|
Post by dodrudon on Aug 26, 2009 1:24:05 GMT
Also, Death Slaad's Confusion immunity aura and Leonal's Fear immunity aura should cure those effects as well (don't know whether they only cure on activation, or every round).
|
|
|
Post by Torin on Aug 26, 2009 20:09:43 GMT
Under spells in this forum are listed Bioware Epic Spells for clerics. Unfortunately, clerics can NOT get them. (No Epic Mage Armor for Battle Clerics, sniff )
|
|
|
Post by MurphysLawAgain on Aug 27, 2009 15:49:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Aug 29, 2009 16:14:43 GMT
There are 4 rings, Water, Lev, Passwall, and Firewalking. 2 you know of, the other 2 have not yet been added to documentation.
|
|
|
Post by dodrudon on Aug 31, 2009 22:27:06 GMT
Bard Song docs
That sentence confuses me, first it says damage bonus is twice level, but the formula shows a quarter level, and the numbers in the table (which it says isn't shown in table) shows a completely diff't progression.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Sept 1, 2009 1:15:46 GMT
It says the BONUS is roughly double (it says nothing about being double the level of the bard, which would be absurd), then gives the equation to calculate the exact bonus. Compare the damage bonus in the table to the one you get using the equation, and you will see that the equation comes out roughly double the value listed in the table (capping at 16, instead of 8).
Funky
|
|
|
Post by MurphysLawAgain on Sept 1, 2009 15:51:50 GMT
I will try to update the doc to make it clearer.
|
|
|
Post by Torin on Sept 1, 2009 16:33:22 GMT
I think the following should be added somehow and much better formulated in the forum docs: .. one of the most confusing things on HG is, that a description in the documents on "X levels" always means "X levels pre-legendary levels (level 1-40)" if X<41 and "X levels in total including legendary levels" if X = 41 or higher. If you know this once, its easy to understand. But most new players are confused by this. That's why you need 30 fighter levels to get epic dodge for free or i. e. only a pure rogue (40 levels of rogue + 20 levels in legendary levels) gets the "inflicts sneak attacks on critical immune mobs" feat.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Sept 1, 2009 17:30:49 GMT
I think the following should be added somehow and much better formulated in the forum docs: It already is: Control Class - Several of the benefits of legendary levels are dependent on the character's 'class'. Legendary levels are NOT considered to be standard levels in a standard class. You cannot, for instance, use them to fulfill level requirements for feats, spells, abilities, and so on - those must all be met by level 40, unless the requirement in question specifically states that legendary levels count toward qualification.
|
|
|
Post by Torin on Sept 1, 2009 17:38:19 GMT
Lol, ok ok Funky... My point is that newer players only click on the "Class Changes Documents" sub fora and there is not that info you just posted. If they carefully read all sub fora, then they are fine indeed. But who does that really...I would give that info I suggested also in the "Class Changes Documents" , maybe on top of it. Edit: Was not so clear below I see now.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Sept 1, 2009 19:18:13 GMT
We try to avoid duplicating information. I see this as a failure on the player's end. Yes, we can try to organize docs better, but it's all for naught if they don't read them. I can't think of a more natural place than the one they're at.
Funky
|
|
|
Post by Torin on Sept 1, 2009 19:42:36 GMT
We try to avoid duplicating information. I see this as a failure on the player's end. Yes, we can try to organize docs better, but it's all for naught if they don't read them. I can't think of a more natural place than the one they're at. Right. I agree on every sentence here. But as an example: if a firm sees that their customers gets one crucial information wrong over and over again, say can say "bah, we do everything right, they should RTFM" or they could say "OK, so be it: This crucial information is listed on 2-3 spots, so we hopefully have not to answer this question again and again on our hot-lines (and concentrate on our work again)". Hope you get my point.
|
|
|
Post by dodrudon on Sept 1, 2009 20:10:23 GMT
Agree with Torin here. Yeah, the user may be stupid, but the user is ALWAYS stupid. Usability is not about doing what *should* work but what DOES work. I'm come to the server, see a bajillion pages of changes, I'm probably gonna skip to the section I care about and ignore the rest.
Maybe non-LLs be pLLs (for pre-Legendary Levels), and total levels including LLs be CL.
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Sept 1, 2009 20:39:11 GMT
Maybe non-LLs be pLLs (for pre-Legendary Levels), and total levels including LLs be CL. We already do this when talking about quasiclasses, or casterlevels. Where precisely are you suggesting we do it? Funky
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Sept 1, 2009 20:44:30 GMT
But as an example: if a firm sees that their customers gets one crucial information wrong over and over again, say can say "bah, we do everything right, they should RTFM" or they could say "OK, so be it: This crucial information is listed on 2-3 spots, so we hopefully have not to answer this question again and again on our hot-lines (and concentrate on our work again)". Hope you get my point. I do, and I agree with it, but the problem is this: if people ALREADY aren't reading docs, making them longer isn't going to help the problem. It boils down to a balancing of conciseness and noduplicativity, against beating people over the head with oft-missed points. On the upside, this is one of those things you can just point them to once, for most people. Funky
|
|