Worst Observed Rules Interpretations (by DM or Players)

[pffh]

Did this make the game better or worse?

Worse since it made it trivial to kill monsters since the players had their +x (in effect +x*2) armour and weapons. Think about selling them an item worth +6 when they paid for +3.

[Gecks]

I once had a DM who sort of... missed how prestige classes worked in 3.5, so that he had experience counts basically "start over" for those classes- as in, for example, if a level 10 character was a level 9 fighter / level 1 horizen walker, to become a level 2 horizen walker, he had to pay enough experience to go from level 1 to level 2, not enough to go from level 10 to level 11. Granted, it was a heavy house-ruled setting with some custom level advancement which made such craziness slightly less obvious, but still...

Needless to say, prestige classes were very popular in that campaign- at least until the power-level spiked so high that things broke down entirely.

[Tar Palantir]

You can't do that unless you're restricted to single standard or move action for that round (ie. surprise rounds etc.).

[Edit]: Even then, it has to be charge (movement in straight line, +2 attack, -2 AC).

I think he means that the group wouldn't permit a character who used a move action to move to subsequently make an attack as a standard action, not a partial charge (which is what you seem to be referring to).

[peacenlove]

Monk / fighters with full plate mails gaining their entire wisdom bonus to AC at 2nd level and flurrying with mercurial greatswords (my first mistake as a dm when i started 3.0 edition)
Also until 2 years ago i was bored of reading the flight rules and i assumed that all creatures and players had perfect maneuverability (of course i told them beforehand i was bored to read the rules)

[Optimystik]

I seem to recall there being a "debate" on these very boards about whether a Sorcerer is a spontaneous caster.

Yes, this one took the cake for me, and I've seen some doozies.

i once played with a person who thought attacks of opportunity provoked attacks of opportunity. and he let it infinite loop.

Two Monks of the Enabled Hand + Robilar's Gambit

[Greenish]

I think he means that the group wouldn't permit a character who used a move action to move to subsequently make an attack as a standard action, not a partial charge (which is what you seem to be referring to).

Oh. OH!

Well, melee is overpowered anyway.

[Nohwl]

Two Monks of the Enabled Hand + Robilar's Gambit

does that allow them to continue to make attacks of opportunity until one of them dies? i mean, not just one, or your dex bonus from combat reflexes, but as many as it takes to kill the person.

[Nerdanel]

Back when 3.0 was new the standard battle tactics for our party was for the other wizard to cast Mage Armor on the dwarf tank. A few levels later, at the same time when we finally could afford buying Masterwork plate armor for the dwarf so he could take hits better, the DM noticed that Mage Armor does not in fact stack with ordinary armor. This was devastating for the other wizard who had been suffering from a bad spell selection and was now out of good shticks.

Namely, while my unoptimized newbie wizard was effective with Magic Missile and deadly with Sleep, his wizard had had his spell selection rolled randomly by the DM, apparently due to influence from AD&D. Somehow his first level spells ended up being Mage Armor and Protection from Arrows and then Shield. He could protect himself from attacks really well, but that was about it, and we usually fought in tight dungeon quarters with the dwarf tank and other non-wizards at the front.

[Dogmantra]

does that allow them to continue to make attacks of opportunity until one of them dies? i mean, not just one, or your dex bonus from combat reflexes, but as many as it takes to kill the person.

Technically, an AoO happens before the action that triggered it, so they would just keep going on forever.

[Ingus]

I have the best. First time in a group the charachters were made by the players alone. Second level start.
Assumed all the players weren't noobs, the DM didn't checked the sheets.
It turned out later that one player had the Sword of Vecna, the shield of Pelor (if I remember) and Hextor's Bracers.

Everyone's reaction: "Wha... wha... You... Are you kidding?"
Player's answer: "No, why"
D.M.: "you must be kidding. How you supposed to have all this artifacts."
Player: "By the rules. They're all sorted as Price: - So they're free."

[Nohwl]

Technically, an AoO happens before the action that triggered it, so they would just keep going on forever.

and that's why combat with him sucked, because he knew that part.

[2xMachina]

Monk / fighters with full plate mails gaining their entire wisdom bonus to AC at 2nd level and flurrying with mercurial greatswords (my first mistake as a dm when i started 3.0 edition)
Also until 2 years ago i was bored of reading the flight rules and i assumed that all creatures and players had perfect maneuverability (of course i told them beforehand i was bored to read the rules)

You've fixed the monk!

[marjan]

and that's why combat with him sucked, because he knew that part.

So, you had two meleers locked in time.

[The Glyphstone]

I have the best. First time in a group the charachters were made by the players alone. Second level start.
Assumed all the players weren't noobs, the DM didn't checked the sheets.
It turned out later that one player had the Sword of Vecna, the shield of Pelor (if I remember) and Hextor's Bracers.

