Correct. Normal vision supersedes darkvision when it is better than darkvision. Darkvision takes over whenever normal vision is impaired from darkness.
That's a very elegant summary of how it works, nice!
Can I add "people who think there should be a realistic economy in their elf and dragon murdering game to things that aggravate me?
Can I add "people who think there should be a realistic economy in their elf and dragon murdering game to things that aggravate me?
You may.
Not sure if anyone's added this, but players who assume that racial alignments are absolute annoy the piss out of me.
"Yep, that's an Orc. Kill it."
As far as I'm concerned, unless it has an intelligence score lower than 3 or an alignment subtype it can be any alignment at all.
"taking 10 takes 10 times as long as a normal check"
Not sure if anyone's added this, but players who assume that racial alignments are absolute annoy the piss out of me.
"Yep, that's an Orc. Kill it."
As far as I'm concerned, unless it has an intelligence score lower than 3 or an alignment subtype it can be any alignment at all.
Does that make the majority of adventurers racist, you think?
Several of my players' characters will kill an orc, goblin, whatever for being what it is, irregardless of its actual alignment (not that this differs from the misconception that they are all evil by default).
|
-Taking a 5-foot step and moving.
-Two 20s in a row is an instant kill
Agreed on the first.
We use the second (As well as the chance to hit your allies in melee) from 3.0.However, I made sure to (a) Have all players agree to it beforehand, and (b) I made sure that they knew that it was a variant rule from an earlier set.
And, as someone mentioned, it is 20+20+ hit, slightly more difficult.
-Uriel
|
|
@ Benchak the Nightstalker - Thanks for pointing that out. :D
@ Ross - Sorry about the misflag and thanks for the correction.
See no b&&#&y player rule. This is a good time to enact the "Get a Stick Rule."Kakarasa is a fan of your work.
I'm all in agreement with this as long as the players are informed of the house rules before making any significant choices. Most GM's I associate with have an approval list and/or written house rules list... it seems to help immensely IMO.That you have to play RAW or you aren't playing correctly. Even worse that you don't know how to play or that you are not a "real" rpg gamer if you don't play RAW and know every rule by heart.
Even if you have 20 + years experience than the person claiming superiority. That bugs me a great deal.
A friend of mine ran a game a few years back> He informed us,AFTER we had been bushwhacked by wights (At Lvl 3, no less) that all Undead Drain was permanent in his World.
World like that, seems like mandatory Cleric schooling for all little tykes would be in order.After my half-orc lost 7 Str and someone else lost 6 Dex in one Undead encounter, we opted to tell him that perhaps he should have told us that beforehand? He got puffy and lost interest in DMing.
Good friend, bad DM.
-Uriel
I find many times these are just misunderstandings, and with calm heads, easy to resolve. The only time I would be a bit peeved is if they new a rule and failed to tell me because "I'm the GM and should know." I have a lot of stuff bumping about in this head of mine and can't memorize every rule. I feel it's "Play the Game" not "Beat the GM."
|
Several of my players' characters will kill an orc, goblin, whatever for being what it is, irregardless of its actual alignment (not that this differs from the misconception that they are all evil by default).
When your PCs kill the next goblin who's minding his own business, they find a note in his pocket that says:
"Dear Adventurer,
By killing me, an innocent goblin minding my own business, an innocent human has just been executed. Had you not killed me, she would have been spared. You're responsible for her death. Hope you've learned a lesson here.
Signed,
A goblin who just wanted to live
P.S. You're a dork."
When they get to whatever town, they learn that some random murder(s) have taken place. If they investigate, the authorities share a similar note that states the human(s) were put to death because a certain adventuring party thought they were cool.
When they get to the end, the BBEG confirms he's the one who set everything up to teach them a lesson, while lecturing them one final time.
|
|
-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)
Since when have private individuals put 'the good of the local economy' before their own personal greed? I can't imagine any shopkeeper thumbing his nose at thousands of gold coins because of some esoteric concern about inflation in the real world, let alone in any game world.
Besides that, I'm not really sure why one merchant becoming extremely rich would necessarily spur on inflation or put that rich merchant's business in peril, but that's another discussion I guess.
Merchant : "What the frack are you doing? I can't take that! I have no place to put 10,000 silver coins, 20,000 coppers, and 5,000 gold coins! Do I look like I have a vault in here? Do I look like I have 10 sons to guard it 24 hours a day from the thieves guild?!?! Do I look like I can haul that by myself up to the Capital and put it into the King's Treasury? Get that crap out of my store and come back when you've got some nice small easily hideable gemstones, you cretins!"
