
Andarion |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we get an official order of operations for rules interactions?
Hear me out. I know that general is overridden by specific. Simple enough in theory, but some rules debates make you wonder.
But what about when specific contradicts specific?
In the Smash from the air and disintegrate thread we see an example of this. Now it is not a great example, but it works for my purposes. Disintegrate says it effects the first object/being it touches and Smash From the Air allows you to deflect spells using an object.
I am not going into the debate here, that is what that thread is for, but if we had an official order of operations for rules interactions, we could nip these things in the bud quick fast and in a hurry...in theory because this is the internet.
So what exactly am I talking about by order of operations?
So instead of the very vague specific trumps general I am looking for something like this:
1. General Rules (ie. Environment, Combat, Magic (not spells just Magic), Equipment, and anything else I forgot
2. Spells
3. Classes
4. Feats
*Please do not debate the priority levels of each, this is just for explanation purposes.
So we start at level 1 and it is overridden by anything from level 2-4, and level 2 is overridden by anything from level 3-4.
With this, if we ever have a rules contradiction we can just look at what section the two contradicting/interacting rules come from and if they are from different priority levels, whichever is higher wins. End of discussion, again in theory.
Now I know this is not something that we can have thrown together in a day or two since the design philosophy of 3e to Pathfinder probably did not have this, but it would help immensely.
Society would run smoother by table because you could have an issue arise that would be solved very quickly. Let's use the SFtA and Disintegrate topic with the above priority listing.
Disintegrate says it effects the first object/being it touches and Smash From the Air allows you to deflect spells using an object. Player 1 argues that the object used to deflect the spell is damaged since it is an object, and Player 2 says it does not since the feat says the attack is deflected.
If we look at the priority levels, Spells are level 2, but Feats are level 4. Therefore, feat overrides spells, and player 2 is correct.
Is it a perfect system? No. But it would help.

Johnny_Devo |

Until you have a rules system that is written to support such an order of operations, an order will only break more things than it fixes.
It's unfortunate, but that's what we're dealing with. I personally wish I had the time to go over the rules with a fine-tooth comb and rebuild it from the ground up, but even then I'm sure there's disagreements between myself and others to how the rules should work. And even then I'm sure there will be disagreements even after the rules are made much more clear, as I nor any of the pathfinder authors are infallible.

Claxon |

This is simply not possible.
To many situations require looking at specifics to say that all feats have higher priority than all class abilities. Or vice versa.
If you did this, you would end up breaking stuff, no matter what hierarchy you ended up using. You just need an competent GM and the generic rule of thumb of "specific trumps general".
If something seems more specific, than that is the thing that wins.