for the vision to traverse through "gaps" that are under closed doors. Do you have a page number you can refer me to for clarification? I know my players will wonder...Thanks!

    -Dave

  24. - Top - End - #204
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ThePurple's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Shameland (4e Forums)

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Kashyyyk View Post
    Could someone please elaborate on the arcane power "Cave Sight?" Particularly, can you see all the creatures in the rooms that you see, or just layout? And, do you allow for the vision to traverse through "gaps" that are under closed doors. Do you have a page number you can refer me to for clarification?
    The exact wording of the power is "You learn the general layout of terrain features in the burst. You cannot sense through solid objects, such as cave walls, but you do sense around corners and into narrow gaps. Additionally, you can make a Perception check to detect hidden creatures, objects, and traps as though you were within 10 squares of them."

    This breaks down into 2 different parts. The first part refers specifically to "general layout of terrain features", so it only allows you to know the location of terrain and the like. It *does* specifically say that it won't allow you to sense through solid objects while allowing you to sense around corners and into narrow gaps. For this, I would just rule that the effect follows the normal rules for blocking bursts and blasts, with total cover preventing sensation (solid objects) but superior cover and normal cover allowing for it (corners and into narrow gaps).

    The second part is simply an extension of the normal use for detecting hidden creatures via Perception. The "within 10 squares of them" is simply a proviso that notes that the DC for the Perception check won't be any higher than normal (normally, 10+ spaces away increases DC by 2). Assuming you roll high enough on Perception, you'll know what spaces are occupied by creatures, traps, and other objects, but you won't be able to actually see and know what they are (as normal for finding a hidden creature without special senses).

    To specifically answer your questions, you can see the layout but you have to roll Perception to detect creatures and, even then, you're only able to know what spaces they're in rather than actually being able to see the creatures. Furthermore, the powers effects extend through doors without perfect seals because they are not total cover (I might even allow it through all doors, in fact, since they're not "solid" by definition).
    4e Homebrew: Shadow Knight
    roll20: Kitru

  25. - Top - End - #205
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    Beholder

    Join Date
    Aug 2017

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by ThePurple View Post
    The exact wording of the power is "You learn the general layout of terrain features in the burst. You cannot sense through solid objects, such as cave walls, but you do sense around corners and into narrow gaps. Additionally, you can make a Perception check to detect hidden creatures, objects, and traps as though you were within 10 squares of them."

    This breaks down into 2 different parts. The first part refers specifically to "general layout of terrain features", so it only allows you to know the location of terrain and the like. It *does* specifically say that it won't allow you to sense through solid objects while allowing you to sense around corners and into narrow gaps. For this, I would just rule that the effect follows the normal rules for blocking bursts and blasts, with total cover preventing sensation (solid objects) but superior cover and normal cover allowing for it (corners and into narrow gaps).

    The second part is simply an extension of the normal use for detecting hidden creatures via Perception. The "within 10 squares of them" is simply a proviso that notes that the DC for the Perception check won't be any higher than normal (normally, 10+ spaces away increases DC by 2). Assuming you roll high enough on Perception, you'll know what spaces are occupied by creatures, traps, and other objects, but you won't be able to actually see and know what they are (as normal for finding a hidden creature without special senses).

    To specifically answer your questions, you can see the layout but you have to roll Perception to detect creatures and, even then, you're only able to know what spaces they're in rather than actually being able to see the creatures. Furthermore, the powers effects extend through doors without perfect seals because they are not total cover (I might even allow it through all doors, in fact, since they're not "solid" by definition).
    Thank you so much for the prompt reply! That all makes sense, just one further quick question. Would you have the players make just one single perception roll to determine all creatures, even if there are 8+ rooms with them? Or would you have them make a roll in each room? It worked out ok with my on the fly ruling. The players needed some help finding Blink, the one-eyed goblin in Fall of the Grey Veil, who was hiding in the cistern. Though I did also inform them of several other creatures, and their type. It didn't break down, because the combats were still challenging for them.

    The heavy oak doors I allowed the Cave Sight through, the secret doors I did not, unless she had rolled higher than the DC21 for them, which she did not. She rolled a single DC18 perception. Anyway, this also begs the question, if doors are not ruled as total cover for the purpose of spells...Than wouldn't that potentially open a can of worms for the players in the future? Many spells simply needing line of effect could be cast to go under doors? Would this be true? And if so, should I present the two options to my players to determine how they want to go forward with the ruling on doors?

    THANK YOU!

  26. - Top - End - #206
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    ThePurple's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Shameland (4e Forums)

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Kashyyyk View Post
    Would you have the players make just one single perception roll to determine all creatures, even if there are 8+ rooms with them? Or would you have them make a roll in each room?
    First off, don't have the players make the rolls in these situations. If failure would tell them just as much as succeeding (e.g. if a player rolls a 1 on an Insight check and you tell them that the target is lying, they know that they're telling the truth because they know they failed), the players do not roll; in these cases, the GM should roll.

