Dysfunctional Rules X: I Cast Comprehend Rules

[goodpeople25]

idk that specific feat says its 15 (10 from it and 5 from its prereq feat) i dont see how it would cause dysfunction. it works how it says because it says it does. yes it ignores the general rule, but it effects nothing but when you have both feats because the general rule covers all other cases except this extremely specific one.

It says you get energy resistance 10 then it says that the total resistance is 15. It doesn't stay it stacks or that you get energy resistance 15 just that it is 15. So if you apply specific trump general to it you do get energy resistance 15 which is fine in a vacuum and a valid way to apply the spell.

How it then applies to other instances of energy resistance could still be considered dysfunctional however since you overwrote/bypassed the rules that govern it.

Of course you can just say it gives resistance 15 with no issues but that's not a case of specific trumps general.

[Remuko]

It says you get energy resistance 10 then it says that the total resistance is 15. It doesn't stay it stacks or that you get energy resistance 15 just that it is 15. So if you apply specific trump general to it you do get energy resistance 15 which is fine in a vacuum and a valid way to apply the spell.

How it then applies to other instances of energy resistance could still be considered dysfunctional however since you overwrote/bypassed the rules that govern it.

Of course you can just say it gives resistance 15 with no issues but that's not a case of specific trumps general.

yes it says the total resistance is 15 which is the same thing. it says "your total resistance is 15" so it is. that the specific rule from the feat. it feels like one would have to be willingly taking the most obtuse reading to think it says otherwise.

[goodpeople25]

yes it says the total resistance is 15 which is the same thing. it says "your total resistance is 15" so it is. that the specific rule from the feat. it feels like one would have to be willingly taking the most obtuse reading to think it says otherwise.

Yes exactly. Your resistance is 15 when raging with the feats and that's great until you have resistance 30 or something.

That's if you use specific trumps general (or are you using an "obtuse reading" of what that means?) over the stacking rules. If you rule that it gives resistance 15 like the brackets says and not resistance 10 then it doesn't have that problem but isn't specific trumps general.

[Remuko]

Yes exactly. Your resistance is 15 when raging with the feats and that's great until you have resistance 30 or something.

That's if you use specific trumps general (or are you using an "obtuse reading" of what that means?) over the stacking rules. If you rule that it gives resistance 15 like the brackets says and not resistance 10 then it doesn't have that problem but isn't specific trumps general.

i just think the simplest solution is the correct one. the feat says you have 15 and says its 10 + the 5 from the prereq feat (tho says so indirectly, its still clear) and since it says you have 15 with these you do. obviously if you had a magic ring that gives 30 it would overlap not stack since it would use the general rule, and someone would be much less inclined to was resources on getting something like that if they already have resistance from those feats.

[loky1109]

Widowmaker (Large vermin):

Steed (Ex) Widowmakers take instruction well and are easy to train. Treat a widowmaker as a magical beast with Intelligence 3 for the purpose of Handle Animal checks.

Handl Animal description:

Special: You can use this skill on a creature with an Intelligence score of 1 or 2 that is not an animal, but DC of any such check increases by 5.

Yeah, very easy to train...

[Inevitability]

Widowmaker (Large vermin):

Handl Animal description:

Yeah, very easy to train...

Easy to train for beast heart adepts, obviously.

[loky1109]

Easy to train for beast heart adepts, obviously.

Speculations? )))

[St Fan]

I can't help but notice that animate dead and most other spells that create undead have the [Evil] descriptor...

But the Fell Animate metamagic feat, on the other hand, has no prerequisite. Meaning even a good divine caster barred from casting Evil spells by his faith can still animate zombies this way.

The rules really should be more consistent on whether creating undead is an evil act or not.

[Bucky]

The rules really should be more consistent on whether creating undead is an evil act or not.

AFAICT it's still an evil act to create undead with Fell Animate, but the spell itself isn't powered by [Evil].

In other words, it's not evil to cast a Fell Animate spell in a way that doesn't animate anything.

[Inevitability]

AFAICT it's still an evil act to create undead with Fell Animate, but the spell itself isn't powered by [Evil].

Unliving corpses—corrupt mockeries of life and purity—
are inherently evil. Creating them is one of the most
heinous crimes against the world that a character can
commit. Even if they are commanded to do something
good, undead invariably bring negative energy into the
world, which makes it a darker and more evil place.

Book of Vile Darkness is pretty explicit about undead creation, regardless of the reasons and purposes, being evil.

[St Fan]

Either this spell is dysfunctional, or there's something I don't get...

