Dysfunctional Rules VIII: When General Trumps Specific [Archive]

Jormengand

2015-12-13, 06:50 AM

Time for another thread in a long line of threads collecting rules from 3.5 and Pathfinder that just don't seem to work right.

Check the handbook (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267985) to see if your dysfunction is already there, 'cause this is the 8th thread.

Previous threads:

"Wait, That Didn't Work Right" - The Dysfunctional Rules Collection (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214988)
"Wait Again, That Didn't Work Right" - The Dysfunctional Rules Collection (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=267923)
Dysfunctional Rules III: 100% Rules-Legal, 110% Silly (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283778)
Dysfunctional Rules IV: It's Like a Sandwich Made of RAW Failure! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=304817)
Dysfunctional Rules Thread V: Dysfunctions All the Way Down (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?333789-Dysfunctional-Rules-Thread-V-Dysfunctions-All-the-Way-Down)
Dysfunctional Rules VI: Magic Circle Against Errata (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?372964-Dysfunctional-Rules-VI-Magic-Circle-Against-Errata)
Dysfunctional Rules VII: Mordenkainen's Dysfunction (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?413407-Dysfunctional-Rules-VII-Mordenkainen-s-Dysfunction)

What this thread is for:

Rules that clearly do something that is pointless or self-abnegating (EG Focused Lexicon is a feat that provides nothing but a penalty, no-one can use Chain Power, Hindering Opportunist helps your enemy).
Rules that do something that is vastly contrary from anything that could possibly be the intended effect (Drown Healing, Greater Reversed Seek the Sky lasts forever, Reversed Mystic Rampart is meant to lower someone's saves but actually drops a tower on them).
Rules that cause an non-resolvable game state (Peerless Archers can stack infinite attacks of opportunity)
Rules that don't define something well enough to use it ("Distracted", "Minimum Caster Level", "Paladin spell", "Primary Ability Score", "Special Material", anything missing a range or other variables).
Rules that, while they don't actually have a negative impact on the game as a game, do stop it making sense (EG fire and acid don't do fire and acid damage, you can fall 9 feet onto your head and take no damage, falling creatures deal no damage if they land on you).
Two or more rules combine to cause an above problem (AC bonuses and bonus feats exist, but bonuses are only applicable to die rolls so no they don't).
As a general rule, if you need to write a house rule for it.

What this thread is not for

Typos (Weapon deals 1d33 or 1d43 damage because 3 isn't superscript; "Share Lesser Form" mistyped as "Share Laser Form".)
Dysfunctions that only arise because of a specific reading of the text (In combat, everyone is flat-footed until they act, so they must have been flat-footed whenever they weren't in combat, even though the text only specifies that they're flat-footed in combat. Someone who can't be flanked can't have a person on each side of them because if they did, they would be flanked.) Unless every possible reading of the text is dysfunctional no matter how you read it (even if it's dysfunctional in different ways).

Debatra

2015-12-13, 09:00 AM

Is it my imagination, or did the writers not have any clue as to what "range" means on spell effects? Range is how far away from you the origin of an effect can originate from, but lightning bolt has a 120 foot range and starts at your fingertips. How does that work, exactly? And that's by no means the only one. Range is hardly ever used properly. But since you can't have a spell's area affect anything outside its range, this forces spells to be written incorrectly to function at all and completely negates what range actually is.

It also screws up how Widen and Enlarge feats function. A lot of the time, you have to use both simultaneously, or neither have an effect.

Not quite. Range is "the maximum distance from you that the spell’s effect can occur, as well as the maximum distance at which you can designate the spell’s point of origin". So Lightning Bolt still works. As for the part about the spell beginning at your fingertips despite the Range being 120', specific trumps general. We also already have the Area/Range Dysfunction.

[edit] And on that note, how does lightning bolt work on a creature without fingers?

And that, I have no answer for.

Jormengand

2015-12-13, 09:09 AM

And that, I have no answer for.

The spell fails because the conditions can't be made to conform. Fireball similarly fails. 5th-level evokers gotta have fingers.

EDIT: Actually, it's worse than that: Ray of Frost, Burning Hands, Magic Missile, Acid Arrow (but your hand), Cone of Cold (but your hand), Chain Lightning, Freezing Sphere, Prismatic Spray (but your hand), Polar Ray (but your hand) and probably a few I've missed have similar clauses.

PallentisLunam

2015-12-13, 11:33 AM

The spell fails because the conditions can't be made to conform. Fireball similarly fails. 5th-level evokers gotta have fingers.

EDIT: Actually, it's worse than that: Ray of Frost, Burning Hands, Magic Missile, Acid Arrow (but your hand), Cone of Cold (but your hand), Chain Lightning, Freezing Sphere, Prismatic Spray (but your hand), Polar Ray (but your hand) and probably a few I've missed have similar clauses.

Actually it's even worse than that

A somatic copponent is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one free hand to provide a somatic component

So most spells are off limits to anything not possessing hands.

Charizander

2015-12-13, 11:58 AM

Actually it's even worse than that

So most spells are off limits to anything not possessing hands.Including dragons and many other races with racial arcane spellcasting.

PallentisLunam

2015-12-13, 12:05 PM

Including dragons and many other races with racial arcane spellcasting.

Not just arcane. While divine somatic components are simpler and don't have an armor failure chance they still require hands.

And what if a caster polymorphs into something without hands? No more spells.

bekeleven

2015-12-13, 12:42 PM

Including dragons and many other races with racial arcane spellcasting.

Dragons have hands.

Here's a simple one I don't recall seeing:

Survival does not allow you to follow difficult tracks unless you are a ranger or have the Track feat

[...]

While anyone can use Survival to find tracks (regardless of the DC), or to follow tracks when the DC for the task is 10 or lower, only a ranger (or a character with the Track feat) can use Survival to follow tracks when the task has a higher DC.What ACFs are good for ranger? Well, be sure to take one that trades out track.

Charizander

2015-12-13, 12:47 PM

Dragons have hands.Source for this? Because they're quadrupedal, and as far as I can tell, they have claws/talons/paws, not hands.

bekeleven

2015-12-13, 01:24 PM

Source for this? Because they're quadrupedal, and as far as I can tell, they have claws/talons/paws, not hands.

I was thinking of some illustrations, but then I looked again and they're really inconsistent, even within the same book.

ShurikVch

2015-12-13, 01:30 PM

Not just arcane. While divine somatic components are simpler and don't have an armor failure chance they still require hands.

And what if a caster polymorphs into something without hands? No more spells.Thus Surrogate Spellcasting feat is a must have!

Book Dangerous Denizens: The Monsters of Tellene
Chapter about Trolls have 13 new Trolls
But, by some reason, description (text, not table) for some of them -
Troll, Chaos
Troll, Mindreaver
Troll, Ravager
Troll, Stench
Troll, Storm
- don't mentioned their Regeneration
Thus they either don't really get Regeneration, or their Regeneration is impenetrable
More interesting are entries for:
Troll, Arctic
Troll, Sand
They have "Limited Regeneration" - text specified when their Regeneration works 50% slower, but not which attacks bypass it
But the most interesting entry is for "Troll, Rot":
Limited Regeneration (Ex): A rot troll must be able to submerge itself for at least 1 hour per day. If it does not, the troll loses its ability to regenerate, and loses 10 hp per hour (through sloughing skin) until dead. Only dumping the skeleton into stagnant water can only revive them. After being submerged in stagnant water for 1 to 3 days. the troll begins to regenerate at its normal rate.
Fresh, free ﬂowing water does nothing.Dead creatures are incapable to Regeneration

torrasque666

2015-12-13, 01:48 PM

Source for this? Because they're quadrupedal, and as far as I can tell, they have claws/talons/paws, not hands.
I think its covered by this, specifically:

Although a dragon’s front feet are not truly prehensile, adragon can grasp objects with its front feet, provided they
are not too small. This grip is not precise enough for tool
use, writing, or wielding a weapon, but a dragon can hold
and carry objects. A dragon also is capable of wielding
magical devices, such as wands, and can complete somatic
components required for the spells it can cast (see Spellcasting,
below). Some dragons are adroit enough to seize
prey in their front claws and carry it aloft.
I guess their claws function close enough to hands to count?

Charizander

2015-12-13, 02:04 PM

I guess their claws function close enough to hands to count?So they're not prehensile enough to write, and just barely prehensile enough to grab prey and carry off (sometimes), but they have the precision necessary to perform gestures that are so demanding that an extra thick shirt can mess them up?

Definitely a dysfunction.

Inevitability

2015-12-13, 02:45 PM

A cleric of St. Cuthbert with the Heretic of the Faith feat can be Lawful Neutral, Lawful Good, Neutral Evil, Neutral Good, and even Chaotic Neutral. Said cleric still can't be Lawful Evil, though.

So they're not prehensile enough to write, and just barely prehensile enough to grab prey and carry off (sometimes), but they have the precision necessary to perform gestures that are so demanding that an extra thick shirt can mess them up?

Definitely a dysfunction.

Well, depending on your campaign setting, dragons might have been the literal inventors of magic, so it wouldn't be too surprising if they'd worked around some of the somatic problems it would otherwise pose for them.

Troacctid

2015-12-13, 02:52 PM

Including dragons and many other races with racial arcane spellcasting.

You forget that racial spellcasting specifically waives the normal requirements for somatic components and allows the creature to use whatever body parts are appropriate for them.

A spellcasting creature that lacks hands or arms can provide any somatic component a spell might require by moving its body.

PallentisLunam

2015-12-13, 06:38 PM

You forget that racial spellcasting specifically waives the normal requirements for somatic components and allows the creature to use whatever body parts are appropriate for them.

Okay, well that fixes racial spellcasting but it doesn't do anything for spellcasting from class levels

Troacctid

2015-12-13, 06:53 PM

Okay, well that fixes racial spellcasting but it doesn't do anything for spellcasting from class levels

I believe Savage Species addressed this issue, but I'm AFB at the moment.

Debatra

2015-12-14, 10:43 AM

Here's one from the Paragnostic Assembly in Complete Champion:

Paragnostic Scholar: You can gain a bonus equal to +1 per hour spent in research (maximum +5) on your choice of one of the following skill checks: Appraise, Decipher Script, any Knowledge skill, PsicraftEPH, Spellcraft, or TruespeakToM. Each time you perform research, you can choose a different skill to which to add the bonus.

Many of the church's clerics members worship specific deities of knowledge, but some empower themselves through the worship of knowledge itself. If you are a cleric, you can choose from the Knowledge, Magic, Trickery, Mind™, and Oracle™ domains.

Note that it doesn't say what happens with the chosen Domain. Can you select it as one of your standard Domains? Do you get it as an extra one? Do you just get access to its spells and/or Granted Power? Do you do something else with it?

Charizander

2015-12-14, 11:03 AM

Note that it doesn't say what happens with the chosen Domain. Can you select it as one of your standard Domains? Do you get it as an extra one? Do you just get access to its spells and/or Granted Power? Do you do something else with it?The passage itself says what clerics get from that. Clerics can worship either a god or hold to an ideal, and clerics who hold ideals from the Paragnostic Assembly typically choose from those domains as their normal clerical domains.

Debatra

2015-12-15, 05:37 AM

And where exactly does it say that?

No, I'm seriously asking.

Charizander

2015-12-15, 06:11 AM

And where exactly does it say that?

No, I'm seriously asking.That whole last paragraph:

"Many of the church's clerical members worship specific deities of knowledge, but some empower themselves through the worship of knowledge itself. If you are a cleric, you can choose from the Knowledge, Magic, Trickery, Mind™, and Oracle™ domains."

You worship knowledge itself as a cleric, you get to choose from those domains.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

ShurikVch

2015-12-15, 07:40 AM

Chronos

2015-12-15, 08:47 AM

The gaunt/obese thing is just yet another example of "the rules work, but are weird, because they're supposed to be weird".

Jormengand

2015-12-16, 10:56 AM

PallentisLunam

2015-12-16, 11:23 AM

Feather tokens have no range and practically no restrictions, allowing you to stop armadas with a pocket full of 50-GP novelties and destroy forts if you're willing to spend 40 platinum on a tree token.

Well the tree token says spring into being, not spring out of the ground, but I guess you could summon one a few hundred feet in the air so destruction is still assured.

Inevitability

2015-12-16, 11:58 AM

Frostburn says:

In addition to the normal characteristics
of the surrounding plane (see Adventuring on Other Planes,
page 147 of the Dungeon Master’s Guide) frostfell regions on
the Inner Planes possess the following traits:
[...]
• Impeded Magic: Spells and spell-like abilities with the
fi re descriptor are impeded. This includes spells of the
Fire domain. These spells and spell-like abilities can still
be used, but a successful Spellcraft check (DC 15 + level of
the spell) must be made to do so.

In other words; creating a shield of ice cold flames, or protecting yourself against fire, is somehow harder when on a plane of pure ice and cold.

Debatra

2015-12-16, 01:51 PM

That's not a dysfunction. It's just weird.

georgie_leech

2015-12-16, 02:56 PM

That's not a dysfunction. It's just weird.