    Secondly, whether you should roll once for each creature or one for all creatures depends entirely upon expedience. Sometimes it's best to just roll the once and then have that number checked against all of the creatures present (keeping in mind that you're rolling against their Stealth); sometimes it's better to roll for each creature independently (if you do this, make sure you either make the rolls secretly or do something else to obfuscate the number of enemies that you rolled for; some GMs will actually "pre-roll" a sheet of numbers and scratch them off as they go in order to prevent players from hearing them roll).

    Anyway, this also begs the question, if doors are not ruled as total cover for the purpose of spells
    Whether a door is total cover largely depends upon the door. Keep in mind that arrow slits (which are 3-4" wide) provide superior cover. Of course, it's also important to note that arrow slits are designed to provide access to a person at usable heights while doors don't really do this (so an attack underneath a door will hit feet while an attack through an arrow slit will hit more vital portions of a target).

    I would tackle whether doors are total, superior, or normal cover on a case-by-case basis (tell your players before they start rolling though so they know what you've decided before they've committed and can't take it back).
    4e Homebrew: Shadow Knight
    roll20: Kitru

  27. - Top - End - #207
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2017

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Q59

    I'm still confused by Runepriest Rune States. More specifically, the Hybrid Runepriest.
    From what I could gather, the Runic keyword on the power states you choose one of the runes, and then apply the relevant effects of the power. Then you enter the associated rune state.
    This seems to suggest that you can enter a rune state regardless of if the power actually hits or not, and that you don't need the Rune Master class feature at all, you just need a power with the Runic keyword. (Meaning even stuff like Dilettante or even a simple Runepriest MC for the 1/day Rune of Mending is fair game for entering a rune state.)
    However, without the Rune Master class feature, both the Rune of Destruction and the Rune of Protection states don't really do anything. So for example, Hybrids without the relevant Hybrid Talent enter rune states but don't gain any direct benefit from them.

    On to the actual main question then: am I correct in the following assumption that other rune states work for hybrids and other characters that picked up a Runic power?
    The Rune Master class feature only gives benefits to being in the rune states associated with the Destruction and Protection runes. Meanwhile, various Paragon Paths for the Runepriest as well as a few obscure Rare Alternative Rewards from D394 give a Runepriest more rune states to play with. They can be entered whenever you would enter another rune state (i.e. the rune state of Destruction/Protection when using a Runic power and picking a rider), which means that anybody who has picked up a Runic power and one of the Paragon Paths or Alternative Rewards can also enter the extra state granted by the PP/AR. Because the benefits of said state are given in the Paragon Path or reward description without a mention to the Rune Master class feature, I presume these extra states work as intended regardless of the class feature.

    Feels a bit weird to be able to effectively poach a benefit like that. I guess it's only really relevant for the D394 runes (since I believe the PP ones end once you use the benefit, meaning you'd have to use another Runic power to enter it again), which are Rare Alternative Rewards players generally shouldn't get their hands on, so it probably doesn't have much significance in the first place.
    Lowkey also annoyed that the few extra Rune States are paragon-tier rare items that can only be given out by DMs who are extremely unlikely to have even heard of the things...
    Last edited by Highfeather; 2017-08-28 at 09:58 AM. Reason: Bolded the actual small question in the not-so-small text.

  28. - Top - End - #208
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    A59
    You need the Rune Master option to gain the benefit of the runic keyword. So, no, you do not get the benefit without it.

  29. - Top - End - #209
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2017

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    Quote Originally Posted by MwaO View Post
    A59
    You need the Rune Master option to gain the benefit of the runic keyword. So, no, you do not get the benefit without it.
    Interesting, though I wonder where that's stated. I'm aware the Rune Master class feature calls out what the Runic keyword does, but the definition of the 'Runic' keyword itself in the RC doesn't seem to note anything about the Rune Master class feature. This, to me, makes it seem like the two are seperate - and the function of the Runic keyword is just repeated in the class feature entry for clarity to not confuse first-time readers who want to create a Runepriest.

    Though if it's true that you can't gain a benefit out of the Runic keyword without the class feature, then I suppose Hybrid Runepriest who want to use the Hybrid Talent to pick up something from their other class are kind of doomed. After all, the Runic keyword is also the one that governs the mechanic of choosing the Destruction/Protection riders, devaluing most Runepriest powers to "MBAs that don't count as an MBA" for anybody lacking the relevant class feature. Which would also devalue nearly any reason for anybody to MC into Runepriest and go for powerswaps.

  30. - Top - End - #210
    Dwarf in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Simple Q&A D&D 4e Thread 3

    A59
    I don't think you need the Rune Master feature to gain the basic benefits of the Rune keyword, only the empowered version is restricted to the Rune Master. Otherwise, it wouldn't even be needed to write the special benefits in the feature, but just in the powers, like what happens with Warlock's Pact or Fighter's Talents power bonuses.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •