Jump to content

Duke Bushido

HERO Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Duke Bushido

  1. Thanks, Chris. Bookmarked it, and I'll get it tomorrow night: 45 minutes to game time with the youth group; I've got to get ready.
  2. You've reminded me of our very earliest games, where none of us really had a clue what was what, but we wanted to jump in and play this game! So we all made characters (wildly bizarre, disparate, mis-matched characters who, without the most extreme of GM intervention, would make a truly ineffective team (you know: a "team" of lone-wolf types ) None of us had considered making up for each other's shortcomings-- to the point where we most often shared shortcomings: "Mute?! Dude, that sounds like an _awesome_ idea! Hey, Jim! My guys mute, too!" (shameful, but a true story )) Short version: we were _incapable_ of keeping _in sight_ of each other, let alone pace, with out-of-combat movement. More than one character's "movement power" was a bus pass the GM tossed at him. Those first three or four adventures (we were adamant that we could make these characters work! ) more often than not were a series of cut scenes: Okay, so you agree to meet at X in twenty minutes and continue the pursuit. or: Your the first one here. You scan the scene, looking for traces of where the villain may have gone. After speaking with eye-witnesses and posing for the crowd, Dave shows up and crumples against a lamp post. Dave, you should probably just Recover for a minute or two. You see a cab headed this way. Mike, didn't you take a cab? Okay, is Dave recovered enough to talk? Sure. Great. I turn to Dave "Greased Lightning, I think I see The Hunter arriving. Tell him I'm headed south, toward the desert road. Demonic is riding in a chariot made of skulls, pulled by giant flaming dog skeletons with battle armor. I haven't seen Lucas at all, but I'm sure he's at the nearest bus stop." That kind of thing. shortest version? We could _not_ make those characters work. I got no idea how old you are, Neil, and I'm not asking. But trust me: that particular "dig" was around a lot longer than the internet. Never, _EVER_ turn off Pedant mode! NEVER! in a hobby overflowing with AMGs (angry math guys: thanks, Neil ), it is _vital_ that we keep reminding them what the rules say to the people who read the _words_! Duke
  3. On the plus side, you'll be much closer and I can come 'round more often. Almost all of my-- Aww, crap! I totally forgot to go back and post this in Chris's House Rules thread! Sorry, Chris. At any rate, most of my non-supers campaigns use EGO as the target for Presence Attacks. It just makes more sense to me: presence is your force of Personality; Ego is your strength of will. It just feels more right. Why not my supers games? Well for one, I get way more EGO: 10 characters in Supers than in any other genre. Don't know why, but the bulk of my supers players seem to think that Captain UltraRighteous and Miss Victorious Leader should be as influenceable as any other schmoe on the street. That, and a lot of them have drifted in and out from other groups that use PRE and PRE Attack as-is. Even so, though: I don't use presence attacks much (outside of Horror or Occult), but I _do_ use them, and even my regular players have a nasty habit of making EGO: 10 supers. (sometimes, when I'm really frustrated with them, I think just how inexpensively I could build a mind-controlling villain.... Not that I would, mind you!) That doesn't happen as often at my non-supers games, because most people who aren't already HERO-familiar will instead look for "that particular game" instead of a HERO-based version of it, and my regular players are aware of the PRE vs EGO rule (you know: the same people who _won't_ buy a little PRE for PRE vs PRE rules! Maddening!) Another exception is my Horroresque games-- well, some of them, anyway, where there are one or more custom damage-tracking characteristics against which PRE-Attacks are directed as a form of sanity or spiritual damage. (and of course, there are recovery rules as well. I ain't Lovecraft). I instituted -- sorry. Not derailing this thread; my apologies. _That_ can go into Chris's House Rules thread, when I find it again. Duke
  4. I agree with you completely. I have always understood the way this works mechanically: it's armor with some eclectic limitations. I totally understand that. This! This is the part that chafes like 80-grit Charmin: " missing me" _is_ a special effect. It's all special effects for playing with random number generators, in the end. But "missing" is not just any special effect. Missing is a special effect for which we already have not just a mechanic, but a well-known mechanic. Several source books have been written around ways to make this mechanic more exciting and colorful, and how to exploit this mechanic in new and creative ways. In response to a question, Hugh (no negativity, Hugh; just citing my source ) responded that he felt the martial arts rules should be considered part of the core rules. The martial arts rules are nothing more than further