Wasn't the second dysfunction pointed out that Monks technically aren't proficient in Unarmed Strikes despite that being part of their core concept? That technically doesn't break the rules but it's weird as anything else. There's room for 'dysfunctions' of 'this makes no sense at all based on what we know about the fluff of what's going on.'

Curmudgeon

2015-12-16, 04:09 PM

There's generally no way for someone who gains natural weapons to gain proficiency with those natural weapons. (I'm excluding unarmed strike here; that's a natural attack which is also considered to be a simple weapon, and it's also already been addressed as a dysfunction.)

Pick up Feral template (Savage Species, page 116) for example, which grants a pair of claw attacks. The result of Feral is always a Monstrous Humanoid (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#monstrousHumanoidType) creature. Fey, Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoid, and Outsider creatures all lack proficiency with natural weapons. (Other types say "Proficient with its natural weapons"; not these commonly-played types, though.) Feral doesn't grant any proficiency with those claws, and there's no "Natural Weapon Proficiency" feat in the game.

Flickerdart

2015-12-18, 11:01 AM

Honestly, I think we can make one big master dysfunction - about half the time, the rules assume all creatures are medium-sized humans - and nest all these "what if I have no eyes" things there.

CrazyYanmega

2015-12-18, 12:05 PM

ShurikVch

2015-12-18, 01:21 PM

I don't sure if it was already mentioned or not, so:
Psionics and the Weave
Unlike spells, which derive their power from Faerûn’s Weave (or the Shadow Weave), psionic ability taps only the inner reservoirs of the manifester. In a sense, each psionic creature is its own Weave, using the magic of its own lifeforce and mind to create psionic effects. Mystra and Shar have no ability to deny psionic creatures access to powers, and they do not control the promulgation of psionic lore and ability throughout the populace of Faerûn.
While psionics does not require the Weave to function, psionic powers are magical in nature. Spells such as detect magic can also detect psionic abilities at work, and spells such as dispel magic or antimagic shell can negate, suppress, or completely cancel psionic manifestations. In Faerûn, psionics and magic are not transparent to each other; they interact exactly as magic interacts with other magic.But...
A dead magic zone functions in most respects as an antimagic field spell, except that it does not impede the spells or spell-like abilities of Shadow Weave users, nor does it interfere with the operation of Shadow Weave magic items. Divination spells cannot detect subjects that are within dead magic zones. Finally, it isn't possible to use a teleportation effect to move into or out of a dead magic zone.So, psionics in Faerûn don't depend on the Weave, but still completely suppressed in Dead Magic zones, which are places where Weave absent

Doctor Despair

2015-12-18, 01:26 PM

georgie_leech

2015-12-18, 03:02 PM

Reposting here since I posted it in the wrong thread:

Harpoons lodge fully in any creature no matter the size. Furthermore, harpoons function perfectly fine against swarms and oozes.

Is my assumption here correct, or did I miss some text somewhere?

I don't see any reason a Harpoon shouldn't lodge in a Tiny or smaller creature, even if the image that evokes seems somewhat more fatal than for a whale. :smalltongue: But the swarm thing is definitely screwy if allowed, I can't find anything on a quick check.

zergling.exe

2015-12-18, 04:05 PM

I don't see any reason a Harpoon shouldn't lodge in a Tiny or smaller creature, even if the image that evokes seems somewhat more fatal than for a whale. :smalltongue: But the swarm thing is definitely screwy if allowed, I can't find anything on a quick check.

Well if its a colossal sized harpoon...

One for Pathfinder: when a eidolon invests evolution points into evolutions, it may not recieve the benefits. This is because most evolutions start with 'An eidolon' not 'The eidolon' or some other phrase that specifies which eidolon it is referring to.

Debatra

2015-12-18, 04:25 PM

This is because most evolutions start with 'An eidolon' not 'The eidolon' or some other phrase that specifies which eidolon it is referring to.

Stop it. We're not doing this again.

georgie_leech

2015-12-18, 04:37 PM

Well if its a colossal sized harpoon...

Like I said, considerably more fatal image :smallbiggrin:

ShurikVch

2015-12-19, 09:40 AM

The text does say that psionics "do not require the weave to function." I suppose it depends on the exact function of the dead magic zone; is it just a place where the weave is absent, or is it a place where the removal of the weave now actively suppresses magic?
The Weave
...
The Weave is the manifestation of raw magic, a kind of interface between the will of a spellcaster and the stuff of raw magic. Without the Weave, raw magic is locked away and inaccessible - an archmage can't light a candle in a dead magic zone.
...
All spells, magic items, spell-like abilities, and even supernatural abilities such as a ghost's ability to walk through walls, depend on the Weave and call upon it in different ways.
Whenever a spell, spell-like ability, supernatural ability, or magic item functions, the threads of the Weave intertwine, knit, warp, twist, and fold to make the effect possible. When characters use divination spells such as detect magic, identify, or analyze dweomer, they glimpse the Weave. A spell such as dispel magic smooths the Weave, attempting to return it to its natural state. Spells such as antimagic field rearrange the Weave so that magic flows around, rather than through, the area affected by the spell.
Areas where magic goes awry, such as wild magic zones and dead magic zones, represent damage to the Weave.
Dead Magic
In some areas of Toril, the Weave is absent altogether. The Weave has a tear or hole, and the area effectively has no magic at all. Like the rare wild magic zones, many regions of dead magic were created during the Time of Troubles and have since failed or retreated. Dead magic zones often persist in places where extreme concentrations of magical power were abruptly scattered or destroyed - in the vicinity of a shattered mythal, at the spot where an artifact was broken, or at the scene of a god's death.
Is Shadow Weave magic unaffected by DMZs because it does not require the weave, or is it by merit of using the shadow weave?
The Shadow Weave
During the course of her eternal war with the goddess Selune, the goddess Shar created the Shadow Weave in response to Selune's creation of Mystra and the birth of the Weave. If the Weave is a loose mesh permeating reality, the Shadow Weave is the pattern formed by the negative space between the Weave's strands. It provides an alternative conduit and methodology for casting spells.
...
Shadow Weave users enjoy several advantages. First, they ignore disruptions in the Weave. A Shadow Weave effect works normally in a dead magic or wild magic zone. (An antimagic field, which blocks the flow of magic, remains effective against Shadow Weave magic, as does spell resistance.) Skilled Shadow Weave users are able to cast spells that are extraordinarily difficult for Weave users to perceive, counter, or dispel.So, psionics in Faerûn impeded by damaged Weave, despite don't using Weave
But if psionic character take for whatever reason Shadow Weave Magic feat, he will be able to use psionics in places where Weave damaged, despite don't using Shadow Weave

PallentisLunam

2015-12-19, 04:06 PM

Troacctid

2015-12-19, 04:18 PM

The use rope skill allows for a character to be bound. Being bound is not specifically defined but it is mentioned in the helpless condition. A helpless character is treated as having a Dex score of 0. Therefore it is impossible to bind a prisoner and force them to walk behind your horse or do anything at all for that matter. It also removes the ability for a character to make an Escape Artist check to get out of their bonds.

This was discussed in a previous thread. The rule refers to a helpless target, not a helpless character. If you target them with anything, they'll be treated as if they had 0 Dex, but aside from that, they retain their normal score.

PallentisLunam

2015-12-19, 05:09 PM

This was discussed in a previous thread. The rule refers to a helpless target, not a helpless character. If you target them with anything, they'll be treated as if they had 0 Dex, but aside from that, they retain their normal score.

Okay well then the fact that being bound is entirely undefined except when being targeted becomes a dysfunction.

DM: You are tied up.
Player: Okay what does that do to me mechanically?
DM: Uuuuuuumm *fiat*

Jormengand

2015-12-19, 05:27 PM

Okay well then the fact that being bound is entirely undefined except when being targeted becomes a dysfunction.

DM: You are tied up.
Player: Okay what does that do to me mechanically?
DM: Uuuuuuumm *fiat*

Well of course, if you bind them on the prime material, it does exactly what you'd expect because of rules specific to the material.

Troacctid

2015-12-19, 05:43 PM

Okay well then the fact that being bound is entirely undefined except when being targeted becomes a dysfunction.

DM: You are tied up.
Player: Okay what does that do to me mechanically?
DM: Uuuuuuumm *fiat*

The normal English definition still applies. Via Google:

http://i.imgur.com/dkO88oB.png

Any of these could apply depending on context. In the case of the Helpless condition, it's probably the second one ("restrained by the tying up of hands and feet").

Gemini476

2015-12-19, 05:44 PM

I don't sure if it was already mentioned or not, so:But...So, psionics in Faerûn don't depend on the Weave, but still completely suppressed in Dead Magic zones, which are places where Weave absent

Wait a minute.

While psionics does not require the Weave to function, psionic powers are magical in nature. Spells such as detect magic can also detect psionic abilities at work, and spells such as dispel magic or antimagic shell can negate, suppress, or completely cancel psionic manifestations. In Faerûn, psionics and magic are not transparent to each other; they interact exactly as magic interacts with other magic.

Looks like the writer was basing their work on AD&D - Antimagic Shell isn't a 3E spell, to my knowledge. It's also worth noting that the old AD&D spell is somewhat different from Antimagic Field, but still pretty similar.

By means of this spell, the wizard surrounds himself with an invisible barrier that moves with him. The space within this barrier is totally impervious to all magic and magical spell effects, thus preventing the passage of spells or their effects. Likewise, it prevents the functioning of any magical items or spells within its confines. The area is also impervious to breath weapons, gaze or voice attacks, and similar special attack forms.

It's also worth remembering that AMS did not actually prevent Psionics from functioning in AD&D. Also, from some googling it seems like there's a house of drow psionicists who kept using their powers during the Time of Troubles? The intension seems to be that Dead Magic Zones in Faerûn don't care about Psionics, at least.

Also, for what it's worth, Player's Guide to Faerûn was released the month before the Expanded Psionics Handbook so I have no clue what 3.0isms might have slipped through.

PallentisLunam

2015-12-19, 06:32 PM

The normal English definition still applies. Via Google:

http://i.imgur.com/dkO88oB.png

Any of these could apply depending on context. In the case of the Helpless condition, it's probably the second one ("restrained by the tying up of hands and feet").

Nice.

So how many different ways are there to bind someone? Does it make movement impossible or limit it to a certain number of feet? Does it impose a penalty to attack rolls or make them impossible? Can you even draw a weapon? Can an arcane caster cast spells with somatic components while bound? How about a divine caster?

The word "bind" is defined but that doesn't help much with the mechanical condition "bound"

georgie_leech

2015-12-19, 06:44 PM

Nice.

So how many different ways are there to bind someone? Does it make movement impossible or limit it to a certain number of feet? Does it impose a penalty to attack rolls or make them impossible? Can you even draw a weapon? Can an arcane caster cast spells with somatic components while bound? How about a divine caster?

The word "bind" is defined but that doesn't help much with the mechanical condition "bound"

In order: depends on how they're bound, depends on how they're bound, depends on how they're bound, depends on how they're bound (sensing a pattern yet?), and depends on how they're bound. It isn't actually a defined condition, but something that affects characters in ways left up to the DM. The mechanical penalties for someone whose feet are tied together will be different than someone who has been hogtied and different still from someone wrapped up in rope like a cartoon character. This is as 'dysfunctional' as saying there aren't mechanical effects for adding different spices to foods or what effect turning a set of clothing blue with Prestidigitation has.

Troacctid

2015-12-19, 07:02 PM

Unless you were hog-tied by a Justiciar, in which case you are most definitely both bound and helpless.

Those guys know their rope.

PallentisLunam

2015-12-19, 07:36 PM

In order: depends on how they're bound, depends on how they're bound, depends on how they're bound, depends on how they're bound (sensing a pattern yet?), and depends on how they're bound. It isn't actually a defined condition, but something that affects characters in ways left up to the DM. The mechanical penalties for someone whose feet are tied together will be different than someone who has been hogtied and different still from someone wrapped up in rope like a cartoon character. This is as 'dysfunctional' as saying there aren't mechanical effects for adding different spices to foods or what effect turning a set of clothing blue with Prestidigitation has.

But there's still a problem. If you want to say that being bound is entirely the purview of the DM then why does the helpless condition point to it? And also regardless of how someone is bound they are always considered helpless. So if a character's wrists are tied together, helpless. If a character's feet are tied together, helpless. If a character is place into shackles or manacles, helpless. If a party of mountain climbers tie ropes around their waists to try and avoid falls, they are all helpless. The only one that really makes any sense is a character becoming helpless when hogtied.

And as an aside, I don't think spices are defined in the rules which while not a dysfunction means that by definition there can be no mechanical effects beside those applied by DM fiat and the mechanical effect of turning a set of clothing blue is that the set of clothing is now blue, mechanical effect does not always mean numerical effect.

georgie_leech

2015-12-20, 01:01 AM

But there's still a problem. If you want to say that being bound is entirely the purview of the DM then why does the helpless condition point to it? And also regardless of how someone is bound they are always considered helpless. So if a character's wrists are tied together, helpless. If a character's feet are tied together, helpless. If a character is place into shackles or manacles, helpless. If a party of mountain climbers tie ropes around their waists to try and avoid falls, they are all helpless. The only one that really makes any sense is a character becoming helpless when hogtied.