And yes, I did have some players looking through 30,000 coppers trying to figure out a way to get them back to town.
Ok I am gonna have to cry foul here and claim that what we have is a classic case of trying to use some sort of logic, but stopping too soon.
Why would a merchant have an item for sale if they are unable to accept payment? In the example above, why are they worried about thieves stealing the coin but not the item itself? Why do they not have security/vault and or a way to discreetly transport wealth? Why does a merchant selling moderately expensive magic items not own a simple bag of holding?
Can I add "people who think there should be a realistic economy in their elf and dragon murdering game to things that aggravate me?
For what it's worth, I've had great fun basing many adventures off of what amount to realistic economics. Then again, it's something that should move at the speed of plot...if only to put off arguments about what constitutes "realistic economics."
|
The older farts among us might remember when Initiative was rolled on a d6... one roll for the WHOLE PARTY and one more roll for the monsters/opponents.And then when the combat started and I requested inititive check... They all took 1d10 and rolled...
Me: Why did you used d10?!
They look on me very confused and say: Initiative is rolled with d10 in (A)D&D games.
Exactly what I was going to say! Oh the good old days... when AC was the lower the better and initiative was rolled on a d6! :-)
.
..
...
.....
......
+1What aggravating misconceptions about rules make you want to scream?That they matter more than civility or having fun.
BOTH OF YOU ARE WRONG FOR OBVIOUS REASONS!1!1one!1eleven1!
That every action your character does must be within their alignment and any thing you do outside of your alignment automatically changes your alignment.
Correct. Normal vision supersedes darkvision when it is better than darkvision. Darkvision takes over whenever normal vision is impaired from darkness.
That's a very elegant summary of how it works, nice!
+1
That every action your character does must be within their alignment and any thing you do outside of your alignment automatically changes your alignment.
This might help, it is for gradual alignment change and it's free.
A friend of mine ran a game a few years back> He informed us,AFTER we had been bushwhacked by wights (At Lvl 3, no less) that all Undead Drain was permanent in his World.
World like that, seems like mandatory Cleric schooling for all little tykes would be in order.
After my half-orc lost 7 Str and someone else lost 6 Dex in one Undead encounter, we opted to tell him that perhaps he should have told us that beforehand? He got puffy and lost interest in DMing.
Good friend, bad DM.-Uriel
This is EXACTLY the kind of thing I'm talking about... It's like finding out you're playing Ravenloft with no cleric or paladin. :\
Correct. Normal vision supersedes darkvision when it is better than darkvision. Darkvision takes over whenever normal vision is impaired from darkness.That's a very elegant summary of how it works, nice!
Woah, a tip of the hat from a dev. :) Nice. :) Thanks.
When people think they can re-prepare spells over and over and over again in the same day with nothing but some rest. Usually pops up when someone can get by on two hours of sleep such as by a racial trait or a magic item).
For those not in the know, you cannot prepare new spells in spell slots that you've used in the last 8 hours. Reducing your resting time does not change this rule.
The misconception that basic algebraic mathematics provide a sufficient tool with which one can effectively analyze the Pathfinder rule set.
Zo
The math guys have already defended that one*. We can start another thread on it if you like though.
*By defended I mean given the true reason behind the math breakdowns.
Would you be so kind as to provide a link to or the name of the thread in question?
Zo
Now you gotta go make me look for stuff.:)
No biggy. I need to find it so I can bookmark it. If I find it soon I will edit this post. If it takes a while I will make a new one.PS:The defense has come up in several posts, but I will still try to find one of the threads I started.
edit:Strangely enough DigiMarx you were the reason I made the thread I am about to send you back to.
My thread that was a result of the straw breaking the camel's back is below. This is not the only instance of the explaining of the reason for math on the boards, but I think this thread is a nice to look at.
My thread as a response to your post about a year ago
Keep in mind we know that math alone proves nothing, but to deny it has a place is not wise, IMHO.
|
Regarding the centaur PC: I come down on the side of allowing him to skip Mounted Combat and Ride ranks. Why? Because he's a freaking centaur. It isn't Mounted Combat...it's just combat. He isn't riding, he's walking. And Savage Species was banned? The DM should have made up his mind. Either ban the book AND ban the non-standard races, or allow both.
|
|
When people think they can re-prepare spells over and over and over again in the same day with nothing but some rest. Usually pops up when someone can get by on two hours of sleep such as by a racial trait or a magic item).
For those not in the know, you cannot prepare new spells in spell slots that you've used in the last 8 hours. Reducing your resting time does not change this rule.
This one bugs me too. I've had casters wondering why no one else was wearing a ring of sustenance because they said it let them relearn their spells every two hours or so.
