| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Many years ago I was playing a gnome spell caster, arcane variety. He had recently learned the delicate art of casting Fireball and couldn't wait to use it...
Enter scenario where he felt Fireball would be great. The interaction wen something like this...
Me: I cast Fireball into the mass of enmies rushing us!
DM: Ok, it's only going to hit a couple of them.
Me: Umm, no it will hit all of them.
DM: No, your a Gnome.
Me: What does that have to do with anything?
DM: You are Small size, so your Fireball is half the size of a regular FireballNot kidding. He told me that small size spell casters cast small size spells. This hadn't come up before as most of my spells were not BOOM type spells.
After a brief conversation and seeing that this fool was serious and was not going to listen to reason of any sort I ended up packing up my stuff and excusing myself from his game and did not return.
I would have rebuilt my character to Medium Sized, cast Enlarge Person, and because I'm Large, now have 40 ft. radius Fireballs.
Or play a Druid with the Fire Domain. As he grows more powerful, and can Wildshape into larger and larger creatures, his spells get bigger too.
For a long time, my group thought that temporary negative levels from undead attacks never became permanent. We had read the negative level entry in the CRB but not the bestiary netry on energy drain. We thought you just kept saving every day until they went away.
Or that "Permanent" means that instead of "Doesn't go away by saves, needs a spell."
It was considerably harder in AD&D. The DMG advised sending the PCs on specific quests to obtain the materials needed.
The idea that making magic items is supposed to be "tough" somehow, when it didn't even require a check in 3.0/3.5.True, but having magic items was a lot less expected in AD&D. You can find examples of pregenerated 13th level characters with a +1 weapon, +1 armor, and maybe a potion as their entire set of magic items.
Yeah, but those weren't real. We had SCADS of magic. Tonnes of it. The problem is- what ya found is what ya got. Thus, we not optimized at all. Sure, everyone could have a Ring of Prot +1 (a very common item) or +1 magic weapons or armor. But you either waited to specialize in a weapon or hoped for a kind DM.
I had a Bard with a girdle of Cloud Giant str and the Fighter didn't even have Gauntlets of Ogre power.
And, generally we rolled for 1st choice. None of this "give it to the PC who could best use it."
Casters roll touch attacks with weapon-like spells using their casting mod instead of dex.
This was a blast for the 3.5 warlock.
I was DM. We ran with that rule from 1-37 across two campaigns.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Actually, making the acrobatics check does mean your movement isn't hampered, because now you can move full speed. If you can move full speed, your movement cannot, by definition, be hampered.Why you can't take a 5' step in darkness is smack in the middle of teh text you cited.
Making the Acrobatic check don't remove the simple fact that your movement is hampered by the darkness.
If you need to take a special action to avoid problems your movement is hampered.
And to repeat it again: it is not what the rules say.The rules say that you must make a acrobatic check to avoid falling if you move a full speed when blind.
The darkness hampered movement don't impede you from moving a full speed. It force you into making a acrobatic check if you move at more than half speed.
Blind
"Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone."
You see something about removing the blind condition? Or the hampered movement?
I'm getting close to disallowing it too.
1. Chaotic neutral because I'm chaotic neutral is fine.
2. Chaotic neutral because I hate the alignment system MIGHT be OK, but it almost always leads to..
3. Chaotic neutral so I can run around torturing villagers and burning down houses and stealing from the party and claiming it isn't evil is just plain annoying.As someone else said, lawful evil and neutral evil are less annoying. And 100 percent of the buttheads I've ever gamed with have been chaotic neutral. There have been some CN NON buttheads, but it certainly has a high butthead draw.
On the opposite side of the fence, I once had a DM turn all the villians in the campaign CN to deny my Paladin the use of Smite Evil ...
On the opposite side of the fence, I once had a DM turn all the villians in the campaign CN to deny my Paladin the use of Smite Evil ...I'm getting close to disallowing it too.
1. Chaotic neutral because I'm chaotic neutral is fine.
2. Chaotic neutral because I hate the alignment system MIGHT be OK, but it almost always leads to..
3. Chaotic neutral so I can run around torturing villagers and burning down houses and stealing from the party and claiming it isn't evil is just plain annoying.As someone else said, lawful evil and neutral evil are less annoying. And 100 percent of the buttheads I've ever gamed with have been chaotic neutral. There have been some CN NON buttheads, but it certainly has a high butthead draw.
No offense Graywolf, but that's kinda funny. I love stories where DMs are just horrible like that.
No offense Graywolf, but that's kinda funny. I love stories where DMs are just horrible like that.On the opposite side of the fence, I once had a DM turn all the villians in the campaign CN to deny my Paladin the use of Smite Evil ...