And as an aside, I don't think spices are defined in the rules which while not a dysfunction means that by definition there can be no mechanical effects beside those applied by DM fiat and the mechanical effect of turning a set of clothing blue is that the set of clothing is now blue, mechanical effect does not always mean numerical effect.

Exactly. The rules not going into as much detail as you'd like isn't a dysfunction. The extent that the base rules defines "bound" is that the Use Rope skill is involved. Additionally, the Justiciar from Complete Warrior gains ability that let's them try to make someone bound and helpless, Hog-tie. Any definition beyond that is up to the DM. While it doesn't technically break any rules to consider any rope tied to a person as making them "bound," it's one of those "you can read the rule to be dysfunctional but you don't have to" situations.

nedz

2015-12-20, 07:17 AM

Reposting here since I posted it in the wrong thread:

Harpoons lodge fully in any creature no matter the size. Furthermore, harpoons function perfectly fine against swarms and oozes.

Is my assumption here correct, or did I miss some text somewhere?
Aren't swarms immune to weapon damage ?

immune to weapon damage

The use rope skill allows for a character to be bound. Being bound is not specifically defined but it is mentioned in the helpless condition. A helpless character is treated as having a Dex score of 0. Therefore it is impossible to bind a prisoner and force them to walk behind your horse or do anything at all for that matter. It also removes the ability for a character to make an Escape Artist check to get out of their bonds.

See Thread 6 Page 24 - several dysfunctions were noted.

georgie_leech

2015-12-20, 07:54 AM

Aren't swarms immune to weapon damage ?

So long as it's enchanted with Flaming or similar, it should be able to deal damage and so lodge itself in the Swarm. Things like this are bound to be screwy though because A&E was right on the cusp of 3.5's release. Barring the usual 'DM decides which revisions are necessary' bit but conversion, the different weapon size rules means that technically you can't have properly sized Small or smaller harpoons, as any creature 'smaller than Medium takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls due to the harpoon's weight and bulk.'

nedz

2015-12-20, 08:29 AM

So long as it's enchanted with Flaming or similar, it should be able to deal damage and so lodge itself in the Swarm. Things like this are bound to be screwy though because A&E was right on the cusp of 3.5's release. Barring the usual 'DM decides which revisions are necessary' bit but conversion, the different weapon size rules means that technically you can't have properly sized Small or smaller harpoons, as any creature 'smaller than Medium takes a -2 penalty to attack rolls due to the harpoon's weight and bulk.'

But even then the swarm only takes the fire damage and not the weapon damage itself.

Trixie

2015-12-20, 10:14 AM

Willing Deformity feat line have number of dysfunctions:
Deformity (eyes) - don't required to have any eyes
Deformity (face) - don't required to have a face
Deformity (Skin) - don't required to have a skin
Deformity (Teeth) - don't required to have a mouth
Deformity (Tongue) - don't required to have a tongue
And? It's a deformity. Something not present in original organism. It might mean you now have one of the above, even if non-functional. Or, the deformity is in the parts equivalent to the above, such as epidermis (skin) or beak (teeth). What is the problem, again? :smallconfused:

Deformity (gaunt)/Deformity (obese):
1. Creatures without any metabolism are still able to take them - as long as they are sentient and Evil
2. Creatures with Deformity (gaunt) are 50% lighter, with Deformity (obese) - X2 heavier, but still occupy the same space. It may be OK for your average Humanoid, but what's about the sentient Constructs, which body is a solid slab of metal(/rock/wood/...)? Or awakened Ooze, which are mostly water, thus notable change of weight should cause similar change of volume? (Or Water Elemental, which is 100% water?)
3. Incorporeal creatures with Deformity (gaunt) and with Deformity (obese) are still have the same weight - no weight at all
And here you can't even argue there is any problem whatsoever. You gain fat looking ghost or thin framed construct. In case of ooze/elemental, you get deformed shape and irregular weight/volume, but still about same footprint. Or is there issue I am not seeing? Because it's perfectly logical and functional rule to me...

georgie_leech

2015-12-20, 12:53 PM

But even then the swarm only takes the fire damage and not the weapon damage itself.

Strictly speaking you just need to damage them with the harpoon, it doesn't care if it's weapon damage or not.

Inevitability

2015-12-20, 01:52 PM

Aren't swarms immune to weapon damage ?

Swarms of Tiny creatures still take damage from harpoons, the damage is just halved.

nedz

2015-12-20, 03:04 PM

Swarms of Tiny creatures still take damage from harpoons, the damage is just halved.

So they do — I never noticed that before.

CrazyYanmega

2015-12-21, 06:55 AM

POSSIBLY found another one, though this might have been done on purpose. Clay Golems have a cumulative 1% chance of going berserk each round it's in combat, like a Flesh Golem. Unlike a Flesh Golem, a Clay Golem has no way of resetting this chance. So a Clay Golem is only going to have about 10 minutes worth of combat in its lifetime without going berserk if the creator is extremely lucky.

Jormengand

2015-12-21, 07:44 PM

Enlarge Person will encumber halflings who were previously just under their light load; their light load goes from 24.75lb to 43 lb (if they were strength 10) and their gear goes from 24lb to 48lb. This probably also works for tiny creatures (16.5 to 32.25, 16.25 to 32.5) but I don't know because while the weight multipliers are specified for large and small weapons, none are mentioned for any other size categories.

EDIT: Also, the Thief of Life's capstone...

"This has no further ill effect on the slain creature... any creature slain by this attack cannot be brought back to life except by means of a miracle, true resurrection, wish, or similar magic." Which one is it?

Inevitability

2015-12-23, 08:46 AM

A bard could technically Inspire Greatness in a Hellwasp Swarm. However, if said swarm had twelve or thirteen hit points at the moment, the two bonus hit dice from inspire greatness would put its current HP at less than its hit dice, making it mindless. Inspire Greatness would stop working at that point in time, and the swarm would once more become nonmindless. This in turn would activate Inspire Greatness, at infinitum.

nedz

2015-12-23, 09:12 AM

Would a Bard applying DFI to a normal swarm, rats say, destroy the swarm ?

Inevitability

2015-12-23, 09:46 AM

Would a Bard applying DFI to a normal swarm, rats say, destroy the swarm ?

Swarms without a hivemind are immune to mind-affecting effects, including bardic music.

Doctor Despair

2015-12-23, 09:50 AM

Swarms without a hivemind are immune to mind-affecting effects, including bardic music.

Until they hit level 21 and take Music of the Gods! Then Bards can do pretty much whatever they want to whoever they want between buffs and the Power of Suggestion.

Debatra

2015-12-23, 12:36 PM

Doctor Despair

2015-12-23, 12:40 PM

Several spells grant certain benefits just for learning them. Not preparing, not casting, just for knowing the spell. Some of these spells are on the lists of classes that automatically know their entire spell list, like Clerics.

That's quite interesting! Could you give a few examples?

Debatra

2015-12-23, 12:56 PM

Adoration of the Frightful (+1 to Diplomacy), Vision of the Omniscient Eye (+1 to Spot), Burst of Glacial Wrath (resist cold 5; not a Cleric spell). There are others.

zergling.exe

2015-12-23, 01:03 PM

Several spells grant certain benefits just for learning them. Not preparing, not casting, just for knowing the spell. Some of these spells are on the lists of classes that automatically know their entire spell list, like Clerics.

I seem to recall Curmudgeon at one point said that the only spells that are spells known are ones that you can currently cast. I don't recall where they would have said this.

Hunter Noventa

2015-12-23, 03:44 PM

I seem to recall Curmudgeon at one point said that the only spells that are spells known are ones that you can currently cast. I don't recall where they would have said this.

Wouldn't that play utter havoc with wands and staffs?

Jormengand

2015-12-23, 03:46 PM

Wouldn't that play utter havoc with wands and staffs?

All X are Y does not imply that all Y are X. Just because all spells you know are ones you can cast (Which I don't incidentally think is true) doesn't imply the reverse.

zergling.exe

2015-12-23, 04:11 PM

Wouldn't that play utter havoc with wands and staffs?

Spell Trigger and Spell Completion items like scrolls, wands and staves merely require you to have the spell on your list, not that you know it. This is why even sorcerers are very powerful with a large variety of these items.

Story

2015-12-23, 04:49 PM

Just noticed a new one: A Dryad that casts Acorn of Far Travel on an acorn harvested from their oak tree is considered touching the tree at all times, regardless of whether they are actually carrying the acorn.

Of course, this is only vacuously true, because Acorn of Far Travel must be cast on an acorn that is still attached to a tree, and thus there is no way to cast it on a harvested acorn.

Several spells grant certain benefits just for learning them. Not preparing, not casting, just for knowing the spell. Some of these spells are on the lists of classes that automatically know their entire spell list, like Clerics.

Not a dysfunction: They specifically covered that case elsewhere in the book. Only classes like Sorcerer that have a limited number of spells known get a benefit from learning those spells.

georgie_leech

2015-12-23, 04:53 PM

Just noticed a new one: A Dryad that casts Acorn of Far Travel on an acorn harvested from their oak tree is considered touching the tree at all times, regardless of whether they are actually carrying the acorn.

Of course, this is only vacuously true, because Acorn of Far Travel must be cast on an acorn that is still attached to a tree, and thus there is no way to cast it on a harvested acorn.

"As you cast the spell, the spirit of the oak tree wells into the acorn, which detaches into your hand once the casting is complete." Given that "harvest" isn't a defined game term, I think we can safely default to the common sense "the acorn targeted by this spell that fell off the tree" in this case.

Divayth Fyr

2015-12-23, 05:51 PM

Not a dysfunction: They specifically covered that case elsewhere in the book. Only classes like Sorcerer that have a limited number of spells known get a benefit from learning those spells.
Not entirely true:

Characters gain an extra benefit by learning some of these spells, as noted in the “Special” entry after a spell’s description. This benefit applies to any character who has a list of spells known, such as a bard, sorcerer, warmage (see Complete Arcane) or favored soul (see Complete Divine), but not to characters who prepare spells from a class list or a spellbook, such as a cleric or wizard.

When a warmage gains access to a new level of spells, he automatically knows all the spells for that level listed on the warmage’s spell list. Essentially, his spell list is the same as his spells known list.

georgie_leech

2015-12-23, 06:07 PM

Not entirely true:

Warmage does get spells aside from those though, due to Advanced Learning. Whether that means they get the benefit of such spells if they appear only through that feature or if they just need to show up on the list somewhere, your guess is as good as mine.

Troacctid

2015-12-23, 06:08 PM

I seem to recall Curmudgeon at one point said that the only spells that are spells known are ones that you can currently cast. I don't recall where they would have said this.
Divine casters don't actually have spells known at all unless their class description specifies otherwise. Spells known are typically an arcane thing.

Swarms without a hivemind are immune to mind-affecting effects, including bardic music.
Mind-affecting immunity is a vermin trait, not a swarm trait. A swarm of animals is susceptible to mind-affecting effects. You're probably thinking of this rule:

A swarm is immune to any spell or effect that targets a specific number of creatures (including single-target spells such as disintegrate), with the exception of mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) if the swarm has an Intelligence score and a hive mind.
An effect that targets a specific number of creatures won't work on swarms unless it's a mind-affecting effect targeting a hive mind. So Inspire Courage and Countersong affect non-vermin swarms, but Inspire Greatness and Fascinate don't.

CrazyYanmega

2015-12-24, 05:37 AM

Has Crusader's stance progression been mentioned at all on these threads? Specifically comparing the Crusader exclusive Devoted Spirit stance levels with when the Crusader can actually learn them?

Chronos

2015-12-24, 10:14 AM

You can still get those stances by multiclassing. It's possible that that was even the intended behavior, to give Tome of Battle classes an incentive to multiclass.

Troacctid

2015-12-25, 06:07 AM

The Lady/Lord of the Dead (http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/dx20021031x) prestige class. You're not a lord. You're not a lady. You are, in fact, a "lady/lord", whatever that is, regardless of your gender.

ShurikVch

2015-12-25, 06:49 AM

Falling is a free action
You are incapable to take free actions outside of your turn (sans few very specific exceptions)
Falling is not exception
So, if enemy bull rash you off a cliff, or pit trap open under your feet, you wouldn't fall; you will hang in the air until it's your turn - assuming no of your allies reach and pull you back to stable ground

Inevitability

2015-12-25, 07:31 AM

Chronos

2015-12-25, 08:16 AM

Is falling actually a free action, or is it a nonaction? Cite?

ShurikVch

2015-12-25, 08:18 AM

So what if you're unconscious? Do you keep floating above the cliff, then fall down when it's your turn?Unconscious (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#unconscious):
Knocked out and helpless.
Helpless (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#helpless):
A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (-5 modifier).
A character with Dexterity 0 is paralyzed.Paralyzed (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#paralyzed):
A paralyzed character is frozen in place and unable to move or act.

So, unconscious is helpless, helpless treated as paralyzed, and paralyzed is "unable to move or act".

It's mean you will float until either regain your consciousness, or somebody/something move you to more supportive surface

Jormengand

2015-12-25, 09:17 AM

Is falling actually a free action, or is it a nonaction? Cite?