In the end we just houseruled it worked so we could get more gaming in, but I told my players that it was a two way street for enemy casters as well. I merely threw some into the loot for NPC casters and swapped out something else to keep player wealth about the same.
Still bugs me a bit though.
Cheers
Can I add "people who think there should be a realistic economy in their elf and dragon murdering game to things that aggravate me?
Hey, my Shipwrecks and Stockbrokers campaign is still running just fine, thank you.
And EVIL's stock rose eight points this week.
People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)
People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
|
People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?
People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?
Oh man, no one's ever said words like that before. You've got to be pretty clever to come up with something like that. Just be careful you don't light yourself on fire with that flamebait you're spewing.
|
People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?
Did you call your portable cassette player "walkman" ? Yes. Was it a Sony Walkman(R) ? Not necessarily.
Americans: substitute "walkman" for "kleenex" and Sony for Kimberley-Clark Worldwide Inc. :)
People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?Did you call your portable cassette player "walkman" ? Yes. Was it a Sony Walkman(R) ? Not necessarily.
Americans: substitute "walkman" for "kleenex" and Sony for Kimberley-Clark Worldwide Inc. :)
We still called cassette players walkmans too.
Hell I think I heard some people call generic portable CD players "walkmans".
|
|
People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?Did you call your portable cassette player "walkman" ? Yes. Was it a Sony Walkman(R) ? Not necessarily.
Americans: substitute "walkman" for "kleenex" and Sony for Kimberley-Clark Worldwide Inc. :)
We still called cassette players walkmans too.
Hell I think I heard some people call generic portable CD players "walkmans".
4th Edition is a CD player then. :)
A few things that bother me about rules misconceptions and discussions:
1) Some areas of the rules have been intentionally left undefined. Gray areas are adjudicated by individual DMs and Players at individual gaming tables. One person’s interpretation of a gray area is not RAW. Many aspects of Stealth fall in this category, maybe too many.
2) Clinging to a single sentence or description as RAW because it fits a particular argument and discounting everything else when there are several other rules and descriptions concerning the same thing, which taken as a whole mean something completely different.
The rules misconceptions that I usually get the most involved in and bother me the most are those dealing with different aspects of Stealth:
1) Stealth doesn't allow you to gain Sneak Attack. Yes, it does.
2) Darkvision trumps Hide in Plain Sight. No, it doesn’t.
3) HiPS doesn’t work the way it says it works. Yes, it does.
4) HiPS incurs a penalty to Stealth checks, like Sniping. HiPS =/= Sniping.
5) HiPS does/doesn’t work in darkness. Solid arguments can be made either way, but it would be stupid, IMO, if it didn’t work in darkness.
6) Scent auto-detects the location of anyone using Stealth. Sent lets you know something is close, not exactly where it is, you still have to Track the scent.
7) What constitutes sufficient distractions for allowing Stealth. The rules indicate you can Stealth past someone who is distracted, but what constitutes distraction?
8) Does coming out from cover/concealment mean you are automatically visible? Solid RAW arguments can be made either way.
9) Adding things to the description/mechanics of HiPS, such as: "Wrapping nearby shadows around you to gain concealment so you can use Stealth." That's not at all what the ability says, not even close.
10) Can sources of concealment be used for Stealth in bright/normal light? Lighting rules vs. Environmental rules, Stealth rules, and Cover/Concealment rules. This has caused me no end of confusion. The Stealth rules, Cover/Concealment rules, and Environmental rules indicate that concealment can be used for Stealth; period. And it would be stupid for so many environmental things to grant concealment and bonuses to Stealth if the only time you could use concealment for Stealth is in dim light or darkness when you don’t need it because you already have concealment from the lighting conditions. However, the lighting rules state concealment isn’t sufficient for Stealth in normal/bright light conditions, you must have cover or invisibility.
4th Edition is a CD player then. :)People who argue that Pathfinder is D&D ...People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.People who argue that Pathfinder isn't D&D ;-)People who argue..
No, wait...
People
!!!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?Did you call your portable cassette player "walkman" ? Yes. Was it a Sony Walkman(R) ? Not necessarily.
Americans: substitute "walkman" for "kleenex" and Sony for Kimberley-Clark Worldwide Inc. :)
We still called cassette players walkmans too.
Hell I think I heard some people call generic portable CD players "walkmans".
Lol and +1.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
People who argue that Pathfinder is 3.5.
Does arguing PF is D&D count? If so, I'm guilty. More than that, I get offended when someone suggests it isn't D&D. I don't care what someone says about 4e, since while it may or may not be D&D (I don't care either way), it has nothing to do with whether or not PF is D&D.
