Dysfunctional Rules VIII: When General Trumps Specific

[Jormengand]

Maybe you could read it like that if you wanted.

No. The other half means the other half. It does not mean the rest, it means the other half. You cannot read the other half to mean the remainder after 12/25 have been removed without stepping outside the bounds of the English language..

[ExLibrisMortis]

No. The other half means the other half. It does not mean the rest, it means the other half. You cannot read the other half to mean the remainder after 12/25 have been removed without stepping outside the bounds of the English language..

Um, yes you can. Interpreting a sentence is not a process of 'it must be this format, else my parser breaks'. It's a process of ranking likely interpretations, and the most salient interpretation does not always conform to dictionary grammar.

[Jormengand]

Um, yes you can. Interpreting a sentence is not a process of 'it must be this format, else my parser breaks'. It's a process of ranking likely interpretations, and the most salient interpretation does not always conform to dictionary grammar.

But "The other half" simply does not mean "The rest". It's not just that I don't see it as a likely interpretation (I don't), but I don't see it as a possible interpretation at all. Sure, they could have said "The other hamster is caused directly by divine power" and we could have guessed that they meant "The rest", but the rest of the damage is no more a half than it is a hamster.

[Troacctid]

No. The other half means the other half. It does not mean the rest, it means the other half. You cannot read the other half to mean the remainder after 12/25 have been removed without stepping outside the bounds of the English language..

Yes you can.

1. one of two equal or approximately equal parts of a divisible whole, as an object, or unit of measure or time; a part of a whole equal or almost equal to the remainder.

[Jormengand]

Yes you can.

I stand corrected. Fair play (though I haven't seen it used like that).

[No brains]

How does the skeleton template's rules for proficiency work? One one hand, the skeleton loses all feats, but on the other, it keeps all weapon proficiencies.

It seems like the template treats proficiencies from class levels as something separate from feats. The Hit Dice section implies that a human warrior 1 actually does get to keep that one level of warrior, even if most of the class features are thrown out. It says to drop class HD to a minimum of one, implying that the human skeleton keeps whatever class it traded its first humanoid HD for.

Although even this is at odds with its intelligence as a non-ability. Doesn't that normally keep creatures from taking class levels? How does the skeleton know how to wield weapons? Muscle bone memory?

[Gallowglass]

I stand corrected. Fair play (though I haven't seen it used like that).

Oh of course you have.

"Hey you want half my sandwich?" what? you think that slicing the sandwich roughly in half results in two molecularly equal parts?

"You want a coffee refill? Sure but only half a cup." what? you think that they get out a milligram scale to get that exactly half?

Outside of pure mathematics you've ONLY seen it used that way.


That being said, put me in the group that says "you round down" first so you end up with 12 fire, 12 holy and 1 point expended to the Great Math Wyrm as a price for getting fancy with your damage output.

How does the skeleton template's rules for proficiency work? One one hand, the skeleton loses all feats, but on the other, it keeps all weapon proficiencies.

It seems like the template treats proficiencies from class levels as something separate from feats. The Hit Dice section implies that a human warrior 1 actually does get to keep that one level of warrior, even if most of the class features are thrown out. It says to drop class HD to a minimum of one, implying that the human skeleton keeps whatever class it traded its first humanoid HD for.

Although even this is at odds with its intelligence as a non-ability. Doesn't that normally keep creatures from taking class levels? How does the skeleton know how to wield weapons? Muscle bone memory?

Up under Attacks it references "Attacks: A skeleton retains all the natural weapons, manufactured weapon attacks, and weapon proficiencies of the base creature, except for attacks that can't work without flesh." which IMO supercedes the loss of feats from lower down.

[Jormengand]

Oh of course you have.

"Hey you want half my sandwich?" what? you think that slicing the sandwich roughly in half results in two molecularly equal parts?

"You want a coffee refill? Sure but only half a cup." what? you think that they get out a milligram scale to get that exactly half?

Outside of pure mathematics you've ONLY seen it used that way.

No, I have not ONLY seen it used to mean "a part of a whole equal or almost equal to the remainder", which is what Troacctid and I were actually going on about, but thanks for assuming I'm an idiot who doesn't realise that halves tend to be approximate. Everything tends to be approximate. There's a whole field of psychology devoted to how and why we approximate things. But D&D doesn't get to be approximate like that: if flame strike only meant "one of two equal or approximately equal parts of a divisible whole", then that would come up with another dysfunction: intensified flame strike (for example) deals 180 points of damage. Now, 79 and 81 are approximately equal. 80 and 80 are equal. 81 and 79 are approximately equal. So how is the damage split up? The problem I had was that it obviously has to mean exactly half, otherwise there's no indicator of which approximate half to use. The question was whether "The other half" can mean "The rest, regardless of whether or not the first bit was actually a half", which I've never seen it used to mean, but which Troacctid kindly showed me it can mean.

MORAL: Don't take the mickey out of someone without devoting at least a modicum of time to making sure you understand the situation.

[Flickerdart]

Since you can have proficiencies without feats (for example, as an outsider) it doesn't seem to be a dysfunction that the skeleton loses the feat that granted it proficiency, but retains said proficiency due to its skeleton powers.

[Debatra]

Most proficiencies from class levels aren't given in feat form.

[Jormengand]

Come to think of it, do fighters get to DCS away their armour proficiencies (the feats in question specify the fighter actually has the feats) and remain proficient in the armour? Because that can't be intentional.

[flare'90]

Come to think of it, do fighters get to DCS away their armour proficiencies (the feats in question specify the fighter actually has the feats) and remain proficient in the armour? Because that can't be intentional.