False Lie

Illusion (Glamer)
Level: Bard 2
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Effect: One creature
Duration: 1 hour/level
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

Your subject takes on a shifty, dishonest demeanor.
False lie causes the subject to appear dishonest and deceptive.
Sense Motive checks made against the subject take a -10 penalty, and any failure convinces the observer that the subject is lying, even if she is not.
Anyone who casts a spell that reveals lies (such as discern lie) can attempt a caster level check (DC 11 + your caster level); if this fails, the spell registers the individual as lying even when she is not.
Material Component: A serpent's tongue.

A penalty to Sense Motive, in normal circumstances, makes the subject more likely to believe what's said to him, not less.
And if the subject is not lying, then the subject makes no roll with the Bluff skill... so how can you tell then that the Sense Motive check was a "failure"? Again, usually, a character who rolled high on Sense Motive versus someone not lying can tell himself "Either he's honest, or he's a very good liar...", or just conclude he can't tell either way if the Sense Motive check was low.

Besides, this is supposed to be a negative spell, but what is stopping the silent type (who otherwise leave the speaking to others) who specialize in using feint in combat to receive the spell and inflict a big penalty against anybody trying to see through the feint?

[loky1109]

I saw somewhere (maybe PHB 3.0 ?) Sense Motive DC 20 to understand that you are being told the truth.

[Chronos]

If there is a rule like loky1109 describes, then the spell works.

If there's not, then the Sense Motive skill by itself is dysfunctional, even without this spell.

Scenario: NPC is telling you something, and is in fact honest.
PC: "Do I think he's telling the truth?" <rolls Sense Motive, gets a high result>
DM: "Yeah, you think he's telling the truth."

This certainly seems like something that should be possible, but how?

Anyway, however that works, it's less likely to, with the False Lie spell.

[InvisibleBison]

I saw somewhere (maybe PHB 3.0 ?) Sense Motive DC 20 to understand that you are being told the truth.

The "Hunch" function of Sense Motive lets you "get the feeling that someone is trustworthy. " Is that what you were thinking of?

In any event, false lie would make it harder for someone to use that feature to get a feel for the subject, which I suppose could make people less willing to trust the subject. It's definitely a bad spell, in no small part because it's useful for feinting than for social shenanigans, but I don't think it's dysfunctional.

[Bucky]

Pathfinder's Ultimate Equipment has parade armor, which gives +3 AC. The details of parade armor differ by country, but the example parade armor includes a chain shirt.

The chain shirt would give +4 AC by itself, and it's four times as expensive as the list price of the parade armor, so the example parade armor gets more protective and expensive if you ditch the helmet etc.

---
Pathfinder's Elysiokineticist archetype adds Heal to its class skills, but all kineticists have Heal as a class skill anyway.

[Chronos]

I think that just means that the chain shirt that's part of a suit of parade armor isn't a full piece of armor by itself, just a piece of a normal chain shirt. Like, maybe it's the infamous chainmail bikini.

[Telok]

Pathfinder's Ultimate Equipment has parade armor, which gives +3 AC. The details of parade armor differ by country, but the example parade armor includes a chain shirt.

The chain shirt would give +4 AC by itself, and it's four times as expensive as the list price of the parade armor, so the example parade armor gets more protective and expensive if you ditch the

Yeah, that scans. I've seen illustrations & panapoly that I'd totally believe would be more protective if you ditched a few pieces. Mostly because the helms or some other bit looks good, but is really too heavy & restrictive for real combat. Better than nothing but take off the helmet so you can see, hear, turn your head, and raise your arms over your shoulders.

[Bucky]

The chain shirt is also heavier, and more restrictive by Armor Check Penalty.

[bekeleven]

I haven't read through the entire thread in a while but I don't think this is covered: Geas doesn't work. Or rather, it works, but it works simultaneously in two different ways due to confused developer intent.

Let's begin with Lesser Geas. I'll bold the relevant phrases.

A lesser geas places a magical command on a creature to carry out some service or to refrain from some action or course of activity, as desired by you. The creature must have 7 or fewer Hit Dice and be able to understand you. While a geas cannot compel a creature to kill itself or perform acts that would result in certain death, it can cause almost any other course of activity.

The geased creature must follow the given instructions until the geas is completed, no matter how long it takes.

If the instructions involve some open-ended task that the recipient cannot complete through his own actions the spell remains in effect for a maximum of one day per caster level. A clever recipient can subvert some instructions:

If the subject is prevented from obeying the lesser geas for 24 hours, it takes a -2 penalty to each of its ability scores. Each day, another -2 penalty accumulates, up to a total of -8. No ability score can be reduced to less than 1 by this effect. The ability score penalties are removed 24 hours after the subject resumes obeying the lesser geas.