That you have to play RAW or you aren't playing correctly.
If the DM wants to consider Touch Spells as something that doesn't require attack rolls, he should be allowed (I went through a Tier 1-2 module as level 7 with a bunch of level 1's and nearly died due to the GM Vampiric Touching me without rolling attack rolls against my AC 21 Touch AC. I asked "did you succeed on your touch attack?" he said "Yes" (without rolling) so I figured it was good enough for me.
Restating my point, if you and the DM disagree with a rules interpretation. Accept the GM's view. You can always vote with your feet by not showing up for future games in his world. It makes your GM have less stress running a game.
since a Centaur is Large ... rope ladder using only his arms. The GM flat-out told him no to that.
I've played a number of Centaur characters. I always get some sort of 1/day or similar Polymorph item for this purpose. So if I were GM, I'd have no problem rejecting any and all odd things of this sort regardless of how well the Centaur rolled on his Climb check.
My list:
1) Spells per day and "I can rest for 2 hours, prepare spells for 1 hour, so that means I can get eight full castings of all my spell slots in 24 hours". In a word, no
2) Only the GM has Rule 0, Players don't.
3) World exploits don't work or back fire (cast wall of salt and sell the salt for $$, same for wall of iron, fabricate full plate, wall of iron on a cliff so it falls and crushes an enemy.)
4) My class sucks, so I want a fix, so I interpret a rules line in my favor when alternate interpretations are valid and reject any concept my interpretation isn't RAW ("Brass Knuckles on a Monk" I'm looking at you)
|
GMs who add in things for 'reality' that are counter to RAW.
-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)
Oh, the irony.
In this case I'll go with the rule of cool: magic swords are cool, spreadsheets & shopkeepers isn't cool.
Wow, turns out that's also RAW, whodathunkit!
But there's nothing to argue about. It's right on the cover: Pathfinder RPG, not D&D.
What's next? Arguing D&D 4 somehow isn't D&D?
read between the lines on the introduction by monte cook.. thats essentially what he's saying.
Players who think that rule 0 is optional or that using rule 0 means you aren't playing by the rules.
People who think that changing the rules on the fly to screw the players is a valid use of Rule 0.
GMs who add in things for 'reality' that are counter to RAW.-When players go to purchase magic items and and they honestly expect the shop keep to accept over 500 pounds of coins dumped out of a bag of holding. As if the merchant is so dumb as to inflate the local market enough to jeopardize his own business and put his community into a recession. (not really a misconception of rules as a misconception of what a stable economy is. Can't really blame players though, since that's how it works by the RAW. The RAW for the D&D economy are pretty dumb.)Oh, the irony.
In this case I'll go with the rule of cool: magic swords are cool, spreadsheets & shopkeepers isn't cool.
Wow, turns out that's also RAW, whodathunkit!
LOL,
You did notice I didn't say you couldn't spend all your money in town (provided the town is large enough). I just pointed out that walking into a small shop that had a sale on and dumping out 500 lbs of coins and asking 'What will this buy us' won't always work. If the 500 lbs of coins is worth 30K, and the town limit is 5K, then the shopkeeper is going to react poorly.That's pretty much the deffinition of RAW, maybe you should pay more attention to the thread?
Keep in mind we know that math alone proves nothing, but to deny it has a place is not wise, IMHO.
Sorry for making you look. I had a brief search and didn't turn up anything. Please understand I'm not trying to harsh on anyone's buzz. Some people get their kicks in a different way than I do, and that's totally fine. Few of us on these boards deny the usefulness of mathcraft, especially when creating an "optimized" character. It's just that some (I) don't believe its utility extends as far as others do.
The fallacy integral to *some* people's approach to mathematical analysis is twofold; the overly simplistic algebra used by posters on these and other boards assumes hypothetical, "average', or otherwise subjectively determined conditions instead of taking a holistic approach, and the derivations of the term "optimize" are used unilaterally, as though (pseudo)objectivity somehow trumps the subjective play experience.
Simply put (from your thread),
A minority of the community wields mathematics (at times poorly executed, though not always) as a cudgel. All too often these are the same people who lack social graces, and end up getting ostracized — not because of their math, but their demeanor.
Zo
Restating my point, if you and the DM disagree with a rules interpretation. Accept the GM's view. You can always vote with your feet by not showing up for future games in his world. It makes your GM have less stress running a game.
Well said.
My GM believes, no matter how many times I explain the wording to him, that a spellcaster must make a concentration check to cast a spell if they have taken damage at any time during the last round. In essence, we have to make a check every round to attempt to cast unless we have taken to damage since our last action.