flavoring for the existing and well-established mechanic of I/you hit/missed. That mechanic is the to-hit roll. I won't go into all the ways to influence that; I could not possibly do a better job typing with two thumbs on a tiny screen than the umpteen actual complete books on the subject have done. I couldn't even do well enough to embarrass myself by comparison. In the last couple of editions, we have seen flavor and color lost to the drive to consolidate mechanics: unique abilities that are now mealy (and often expensive!) versions of their former selves, simply because, if you stretched a different mechanic far enough, and piled enough advantages and limitations, and had a shoe horn and one of those long-handled golf hammers, you could make it fit. The push has been toward the importance of reducing mechanics into groups of type: transfer is now drain and aid; instant change is now T-form (for _how_ many ap?!), etc, etc. Except for this. This is a mechanic that is clearly armor (sorry; it's so much more practical to type than "Resistant Defense"). Ain't no doubt about it. We all see it's just armor. No one, myself included, will claim that armor does not work just the way the mechanic of this power works. But then the text spells out the intent of this power (which it further supports via the limitations listed) is to nullify the to-hit roll. I ain't havin that. You want to get missed, then find a way to affect that roll before it happens, and not a way to claim it was any different than what it was. Combat weaving: +2 DCV. If 6 let's you put mods on skill levels, or buy raw CV as talents and powers, flavor it up a bit: Character has a well-defined defensive instinct or extreme training that keeps him moving, feinting, and learning his opponent's Tell for striking. This allows him to twist and weave in such a way that he is often able to completely side-step attacks from even the most skilled of fighters. In which case, it missed complete, by the Combat Luck description. At the end of the phase, a miss and a zero-damage hit are "mechanically the same." I'm not a damned robot; I don't get hot for mechanics. I'm not an accountant; balanced spreadsheets don't tighten my pants, either. I'm a writer, a reader, and a teller of stories, and this construct was designed specifically (it's right there in the description) to re-write a piece of the story that has already been penned, and read by everyone at the table. It _kills_ me a little that no one else is ever bothered by that because "hey, same thing, sort of, and it's cheap, too!" So what? Get your THAC0 out of my OCV/DCV. Except for the qualifier phrase, that's my own construct as well. Duke
  5. Interesting programs from other countries? From Venus? From next week? Maybe it's now the world's first high-def 3D CRT screen? Or go with the more obvious, if a bit more mundane, suggestion for a critical repair roll: it never, ever breaks again. Or he did it in record time, with a stylish flair. Something like the Fonzie thump, and viola: never breaks again. Rewards don't have to be spendible to be satisfying.
  6. 5e: Unfortunately, 5e is only in my phone right now (didn't realize that when I sat down here), but I promise it's pretty much the same, including the phrase "sometimes called the just missed me!" effect. 5er: Because Combat Luck depends on a char- acter’s ability to dodge, block, or otherwise avoid damage, it doesn’t work if he’s asleep, unconscious, or deliberately throws himself in the way of an attack (for example, to save a comrade from injury). Nor does it protect him from damage in most situ- ations where he deliberately does something he knows will hurt him (such as performing a Move By/Through, both of which cause him to take some of the damage he does to the target). In some cases Combat Luck won’t apply if the character is Sur- prised (see page 380); the GM may require a PER Roll or other roll to determine if the character per- ceived the attack in time to use his Combat Luck. 6e1: This Talent represents a character’s ability to avoid damage in combat due to luck, skill, training, or some similar reason. Although referred as Combat Luck, it can indicate a charac- ter’s skill at dodging attacks (it’s sometimes known as the “just missed me!” effect). Combat Luck provides a character with 3 points of Resistant PD and ED for 6 Character Points. (Characters may buy Combat Luck more than once, unless the GM rules otherwise.) This defense is considered Hardened (see 6E1 147). It works together with any other applicable defenses a character has, such as his innate PD/ED, armor he wears, his Resistant Protection power, and the like. Because Combat Luck depends on a character’s ability to dodge, block, or otherwise avoid damage, it doesn’t work if the character is asleep, unconscious, or deliberately throws himself in the way of an attack (for example, to save a comrade from injury). Nor does it protect him from damage in most situations where he deliberately does something he knows will hurt him (such as performing a Move By/Through, both of which cause him to take some of the damage he does to the target). In some cases Combat Luck won’t apply if the character is Surprised ( Let me see if I can shorten that up: 5er: Combat Luck depends on a char- acter’s ability to dodge, block, or otherwise avoid damage, it doesn’t work if he’s asleep, unconscious, or deliberately throws himself in the way of an attack (for example, to save a comrade from injury). 