A lesser geas (and all ability score penalties) can be ended by break enchantment, limited wish, remove curse, miracle, or wish. Dispel magic does not affect a lesser geas.

So here, we see that Geas is a dominate person effect, which makes some sense, as it's a compulsion spell. The creature under the geas is forced to follow the instructions, and penalties are given to them if they are "prevented from" doing so.

Now, let's look at Geas, proper. First of all, it inherits Lesser Geas's function:

This spell functions similarly to lesser geas, except that it affects a creature of any HD and allows no saving throw.

So we'll move forward assuming that's the case. But what's the very next paragraph?

Instead of taking penalties to ability scores (as with lesser geas), the subject takes 3d6 points of damage each day it does not attempt to follow the geas/quest. Additionally, each day it must make a Fortitude saving throw or become sickened. These effects end 24 hours after the creature attempts to resume the geas/quest.

This pretty directly contradicts Lesser Geas. Rather than being compelled to take a course of action, they are instead punished on days they "don't attempt" to take it. And they can avoid those penalties by "attempting to resume" the quest.

You can resolve this two ways:

1. Geas's wording overrides Lesser Geas's wording. The creature is no longer compelled to follow the quest you've given them, they are instead only punished if they don't.
2. Geas says it's "like lesser, except" and doesn't explicitly override the compulsion, so you're still compelled to attempt it, meaning that unlike lesser Geas, Geas has no RAW way for anybody to invoke its penalties. And those penalties explicitly override the ones applied by Lesser Geas.

Obviously, both of these readings are nonsense, but I think the first one is closer to making sense. When combined with the fact that the penalties are notably weaker (10 damage/day instead of a stacking -2 to every score), Geas appears to be a strictly worse effect, albeit one that's much more reliable to apply.

[EliDupree]

Nice find!

To my reading, (2) is the only possible meaning under a literal interpretation of RAW: In general, the subject cannot "not attempt" to carry out the Geas, and therefore cannot take any penalties. (It's not obvious whether this is better or worse for the caster, who might prefer for the subject not to be penalized, to make them better at attempting the task.)

However, this doesn't mean it's technically impossible by RAW:

Sometimes magical effects that establish mental control render each other irrelevant, such as a spell that removes the subjects ability to act. Mental controls that don’t remove the recipient’s ability to act usually do not interfere with each other. If a creature is under the mental control of two or more creatures, it tends to obey each to the best of its ability, and to the extent of the control each effect allows. If the controlled creature receives conflicting orders simultaneously, the competing controllers must make opposed Charisma checks to determine which one the creature obeys.

This would enable someone to not attempt the Geas. I also think that if the character was asleep for 24 hours, they would take the penalties. (They would literally be "not attempting", despite not doing anything to disobey the orders either – in contrast to being imprisoned, where they could "attempt" by trying to escape or get released, even if they don't expect it to be successful.)

[Chronos]

Since the thread is active again anyway, here's another one: The Bone Bow (Frostburn pg. 75) is an exotic weapon, but includes the text

A character may use a bone bow as a martial weapon, but doing so imparts a -4 penalty on attack rolls, and firing an arrow from the bow requires a full-round action

Or, you know, you could just wield it as an exotic weapon, even though you don't have proficiency. In that case,

A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls.

So the entire effect of that rule for a Bone Bow is that a non-proficient character has the option (which they can choose not to take) to become even worse at wielding it than they already are.

[H_H_F_F]

I don't think I've seen this anywhere: Rings of Shared Suffering are found in the Eberron Campaign Setting. They're a Dragonmark Focus item that lets a sentinel-marked Deneith house member apply shield other on the person wearing the other ring, with unlimited range and duration, at will. On top of that, they give you DR against the incoming damage from the spell: 1/-, 2/-, 3/- or 5/-, depending on the strength of your mark.

The dysfunction: shield other is a spell that causes untyped damage without an attack role. DR doesn't work on it for like, four different reasons.

RAI is clear (reduce n from each instance of incoming damage) but RAW is completely dysfunctional.

[St Fan]

The Half-Elf Bard substitution levels include this feature:

Secrets of the Diplomat: At 8th level, a half-elf bard adds the following spells to her spells known: 1st - command; 2nd - zone of truth; 4th - sending.

This benefit replaces the 4th-level spell learned by a standard bard at 8th level. From now on, the bard knows one fewer 4th-level bard spell than normal (not counting the spells she learned from this substitution feature).

There is just a slight problem with this: standard bards don't learn a 4th-level spell at 8th level. The spell progression for bards only gives 4th-level spells at 10th level. (And even then, you need 18 Charisma to even have a spell slot and spells known.)