Falling prone in your own space is a free action (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#dropProne). However, nothing actually causes you to fall except if you're taking the actions to do so. This is a known dysfunction. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?413407-Dysfunctional-Rules-VII-Mordenkainen-s-Dysfunction&p=19541359#post19541359)

Troacctid

2015-12-25, 02:31 PM

Falling prone in your own space is a free action (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#dropProne). However, nothing actually causes you to fall except if you're taking the actions to do so. This is a known dysfunction. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?413407-Dysfunctional-Rules-VII-Mordenkainen-s-Dysfunction&p=19541359#post19541359)

Gravity causes you to fall, as per that rule that says the material plane has normal physics unless otherwise stated.

I'm sure if we poked around, we could find more specific things that make you fall as well, like failing to maintain a minimum speed for a flying creature with average maneuverability or worse.

Inevitability

2015-12-25, 03:53 PM

Gravity causes you to fall, as per that rule that says the material plane has normal physics unless otherwise stated.

Then simply go to another plane.

Gemini476

2015-12-25, 04:07 PM

Then simply go to another plane.

Most planes have the "normal gravity" trait (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm#gravity), which is defined as "similar to that of the Material Plane". The ones that don't have their own rules, which are mostly just "as normal, but...".

A possible dysfunction: planes with Heavy/Light Gravity double/halve weights and increase/decrease falling damage to d10/d4, but don't actually change the speed at which you fall.

Inevitability

2015-12-25, 04:14 PM

georgie_leech

2015-12-25, 04:20 PM

Related: If someone falls 190 feet, then enters a planar bubble keyed to a plane with the Heavy Gravity trait, his fall will be resolved as if he fell 200 feet on a plane with heavy gravity. That's got to be dysfunctional.

By how Momentum is supposed to work, but I think if you look at it like "twice as Heavy is Twice the impact" it works just fine. Yes, Increased gravity should actually just increase the acceleration and so increase the speed slightly. But D&D generally treats Weight and Mass as the same thing, and an object in the Planar Bubble is heavier than outside of it. As far as the rules are concerned, heavier objects hit harder.

Curmudgeon

2015-12-25, 05:20 PM

Troacctid

2015-12-25, 05:32 PM

Gravity is the only element of D&D which has acceleration. Characters go from standing still at the start of their turn to movement at their speed immediately; there's nothing between not moving and full speed. At the end of their turn of moving they're standing still again, also with no transition from moving to not moving. Fired arrows do the same damage at 1000' as they do at 10', so they don't decelerate in flight.

Creatures do accelerate and decelerate--the rules make mention of slowing down and speeding up in several places--it's just not modeled in the combat rules, which use average speed instead of doing calculus with your instantaneous velocity.

Curmudgeon

2015-12-25, 11:01 PM

Creatures do accelerate and decelerate--the rules make mention of slowing down and speeding up in several places--it's just not modeled in the combat rules, which use average speed instead of doing calculus with your instantaneous velocity.
Can you provide citations? It would be good to know where those are, because I can't think of any instances in the Player's Handbook. In particular, the combat rules for Run mean it will generally be disadvantageous only if there's no straight-line path that doesn't pass through an enemy's threatened area. Run is a full-round action, so you start it on your turn and finish it at the end of your turn. You can Run for multiple rounds, but you're always stopped when it's not your turn. And your straight-line Run path for a round can be in a completely different direction from your straight-line Run paths for the previous and following rounds.

Troacctid

2015-12-25, 11:17 PM

Sure. Just off the top of my head, here's a couple relevant passages from the SRD.(http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm)

Most flying creatures have to slow down at least a little to make a turn

In general, when the characters aren’t engaged in round-by-round combat, they should be able to move anywhere and in any manner that you can imagine real people could. A 5-foot square, for instance, can hold several characters; they just can’t all fight effectively in that small space. The rules for movement are important for combat, but outside combat they can impose unnecessary hindrances on character activities.
I'm sure some digging could uncover more.

You can Run for multiple rounds, but you're always stopped when it's not your turn. And your straight-line Run path for a round can be in a completely different direction from your straight-line Run paths for the previous and following rounds.
The former is probably more a quirk of the initiative system using discrete turns to represent simultaneous actions, but I certainly agree that the latter is a dysfunction.

Sir Chuckles

2015-12-27, 05:33 AM

I didn't trawl through every thread to see if this was mentioned, but it wasn't in the Handbook...

Leaping into a lake or magically extinguishing the flames automatically smothers the fire.
Does this mean jumping into a river or ocean does nothing if you've been set on fire by Alchemist's Fire? Or is there somewhere else that expands the rule and I'm just going crazy?

Jormengand

2015-12-27, 09:39 AM

I didn't trawl through every thread to see if this was mentioned, but it wasn't in the Handbook...

Does this mean jumping into a river or ocean does nothing if you've been set on fire by Alchemist's Fire? Or is there somewhere else that expands the rule and I'm just going crazy?

A character on fire may automatically extinguish the flames by jumping into enough water to douse himself. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/environment.htm#catchingOnFire)

Inevitability

2015-12-27, 02:52 PM

What if you jump into a lake of oil?

Troacctid

2015-12-27, 02:53 PM

Oil is flammable, so you'd probably only make it worse.

Gemini476

2015-12-27, 03:08 PM

Oil is flammable, so you'd probably only make it worse.
Wouldn't you smother the flames anyway due to the lack of oxygen?

Can't say the same for the surface of the lake, though.

Inevitability

2015-12-27, 03:36 PM

Oil is flammable, so you'd probably only make it worse.

I know, but the rules for alchemist's fire imply it'd smother the flames.

georgie_leech

2015-12-27, 03:52 PM

I know, but the rules for alchemist's fire imply it'd smother the flames.

Which it would. As indicated above though, you'd likely set the rest of it on fire, which would make the reprieve short-lived at best.

Debatra

2015-12-28, 04:33 PM

If a poison causes unconsciousness as its secondary effect, it lasts 1d3 hours unless stated otherwise. If it's the initial effect, it has no duration unless stated otherwise.

The reverse is also true of paralysis poisons. (initial is noted as 2d6 minutes, secondary isn't mentioned)

bekeleven

2015-12-29, 04:04 PM

Special Qualities: A Vecna-blooded creature gains the following special qualities.
Cloak of Mystery (Su): All knowledge of the Vecna-blooded creature fades from the world. Its original name, its deeds before becoming Vecna-blooded, and so forth, disappear from memory. Only Vecna and the Vecna-blooded creature retain this knowledge.If a vecna-blooded creature enters an antimagic field, does everyone remember him, or do people just stop forgetting him for that period of time?

Troacctid

2015-12-29, 04:16 PM

If a vecna-blooded creature enters an antimagic field, does everyone remember him, or do people just stop forgetting him for that period of time?

I don't believe it's a continuous effect—it appears to be instantaneous.

Jormengand

2016-01-03, 04:01 PM

Superior Unarmed Strike doesn't work properly for Disciples of the Word, and presumably other monk-esque classes which aren't actually called "Monk" - they deal the SUAS damage, but they deal the DotW damage.

It also decreases the damage dealt by huge or larger unarmed strikes of 3rd-level characters, gargantuan or larger of 4th-7th, and colossal of 8th-11th. Another one for the "Game assumes you're medium" box, as well as the fact that it allows a moth-sized creature to do unrealistic amounts of damage, but that's slightly less flagrant.

Also, does anyone have any objections to me putting the following explanation into the OP?:

What this thread is for:

Rules that clearly do something that is pointless or self-abnegating (EG Focused Lexicon is a feat that provides nothing but a penalty, no-one can use Chain Power, Hindering Opportunist helps your enemy).
Rules that do something that is vastly contrary from anything that could possibly be the intended effect (Drown Healing, Greater Reversed Seek the Sky lasts forever, Reversed Mystic Rampart is meant to lower someone's saves but actually drops a tower on them).
Rules that cause an non-resolvable game state (Peerless Archers can stack infinite attacks of opportunity)
Rules that don't define something well enough to use it ("Distracted", "Minimum Caster Level", "Paladin spell", "Primary Ability Score", "Special Material", anything missing a range or other variables).
Rules that, while they don't actually have a negative impact on the game as a game, do stop it making sense (EG fire and acid don't do fire and acid damage, you can fall 9 feet onto your head and take no damage, falling creatures deal no damage if they land on you).
Two or more rules combine to cause an above problem (AC bonuses and bonus feats exist, but bonuses are only applicable to die rolls so no they don't).

What this thread is not for

Typos (Weapon deals 1d33 or 1d43 damage because 3 isn't superscript; "Share Lesser Form" mistyped as "Share Laser Form".)
Dysfunctions that only arise because of a specific reading of the text (In combat, everyone is flat-footed until they act, so they must have been flat-footed whenever they weren't in combat, even though the text only specifies that they're flat-footed in combat. Someone who can't be flanked can't have a person on each side of them because if they did, they would be flanked.) Unless every possible reading of the text is dysfunctional no matter how you read it (even if it's dysfunctional in different ways).

Green and Red

2016-01-03, 06:08 PM

My first time posting in these threads, not sure how valid this is, but it just jumped out at me while reading. It wasnt in the handbook, so it may not have come up.

The Hospitaler, in Defenders of the faith.
Can be of any nonchaotic alignment. Falls (loses class) if she becomes chaotic.
However, also falls if she performs any evil act. Despite lawful evil and neutral evil alignment being no hindrance to joining.

What exactly is the alignment restriction supposed to be here?

Its at minimum strange.

EDIT: On checking complete divine, the updated version of the hospitaler forbids chaotic acts, not evil acts. So i guess it got fixed. Although there the class has a bunch of other differences too.

Troacctid

2016-01-03, 06:35 PM

Also, does anyone have any objections to me putting the following explanation into the OP?:

What this thread is for:

Rules that clearly do something that is pointless or self-abnegating (EG Focused Lexicon is a feat that provides nothing but a penalty, no-one can use Chain Power, Hindering Opportunist helps your enemy).
Rules that do something that is vastly contrary from anything that could possibly be the intended effect (Drown Healing, Greater Reversed Seek the Sky lasts forever, Reversed Mystic Rampart is meant to lower someone's saves but actually drops a tower on them).
Rules that cause an non-resolvable game state (Peerless Archers can stack infinite attacks of opportunity)
Rules that don't define something well enough to use it ("Distracted", "Minimum Caster Level", "Paladin spell", "Primary Ability Score", "Special Material", anything missing a range or other variables).
Rules that, while they don't actually have a negative impact on the game as a game, do stop it making sense (EG fire and acid don't do fire and acid damage, you can fall 9 feet onto your head and take no damage, falling creatures deal no damage if they land on you).
Two or more rules combine to cause an above problem (AC bonuses and bonus feats exist, but bonuses are only applicable to die rolls so no they don't).

What this thread is not for

Typos (Weapon deals 1d33 or 1d43 damage because 3 isn't superscript; "Share Lesser Form" mistyped as "Share Laser Form".)
Dysfunctions that only arise because of a specific reading of the text (In combat, everyone is flat-footed until they act, so they must have been flat-footed whenever they weren't in combat, even though the text only specifies that they're flat-footed in combat. Someone who can't be flanked can't have a person on each side of them because if they did, they would be flanked.) Unless every possible reading of the text is dysfunctional no matter how you read it (even if it's dysfunctional in different ways).

I do like the last one. I think typos are fair game if they're not fixed by errata, though.

Jormengand

2016-01-03, 07:05 PM

I do like the last one. I think typos are fair game if they're not fixed by errata, though.

Except that the errata are explicitly not for fixing typos:

Errata in this file includes material that the Wizards of the Coast RPG R&D department and editors feel might affect your gameplay experience. It does not include minor, typographical errors—the sort of thing that might be fixed in a reprint but has no impact on your game.

Inevitability

2016-01-04, 01:40 PM

Master's Lament (HoH) says:

Target: One humanoid creature with a familiar or other empathically linked animal companion

However, it also says:

This spell can be cast on either the master or the familiar.

So you can cast it on familiars, but only if said familiars are humanoid?

Chronos

2016-01-04, 04:05 PM

I'd say that the description trumps the summary, there.

georgie_leech

2016-01-04, 04:08 PM

I wonder what the rationale was for restricting it to humanoid casters only. What, are Dragons not allowed to have familiars now?

Flickerdart

2016-01-04, 04:40 PM

I wonder what the rationale was for restricting it to humanoid casters only. What, are Dragons not allowed to have familiars now?
It's a power limiter, like enlarge person has.

Gemini476

2016-01-04, 04:41 PM

The question is, do they mean the type of humanoid that includes stuff like orc sorcerers and dryadic druids or do they mean the Type of Humanoid that doesn't?

Flickerdart

2016-01-04, 04:46 PM

The question is, do they mean the type of humanoid that includes stuff like orc sorcerers and dryadic druids or do they mean the Type of Humanoid that doesn't?
It's not a question - humanoid is a reserved rules term and means the creature type. Orc sorcerers are humanoids. Dryads are not, but they are a "creature with humanoid physiology" which is a term used occasionally.

georgie_leech

2016-01-04, 05:58 PM

It's a power limiter, like enlarge person has.

