"Common Sense" approach to rules (RACSD)

[TuggyNE]

Rule 018: Claw, Stab Claw…and now with my other arm!

Hmm, erikun has gotten me to rethink this a bit, and actually this does seem more reasonable. Agreed after all.

Rule 020: My Weapon Is My Shield!

I believe I'm confident enough in this to now register agreement.

Rule 021: Enchanting Enhanced Projectiles

Much preferred to the original version; agreed.

Rule 025: Lava Is Easily Resisted
Revision: Resistance to fire provides an equal amount of resistance to the fire damage caused by lava (in place of the lava 'immunity' currently written in the rules).

Somehow I seem to have missed this on my previous run-through, but it is quite clearly a good change, so agreed.

Rule 030A: Loose Aptitude
The Aptitude ability (ToB) allows the user to use the enhanced weapon with any feat that applies to only a single type of weapon, chosen or preset, like Weapon Focus or Lightning Maces. (This one is supported by the actual text of Aptitude, but leads to some system abuse, especially with the aforementioned Lightning Maces.)

Rule 030B: Strict Aptitude
The Aptitude ability (ToB) allows the user to use the enhanced weapon with any feat that applies to only a single chosen type of weapon, like Weapon Focus or Improved Critical. (This one closes some ridiculous exploits, but RAW-wise it relies on inferring a distinction not made by the text of the ability.)

I do not presently know of any legitimate (non-abusive) use for 030A's reading, so I'm changing my previous abstention to disagree with that and agree with 030B.

Rule 033: No Double Dipping
Multiple ability-based bonuses cannot stack unless specifically permitted in the description of the ability. There are ways, for example, to get your Charisma bonus to AC, your Wisdom bonus to AC, etc...but you cannot get your Wisdom bonus x2 to AC through two different classes.

This seems ... hmm. Maybe a bit unnecessary? Generally the ways of gaining double Cha to saves, for example, require a lot of hoop-jumping, and while they are indeed more powerful, I don't necessarily see them as brokenly so. I could certainly see the point of houseruling it one way or another, but I'm not really sure there's any clear dictate from common sense to decide it.

As mentioned previously, there are cases where the bonuses implicitly stack by their nature (Con to natural armor, Con to armor), cases where they explicitly do not stack (Monk/Ninja AC bonus), but no cases I'm aware of where they explicitly stack. However, the default would seem to be to treat them as an untyped bonus, which would stack.

Anyway, upshot is that this seems a little dubious to me right now, both in scope and in conclusion, so I think I have to disagree pending further discussion.

---

1

Also a largely unrelated linguistic nitpick: the "yay" sound you make when formally agreeing with something is actually written out as "yea". No more typos please.