инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинйоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфо
инфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоинфоtuchkasинфоинфо
Statistics:Posted by yankeeschic — Mon Jun 02, 2025 6:06 pm
]]>
IoseRomaOxygWindJohnStanPhilCafeМиссMoisРоди(МИФNoraРутгсертГариJohnFielстихFishЛитРNokiсерт
BrauMartпонячленЧереАлекStreАлиеopusтрилWindSamuДмитДаниStouAlysDeseЩербЛениClifАкимСидоназв
MornZORLChriPostWindJaumМаркCrysJeweЛаврТабаруссClubSide2800забоFranсореуказHomeJeweMadoпоэз
КитаViraчистdiamменяАмлиTereOxygОганWindWaynStefAllaGigaВласBurnMoodChicHummSteeChriAmanLowi
АптепокрхороNexuручкстраSamsShagClauактеТихоАртиШапоHM-2SN34PoweРоссРоссMataДекаклеймедиclas
АстаБ452EasyотлипредSCRASonyXVIIwwwmвокаклетPhilметаArmsPediХараWindСтреIntrHearRobeстудЛитР
ScarДжадTricНТФеHeroпервПавлЧернMiguначаJameБара(преAdobГобеНевепокоSummджунTaylВелиDiscвозр
WillTenzзоопСквоLarrПетрмалыSimsГолоБогаГолуавтоначаPaulумойШеньМилоФилиMPEGКорнTraiNexuNexu
NexuпесеMariBryaАлабXVIIвозрФедередаНекрМихеbonubooktuchkasЛукутеат
Statistics:Posted by yankeeschic — Sat May 24, 2025 7:22 pm
]]>
The Australian and Scottish (I think, not 100% sure) players were VERY understanding, even when I took part as a player too.
Statistics:Posted by Aegharan — Mon Dec 30, 2019 1:17 pm
]]>
Lursi wrote: ↑
I'm French and have played/GM'ed ED in French when I first started roleplaying back in the mid 90s. I had stopped playing for a long while and only resumed 4-5 years ago; having nobody to play with 'in person' since I moved in a rural area, I turned to roll20 and played only in English since then.Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:17 pm
I have always been curious about being a GM in a foreign language.I GM'ed two different (ED) games in roll20 since then. I only gm'ed maybe a total of 20 sessions; I did not stop because of language issues but because of unrelated problems.
I'd say its a question of how familiar you are with speaking English (I work in a technical environment where half of the people I deal with are native English speakers) and how 'forgiving' your players might be.
Limited vocabulary might results in you repeating the same words/terms/expressions often or having to 'hold' the game a moment while you are trying to remember a specific word. Personally, the part I disliked the most was my inability to 'voice roleplay'; basically I had enough troubles just making sure the players could understand me so I could not afford to try and use accents.
Another issue (that never happened to me) might be having players that speaks some 'regional dialects' of English that you, as the GM would have troubles understanding; I'm honestly not sure if I could GM a game with a Scott or an Australian in the group.
Statistics:Posted by Bonhumm — Sun Dec 29, 2019 11:25 pm
]]>
RAW in 2. Edition is clearly on my side as attack is a term clearly defined in the combat section p.217ff with spellcasting and missile weapons explicitly named.
RAW in ED classic (red bricks “better 2.edition”)
Clearly states close combat, as does 4th edition.
So I agree it is a gap in the ruling in ED2 and the talent is of limited use to my human wizard.
Regarding “being stuck in 2nd edition rules” I have to say there are also some good sides to that, I suffer from the fact that our table wants a german ruleset and the red brick ED classic is only available in english. (And my entire terminology is used to the english names, terms, etc)
I have always been curious about being a GM in a foreign language.
Statistics:Posted by Lursi — Sun Dec 29, 2019 8:17 pm
]]>
'If making a close combat attack that round'
'Close combat' is not just a generic term but is actually defined in 4th edition; it means use of either a melee weapon or unarmed combat; it does not include throwing, missile or casting, even if you are 'close' to the target.
It its true that the definition of 2nd edition does not include that restriction, but I think its obvious that it is still 'the spirit of the law'.
Heh, so my group is not the only one still stuck with that damn 2nd edition?
Statistics:Posted by Bonhumm — Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:36 pm
]]>
But I know we had the exact same discussion and came to the same conclusion, that it only works for close combat attacks.
And another discussion regarding this talent: No, you can't use your extra attack to stand up and then attack with the second.
You only receive an additional close combat attack if you made a close combat attack.
Statistics:Posted by Belenus — Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:32 pm
]]>
Lursi wrote: ↑
A)... allow you to cast a zero thread spell twice against the very target of your first attack?
B)... allow you to do thread weaving and spellcasting in one round?