Yeah, but it's a level 6 spell with no higher level counterpart to expand it to other creature types. It doesn't let you target the weaker familiar saves (it explicitly gives both targets a save) and damage splitting is a bit... underwhelming given how little direct punishment most familiars can take. This looks to be a fluffy spell that isn't actually all that powerful, unless there's some combo I'm missing.

Andezzar

2016-01-04, 06:26 PM

Yeah, but it's a level 6 spell with no higher level counterpart to expand it to other creature types. There isn't a spell that can enlarge non-humanoids either.

georgie_leech

2016-01-04, 06:37 PM

There isn't a spell that can enlarge non-humanoids either.

Yes there is it's...

...

...huh, look at that. I could have sworn there was. The point stands that it seems a somewhat arbitrary restriction.

Troacctid

2016-01-04, 06:38 PM

Yes there is it's...

...

...huh, look at that. I could have sworn there was. The point stands that it seems a somewhat arbitrary restriction.

Righteous Might. It's self-only though.

Andezzar

2016-01-04, 06:41 PM

Righteous Might. It's self-only though.OK, What I meant is that there is no more versatile higher level spell like with charm person and charm monster. Righteous might does quite a few things besides enlarging the target.

Debatra

2016-01-05, 09:55 AM

One more for the "All players are Medium Humanoids" pile I guess.

Inevitability

2016-01-05, 10:42 AM

Yeah, but it's a level 6 spell with no higher level counterpart to expand it to other creature types. It doesn't let you target the weaker familiar saves (it explicitly gives both targets a save) and damage splitting is a bit... underwhelming given how little direct punishment most familiars can take. This looks to be a fluffy spell that isn't actually all that powerful, unless there's some combo I'm missing.

Casting Delay Death on the familiar beforehand, maybe?

Chronos

2016-01-05, 11:38 AM

In any event, a spell being weak for its level isn't a dysfunction.

ShurikVch

2016-01-05, 12:42 PM

Weapon Graft (Fiend Folio) and Graft Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/graftWeapon.htm) are both share similar dysfunction:
However, it cannot use the hand with the graft for anything but combat, and it takes a –2 penalty on all skill checks requiring the use of hands.
While your hand is grafted to a weapon, you lose the use of that hand and take a -2 penalty on all skill checks requiring the use of hands.While it's completely understandable for most weapons, I can't see how exactly grafting a Gauntlet (or Poison Ring) can cause so much penalties

Also, note: neither graft, nor psionic power forbid you to graft the actual natural weapon to the hand :smallamused:

georgie_leech

2016-01-05, 02:17 PM

In any event, a spell being weak for its level isn't a dysfunction.

Mm, wasn't arguing that part was, just wondering about the reasoning behind it.

ShurikVch

2016-01-06, 06:26 AM

I think this one hasn't been mentioned:

Rule on action types for Extraordinary abilities:

Factotum ability:

So, accordingly a Factotum can spend 3 points and a standard action to get a standard action. Wait what?

ethically I should mention this is now contradicted by the Official glossary on the web, however the most recent 3.5 PHB is in agreement with the SRD20 that actions (ie Cunning Surge) are standard, whereas reactions or always on abilities are no action at all.No, not exactly
SRD may say so, but, according to any single Monster Manual,
Using an extraordinary ability is a free action unless otherwise noted.
Using an extraordinary ability is a free action unless otherwise noted.
Using an extraordinary ability is a free action unless otherwise noted.
Using an extraordinary ability is a free action unless otherwise noted.
Using an extraordinary ability is a free action unless otherwise noted.Rules Compendium support it too:
Using an extraordinary ability is a free action unless otherwise noted.Dungeon Master's Guide don't specify type of action for Extraordinary Abilities:
Extraordinary Abilities (Ex): Extraordinary abilities are nonmagical. They are, however, not something that just anyone can do or even learn to do without extensive training (which, in game terms, means to take a new character class). A monk’s ability to evade attacks and a barbarian’s uncanny dodge are extraordinary abilities. Effects or areas that negate or disrupt magic have no effect on extraordinary abilities.The only book which disagree is Player's Handbook:
Those extraordinary abilities that are actions are usually standard actions that cannot be disrupted, do not require concentration, and do not provoke attacks of opportunity.While it may cause certain problem when action type is unspecified (Is it standard or free action?), Cunning Surge is still not a "standard action to get a standard action" - after all, even PHB says "usually", not "always"

Chronos

2016-01-06, 10:10 AM

And the MM and PHB rules are reconcilable: That could just mean that most extraordinary abilities are standard actions by virtue of most of them being specified as standard, but the occasional ones without a specified action type are free.

bekeleven

2016-01-06, 01:27 PM

The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions.
[...]
The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.
All "base" classes not presented in the player's handbook are officially referred to as "Standard Classes," e.g:

New Standard Class: Factotum
Looks like the MM has it.

Jormengand

2016-01-07, 07:37 AM

Fun with Elocaters:

"An elocater of 4th level or higher can flank enemies from seemingly impossible angles. She can designate any adjacent square as the square from which flanking against an ally is determined (including the square where she stands, as normal). She can designate the square at the beginning of her turn or at any time during her turn. The designated square remains her effective square for flanking until she is no longer adjacent to it or until she chooses a different square (at the start of one of her turns). The character can even choose a square that is impassable or occupied."

So, this ability allows you to flank your enemies... except that it only works on your allies.

Also, the Catsfeet spell, from Complete Mage, aids with move silently checks, only it has a verbal component.

Debatra

2016-01-07, 02:25 PM

If you step on a caltrop, it injures your foot. This somehow also inhibits your flying.

Trixie

2016-01-07, 07:30 PM

Weapon Graft (Fiend Folio) and Graft Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/graftWeapon.htm) are both share similar dysfunction:While it's completely understandable for most weapons, I can't see how exactly grafting a Gauntlet (or Poison Ring) can cause so much penalties

See this video (https://youtu.be/bpurFCdTaqY?t=190) (yes, the gauntlet is badly made modern copy with much less articulation than originals and the guy's knowledge is barely amateur level but it does show actual medieval plated gauntlet's weaknesses).

Jormengand

2016-01-09, 03:55 PM

PallentisLunam

2016-01-10, 12:15 AM

Psicrystals belonging to Psychic Warriors, Ardents, Psychic Rogues (insert every psionic class that isn't Psion or Wilder here) and creatures with the Hidden Talent feat don't have any hit dice. This may cause funky effects when something calls their hit dice.

Their stat block doesn't specify the class of their owner (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm)

The Random NPC

2016-01-10, 01:21 AM

Their stat block doesn't specify the class of their owner (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm)

As we all know, text trumps table, and the text says that the Psicrystal's HD is equal to it's master's counting only Psion and Wilder. Therefore, if you get a Psicrystal without being either of those classes, your Psicrystal has 0 HD.

bekeleven

2016-01-10, 03:11 AM

Can I get a judge call?

Dysfunctions that only arise because of a specific reading of the text (In combat, everyone is flat-footed until they act, so they must have been flat-footed whenever they weren't in combat, even though the text only specifies that they're flat-footed in combat. Someone who can't be flanked can't have a person on each side of them because if they did, they would be flanked.) Unless every possible reading of the text is dysfunctional no matter how you read it
Does the table making perfect sense and being the obvious intent count?

Inevitability

2016-01-10, 05:21 AM

Andezzar

2016-01-10, 05:38 AM

You attach any melee weapon you can use in one hand—mundane, psionic, or magical—onto the end of one of your arms.Is a gauntlet really a weapon that you normally use in one hand? To me the normal use is to it on one's hand. If you actually grab the gauntlet and hit someone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjE2sxCQ_rU) instead of wearing it and hitting someone the penalties are totally understandable. I think the writers only had that way of using a weapon in mind.

Chronos

2016-01-10, 08:20 AM

Quoth bekeleven:

Does the table making perfect sense and being the obvious intent count?
Not when it's clearly and explicitly contradicted by the text, it doesn't. Besides, the intent isn't obvious: Even if they meant to say "levels in psionic classes" instead of "levels in psion or wilder", that would still leave unclear the status of masters with the Wild Talent feat.

ShurikVch

2016-01-10, 10:53 AM

See this video (https://youtu.be/bpurFCdTaqY?t=190) (yes, the gauntlet is badly made modern copy with much less articulation than originals and the guy's knowledge is barely amateur level but it does show actual medieval plated gauntlet's weaknesses).Graft/power completely prevent usage of grafted hand (except for attacks).
1) How about the two-handed weapons? Shouldn't be gauntlet (even if grafted) explicitly allow to use it?
2) If gauntlet don't inflict -2 penalty on skill checks while worn normally, then why it should when grafted?
3) Later gauntlets were nimble enough to shoot pistols
4) How about the Poison Ring? It take just one finger, but (by the RAW) still make whole hand unusable

Is a gauntlet really a weapon that you normally use in one hand? To me the normal use is to it on one's hand. If you actually grab the gauntlet and hit someone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjE2sxCQ_rU) instead of wearing it and hitting someone the penalties are totally understandable. I think the writers only had that way of using a weapon in mind.Amusingly, this ruling still don't prevent from grafting retractable claws, which would go exactly in hand, and, while retracted, shouldn't prevent hand usage, or incur skill check penalties

Not when it's clearly and explicitly contradicted by the text, it doesn't. Besides, the intent isn't obvious: Even if they meant to say "levels in psionic classes" instead of "levels in psion or wilder", that would still leave unclear the status of masters with the Wild Talent feat.Or racial manifesting...

Story

2016-01-10, 03:51 PM

Fun with Elocaters:

"An elocater of 4th level or higher can flank enemies from seemingly impossible angles. She can designate any adjacent square as the square from which flanking against an ally is determined (including the square where she stands, as normal). She can designate the square at the beginning of her turn or at any time during her turn. The designated square remains her effective square for flanking until she is no longer adjacent to it or until she chooses a different square (at the start of one of her turns). The character can even choose a square that is impassable or occupied."

So, this ability allows you to flank your enemies... except that it only works on your allies.

I think the intent is pretty clear here. It's just an ambiguously used preposition.

Jormengand

2016-01-10, 04:23 PM

I think the intent is pretty clear here. It's just an ambiguously used preposition.

Only you can't use against like that in English.

Story

2016-01-10, 06:47 PM

You could say "against a wall" so why not "against an ally"? They were going for the other side meaning.

Jormengand

2016-01-10, 07:06 PM

You could say "against a wall" so why not "against an ally"? They were going for the other side meaning.

Right, but if something is against a wall it means it's leaning on or hung on the wall, not that there's an enemy between it and the wall.

Chronos

2016-01-11, 11:00 AM

Jormengand

2016-01-11, 01:47 PM

On the other hand, you might refer to a hammer as being against an anvil, even though the whole point of using a hammer against an anvil is that there's something being smashed in between. Like flanking.

If you say "The hammer is against the anvil", the only thing I can see that meaning is that the hammer is leaning on the anvil. If you say "The hammer is being hit against the anvil," the only thing I can see that meaning is that the hammer is being hit directly onto the anvil, with nothing in between. Either way, it doesn't make the kind of sense you want it to.

bekeleven

2016-01-11, 04:13 PM

If you say "The hammer is against the anvil", the only thing I can see that meaning is that the hammer is leaning on the anvil. If you say "The hammer is being hit against the anvil," the only thing I can see that meaning is that the hammer is being hit directly onto the anvil, with nothing in between. Either way, it doesn't make the kind of sense you want it to.

These are not my associations with these terms.

Ctrl-F "Hammer Hitting Anvil (https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&sa=1&q=%22hammer+hitting+anvil%22)"

Jormengand

2016-01-11, 04:30 PM

Or we could just look up what against means directly. (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=against&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=qh6UVt_kEcTJOteBh_gB)

in or into physical contact with (something), so as to be supported by or collide with it.

tl;dr there is no possible way in the English language that "Against an ally" can be synonymous with "Opposite an ally".

georgie_leech

2016-01-11, 05:13 PM

Or we could just look up what against means directly. (https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=against&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=qh6UVt_kEcTJOteBh_gB)

tl;dr there is no possible way in the English language that "Against an ally" can be synonymous with "Opposite an ally".

I direct your attention to definition 2 here (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/against).

PallentisLunam

2016-01-11, 05:21 PM

I direct your attention to definition 2 here (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/against).

Oh god, not this affected crap again.

Jormengand

2016-01-11, 05:30 PM

I direct your attention to definition 2 here (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/against).

Huh. Weird that I haven't heard it used like that before, but fine.

Oh god, not this affected crap again.

Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this affected crap again." crap again.

Story

2016-01-12, 12:08 AM

I'm not sure if anyone's mentioned this before, but I just realized that Magic Aura doesn't specifically negate its own aura. So if you cast it on an item, that item will appear nonmagical except that it also has an illusion aura.

Inevitability

2016-01-12, 09:35 AM

Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this affected crap again." crap again.

Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this affected crap again." crap again." crap again. :smalltongue:

Debatra

2016-01-12, 09:54 AM

Oh god, not this affected crap again.

Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this affected crap again." crap again.

Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this "Oh god, not this affected crap again." crap again." crap again. :smalltongue:

...Well at least it's better than arguing over "affected".

Triskavanski

2016-01-12, 11:34 AM

I wonder if Bone Fiddle counts in here?

As written it can't affect undead, even if said undead are skeletal or have a skeleton in them.

