Consequences of Bending the Graft Rules [3.5]

[Zaq]

So, the Graft rules presented in Races of the Dragon and Magic of Eberron (which I believe to be the newest graft rules, overriding or modding previous ones) state that you cannot have grafts from two sources. Simply put, do you see any balance-related reasons for this? Do you think it would break anything to put, for example, elemental grafts and plant grafts on the same body? If so, why? (Hell, the character I'm considering doing this to, assuming I can convince my GM to bend the rules, is a Warforged anyway... if we've already added dwagon parts, why can't we add Undead parts too?)

Remember, we're looking for problematic interactions between different flavors of grafts. Problematic single grafts (I don't think any are too problematic except maybe the ones in the FF) are different.

[Thrice Dead Cat]

I vaguely remember there either being errata or an FAQ ruling where they mentioned that the newer graft rules do not override the older graft rules. So illithid and fiendish grafts can go hand and hand, but if you go dragon, you don't go back.

Personally, I don't remember there being any grafts that were OMGmazing nor any combos that screamed auto-win, so doing away with that rule is probably fine, from a balance perspective.

[Akal Saris]

I don't see any particular issues with it - if balance is a prime issue, it could be made one of the benefits of a home-brewed feat, or a class feature for a graft-focused PrC. Certainly for a graft-focused character such as a fleshwarper, you would quickly run out of grafts from any single race.

And ya know what irritates me? The fleshwarper specifically states that it was designed so that an adept could enter it at 6th, but Graft Flesh requires 10 ranks in Heal, so the earliest an adept could enter it would be 9th.

[The Glyphstone]

I just pretend the rule doesn't exist, considering it invalidates my #1 ultimate favorite PrC of all time, the Fleshwarper.

[Zaydos]

Magic of Eberron specifies that the new rules within don't apply to the grafts that came before. Really they're a separate type of items with the same name because WotC didn't have a thesaurus handy.

[Curmudgeon]

(The rulespresented here might deviate from those of the grafts presented in other books. These rules apply only to the grafts in this book, and not to any other form of graft previously introduced.)

The draconic grafts in this book have the following rules in common. (These follow the revised graft rules presented in Magic of Eberron.)

So it's clear that they wanted those two books to use the same rules. (Hey, they even used the same page number!)

[PlzBreakMyCmpAn]

When the rules prevent you from doing something reasonable and cool, they aren't doing their job.

[oxinabox]

When the rules prevent you from doing something reasonable and cool, they aren't doing their job.

yes, yes they are.

It's Cool and resonsable to summon sharks at your max range, veritally about your enemies heads, it's also against the rules.
Why? because this puts you at almost quadruple the max damage, of any equivient spell at that spell lvl>
(druids on average (from core atleast)'s best damage spells are 1d6 / 2 CLs, Summon monster IV bombing come out at ...well I'm to otired to equate falliong damage to CL, ....)

[Yukitsu]

Reasonable also implies it's not broken.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

The only possible problem I could see with combining different types of grafts would come if you add every possible graft to the same person (as I did for a graft-happy BBEG necromancer of mine). They'd look ridiculous! No one would ever take them seriously! Rules-wise, it isn't really an issue; the BBEG's not powerful because of the grafts (just weird), he's powerful because he's a wizard with a few extra perks.