Difference between revisions of "Talk:Necromancer"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(→Intrinsic Robe of Power effect?: new section) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
[[Special:Contributions/64.185.146.160|64.185.146.160]] 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | [[Special:Contributions/64.185.146.160|64.185.146.160]] 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Intrinsic Robe of Power effect? == | ||
| + | |||
| + | It seems to me that wearing a robe of power for a Necromancer does not alter his spellcasting ability. Can anybody confirm this?[[User:MrFroon|MrFroon]] 07:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 07:05, 14 October 2009
In "Of Weapon and Spell Skills" it recommends abandoning the quarterstaff (1d6) for dagger or mattock. mattocks (1d12), i understand but why waste proficiency slots on daggers (1d4) ? --Petzl 01:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Because Necromancers get many nice artifact daggers. Loof42 15:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, but the odds of finding a +1 or better dagger early in the game are slim. In my opinion it's worth using the enchanted quarterstaff until your first artifact weapon.
64.185.146.160 06:57, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Intrinsic Robe of Power effect?
It seems to me that wearing a robe of power for a Necromancer does not alter his spellcasting ability. Can anybody confirm this?MrFroon 07:05, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