6e: Combat Luck depends on a character’s ability to dodge, block, or otherwise avoid damage, it doesn’t work if the character is asleep, unconscious, or deliberately throws himself in the way of an attack (for example, to save a comrade from injury). Factor in the creator of the rule calling it "just missed me," the rule that says characters can have it multiple times, and the fact that it is _not_ armor (though it works like it) and the fact that the only way it won't help a character is if he, paraphrasing, chooses to get hit or is in a circumstance where he cannot dodge, twist, bend, fold, spindle, or mutilate his way out of being hit. The rules, as quite specifically written, regardless of _how you chose to _use_ them_, have a very clear message that this is intended to simulate "not getting hit" (when it works perfectly, at any rate) _after_ having actually been hit. Fine. It bothers none else. We could decide to roll a die every time a character takes any sort of action. Every time a 6 comes up, we ignore that action as though it never happened. Eventually, we'd find a way to justify that, too. We are creative people, after all. Used with proper GM discretion, this models it _poorly_, but since so many people worry about stacking it with several other kinds of defenses, I, like Chris, have to wonder just how much P-v-P is going on between GM and everyone else. I mean, if the GM decides he wants to hose you, go adventure naked. It'll be over sooner. _IF_ this rule _did not_ present itself as a way to avoid getting hit without using CV, skill levels, or their mechanics, but instead said "roll with the punch" and presented itself as "this talent represents people who have learned to instinctively blah blah blah to alter and change etc etc etc deflect knife blades hooziwhatsits to mitigate the damage he takes from being hit in combat," I would have _way_ less problems with it. If it just changed it's name from "Combat Luck," that would help. Lessen the severity of knife wounds? Screw that! I rolled three sixes! I want a damned flamethrower! _That's_ a three-sixes luck roll. So my last entry to this conversation (bowing out before the round of "why don't you just call it that and define it so?" questions-- actually, no: I'll answer it preemptively this time) Why does it bother me? Partly because it claims to be luck. Oh, but luck doesn't have a good mechanic. Well neither does actual, honest-to-Pete luck. Things just happen-- good or bad, while you're too damned busy to figure out why, or sometimes even understand. "A good mechanic for Luck" is physics, which is the opposite: it's understanding-- Hell, most of you are better educated than I am: you know what physics is; I'm not here to patronize anyone. (short "a") Mostly, though, it bothers me for the same reason so much of the Dark Champions fall-out bugs me: here's a neat way to use one mechanic to screw up another one. Want to be invincible? Desolid, only versus bullets / knives / thrown weapons / whatever. So now my "Desolid" is cheaper (you know, because it's "limited" ), I'm practically invincible within my campaign, _and_ I don't have to buy "affects Solid" because my enemies aren't damage dice! Woo-hoo! Want to never miss? Autofire or Area Effect on your fist, Dude. (yeah, there are some giants and speedsters for whom that's a rather inspired build; we know that. But just because you don't want your street-wise vigilante to have a serious chance of missing a punch? Bit much). Enough! Sorry: first day back to work after three days of unbelievable fever, and I'm tired as all get-out, and want to wrap this up before forgetting it. The reason I don't do that and call it that is because that is not a HERO construct: That is a Duke construct. Or a Lucious construct. Or a whoever-wants-to-be-the-first-to-suggest-this-obvious-solution-this-time construct. The official HERO construct will always be "here's a way to completely undo getting knocked on the head. Try it out." And from HERO-- the company that is _not_ D&D-- this rule, by it's own explanation, completely ties the strength of your armor to whether or not you got hit. Coming from Champions (HERO System today)-- the game that, so far as I can recall in my foggy sleep-deprived mind, was the _first_ game to separate "getting hit" from "defense"-- it's a Flippety-flappin abomination. Night, All. Duke
  7. Hmmmm.. Base it on AP flies to mind, but that still makes it much more effective for some powers than others, and of course, anything I an ultra gets it for a song. Base it on Actual Cost? Lots of complaints all around, but I think the scenarios that spilled out of it until everyone had a handle on where to go next.