PallentisLunam

2016-01-12, 12:02 PM

Has anyone noted before that an Urban Ranger get a bonus to Survival against his Favored Enemy (meant to help him track) even though an Urban Ranger tracks using Gather Information and Survival is no longer a class skill for him

Andezzar

2016-01-12, 12:23 PM

Suboptimal, and perhaps not intended, but not dysfunctional.

The Urban Ranger's HiPS however is at least misnamed, possibly dysfunctional. The write up removes the class feature that waives the need for concealment (Camouflage). So the Urban Ranger can only hide while being observed in dimly lit areas (or if he has some other form of concealment. I wouldn't call such situations plain sight.

Chronos

2016-01-12, 04:39 PM

There are many versions of HiPS, and it's fairly common for it to not remove the concealment requirement. It's much less common, when it doesn't, for it to not be paired with some other ability which either removes the requirement or provides concealment, but that's not unprecedented, either: The Dark creature template from Tome of Magic has the same issue.

The Viscount

2016-01-13, 12:29 AM

Two feats that I don't think have been brought up here. One is a technicality type, another is an "error, not found" type.

The Able Learner feat is a 1st level only feat that makes all skills cost 1 point. By strict RAW it doesn't apply to the skills at first level, since these are bought before selecting feats.

Shape Soulmeld tells you to use the normal rules for shaping soulmelds. The normal rules say that DCs are based on Wisdom for Incarnates and Constitution for Totemists and Soulborns. If you take Shape Soulmeld but do not have levels in any of these classes, it is undefined what the DC is based on.

Andezzar

2016-01-13, 03:09 AM

rrwoods

2016-01-17, 03:56 PM

Here's a strange one:

... and your strikes deal extra damage equal to the number of disciplines you readied maneuvers from at the beginning of the day. ...
Given that you can change your readied maneuvers pretty much any time you're not fighting, I can't imagine this is what they intended.

Jormengand

2016-01-17, 04:02 PM

Mobs (Cityscape) are weird.

If you arrange 48 humans into the same space that a gargantuan creature takes up, and then throw a hurricane at them, they each need to take a DC 20 fortitude save (which is very difficult) or be blown away. If however you have a mob of 48 humans, they can pass that save more than half the time, and there's no effect even if they fail it.

Similarly, if you launch a widened fireball into them, you would normally expect it to kill them all... but because they're a mob, they suddenly only take about a third of their hit points in damage.

Suppose that you get really fed up with this unit, and decide to drop an intensified fell drain meteor swarm on them to do LOLHUEG damage. You deal damage far in excess of their hit points... but only about 30% of the mob is actually dead. If that mob gets hit by the Locate City Bomb, dealing some number of hundreds of d6s of damage, only a third of them die.

I think I've just worked out how to survive the LCB...

EDIT: Also, a mob of lawful good humans isn't susceptible to word of chaos, but it is susceptible to holy word or dictum.

No brains

2016-01-17, 11:35 PM

illyahr

2016-01-18, 10:31 PM

But do they keep these traits in were-orca form? :smallbiggrin:

WE ARE MANY, YOU ARE BUT ONE!

Maybe a mob is so tightly packed together so that they're all holding each other down in the hurricane and they're dense enough at the front that they block the LoE of the fireball?

Also with Fell Drain there, does the 30% dead pile of mob come back to life as a single wight?

As a were-orca wight, or a were-wight orca. :smallbiggrin:

CrazyYanmega

2016-01-20, 07:08 AM

According to the SRD, a Sailing Ship weighs the same as a piece of chalk. Note also that the size of said piece of chalk is not specified.

Scratch that, I looked in the wrong place of the Dysfunction Handbook. It's already down.

Andezzar

2016-01-20, 08:13 AM

Having a weight of - listed is not the same as having the same weight or as having a weight of 0 lb.

Chronos

2016-01-20, 09:11 AM

Yes, but in the equipment table, a weight of - is explicitly said to mean "so small as to be not worth tracking".

Andezzar

2016-01-20, 09:23 AM

Still, two weights that are not worth tracking do not have to be the same. Not tracking the weight of a ship probably is due to the writers not thinking its weight would be needed. You don't often carry or pull such vessels.

That an arbitrarily large volume of chalk does not have a weight is weird though. Again I think the writers haven't thought about trading chalk as a commodity.

Gemini476

2016-01-20, 09:34 AM

Cows don't have a listed weight, so I don't see why bits of chalk would.

Or, y'know, Dire Cows if you want to eliminate the "just look up to IRL values" argument.

How many Tarrasques can you load on a boat? How old do [insert non-"Races of X" monster here] get?

This is especially annoying since monster weights might actually be relevant in combat what with grappling and stuff.

turbo164

2016-01-20, 09:40 AM

I kinda want to make a Hulking Hurler that throws cargo ships full of chalk now.

With some Rogue levels for Sneak Attack, since the boat doesn't weigh enough to do much damage on it's own :smallbiggrin:

Andezzar

2016-01-20, 09:47 AM

How many Tarrasques can you load on a boat?Not more than one, because there is only one.

Generally though weight for monsters and the maximum load of a ship can be found in the entries.

Tarrasque: 130t
maximum load of a sailing ship: 150t

Graypairofsocks

2016-01-20, 10:36 AM

georgie_leech

2016-01-20, 10:47 AM

The essence of Shothragot (web.archive.org/web/20090619191816/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drfe/20080318a) has an ability which drives extraplanar outsiders with divine ranks that are within 100 miles of Shothragot insane (with no saving throw).

However all Creatures with divine ranks are immune to mind affecting abilities.

Don’t forget the DC 35 Check to avoid being affected by its Aura of Madness. What kind of check? Beats me, but we at least know the DC :smallbiggrin:

Dimers

2016-01-21, 02:46 AM

The Able Learner feat is a 1st level only feat that makes all skills cost 1 point. By strict RAW it doesn't apply to the skills at first level, since these are bought before selecting feats.

I quibble therewith. PHB says "follow these steps", not "follow these steps in exactly this order (but see caveat under Record Racial And Class Features)". Also, if you had to follow the steps precisely as written, it wouldn't be rules-legal to create a character without reviewing the starting packages for your class, you wouldn't be allowed to choose gender until after deciding on a name*, there's at least an implication that you're not allowed to denote your character record using computer or possibly even a pen ... et cetera.

* I can just hear it now. "My character's name is Melissa, and he's the -- wait, crap."

Inevitability

2016-01-21, 09:39 AM

The Dream of the Insight feat says:

While in a dreamtouched state, you gain low-light vision, darkvision out to 60 feet, and blindsense.

What's the range on that blindsense? No one knows.

ShurikVch

2016-01-21, 10:39 AM

What this thread is for:

Rules that clearly do something that is pointless or self-abnegating (EG Focused Lexicon is a feat that provides nothing but a penalty, no-one can use Chain Power, Hindering Opportunist helps your enemy).
Rules that do something that is vastly contrary from anything that could possibly be the intended effect (Drown Healing, Greater Reversed Seek the Sky lasts forever, Reversed Mystic Rampart is meant to lower someone's saves but actually drops a tower on them).
Rules that cause an non-resolvable game state (Peerless Archers can stack infinite attacks of opportunity)
Rules that don't define something well enough to use it ("Distracted", "Minimum Caster Level", "Paladin spell", "Primary Ability Score", "Special Material", anything missing a range or other variables).
Rules that, while they don't actually have a negative impact on the game as a game, do stop it making sense (EG fire and acid don't do fire and acid damage, you can fall 9 feet onto your head and take no damage, falling creatures deal no damage if they land on you).
Two or more rules combine to cause an above problem (AC bonuses and bonus feats exist, but bonuses are only applicable to die rolls so no they don't).

What this thread is not for

Typos (Weapon deals 1d33 or 1d43 damage because 3 isn't superscript; "Share Lesser Form" mistyped as "Share Laser Form".)
Dysfunctions that only arise because of a specific reading of the text (In combat, everyone is flat-footed until they act, so they must have been flat-footed whenever they weren't in combat, even though the text only specifies that they're flat-footed in combat. Someone who can't be flanked can't have a person on each side of them because if they did, they would be flanked.) Unless every possible reading of the text is dysfunctional no matter how you read it (even if it's dysfunctional in different ways).

Which of those will be the it? -

Orb of Force is "Conjuration (Creation (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#creation))" with "Duration: Instantaneous"
If the spell has a duration other than instantaneous, magic holds the creation together, and when the spell ends, the conjured creature or object vanishes without a trace. If the spell has an instantaneous duration, the created object or creature is merely assembled through magic. It lasts indefinitely and does not depend on magic for its existence.Thus after the cast of Orb of Force we will get completely non-magical Orb of Force, which exact properties (besides 3" size) are completely unknown

Andezzar

2016-01-21, 11:59 AM

Actually the orb is completely inert. It deals damage only once, so after that it does nothing.

ShurikVch

2016-01-21, 12:03 PM

Actually the orb is completely inert. It deals damage only once, so after that it does nothing.It's also completely free, and indestructible

Andezzar

2016-01-21, 12:20 PM

It's also completely free, and indestructibleIt is also completely unable to interact with anything. It has no mass, no impulse no charge, no state of aggregation etc.

ShurikVch

2016-01-21, 12:44 PM

It is also completely unable to interact with anything.Why?
It can do it just fine, no worse than any other item in a game
Scratch it, force able to ignore DR and hardness, and even to interact with ethereal or incorporeal stuff

It has no mass, no impulse no charge, no state of aggregation etc.
http://sellingoutforfunandprofit.com/images/catgirltpreview.jpg

Jormengand

2016-01-21, 01:15 PM

The main reason that the ball of force doesn't do anything, by RAW, is that the RAW doesn't define it as doing anything. Apart from damage, but it's done that now.

Andezzar

2016-01-21, 01:23 PM

The main reason that the ball of force doesn't do anything, by RAW, is that the RAW doesn't define it as doing anything. Apart from damage, but it's done that now.That is what I was about to say.

As for the orb of force, the rules do not say that it can do that more than once.

Also, I hate catgirls.

ShurikVch

2016-01-21, 01:30 PM

The main reason that the ball of force doesn't do anything, by RAW, is that the RAW doesn't define it as doing anything. Apart from damage, but it's done that now.Isn't continuous existence of something which don't described in RAW a dysfunction by itself?

Jormengand

2016-01-21, 01:55 PM

Isn't continuous existence of something which don't described in RAW a dysfunction by itself?

Not really. I don't know whether or not trees or twigs or rocks or sand are described in the rules, but their existence isn't really a dysfunction.

Of course, on the material plane, the ball of force basically explodes into a small omnidirectional shockwave the moment it's left to its own devices, because that's how force would work in the real world if there was just some force sitting in a random sphere for no particularly good reason.

The Viscount

2016-01-21, 02:03 PM

I quibble therewith. PHB says "follow these steps", not "follow these steps in exactly this order (but see caveat under Record Racial And Class Features)". Also, if you had to follow the steps precisely as written, it wouldn't be rules-legal to create a character without reviewing the starting packages for your class, you wouldn't be allowed to choose gender until after deciding on a name*, there's at least an implication that you're not allowed to denote your character record using computer or possibly even a pen ... et cetera.

* I can just hear it now. "My character's name is Melissa, and he's the -- wait, crap."

That's actually a really good point. I had assumed it would be in order because this is the order you must do on leveling up. The fact that this order is enforced on level up but not necessarily on character creation is an oddity in and of itself.

ShurikVch

2016-01-21, 03:30 PM

Not really. I don't know whether or not trees or twigs or rocks or sand are described in the rules, but their existence isn't really a dysfunction.Trees are may be kinda important - for example, you may awake it, but what's the stats?
Rocks should matter too - such things as weight, hardness, or hit points may be important
Sand may be awakened too
Twigs may be animated
Of course, on the material plane, the ball of force basically explodes into a small omnidirectional shockwave the moment it's left to its own devices, because that's how force would work in the real world if there was just some force sitting in a random sphere for no particularly good reason.Except, there is no [force] in real world, so we can't say how it will behave in real world

Flickerdart

2016-01-21, 03:34 PM

"A ball of force is left in existence, but has no physical properties so it doesn't matter" honestly seems to be the least dysfunctional of all the Orbs.

Sky

2016-01-21, 04:24 PM

I think I have a dysfunction in Pathfinder. Enlarge Person only works on hominoids, and can be made permanent with a Permanency spell (and 2,500 gp, of course :smallwink:). The capstone feature of the Monk (and several other classes) changes your type to Outsider (Native). To the best of my knowledge, the rules don't cover what happens if you cast a spell and make it permanent, but the target later changes type.
(This may work in 3.x more broadly, but I only have Pathfinder.)

Flickerdart

2016-01-21, 04:35 PM

To the best of my knowledge, the rules don't cover what happens if you cast a spell and make it permanent, but the target later changes type.
The popular interpretation is that a spell only checks when cast. If the target later becomes illegal, the spell remains in effect. This makes sense because the alternative (a spell stops working as soon as the target becomes illegal) runs into the issue of creatures walking out of range of the caster to rid themselves of dangerous debuffs, because they are now illegal targets due to being too far away.