Everyone's reaction: "Wha... wha... You... Are you kidding?"
Player's answer: "No, why"
D.M.: "you must be kidding. How you supposed to have all this artifacts."
Player: "By the rules. They're all sorted as Price: - So they're free."

I hope he never discovered Apocalypse from the Sky. Minor Artifact as a material component + artifacts having no listed price + spell component pouch = !?!?

[Last Laugh]

I have the best. First time in a group the charachters were made by the players alone. Second level start.
Assumed all the players weren't noobs, the DM didn't checked the sheets.
It turned out later that one player had the Sword of Vecna, the shield of Pelor (if I remember) and Hextor's Bracers.

Everyone's reaction: "Wha... wha... You... Are you kidding?"
Player's answer: "No, why"
D.M.: "you must be kidding. How you supposed to have all this artifacts."
Player: "By the rules. They're all sorted as Price: - So they're free."

I had a similar experience.
I am dming a group right now, weeks before the game I emailed everyone and told them to tell me anything about their characters that I should know. Questionable feats, ACFs, etc.

In the first game I learned that one of the characters was a monk/barbarian with vow of poverty. He offered to be the parties pack mule and I pointed out that he had vow of poverty. His response was that vow of poverty lets you hold anything you want as long as it's non-magical.
He started arguing and I mentioned that he was supposed to not only ask MY permission before taking a vow, but also the PARTIES permission. (he did neither)

Meanwhile the Dwarven tank quietly rerolled into a Paladin of Tyranny without asking anyone.

I kind of want to kill them all just so I'm present when they make characters. Maybe just those two.

[Optimystik]

Technically, an AoO happens before the action that triggered it, so they would just keep going on forever.

To quote Jet Li: "Jet Li fight Jet Li!"

[LibraryOgre]

I can't remember if this was MERP or Rolemaster, but one of my GMs told me about an early experience he had in his brother's first attempt at a game. There were tables that showed what bonuses you had at various levels. Pretty much exactly like the class charts in 3.5 The group assumed that at those levels you gained the bonus listed, not realizing that those scores were cumulative. In D&D terms, a 5th level fighter would have had 1+2+3+4+5 = 15 BAB.

Heh. Had a similar problem when running MERP the first time. I thought you added your attack bonus to your criticals. A lot of people got shot through the ears...

[marjan]

He offered to be the parties pack mule

Actually he can do that. As long as he is not considered owning those items, he'll be fine. After all he is required to donate his share of loot to churches or the poor, which would be hard without him carrying anything valuable. Though his explanation is incorrect.

[TheThan]

That kind of makes sense, actually. Not from a rules perspective, but a kind of sense anyway... More sense than a titan bloodline pixie wielding a gargantuan weapon but still having a 0 foot reach, at least.

ok the imagery of that totally just cracked me up.

[Ravens_cry]

ok the imagery of that totally just cracked me up.

It sounds great until you think about how the bloodline was created.

[Eldonauran]

It sounds great until you think about how the bloodline was created.

A wizard did it.

[hangedman1984]

A wizard did it.

Oh yeah ;)

[Ravens_cry]

A wizard did it.

Did it or did it?

[pffh]

Did it or did it?

giggity giggity

[Sliver]

and that's why combat with him sucked, because he knew that part.

What? He just started saying "And he triggers an AoO, which triggers an AoO, which triggers an AoO..."? Nobody could actually make the AoO as there will always be an AoO before that so... I don't see how it can be resolved, at all.

Worse since it made it trivial to kill monsters since the players had their +x (in effect +x*2) armour and weapons. Think about selling them an item worth +6 when they paid for +3.

How did you read the part about weapons being above +5 value but not above +5 enhancement bonus?

[Ravens_cry]

giggity giggity

More like ouchity, ripity, that-don't-fitity.
And I thought half-halfling was bad.

[Greenish]

What? He just started saying "And he triggers an AoO, which triggers an AoO, which triggers an AoO..."? Nobody could actually make the AoO as there will always be an AoO before that so... I don't see how it can be resolved, at all.

By a robust application of PHB, DMG or perhaps Encyclopedia Britannica.

[Quietus]

Did it or did it?

Both. Obviously!

[Olympus]

I had a DM who thought that you couldn't charge except in a straight line towards the target... so if that straight line towards the target didn't lead to the middle of a square, you couldn't charge. In other words, you could only charge in the same way as a queen in chess - when your opponent was in a straight or diagonal line of squares.

Unless I haven't played in so long I'm starting to forget the rules, your DM is correct. You can only charge in straight lines . . .

[Reynard]

No, you charge in a straight line, regardless of actual squares. Not like the Queen in chess.