  8. Sorry folks, lunch break is twenty minutes, so I can't really read what I've missed if I want to poke in any words on this tiny screen. From 5, 5r, and 6, without changing from one to the next: (paraphrased for time reasons) Combat luck represents a character's ability to dodge or turn or otherwise avoid attacks. Also called the "just MISSED me effect." Whether or not the math works out, the intent that here is a mechanic designed to turn a success "yay! I hit!" "Okay, roll your damage, then add it up." Oh, okay. Turns out you missed. You mean I didn't go through his defense? No; I mean you miss. I'm a super marksman, government sniper assassin with eleven skill levels with this particular weapon, a scope that has nine more skill levels built in, and I'm firing from twelve feet away. And you missed. You said I hit. Well you did. But then you rolled too low on your damage, so you missed. That's bull"&3i@, Man. Yeah, but you still missed. We can sit hear and say "well it should be used" or "it could be used" and you won't be wrong: we all tend to create situations where we are justified, after all. Hell, I'm doing it now. But we have a unique situation in the history of all editions: we have access to the original incarnation of the rule, and every version thereafter, and we know that it was written (and left unchanged) by the same guy (not team) every time. So no matter what we may convince ourselves was the direction of the first few players who created this game, we can _see_ the original intent of this rule, and see that it is _still_ the intent of this rule. And just like the 4e crap of "Desolidification: only versus damage" or that other nonsense, it is intended as a way to _take_ a success without actually going to the trouble of altering the probability of that success. Suppose it was some other sort of success? You have successfully defused the bomb and saved everyone in the stadium! The police officer slumps against the wall in relief. Thank you. My kids are here. Thank you. Too bad our villain has retroactively improved the design. Kaboom! What? That's crap, Dude! No. It's Something we put together building on the idea of retroactively taking a success away from you. On the plus side, you never knew the cop's kids were there, either. And we've done this before, back when it first hit, and taking my lessons from then, I'm done. There are those who will refuse to see this, and those who will justify it with a work-around definition without acknowledging the origins, clearly-stated intent, and maybe even a few who have gone out of their way to make sure they can't, but at the end of the day, if you can't see why a power build intended to retroactively take a success away from someone is utter crap, I can't help you see it, either. Have fun! Gotta get back to work. Duke
  9. Really? How is acknowledging his successfully making contact with you any different from some some bull$@=; pansy-@$+ little-kid-getting-tagged-and-runs-off-yelling "did not! Did not! Did not!"? Just clarifying: that _is_ the question being asked here, correct? At the beginning of every single edition of these rules is some syrupy little bit about how 'we use to play cowboys and indians or cops and robbers or army and aliens or pirates and navy or whatever. Do you remember the problems? First, you had to have room to run around' etc, etc, until they get to talking about what's so gteat about an RPG, and they get to that point where there are rules we all share that let us know when we are successful, or when we've been hit, or when we've yadda yadda, and these rules are great, because they keep your friends from being the complete dicks they were when you were kids who kept yelling "nunh-unh" and "did not" every time they were shot, outflanked, arrested-- whatever. ' So then this tiny little cobble pops up one day, slap in the face of that very preface in the same book. Is Steve telling us something? Was he one of those kids? Or did they leave a bad taste in his mouth so he built us a handy little detector they couldn't help but pick up, because it's just so _them_? Y'all can (and will; I've been down this road before. I almost developed a roster (almost because a lot of them don't seem to be active anymore) of who will tell me this very thing here: "But the end result is the same, so what does it matter? " Because Forrest Gump is not Lord of the Rings! You know what? I dont care any more. Screw it. Forrest Gump _is_ Lord of the Rings, because the end result is the same. Imagine the money Peter Jackson would have missed out on if Hanks had just titled his film "guy takes boring-assed walk". There. Same. And SWAT kicking in your door and shooting your grandmother and your dog, that's the same as serving a warrant, because now you know the police want something. Same/same. At the end of the day, the player had a Success. And Cobblebat Luck very specifically uses a mechanic (one of the new perfect ones) that absolutely one-hundred percent cannot affect that success, and uses that mechanic to take that success away. I say "take it away" instead of prevent it, but this mechanically-perfect bit of "nyunh-uhn" used a mechanic that is incapable of affecting the odds of success one way or another to flat out pick up its ball and go home--- I mean, steal someone's success retroactively: you know: after everyone at the table has watched them succeed. You want to know what the difference is when the end results are the same; I want to know why, given the number of builds that could have incorporated things that actually affect an attack roll, were all fighting to see how many levels of Dick Move we should allow to stack. And a million more, but I went back to work today; I've got to get inside.