Chronos

2016-01-21, 05:07 PM

There are also spells which require a target of one type and change them to a different type, which would be self-terminating under the other interpretation.

As for Orbs of Force, we do know some of their properties. First of all, of course, we know that they're made of force, which gives us some properties right there: In particular, D&D force is quite durable, being vulnerable only to Disintegrate and a handful of other rare effects, or to the spell which created it expiring (not an issue here). We also know that an orb of force does a bunch of d6 of damage when flung violently. So, anyone who can fling things violently can get the same benefit from it. It may or may not have mass or momentum, but that's irrelevant, because even if it doesn't have those things, we still know it's capable of dealing damage.

Sky

2016-01-21, 05:33 PM

The popular interpretation is that a spell only checks when cast. If the target later becomes illegal, the spell remains in effect. This makes sense because the alternative (a spell stops working as soon as the target becomes illegal) runs into the issue of creatures walking out of range of the caster to rid themselves of dangerous debuffs, because they are now illegal targets due to being too far away.

Okay. Just something I'd noticed. Figured I would drop it here to see what other people thought.

Regarding Force: Force is, I believe, used to mean two different things in D&D. One is an energy type, like [Fire] or [Cold], but the other is an actual substance, like in the spell Wall of Force. I don't know if using the same name to mean two different things is a dysfunction, but it is certainly confusing.

Troacctid

2016-01-21, 05:39 PM

Force is a damage type, but not an energy type. The energy types are acid, cold, electricity, fire, and sonic.

georgie_leech

2016-01-21, 05:39 PM

We also don't know if you can actually lift said Orb to do the throwing, or if when not flung violently it is quite easy to pass through it with normal force like non newtonian liquids except more so. Or for that matter it's not one of those things that burst violently on impact because that's a more dramatic result than thudding into an opponent and sitting there like a baseball.

Debatra

2016-01-21, 06:02 PM

There are also spells which require a target of one type and change them to a different type, which would be self-terminating under the other interpretation.

Well there's also the "Shrodinger's PrCs" like Dragon Disciple (requires you to not be a dragon, capstone makes you a dragon) and Ur-Priest (requires you to be unable to use divine magic, gives you divine magic).

To be clear: I'm not arguing in favor of that argument; just pointing out the precedent.

Andezzar

2016-01-21, 06:43 PM

Well there's also the "Shrodinger's PrCs" like Dragon Disciple (requires you to not be a dragon, capstone makes you a dragon) and Ur-Priest (requires you to be unable to use divine magic, gives you divine magic).

To be clear: I'm not arguing in favor of that argument; just pointing out the precedent.Once again it does not work that way. The prerequisites are only checked once: when you take the first level in a PrC. It does not matter what happens afterwards. The broken rules that continually require the character to fulfil the prerequisites are only for the PrCs in CArc and CW.

So that is no precedent.

Jormengand

2016-01-21, 06:54 PM

The broken rules that continually require the character to fulfil the prerequisites are only for the PrCs in CArc and CW.

Really? Where does it say that?

Chronos

2016-01-21, 09:00 PM

Those rules are only found in those two books. So it's not a question of where it does say that, it's a question of where it doesn't say otherwise.

PallentisLunam

2016-01-21, 09:33 PM

Building an artificer and I noticed:

Infusions never allow saving throws

Then when picking my stats I found Enhancement Alteration:

If the weapon or shield is attended, the weilder can make a Will saving throw to negate the effect

Couldn't find anything in the Handbook about it.

Flickerdart

2016-01-21, 11:21 PM

Seems to be a case of the ol' specific trumps general. Usually you have to look in another book for something to violate an "absolute rule" (such as the PHB saying there are X classes and then bam, there are more) but I guess the editing department screwed the pooch again.

PallentisLunam

2016-01-21, 11:27 PM

It can't be specific trumps general because we are never told how to calculate a save DC for an infusion. Yes we know the formula that is used everywhere else but to apply it in this case would be improper and even then does it key off of INT or CHA?

EDIT: Forget that last part, artificers aren't dual stat casters don't know where I got that idea

Dimers

2016-01-22, 01:30 AM

That's actually a really good point. I had assumed it would be in order because this is the order you must do on leveling up. The fact that this order is enforced on level up but not necessarily on character creation is an oddity in and of itself.

Sorry, I don't mean to be obtuse, but I can't find any requirement of a specific order-of-operations for leveling up, either. It's not on page 58-59, nor do I see a restriction in the Skills or Feats chapters. I know that's how it was done for the Neverwinter Nights video games, but ... I can't find it in the PHB. The only clear indication of order is that a class choice has to come before several other steps, since class sets the parameters for them. Also the rules for prestige classes say "the first step of advancement is always choosing a class", strongly implying a specific intended order without actually delineating anything past step 1.

I just don't see any written rule demanding skill selection before feat selection.

Andezzar

2016-01-22, 01:47 AM

Those rules are only found in those two books. So it's not a question of where it does say that, it's a question of where it doesn't say otherwise.On top of that the Primary Source rule says that those books have no authority over the DMG or other source books.

Chronos

2016-01-22, 09:52 AM

Quoth PallentisLunam

EDIT: Forget that last part, artificers aren't dual stat casters don't know where I got that idea
Actually, by the text, we don't know if artificers are dual stat casters or not, since it never tells us what ability their saves are based on. For all we know, it could be Wis, or even Str or something. I'd noticed this problem before, with the Disable Construct infusion (basically, Harm vs. constructs), which will always offer a save.

However, this was fixed in the errata. Artificer infusions do indeed have a save DC based on Int.

Jormengand

2016-01-22, 11:27 AM

On top of that the Primary Source rule says that those books have no authority over the DMG or other source books.

But the DMG doesn't say anything about that - it's like me saying that the spell Thunderhead (SpC) does nothing because the core 3 don't say it does anything, and they have prevalence of the SpC.

Andezzar

2016-01-22, 11:41 AM

But the DMG doesn't say anything about that - it's like me saying that the spell Thunderhead (SpC) does nothing because the core 3 don't say it does anything, and they have prevalence of the SpC.No, that is something different. The rules from CArc or CW applying to PrCs from other books is like saying Thunderhead somehow modifies how Shout works.
The primary source for how PrCs work is the DMG. CArc or CW cannot overwrite those rules:
When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct.

Flickerdart

2016-01-22, 11:50 AM

Primary source doesn't work that way. Quoth every errata file: "When you find a disagreement between two... rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct."

The DMG gives rules about PrCs, but it does not mean other sources can't also give rules about PrCs. The DMG has nothing to say on what happens once you stop qualifying for a PrC, therefore a "lesser" book providing such a rule is not in conflict with the DMG.

PallentisLunam

2016-01-22, 12:01 PM

Andezzar

2016-01-22, 12:01 PM

Being allowed to take another level in a PrC without fulfilling the prerequisites is in direct contradiction to either of the rules in CArc and CW. For your convenience:
Unlike the basic
classes found in the Player’s Handbook, characters must meet requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. The rules for level advancement (see page 58 of the Player’s Handbook) apply to this system, meaning the first step of advancement is always choosing a class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before that first step, that character cannot take the first level of that prestige class.None of the PrCs in the DMG or other books (besides those in CArc and CW) require you to fulfil the prerequisites at any other point, nor do they generally remove the ability to take levels in a class.

Any restrictions of PHB (base) classes for advancing or keeping class features are not general rules about level advancement or gaming in general, but are rules specific to certain classes (like monk or paladin).

Flickerdart

2016-01-22, 12:14 PM

bekeleven

2016-01-22, 12:24 PM

ShurikVch

2016-01-22, 12:30 PM

Small technical dysfunction:
If a template changes a creature’s size, use Table 4-2 to calculate changes to natural armor, Armor Class, attack rolls, and grapple bonus.Except Table 4-2 doesn't have info about grapple bonus (it's in the Table 7-1)

Andezzar

2016-01-22, 12:35 PM

That's still not a contradiction. The rules do not say "yeah you can't take the first level, but if you're already in you're fine." They just do not address the remaining 4, 9, or whatever levels of PrCs.And so the general rule applies. The first step of levelling up is picking a class. CArc/CW cannot prevent you from picking a class that is not in the same book.

Flickerdart

2016-01-22, 12:42 PM

And so the general rule applies.
General rules can be overridden by specific rules. Otherwise the whole game breaks down. "Taking a level in a PrC" is more specific than "taking a level in a class."

Andezzar

2016-01-22, 01:07 PM

General rules can be overridden by specific rules. Otherwise the whole game breaks down. "Taking a level in a PrC" is more specific than "taking a level in a class."The differences between taking a level in a class and taking the first level in a PrC have been delineated on p. 176 of the DMG (the primary source for PrCs). CArc or CW cannot add additional restrictions with the same level of generality. Taking a level in a PrC from one of those books is much more specific than taking a level in any PrC.

If you think that the rules from CArc or CW actually work and apply to all PrCs, how do you explain to your players that their characters with PrCs are screwed as soon as it is not their turn? The rules say that you loose stuff (it varies between the two books) if at any time you do not fulfil the prerequisites.
When it is not a caster's turn, he cannot cast spells (unless he has immediate action spells), so whatever the book specifies is gone. When the assassin is not constantly killing someone to join the assassins (which he can't because he already joined), he loses stuff. etc.

And did you notice that neither CArc nor CW has rules how to regain whatever they remove? So even if at some point you again fulfil all the prerequisites, whatever you lost is gone forever.

Telok

2016-01-22, 01:59 PM

Andezzar

2016-01-22, 03:22 PM

Well noboy's saying that the Complete Screwball rules aren't stinky tooters. The issue is that the DMG and C~ address different things. DMG says thay you have to meet the requirements to take a level in the class, the C~ says that if you stop meeting requirements you lose. They address different aspects of prestige classes and neither one explicitly addresses if you need to continue meeting requirements for taking later levels of the class.The screwed up rules in CW do address that:
An alignment change, levels lost because of character death, or the loss of a magic item that granted an important ability are examples of events that can make a character ineligible to advance farther in a prestige class.CArc is silent on the matter.

Telok

2016-01-22, 08:30 PM

The screwed up rules in CW do address that:CArc is silent on the matter.

Ah, I missed that one. Still looks like the DMG is setting the rules for 'to take the level of this class you must' while the screwball rules are more of a 'when you lose X, lose the character'.

Debatra

2016-01-23, 12:08 AM

If you think that the rules from CArc or CW actually work and apply to all PrCs, how do you explain to your players that their characters with PrCs are screwed as soon as it is not their turn? The rules say that you loose stuff (it varies between the two books) if at any time you do not fulfil the prerequisites.
When it is not a caster's turn, he cannot cast spells (unless he has immediate action spells), so whatever the book specifies is gone. When the assassin is not constantly killing someone to join the assassins (which he can't because he already joined), he loses stuff. etc.

And did you notice that neither CArc nor CW has rules how to regain whatever they remove? So even if at some point you again fulfil all the prerequisites, whatever you lost is gone forever.

Oh come on. That's nonsense on the same level as "affected" and you know it. How can you apply that kind of "logic" without also using it on the PrCs that are actually in CA/CW? Acolyte of the Skin, for example (the very first PrC in CArc) would be ineligible the moment they were no longer undergoing the Ritual of Bonding.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 01:34 AM

You are absolutely right in the assessment that Acolyte of the Skin loses its special abilities as soon as the character is no longer undergoing the Ritual of Bonding.

The write up of this class however highlights the writer's ineptitude. One prerequisite is correctly worded, so that you do not lose it as soon as the character is no longer perfomring it and the other is not:

Special: Must have made peaceful contact with a summoned evil outsider.
Special: Must undergo the Ritual of Bonding (see above).They would just have had to write "Must have undergone" and the prerequisites would have been a lot less dysfunctional.

The more common prerequisites of having certain feats and skill ranks don't cause trouble with the screwball rule, because you usually cannot lose them anyways, and you even have them when it is not your turn. The screwball rule would at least kind of work, if all prerequisites would only require possession of something and not the ability to do something.

torrasque666

2016-01-23, 03:24 AM

They would just have had to write "Must have undergone" and the prerequisites would have been a lot less dysfunctional "Undergo" is a verb, without a tense to be applied to (undergoes, undergone) it simply means to "experience or be subjected to (something, typically something unpleasant, painful, or arduous)." (emphasis mine) Its still kinda grammatically correct to say "Must undergo" as that is saying that the verb needs to be performed.

English is weird.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 03:33 AM

"Must undergo" is present tense. So the prerequisite is no longer fulfilled as soon as the ritual is in the past. "Must have undergone" is present perfect. So it still applies to the presence even if the contact with the outsider has been in the past.

Troacctid

2016-01-23, 04:26 AM

"Must undergo" is present tense. So the prerequisite is no longer fulfilled as soon as the ritual is in the past.

No, that would call for the present progressive tense, which indicates ongoing actions.

This is more an issue of stylistic inconsistency, which is, at worst, a minor editing error without any rules implications. RAW-wise, it is cause for less concern than a typo.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 04:29 AM

No, that would call for the present progressive tense, which indicates ongoing actions.While present progressive would emphasize ongoing actions, any present tense is wrong for past actions, especially with the requirement to continually fulfil the prerequisites.

georgie_leech

2016-01-23, 05:04 AM

While present progressive would emphasize ongoing actions, any present tense is wrong for past actions, especially with the requirement to continually fulfil the prerequisites.

