Gaming Discussion

For all things gaming related.

Quick questions and answers

Originally Posted by Sithobi1 View Post
+3 Int, Wis, and Cha are not.
I'm not saying they are. I'm saying if the DM rejects the +3 to all mental stats, that it's fair to negotiate a +2 to one stat on the grounds that kobolds suck unless you're doing ridiculous cheese.

I'm a little confused about something, and have found conflicting reports through research on various forums. Does a Favored Soul use CHA to determine both bonus spells and save DC's, or CHA for bonus spells, and WIS for save DC's?

DCs are based on wisdom. Bonus spells are based on charisma. The ability to cast spells is based on charisma.

Being small in 4e is only a drawback: you are limited in the weapons that you can use as described in the Handbook. Small races usually get some other race powers to compensate for it, but just being small in itself grants no bonuses.

One possible benefit to being small is that you can move into places other characters can't. For example, you can move through a Large enemy's space because that enemy is two size categories larger (or smaller) than you, as described in the section on movement, page 283 of the PHB. Most players won't remember that.

If an Avenger applies a poison to a melee weapon, and makes a melee attack under
The target is the target of his Oath and is the only enemy adjacent to him, so he gets to make two attack rolls.
conditions that would trigger his Oath of Enmity and hits with that attack, would he also make two attack rolls for the secondary attack given by the poison?

Oath of Enmity effect: "When you make a melee attack against the target and the target is the only enemy adjacent to you, you make two attack rolls and use either result."

Poison effect: "Make a secondary attack against the next target you hit with the coated weapon or ammunition: +6 vs. Fortitude; on a hit, the target takes ongoing 5 poison damage (save ends)."

I guess I'm asking if the secondary poison attack is still a melee attack for the purposes of using the Oath of Enmity.

Technically, it's the sword making the attack, not the Avenger.

Ok, that's fine too if you want to see it that way. I felt that the attack secondary attack was being made by the poison, because that was the effect, and the poison is linked to the sword. Either way I read it, the oath is granting the avenger himself the ability and should only affect the avenger's powers, and not any other power.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Last Database Backup 2017-02-24 09:00:06am local time
Myth-Weavers Status