  10. Here's a traditionally unpopular idea I used to toss out when there where "what would you like to see in 5e?" or 5er? Or 6e? And that was about it... How about _raising_ the prices of Characteristics (preferably primary and secondary, but you know: I just don't think that's going to happen anymore) until there is actually room for the granularity required to make all these things balance. I've been avoiding this one, and I'm stepping out now, simply because I don't want to get on a rant about "skill levels in a power framework."
  11. I agree completely, which is why I will continue to fuss and gripe until "luck," which plays _zero_ part in this power, is removed completely. Call it "invisible armor" or "big girl panties" or "I want the stylish and rugged charm of not needing or wanting armor, but I also definitely want me some armor." "oh, but it so perfectly models not getting hit in spite of your opponent flat-out hitting you." Well so does any other armor, if that's how you want to define it. Granted, I have issues with that definition (make Combat Luck a DCV boost, for Pete's sake: then you can actually model" well how about that! You didn't actually hit me" without sticking in the craw of the guy who vey clearly hit you.), but it'd be a Hell if a lot easier to ignore if it wasn't being called "Luck (a thing that actually exists in the game)" without remotely _being_ Luck.
  12. Or roll your Luck Dice. Every 6 gives you +X appropriate defense.
  13. I will first confess that I've been a Ed with flu for going into my fourth day now, so I can't read too well (watery eyes) and I'm posting via phone. But you are proposing the notion that you will accept Danger Sense with Limitations, in some cases pretty sever ones: The Danger Sense based on telepathy, for example, is useless against pitfalls or other death traps. It might even be useless against a sniper (your discretion, of course) or smoldering sawdust about to ignite paint-thinner-soaked rags three floors below you and block any chance of escape. And on and on and on. and I can go two ways with the sense group idea (three, if I admit that it's valid-and yeah; I kinda do. I mean, it's your game, right?) First: there is only one sense group, and that is touch. All senses are variations by being filter through specialized touch sensors. (at the end of the day, this is what's difficult with PD and ED: all energy is formed of some sort of measurable (and therfore touchable, and therfore physical) matter; there are just a lot of specialized forms of matter. (hey! Digression! I must be getting better!) The other way I can go with this is that from its inception, or, to restate: in 2/3 of the rules editions, Danger Sense had its own mechanic. This would suggest to me that it belongs in the "Danger Sensing" Sense Group. Though I don't like to discuss sense groups too deeply. At the end of the day, it just reminds me that ShapeShift still exists as a power. Why don't we do like GURPS Supers and make whole new powers out of all the other popular special effects, too? Duke
  14. Neil: Loved the post; would have quoted it but that's a pain on a touch screen. At any rate, I think the bulk of your answers (drone or pilot, 36000 years, etc) can be answered by studying, mechanically, what it is Danger Sense does: as you noted, it's the last-line defense against being surprised. So the answer, I would think (and generally how I use it) is that it is responding to that thing that _will_ attempt to hurt you if you don't move _now_. When the missile gets launched, you've still got twenty minutes or so to go on about your business before it becomes a "now or never" situation. Of course, the raises questions of "danger payload" (at least, it has for me in the past) : no amount of "dive for cover" is getting you out of the blast radius of seven Megatron fuel/air bomb; I give a _rip_ what the maneuver says. There are guys on this board way more familiar with comic books than me, but when this question came up at my table, a couple of players pointed out different scenes in Spiderman's history were his danger sense went off either repeatedly or protractedly while he was trying to figure out what was the danger. Turned out (according to the guys education me) that it was really, really big danger, and his more or less ignoring his danger sense (thinking something was wrong with him) nearly got him killed. Again: there are likely actual experts here who can tell me if I got played, but given that basis, the point at which something becomes an immediate danger is going to vary depending on just how big that danger is, and when it's "now or never" to get out of the way.