'You must run to the store for errands to get my help.' Do you think the only way this hypothetical person is getting aid is if they are currently running to the store, or will they be helped if they do the task being asked?

The Random NPC

2016-01-23, 05:20 AM

'You must run to the store for errands to get my help.' Do you think the only way this hypothetical person is getting aid is if they are currently running to the store, or will they be helped if they do the task being asked?

I'd say that while it is a prerequisite, it sounds like it is being communicated directly to a person about a task to be completed in the future.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 05:29 AM

'You must run to the store for errands to get my help.' Do you think the only way this hypothetical person is getting aid is if they are currently running to the store, or will they be helped if they do the task being asked?If the person is required to continually fulfil the prerequisites, yes, which is exactly what the screwed up rules require.

In your example the run to the store has to come before the help. The person won't get help before he has run to the store, but he will get it afterwards. Fulfilling prerequisites in this way is explicitly forbidden by the screwed up rules.

georgie_leech

2016-01-23, 05:37 AM

Let me try again. One of the the prerequisites for Assassin is 'The character must kill someone for no other reason than to join the assassins.' Does this also require a constant state of 'killing,' and if not, what's the difference?

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 06:04 AM

Yes, because:
Should a character find herself in a position (because of changed alignment, lost levels, or the like) where she no longer meets the requirements of a prestige class, she loses all special abilities (but not Hit Dice, base attack bonus, or base save bonus) gained from levels of the
prestige class.
And

It’s possible for a character to take levels in a prestige class and later be in a position where the character no longer qualifies to be a member of the class. An alignment change, levels lost because of character death, or the loss of a magic item that granted an important ability are examples of events that can make a character ineligible to advance farther in a prestige class.
If a character no longer meets the requirements for a prestige class, he or she loses the benefit of any class features or other special abilities granted by the class. The character retains Hit Dice gained from advancing in the class as well as any improvements to base attack bonus and base save bonuses that the class provided.

For the assassin not autodisqualifying himself by not constantly murdering people to join the assassins, the prerequisite would have to say:"The character must have killed someone for no other reason than to join the assassins." Simple present and present perfect do not have the same meaning.

On top of that there is a logic problem with the prerequisite. As soon has the character has joined the assassins, he can no longer kill anyone with the sole purpose of joining the assassins.

But we are in luck those rules cannot not apply to PrCs in the DMG anyways.

Sliver

2016-01-23, 08:15 AM

Thus after the cast of Orb of Force we will get completely non-magical Orb of Force, which exact properties (besides 3" size) are completely unknown

As for Orbs of Force, we do know some of their properties. First of all, of course, we know that they're made of force

Technically, the usual orb dysfunction means that the orb of force is not, in fact, made of force, but acid. After dealing the damage, it's an inert pile of acid.

Enlarge Person will encumber halflings who were previously just under their light load; their light load goes from 24.75lb to 43 lb (if they were strength 10) and their gear goes from 24lb to 48lb. This probably also works for tiny creatures (16.5 to 32.25, 16.25 to 32.5) but I don't know because while the weight multipliers are specified for large and small weapons, none are mentioned for any other size categories.

Why is that a dysfunction? Enlarge Person isn't harmless...

ShurikVch

2016-01-23, 10:32 AM

Technically, the usual orb dysfunction means that the orb of force is not, in fact, made of force, but acid. After dealing the damage, it's an inert pile of acid.Nope!
Actually, neither Complete Arcane, nor Spell Compendium version of Orb of Force refer to Orb of Acid spell; Orb of Force do untyped damage, because spell's text don't specify 1d6/CL of which type it does

Troacctid

2016-01-23, 01:54 PM

While present progressive would emphasize ongoing actions, any present tense is wrong for past actions, especially with the requirement to continually fulfil the prerequisites.

That's not true. The present tense can totally be used for actions that aren't occurring in the present, such as with the historical present or the present subjunctive. I'm sorry, but this is a serious transgression and I'm afraid I'm going to have to revoke your Grammar Nazi card.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 02:23 PM

georgie_leech

2016-01-23, 02:46 PM

Neither of those are used in this case (one is more a stylistic tool than a grammatical one and the other only applies to subordinate clauses), and what I meant was that if both sentences (the prerequisite and the rule for fulfilling the prerequisites) are in the same tense, they happen at the same time, or at least overlap. So yes the assassin must constantly kill someone for the sole purpose of joining the assassins lest he lose his class features, if those screwed up rules applied to that class.

No, Assassin isn't safe even if the screwed up rules don't apply, because you need to fulfill the prerequisites to take the first level in the first place. Under your interpretation, a prospective Assassin must be in the process of killing someone as they level up, which is impossible given how XP works.

Or, you're wrong and the Present Subjunctive is being used for an imperative, which is both grammatically correct (imperatives can use the subjunctive phrasing) and not dysfunctional.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 02:57 PM

No, Assassin isn't safe even if the screwed up rules don't apply, because you need to fulfill the prerequisites to take the first level in the first place. Under your interpretation, a prospective Assassin must be in the process of killing someone as they level up, which is impossible given how XP works.No. The rules in the DMG explicitly say that all prerequisites must be fulfilled before taking the first level in the PrC, they do not specify how long before. They most certainly do not say that you must fulfil them at the same time as taking the first level. For your convenience
Unlike the basic classes found in the Player’s Handbook, characters must meet requirements before they can take their first level of a prestige class. The rules for level advancement (see page 58 of the Player’s Handbook) apply to this system, meaning the first step of advancement is always choosing a class. If a character does not meet the requirements for a prestige class before that first step, that character cannot take the first level of that prestige class.

Or, you're wrong and the Present Subjunctive is being used for an imperative, which is both grammatically correct (imperatives can use the subjunctive phrasing) and not dysfunctional.the imperative has even more direction to the future.

Troacctid

2016-01-23, 03:02 PM

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 03:26 PM

Yes kill is an infinitive but the modal verb must is still present tense.

Troacctid

2016-01-23, 03:43 PM

Well of course "must" is in the present tense. Defective modal auxiliaries like "must" can't take any other tense. Not only would it be grammatically incorrect to put it in the past tense, it would also be impossible, since no past tense form of the verb exists.

Andezzar

2016-01-23, 04:30 PM

And in that case you must use the equivalent construction with "to have to" or something similar to express obligation in the past or future.

The Viscount

2016-01-23, 06:39 PM

Sorry, I don't mean to be obtuse, but I can't find any requirement of a specific order-of-operations for leveling up, either. It's not on page 58-59, nor do I see a restriction in the Skills or Feats chapters. I know that's how it was done for the Neverwinter Nights video games, but ... I can't find it in the PHB. The only clear indication of order is that a class choice has to come before several other steps, since class sets the parameters for them. Also the rules for prestige classes say "the first step of advancement is always choosing a class", strongly implying a specific intended order without actually delineating anything past step 1.

I just don't see any written rule demanding skill selection before feat selection.

I certainly understand that, and I don't mean to be argumentative, but in my copy of the PHB, on page 58-59, there is a numbered list, beginning with "choose a class." Skills are #6 on this list, and Feats are #7, so you would choose skills before feats on levelup. Is there some other way to interpret this?

Jormengand

2016-01-24, 07:45 AM

Interesting one from here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=20338546&postcount=40), cleave and great cleave trigger whenever you deal zero or more damage to a creature, because that's enough to make it drop if you trip it.

Judge_Worm

2016-01-24, 02:19 PM

My two cents.
Must undergo- Future tense.
Must be undergoing- Present tense.
Must have undergone- Past tense.

Must is unnecessary here, and you is understood.
Must is the primary verb here, and that's the real disfunction. "Shall/Will," "Has," and "Is" are all better choices.
Must lacks any alternate forms.
Ex.
I must. Thou must. He must. We must. You must. They must. I must do this. I must have done this. I must be doing this. I must be done with this. I must have been doing this. (Bonus) I must have been done doing that which I am having to be doing at a time in which I have to do this. (That last sentence is proper English, it can be shortened to "I have done this when it had to be done," but where's the fun in that?)
There is no musting, or musted. Must is a crappy verb, it has to be modified by another verb to make any sense. "I must this" is technically a full thought, but it is awkward and has very little usage except when "this" is an understood verb; even then that sentence is still extremely awkward.

Ebonics/African American Vernacular makes more sense in conjugation as a creole than English does as a proper language.

Telok

2016-01-29, 01:54 AM

Something I recently realized, Forcecage has the text "All spells can pass through the bars" in it's barred version. Which means that the barred Forcecage is completely transparent to spells and cannot block or hinder line of effect.

This only applies to spells, not to invocations, psychic powers, utterances, or anything else. Apparently you can toss a barred Forcecage on someone and then cast something like Bigby's Clenched Fist to beat then to death.

Graypairofsocks

2016-01-29, 05:11 AM

Andezzar

2016-01-29, 06:38 AM

If the creature does not fill the forcecage, you can just set the clenched fist inside the cage. Cover does not help against that, and once the fist is in there it can pummel the creature.

Jormengand

2016-01-29, 10:52 AM

invocations, utterances

"Utterances (Sp):"
"A warlock's invocations are spell-like abilities"
"Spell like abilities... work just like spells".

psychic powers

"The default rule for the interaction of psionics and magic is simple: Powers interact with spells and spells interact with powers in the same way a spell or normal spell-like ability interacts with another spell or spell-like ability. This is known as psionics-magic transparency."

Telok

2016-01-29, 10:52 AM

Creatures in the barred version of Forcecage do have cover against ranged attacks.
Not all spells are ranged attacks. Plus you get into the territory of the spell saying that it gives cover against ranged attacks and allows all spells to pass through it. So does a ranged spell attack pas through or not? The spell says both.

Ok, looks like psi gets a pass too. How does that affect Astral Construct?

You don't have to cast a Bigby's hand spell inside the cage, the cage allows the spell through.

I'm not completely convinced about the invocations. They 'work like spells' while the Forcecage allows spells through. I can understand the reasoning but that also allows +0 metamagics to work on spell-likes. Forcecage does not say 'spells and similar' or anything, it seems pretty exclusive to spells alone. What are the implications if all instances of the word 'spells' are replaced with 'spells and spell-likes', does anything else break?

illyahr

2016-01-29, 11:02 AM

Flickerdart

2016-01-29, 11:19 AM

Not all spells are ranged attacks. Plus you get into the territory of the spell saying that it gives cover against ranged attacks and allows all spells to pass through it. So does a ranged spell attack pas through or not? The spell says both.
I would say "ranged attack which is a spell" is a more specific subset of "ranged attack" and so the specific rule of "it's a spell!" triumphs over the general "all ranged attacks get cover." But the other way could also be argued for.

torrasque666

2016-01-29, 11:23 AM

It may be referring to things like Fireball, which need a ranged touch attack to accurately pass through such small openings.

Telok

2016-01-29, 12:18 PM

It may be referring to things like Fireball, which need a ranged touch attack to accurately pass through such small openings.

It's obvious that the intent is that way. It's supposed to be a cage made of unbreakable force fields that acr physical in nature. But it explicitly says that all spells can go through it.

This includes (can't double check at the moment) flame blade, phantom steed, the wall spells, tensers flotaing disc. All spells, right?

No brains

2016-01-29, 03:17 PM

So could a living spell just walk right out of a force cage?

Flickerdart

2016-01-29, 04:00 PM

So could a living spell just walk right out of a force cage?
A living spell is a spell in name only. It's an ooze that casts a spell when it hits things, and not a spell itself.

Graypairofsocks

2016-01-30, 03:33 AM

I think some oozes could fit through a half-inch gap.

Debatra

2016-01-31, 08:12 PM

Denver

2016-02-01, 02:08 AM

You can decide (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullRoundActions) whether or not you're Full Attacking after you see the results of your first attack, but there are several Full Attack options (Flurry of Blows, TWF, Rapid Shot, etc) that would affect that first attack. I'm not seeing any specific vs general solution here either (like needing to call it a Full Attack ahead of time or something).

I see that rule as specifically spelling how to handle the remainder of a Full Attack, as it reads: "After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks [...]"

That is: In order for that rule to have bearing on a round, it has to come into play in a round for which a character would have multiple attacks. In order for a character to have those multiple attacks, they have to take a full round action.
If, as a low-level monk, you make an attack at your normal attack bonus - then you have not made an attack using Flurry of Blows, which means you have made an Attack Action, which is a standard action, and means that the monk has no remaining attacks that round. Since there are no remaining attacks, there is nothing to satisfy the "instead" part of the clause.
If my character makes a ranged attack at my normal attack bonus, then I have made a standard attack action, not a Rapid Shot, which means I have no remaining attacks.

But, this rule does work just fine for Two-Weapon Fighting. Since wielding a weapon in each hand means the character takes the Primary hand penalty for both regular attacks and attacks with the primary hand in a two-weapon attack, this means that a character wielding two weapons *could* make a single attack (with the -6) and then decide to make it a full attack action, with no declaration. But, again, since the Primary hand penalty applies for regular attacks and attacks as part of a two-weapon attack, I think the rule still works fine.