Eh, it's not like I was useless afterwards, just... annoyed. It's in the past either way.
|
PFS 3 star GM killed my Cleric PC in a scenario in part because he thought DR5/Slashing applied to my spells, since they don't do slashing damage. So after wasting several spells without doing damage I switched to casting Guidance every round since my weapons couldn't bypass it either. By the time I found out, we were already hosed.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since a Halbard is a Pole-arm it gets a 10ft reach!
I swear I thought this was true.
Now, a year after the incident, I get an email from by buddy in the game that has his son standing in front of a rack of halbards. His note on the email said, and I quote,
"We came across this display in the main hall at Edinburgh Castle this afternoon. Note that the weapon directly to Austin's left is a halbard ... Note the haft length, when compared to all the other pole arms. Definitely not a reach weapon."
Love the halberd pic story. It's for things like this that I love the Leeds Royal Armouries Museum.
Anyway, sorry for the aside: I return you to your regularly scheduled misconceptions.
Attacks of Opportunity on entering a threatened area.you mean something with 10 foot reach wont get an AoO when someone goes into melee range with it?
/mind blown
It will, but it gets it from leaving a square at 10-foot reach (and, in this case, entering an adjacent square). It doesn't get one just because something comes into reach.
It will, but it gets it from leaving a square at 10-foot reach (and, in this case, entering an adjacent square). It doesn't get one just because something comes into reach.Attacks of Opportunity on entering a threatened area.you mean something with 10 foot reach wont get an AoO when someone goes into melee range with it?
/mind blown
so there is 2 squares of that 10 foot reach.
person with only 5 foot reach enters first square, doesnt provoke, enters second square to attack enemy, provokes, is this correct?
Yes.
Yes.It will, but it gets it from leaving a square at 10-foot reach (and, in this case, entering an adjacent square). It doesn't get one just because something comes into reach.Attacks of Opportunity on entering a threatened area.you mean something with 10 foot reach wont get an AoO when someone goes into melee range with it?
/mind blown
so there is 2 squares of that 10 foot reach.
person with only 5 foot reach enters first square, doesnt provoke, enters second square to attack enemy, provokes, is this correct?
And, importantly, the same holds true for reach weapons: even though it doesn't threaten the adjacent squares, a creature leaving any of the squares it does threaten (unless using some movement that doesn't provoke, like a 5-foot step) provokes an attack of opportunity.
Well you can build him to be ALMOST like that, in his defense.
Superstition, Energy Resistance, Increased DR, etc.
dunno if this one has been done before or not
Taking 10 takes 10 times longer than trying it normally
dunno if this one has been done before or not
Taking 10 takes 10 times longer than trying it normally
Nope, you're thinking of take 20 taking 20 times as long. There's no language like that for take 10.
It's called a 'role play game' because you 'roll' the dice
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
dunno if this one has been done before or not
Taking 10 takes 10 times longer than trying it normally
Nope, you're thinking of take 20 taking 20 times as long. There's no language like that for take 10.
I believe Darigaaz the Igniter knows that, he was posting it as a Rules Misconception as the thread is requesting.
Maybe all posts to this thread should be in the form:
Misconception: Taking 10 takes 10 times longer than trying it normally.
Reality: Taking 10 takes no longer than rolling for the check, it is only Take 20 that involves taking 20 times as long.
I was in a game with a high-level Invulnerable Rager barbarian who declared himself immune to all types of damage, period. Spells? Energy? Attacks that specifically bypass DR? Didn't matter. "I'm invulnerable, that's what invulnerable means!"
Perhaps they need to rename the archetype to "nigh-invulnerable rager"!
dunno if this one has been done before or not
Taking 10 takes 10 times longer than trying it normally
Nope, you're thinking of take 20 taking 20 times as long. There's no language like that for take 10.
I believe Darigaaz the Igniter knows that, he was posting it as a Rules Misconception as the thread is requesting.
Maybe all posts to this thread should be in the form:
Misconception: Taking 10 takes 10 times longer than trying it normally.
Reality: Taking 10 takes no longer than rolling for the check, it is only Take 20 that involves taking 20 times as long.
Exactly, thank you. Doesn't stop the fact I have to explain this difference nearly every single time I try to take 10 in my one group.
As long as you have a sufficiently high int/cha/wis modifier, you can cast spells of a level equal to your caster level.
IE at level 2 you can cast 2nd level spells, at level 3 3rd level...
The adopted trait allows you to take racial traits from other races (as opposed to what it really does; allowing you to take a race trait from the traits list).
|
The adopted trait allows you to take racial traits from other races (as opposed to what it really does; allowing you to take a race trait from the traits list).
What I love about this particular rule is I had a player chose human as a race, then tried argue that he was adopted by humans, so he could choose the adopted racial trait:
+2 to One Ability Score: Human characters get a +2 bonus to one ability score of their choice at creation to represent their varied nature.
thus getting +2 (twice) to one ability score.
I laughed in his face.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My favorite rules misconceptions? Hmmm. I'm not sure, but a few I hear often spring to mind:
"Casting spells or using items with the [Evil] descriptor is an evil act, and affects your alignment"
And
"killing an evildoer can be a good act"
-Nearyn
|
|
Many years ago I was playing a gnome spell caster, arcane variety. He had recently learned the delicate art of casting Fireball and couldn't wait to use it...
Enter scenario where he felt Fireball would be great. The interaction wen something like this...
Me: I cast Fireball into the mass of enmies rushing us!
DM: Ok, it's only going to hit a couple of them.
Me: Umm, no it will hit all of them.
DM: No, your a Gnome.
Me: What does that have to do with anything?
DM: You are Small size, so your Fireball is half the size of a regular FireballNot kidding. He told me that small size spell casters cast small size spells. This hadn't come up before as most of my spells were not BOOM type spells.
After a brief conversation and seeing that this fool was serious and was not going to listen to reason of any sort I ended up packing up my stuff and excusing myself from his game and did not return.
Good idea.
Especially if the adventure you were about to go on next was 'Against The Giants'...|
|
It's called a 'role play game' because you 'roll' the dice
I hate debates about 'roleplay vs rollplay', because the two words sound identical, causing confusion, irritation and people talking past each other.
Unless they make an effort to stress which meaning they're using, which usually involves 'putting on a funny voice' (like a lisping thespian) or miming the action (a limp-wristed 'I'm a little teapot' stance, for roleplay, or shaking imaginary dice in a suggestive onanistic manner, for rollplay).
Can we call them something else? Storytelling vs wargaming? Anything?
|
Since a Halbard is a Pole-arm it gets a 10ft reach!
I swear I thought this was true.
Now, a year after the incident, I get an email from by buddy in the game that has his son standing in front of a rack of halbards. His note on the email said, and I quote,
"We came across this display in the main hall at Edinburgh Castle this afternoon. Note that the weapon directly to Austin's left is a halbard ... Note the haft length, when compared to all the other pole arms. Definitely not a reach weapon."
In Ultima IV, the halberd is a reach weapon that can attack through walls.
|
Actually, making the acrobatics check does mean your movement isn't hampered, because now you can move full speed. If you can move full speed, your movement cannot, by definition, be hampered.Why you can't take a 5' step in darkness is smack in the middle of teh text you cited.
Making the Acrobatic check don't remove the simple fact that your movement is hampered by the darkness.If you need to take a special action to avoid problems your movement is hampered.
And to repeat it again: it is not what the rules say.
The rules say that you must make a acrobatic check to avoid falling if you move a full speed when blind.
The darkness hampered movement don't impede you from moving a full speed. It force you into making a acrobatic check if you move at more than half speed.You see something about removing the blind condition? Or the hampered movement?
Blind
"Blind creatures must make a DC 10 Acrobatics skill check to move faster than half speed. Creatures that fail this check fall prone."No, but I see something abut removing the "hampered" condition from the movement.
The grease spell has similar la gauge, except the acrobatics check is required to move up to half speed. So you could not 5 foot step in grease. If you are able to make a full-speed movement, you can 5 ft step.to hold back; hinder; impede: A steady rain hampered the progress of the work.
to interfere with; curtail: The dancers' movements were hampered by their elaborate costumes.
You can move your full speed, even while at the same time each square costs double of what it normally does. For example, if you've got a 30ft speed and you're moving through difficult terrain with no other modifiers, you can move your full speed and still only end up 15ft from where you started, because each square cost 10ft of your speed.
"Casting spells or using items with the [Evil] descriptor is an evil act, and affects your alignment"
Sadly, and to this game's great detriment, this one is not a misconception. It is true.
|
|
Not sure if misconception or just trying to game the system, but wearing a masterwork cloak to get the +2 'tool' bonus to stealth.
It should be a masterwork CAMOUFLAGE cloak.
A masterwork cloak bonus can be several things, but each cloak should add only to a single kind of skill check.A cloak that is masterwork because of his high fashion would give a +2 to diplomacy.
A camouflaged masterwork cloak would give a +2 to stealth (the 2nd darkness boots probably gave a bonus to move silently, as it is a 3.5 AP, not a Pathfinder AP).
A double-face masterwork cloak with two different patterns would give a +2 to disguise.