  15. Sorry, Sir. Looks like I'm all out of rep again. I gotta get over this bug!
  16. Thanks to both of you. I would prefer to buy it here (I have no idea, of course, but I'd like to think the company gets a better "cut" that way. )
  17. Holy cats! If I wore a hat, I would take it off to you, Christopher. If I had hair, I'd take it off, too. That sounded almost like _science_! 😨 (though if I had hair, I'd want that suave world traveler hair like Ruggels has )
  18. I've been lying abed ill for a couple of days; I thought I'd use some of this time to catch up on some reading. The problem is the HERO books aren't exactly novels, and hard to keep open and out of your face when lying at odd angles. So I thought I'd pick up the PDF and read it on my phone. I went to the 5e section for the store, and there is no PDF for this book. No; I take that back: I can't buy the PDF because they don't have a paper book to go with it. So: Does anyone know where I can buy- legitimately buy- a PDF of this book? Thanks. Duke
  19. It's not for typing into this phone, but I did a race once that had a very long chain as a cultural weapon. More than just a weapon, it was a significant part of their social and familial standing.
  20. Yup. It just grows and grows, don't it?
  21. That is an excellent question, Hugh, and one I'd never before stopped to wonder. I've been giving it some thought, and it's hard to answer. I mean, I could say "I don't know; maybe half" and let it ride, but out of respect for you and the others, and my enjoyment of the things I am learning here in this thread, the best I can say is "somewhere between 2/3 and 3/4. _But_.... Most (not all) of my play groups, at least until say the last ten or so years, are filled with pre-internet veterans. That doesn't sound significant, until you stop to realize that we couldn't post a question to the mass of humanity and wait for an answer; we certainly couldn't jump onto a website and ask the guy that wrote the book. So where did we get answers to questions? Isolated groups worked it out for themselves (like my first group; I told you about our "gaming store" ) by study of what was given in the books and and nigh-endless discussion. But there were game stores and rec centers (we had a rec center) where other gamers hung out. We could talk to them, too, so long as we played the same game. Game stores were big one (eventually, we all lived close enough to make semi-regular trips to a couple of different ones). And we'd sit in on each other's games now and again, and there was almost always something--or a couple of somethings--the other group did differently. If we liked it, we'd adopt it, and if we didn't, then we didn't. Same for them, too: if they liked it, etc. Local colleges and high schools weas where the bulk of gamers seemed to come from, and certainly they discussed the games as much as anything else (except possibly dating, for the high schoolers). I know I kept in touch with every gamer I could find on the ol college campus. All of that is a long way around to say that even at those tables I didn't teach, how much "local influence" were we already sharing before we even sat down together? How many learned from people I taught, or who taught me? I have no real way to evaluate that, except to say that I can assume "more than I would have thought," given how much easier it used to be to teach the game. Okay, I kid on that last line: I know our brains harden as we get older, and that's kind of sad to me. So again, really good question, but I don't know if I can answer it any more accurately than if you'd asked "other than my GMs, who else has affected the way I play?" I just don't know, accurately. (Take the following _only_ as the good-natured teasing it is meant to be:) .... Says the guy who knows that KA is the most effective way to deliver _STUN_ to a target..... Seriously: I've been playing slug abed for two days now with the flu (turns out the shot people guessed wrong this year), and I just needed a good laugh (and subsequent coughing and hacking fit. ) That's entirely possible; the only published characters we had access to for years were the ones in the rules book, but we seem to have used them differently. We didn't look at them as models for "how to build a character" or "what a character should look like" as much as we used them as references for specific bits of build: how to use a multipower; how to apply an advantage; what's a "good" CON or a "typical" DEX. That sort of thing.
  22. Now that's an interesting take on it. Thanks!
  23. Okay, had minute to check BBB. It doesn't specify being able to use it on behalf of others, but given the assumption that at its base, it means "detect when you are in immediate danger," I would have to interpret the Adders "danger in your immediate vicinity," "danger in your general area," and "danger anywhere" to mean detecting danger to others in that area, as no matter how far away _you_ can sense danger_, you're only in danger because you are _right here_. You know: where the sniper is aiming, or where the missile is going to land, or where your ex-wife's attorney is heading. Given the interpretation of detecting danger to others, that "detect danger anywhere" thing has got to cause a lot of sleepless nights....
  24. And you may be right. I'd have to check. But I seem to recall (and again, I could be way off; I haven't sat down and read 4e for a long time) that there was a separate adder or advantage for detecting danger to others.
  25. That's it? You're not going to tell us?! (you, Sir, have an evil streak in you....) Duke
  • Create New...