PS: And now, just reading the handbook, I see it was already mentioned. I should have realized the previous threads covered lots of ground.

[Beni-Kujaku]

There is just a slight problem with this: standard bards don't learn a 4th-level spell at 8th level. The spell progression for bards only gives 4th-level spells at 10th level. (And even then, you need 18 Charisma to even have a spell slot and spells known.)

Versatile Spellcaster is your friend ^^ But yeah, since it doesn't replace anything (since the bard doesn't know a 4th level spell), only the "you know one 4th level spell less" applies, which in the end has the intended result.

[EliDupree]

I was just having a look at Detect Good, which states:

This spell functions like detect evil, except that it detects the auras of good creatures, clerics or paladins of good deities, good spells, and good magic items, and you are vulnerable to an overwhelming good aura if you are evil. Healing potions, antidotes, and similar beneficial items are not good.

...It doesn't say that it doesn't still detect evil things, just that it does now detect good things. So by RAW, Detect Good detects both good and evil. (The same dysfunction applies to Detect Law and Detect Chaos.)

[truemane]

Metamagic Mod: thread re-opened

[ShurikVch]

The People’s Champion PrC:

Supreme Cleave: At 3rd level, the people’s champion receives this feat for free.

No such feat
There are Supreme Cleave class features - Frenzied Berserker 2, Knight Protector 3, and Master Samurai 2 (and Supreme Cleave of Frenzied Berserker is more restrictive, since it specifies: "She is still limited to one such adjustment per round, so she cannot use this ability during a round in which she has already taken a 5-foot step" - which is not the case for the other two)

[Inevitability]

Frostburn mentions the Icebergs and Snow domains in its deity table on page 42: neither exists.

[bekeleven]

I assume everybody knows the kerfluffle with warlocks and metamagics, but to recap: The text of all metamagic feats explicitly require casting spells, but there's a paragraph in the start of the chapter saying "Obviously, since the sudden metamagic feats don't modify spell slots, warlocks can benefit from them." meanwhile the benefit is "you can cast a spell better."

One paragraph before that note is the one about weaponlike spells feats. I posted in a different thread about the issues with weapon focus and weaponlike spells. the short version is that paragraph makes equally little sense, or even less, as it might manage to randomly break how sorcerers and wizards work.

Just today I've been looking at the Techsmith class from Faiths and Pantheons (I know 3.0 is easy pickings for this thread). At first I just wanted to figure out whether your Gondsman - a familiar-like construct you get as a class feature - can speak, and if so, what languages.* But from that, and a bizarre typo where at least half of a sentence is just missing mid-paragraph, more problems arose. Among them:

• The Gondsman states that it has "hit dice equal to the techsmith's class level + 3." Almost immediately after it says "as the techsmith gains a level, the gondsman also increases its abilities by gaining a hit die." It feels like this class was written not thinking about the fact that characters can be multiclass - which is wild since it's a prestige class you're meant to enter after level six (requires 9 skill points). So even if "I dip this class and then progressing my build elsewhere" wasn't on their mind or was seen as explitative, "I finish the 10th level in the class" is still part of the assumed progression!
• The Techsmith can grant their gondsman +1 "base attack bonus" on levelup, in addition to its BAB from HD (which it explicitly gains), meaning you can pump it over +20 - Less notable in 3.0, just weird in a book with no errata.
• "Since constructs are creatures, cure spells affect [the Gondsman] normally." I checked, and yes, Cure spells in 3.0 also referred to laying your hands on a living creature.

*The text mentions you can communicate with it telepathically over a distance but doesn't cover what, if any, communication modes it has. It's intelligent and could in theory know/learn one or more languages. The answer is: really unclear, ask your DM, but conservatively assume no.

[Chronos]

The Gondsman states that it has "hit dice equal to the techsmith's class level + 3." Almost immediately after it says "as the techsmith gains a level, the gondsman also increases its abilities by gaining a hit die."

Any reference to "level" in a class ability is always assumed to mean class level in that class, unless it explicitly says "character level". So the Gondsman would only gain a hit die when you gain a level in Techsmith. This is the same effect that sets the Gondsman's HD stated earlier, just restated for clarity. No dysfunction.

And it being possible for the Gondsman to have higher BAB than its HD is certainly unusual, but it's also the clear effect, here. And even in 3.5, having BAB greater than 20 is possible for monsters. Also not a dysfunction.

The only dysfunction here is the one about cure spells.

Oh, and there's also a rule that anything with an Int of 3 or more understands at least one language, so the Gondsman would, too. The only question is which language. The most likely candidates would be Common, the techsmith's primary language, or one language the techsmith knows of their choice (which might all be the same thing).