[dungeoncrawl] Re: Rules trivia and IMAX

    And, you can even take Weapon Focus with touch spells (or ray spells) and
get a +1 to hit with them.

Johnathan Detrick wrote:

>     Another interesting thing you can do with touch spells is take the
> Weapon Finesse feat.  Then you can use your dexterity bonus rather than you
> strength bonus when you roll to hit.
>
> Damon Kline wrote:
>
> > That's fascinating!  I had no idea that you could get a critical with a
> > spell!  That actually makes some of those spells more effective and more
> > likely for someone to take one.  Imagine if a high level character got a
> > critical with a Vampiric Touch!  Very cool.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Johnathan Detrick [mailto:jdetrick@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 11:12 AM
> > To: Riders II
> > Subject: [dungeoncrawl] Rules trivia and IMAX
> >
> > Guys,
> >     Two short topics, one e-mail.
> >
> >     Attack of the Clones comes out on IMAX next Friday.  From what I
> > have been able to determine (on the official IMAX website), the only
> > place in PA to get it is Pittsburgh, and the closest place is the IMAX
> > theater at the Smithsonian.  I'm guessing we probably won't be able to
> > get a group to go see it, but if anyone is interested, let me know.
> >
> >     I've been reading some of the rulebooks recently.  I'm usually
> > interested in rules if they are well written.  I'm always looking for DM
> > ideas (even though I won't be DMing for a while).  I'm also looking for
> > ideas for new characters, and I'm also checking out ideas for our new
> > world.
> >     Anyway, is anybody aware that magical spells where you have to roll
> > to hit, can get critical hits just like a weapon attack?  That's right,
> > according to third edition, if you roll a 20 on your Shocking Grasp and
> > then hit again, it does double damage.  In fact, you can take Improved
> > Critical with one type of magic spell (like all touch attacks) and
> > double the threat range, just like a weapon.
> >     Thought that was interesting.
> >     John

Other related posts: