Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ancestral Style (3.5e Alternate Class Feature)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
(Created page with "== Loophole == I get the intent, but as worded you can use this on a sorcerer or another class who lacks martial/exotic and just get unarmed. Shouldn't that be in the pre-req...") |
(→Loophole) |
||
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Loophole == | == Loophole == | ||
− | I get the intent, but as worded you can use this on a sorcerer or another class who lacks martial/exotic and just get unarmed. Shouldn't that be in the pre-reqs? -- [[User:Eiji-kun|Eiji-kun]] ([[User talk:Eiji-kun|talk]]) 00:27, 17 August 2017 (MDT) | + | <s>I get the intent, but as worded you can use this on a sorcerer or another class who lacks martial/exotic and just get unarmed. Shouldn't that be in the pre-reqs?</s> -- [[User:Eiji-kun|Eiji-kun]] ([[User talk:Eiji-kun|talk]]) 00:27, 17 August 2017 (MDT) |
+ | |||
+ | : How does a Sorcerer get Unarmed Damage Progression? But fair. --[[User:Leziad|Leziad]] ([[User talk:Leziad|talk]]) 00:31, 17 August 2017 (MDT) | ||
+ | |||
+ | ::I appear to be a dumb who cannot into reading. -- [[User:Eiji-kun|Eiji-kun]] ([[User talk:Eiji-kun|talk]]) 02:07, 17 August 2017 (MDT) |
Latest revision as of 08:07, 17 August 2017
Loophole[edit]
I get the intent, but as worded you can use this on a sorcerer or another class who lacks martial/exotic and just get unarmed. Shouldn't that be in the pre-reqs? -- Eiji-kun (talk) 00:27, 17 August 2017 (MDT)