I'd say yes, because the fighter class gives them the proficiency and the feats. They're basically proficient twice.

[Jormengand]

Vow of Peace can break a monk's unarmed strike, which is both a natural and a manufactured weapon.

[Troacctid]

Vow of Peace can break a monk's unarmed strike, which is both a natural and a manufactured weapon.

Only for the purpose of effects that enhance or improve it. I don't think breaking it counts as enhancing or improving it.

[Jormengand]

Only for the purpose of effects that enhance or improve it. I don't think breaking it counts as enhancing or improving it.

I dunno, if you have a vow of peace then I would think that counts as improving it.

[Bucky]

I'd say yes, because the fighter class gives them the proficiency and the feats. They're basically proficient twice.

Pathfinder fighters can trade away their heavy armor proficiency for an archetype and still have it from the text in the feat.

[Florian]

Come to think of it, do fighters get to DCS away their armour proficiencies (the feats in question specify the fighter actually has the feats) and remain proficient in the armour? Because that can't be intentional.

Proficiencies can be expressed as feats and the feats provide the proficiency, but the original proficiency is a class feature, not feat.

[No brains]

So in the case of a Human Skeleton Fighter 1, it would have every proficiency granted as a class feature, but if it had Exotic Weapon Proficiency as a feat, it would lose that proficiency?

How would this work if the weapon group variant were used? Would the skeleton keep all its weapon groups?

It's still weird that the skeleton has class levels despite - intelligence.

[Troacctid]

I dunno, if you have a vow of peace then I would think that counts as improving it.

It's a Vow of Peace, not a Vow of Destruction. And you'll have a hard time keeping it if you go around punching people. Also, stop hitting yourself!

[Jormengand]

It's a Vow of Peace, not a Vow of Destruction. And you'll have a hard time keeping it if you go around punching people. Also, stop hitting yourself!

I mean that from the VoPeace-haver's perspective, she is improving the monk's unarmed strike (because the monk can no longer make unarmed strikes), even if the monk doesn't agree. Whose opinion wins?

(Note: I am entirely joking at this point so don't feel obliged to take me seriously.)

[Debatra]

(Note: I am entirely joking at this point so don't feel obliged to take me seriously.)

.Only now?

[Jormengand]

.Only now?

Look, stop. I don't know why you find it funny to harass me, but stop. I don't care how hard it is for you, just stop. It isn't funny to accuse me of trolling, nor are you correct in doing so. It's just aggravating. Please, desist, stop, end, discontinue, or whatever synonym you like, just don't do it.

EDIT: Because you're not going to stop me doing what this thread is ACTUALLY FOR, all shadow jumps made by a psychic rogue count as a 10 foot jump irrespective of the actual distance. Clearly, it's meant to say all jumps count as at least a 10 foot jump, but it doesn't say that.

[Debatra]

...Huh. Honestly didn't think you found it that annoying.

[Jormengand]

...Huh. Honestly didn't think you found it that annoying.

I think I made myself clear. I like to think that Haruki-kun made himself pretty clear on the matter too. Can we please stop this now?

[Debatra]

The description for the "Monstrous Thrall" spell (SpC, 142-143) says that it's permanent.

Duration: 24 hours/level

[Jormengand]

Psions who aren't nomads can't choose ("Cannot choose powers from discipline lists other than your own discipline list") levitate, but it's also on the psion list, even though they can't actually take it.

[Andezzar]

Psions who aren't nomads can't choose ("Cannot choose powers from discipline lists other than your own discipline list") levitate, but it's also on the psion list, even though they can't actually take it.

No dysfunction there. They cannot and do not choose the levitate power from the nomad list but they can choose the levitate power from the psion/wilder list. Those two powers are not the same.

[Jormengand]

No dysfunction there. They cannot and do not choose the levitate power from the nomad list but they can choose the levitate power from the psion/wilder list. Those two powers are not the same.

The power is listed as nomad 2, psion/wilder 2, psychic warrior 2, just like summon monster II is listed as sor/wiz 2, clr 2. It's the same power.

That said, you can argue that because wilders can take levitate from the p/w list it's not redundant to put it there as well as the nomad list, but it's probably not intended that it should be on both lists.

---

Next dysfunction: A creature who takes dreamlily (Sharn: City of Towers page 161) is too anesthetised to double-move, but can run.

[Andezzar]

Summon Monster II is not only one spell, it is one spell for each class on whose list it is. If it were only one spell, a wizard could use a scroll made by cleric and vice versa.

[Troacctid]

The power is listed as nomad 2, psion/wilder 2, psychic warrior 2, just like summon monster II is listed as sor/wiz 2, clr 2. It's the same power.

That said, you can argue that because wilders can take levitate from the p/w list it's not redundant to put it there as well as the nomad list, but it's probably not intended that it should be on both lists.

I believe the intent is that the "Special" section is supposed to be a perk for nomads, which is why they're the only class list not called out. However, since nomads are psions, it actually doesn't apply to them, which is a dysfunction. At the time of the power's printing, it only applied to a War Mind or a Fist of Zuoken, which I don't think was the intent.

Summon Monster II is not only one spell, it is one spell for each class on whose list it is. If it were only one spell, a wizard could use a scroll made by cleric and vice versa.

This interpretation is going to cause waaaaay more problems than it solves. For example, counterspelling now only works if both casters are the same class.

You're also wrong about scrolls. Members of one class can use scrolls from a different class if the spell is on their class spell list. A bard can use a scroll of tongues that was crafted by a wizard. What you can't do is use a divine scroll if you're not a divine caster, or use an arcane scroll if you're not an arcane caster.