C)... allow you to cast a zero thread spell against your target and one against another target in your extra round?
D)... none of the above, as it it is only intended for melee attacks?
I would vote for A) as the Air Dance is compared to the result of your direct enemy, your actions are somewhat connected to this enemy.
Although we play ED2, I would say the only thing changed is the success condition (which is clear in both editions) and not the outcome.
It's most certainly D. Air Dance does not give you extra spellcasting, as it specifically refers to extra attacks (also in ED2). It always bothered me that it didn't specify close combat in ED2, as it resulted in a large discussion on my table when our archer picked up the talent. So I'm glad that ED4 fixed these problems with specific terminology.Sun Dec 29, 2019 7:05 am
I had a discussion with my GM yesterday. As a human wizard, does Air Dance(given you score 10 higher ini)...A)... allow you to cast a zero thread spell twice against the very target of your first attack?
B)... allow you to do thread weaving and spellcasting in one round?
C)... allow you to cast a zero thread spell against your target and one against another target in your extra round?
D)... none of the above, as it it is only intended for melee attacks?
I would vote for A) as the Air Dance is compared to the result of your direct enemy, your actions are somewhat connected to this enemy.
Although we play ED2, I would say the only thing changed is the success condition (which is clear in both editions) and not the outcome.
Statistics:Posted by ragbasti — Sun Dec 29, 2019 1:29 pm
]]>
So per the written rules, for 4th Edition, no use for Spellcasters other than being faster in Initiative, as long as they don't pull out their weapons and enter melee
Statistics:Posted by Aegharan — Sun Dec 29, 2019 12:20 pm
]]>
Mataxes wrote: ↑
For a more concrete example, it your target scored a 7 on their Initiative, here's the breakdown:
Air Dance result less than 7: No successes.
Air Dance result of 7-11: One success (you "succeed" when you equal or exceed the target number)
Air Dance result of 12-16: Two successes (one for equaling the DN 7, plus one "extra" for getting 5 over the DN)
Air Dance result of 17+: Three successes (one for equaling DN 7, plus two "extra" for getting 10 over the DN)
I had a discussion with my GM yesterday. As a human wizard, does Air Dance(given you score 10 higher ini)...Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:46 am
To clarify: to get the extra attack with Air Dance with three successes, not three extra successes (for a total of four).For a more concrete example, it your target scored a 7 on their Initiative, here's the breakdown:
Air Dance result less than 7: No successes.
Air Dance result of 7-11: One success (you "succeed" when you equal or exceed the target number)
Air Dance result of 12-16: Two successes (one for equaling the DN 7, plus one "extra" for getting 5 over the DN)
Air Dance result of 17+: Three successes (one for equaling DN 7, plus two "extra" for getting 10 over the DN)
A)... allow you to cast a zero thread spell twice against the very target of your first attack?
B)... allow you to do thread weaving and spellcasting in one round?
C)... allow you to cast a zero thread spell against your target and one against another target in your extra round?
D)... none of the above, as it it is only intended for melee attacks?
I would vote for A) as the Air Dance is compared to the result of your direct enemy, your actions are somewhat connected to this enemy.
Although we play ED2, I would say the only thing changed is the success condition (which is clear in both editions) and not the outcome.
Statistics:Posted by Lursi — Sun Dec 29, 2019 7:05 am
]]>
It also offers secondary benefits to talents like maneuver.
Lastly, you can make a difference killing a big monster before it strikes again 6 times and maybe pushes one of your friends over the line.
For me, one of the strongest talents being. fighter that uses Maneuver as well.
Statistics:Posted by Lursi — Sun Aug 25, 2019 2:18 pm
]]>
]]>
For a more concrete example, it your target scored a 7 on their Initiative, here's the breakdown:
Air Dance result less than 7: No successes.
Air Dance result of 7-11: One success (you "succeed" when you equal or exceed the target number)
Air Dance result of 12-16: Two successes (one for equaling the DN 7, plus one "extra" for getting 5 over the DN)
Air Dance result of 17+: Three successes (one for equaling DN 7, plus two "extra" for getting 10 over the DN)
I can understand the confusion (the wording isn't great), but look at it more like Maneuver, or Taunt, or Mystic Aim, or any of the other talents that have a flat "each success does X" kind of mechanic -- you count successes starting from the DN. It's just that some talents (like Melee Weapons) don't start doing anything "extra" until... well, you get "extra".
Does that help at all?
Statistics:Posted by Mataxes — Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:46 am
]]>
]]>
Whether or not it's worth it probably depends on your overall focus. But just, like, in and of itself, yeah, I think it's still pretty solid.
Statistics:Posted by utsukushi — Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:13 pm
]]>