Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 151 to 174 of 174
  1. - Top - End - #151
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Razanir's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The last place you look
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sugashane View Post
    Me- "Remember Final Fantasy II?"
    PC-"Yeah, why?"
    Me- "The old man that stares at you disappears from your view, as does everything else."
    PC- "What?!"
    Me- You're dead, he basically cast 8 Meteos, 2 Nukes, and called Bahamut and Jinn all at the same time. An imp walks up an poops on your charred body. Golbez was the loved child, your father hated you, Rosa was cheating on you....with Kain...and Cid."
    Quote Originally Posted by The Redwolf View Post
    I'm sorry to disrupt the topic, but that would really be Final Fantasy 4, they just labelled it as Final Fantasy 2 on Super Nintendo outside of Japan because they hadn't released the others. I realize it doesn't matter, but I'm a FF nerd.
    Gah! I'm playing though that game for the first time! When I saw FFII, I thought it was the actual FFII. The one with the super exploitable leveling system that gave me 3 healers who use unarmed strike so I never need to buy weapons. Or healing potions, for that matter

    Quote Originally Posted by Careless View Post
    There's also the fact that a Beholder is a giant floating eye. Its kind of easy to guess where you should stab/bludgeon/blast it. Unless it doesn't have a big eye, then you should hit the little ones.

    Legend of Zelda gave me favored enemy: Aberration, I think.
    Rule of thumb: Stab it either in the eye, the tail, the flashy spot or the oddly colored spot. Or also the head in older games.

    Quote Originally Posted by Darthteej View Post
    I open up the SRD Hypertext and point to the clause that says that sneak attack works on any creature who is denied a dex bonus to their AC.
    According to TV Tropes (I'll find the page later), sneak attacks, by RAW, can give extra healing power to wands of cure spells

    Quote Originally Posted by Darthteej View Post
    So the only thing that changed was that the debate about whether you could stack TWF and FoB was rendered moot, something that no one in their right mind would do anyway.

    And the clause about the +5 sai vs unarmed strikes, I thought they were just plain common sense. Now don't get me wrong, this rule still screws over the zen archer, but everything else seems to be how Flurry worked before.
    Couldn't you just repeatedly stab the enemy with your magic sai and render this whole debate moot?

    Quote Originally Posted by tuggyne View Post
    OT for great justice:
    Spoiler
    Show


    Heh, fair enough.

    If one did, though, perhaps a sort of green?



    I ... had not actually thought of that, but oh well, I got no other idea on how to handle that.
    OT:
    Spoiler
    Show
    I second this decision to make green the sincerity color.


    Quote Originally Posted by Firechanter View Post
    Or to the Halfling Rogue player: "You actually don't need Open Lock and Disable Device, just take Profession: Locksmith and you're good for both."
    Wait. Does this actually work?
    Last edited by Razanir; 2012-11-19 at 04:22 PM.
    Avatar from anythingcomic.com

    Quote Originally Posted by Razanir View Post
    Everyone knows frying pans are actually weapons that people repurpose for cooking
    I am an 11/11/12/15/12/14 LG Wiz 1/Clr 1

    I have invented a new pronoun. is to be referred to as V/vim/vis/vis/vimself instead of he/him/his/his/himself or she/her/her/hers/herself

  2. - Top - End - #152
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Starbuck_II's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Elimu Marimech View Post


    According to TV Tropes (I'll find the page later), sneak attacks, by RAW, can give extra healing power to wands of cure spells
    Only to undead as sneak attack increases damage...so CLW can be used for sneak attack on a Skeleton (with Grave Strike spell).

  3. - Top - End - #153
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    toapat's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Elimu Marimech View Post
    Wait. Does this actually work?
    No, and if it was a skill, it would only be +2 synergy or action reduction


    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    I use Red when I'm angry, I use blue when I'm excited.
    Drow avatar @ myself

  4. - Top - End - #154
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Venger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    you don't need to go to that trouble. rogues all dump wis, profession is difficult to do well in.

    just put ranks in DD. the literal first sentence on it in the PHB (p72) says that you can use it to "jam a lock (either in the open or closed position)" if that's not opening a lock... then I don't know what your DM's thinking.
    fight my brute! it's a lot of fun
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelb_Panthera View Post
    How telling is it that people would rather discuss the taxonomy of tomatoes (which are delicious) than the truenamer class?
    Iron Chef Medals!
    Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition

  5. - Top - End - #155
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    You could jam it in its current position, but not into another.
    Spoiler
    Show
    Like one, that on a lonesome road
    Doth walk in fear and dread,
    And having once turned round walks on,
    And turns no more his head;
    Because he knows, a frightful fiend
    Doth close behind him tread.
    The Rime of the Ancient Mariner -- Samuel Coleridge Taylor

    Spoiler
    Show


  6. - Top - End - #156
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2009

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by White_Drake View Post
    You could jam it in its current position, but not into another.
    Ah, but the RAW is you can do either, from either position. And the RAI is Disable Device replaces Open Lock. Also, if you know how to take the lock apart, you should know how to unlock it.
    See when a tree falls in the forest, and there's no one there to hear it, you can bet we've bought the vinyl.
    -Snow White

  7. - Top - End - #157
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Venger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Random NPC View Post
    Ah, but the RAW is you can do either, from either position. And the RAI is Disable Device replaces Open Lock. Also, if you know how to take the lock apart, you should know how to unlock it.
    yep, basic common sense FTW.

    I never make anyone put points into open lock, I tell them straight up that DD does that too, and show them the part in the rulebook where it says so. they appreciate saving the points.

    though seriously, if you're starting above 1st, a wand of knock will pay for itself many times over.
    fight my brute! it's a lot of fun
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelb_Panthera View Post
    How telling is it that people would rather discuss the taxonomy of tomatoes (which are delicious) than the truenamer class?
    Iron Chef Medals!
    Amazing Princess Mononoke avatar by Dispozition

  8. - Top - End - #158
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    HalflingRogueGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Huh... The one time I don't put in a qualifier or look up the rules... Still, that's good to know; I'm a fan of rogues.
    Spoiler
    Show
    Like one, that on a lonesome road
    Doth walk in fear and dread,
    And having once turned round walks on,
    And turns no more his head;
    Because he knows, a frightful fiend
    Doth close behind him tread.
    The Rime of the Ancient Mariner -- Samuel Coleridge Taylor

    Spoiler
    Show


  9. - Top - End - #159
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    there was so much dumb, i could not brain
    This has to be the best series of words I have ever seen on GiTP outside of anything debihuman says.. you sure Win the entire forum in my opinion.

  10. - Top - End - #160
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Telok's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    PRAK

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Random NPC View Post
    Ah, but the RAW is you can do either, from either position. And the RAI is Disable Device replaces Open Lock. Also, if you know how to take the lock apart, you should know how to unlock it.
    Cutting open the lock casing and disassembling the mechanisim does not allow anyone to subsequently unlock a similar lock without a key. Think about it this way, with a screwdriver and a wrench set you can disassemble a TiVo but that will not help you program one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Disable Device
    The Disable Device check is made secretly, so that you donít necessarily know whether youíve succeeded.

    The DC depends on how tricky the device is. Disabling (or rigging or jamming) a fairly simple device has a DC of 10; more intricate and complex devices have higher DCs.

    If the check succeeds, you disable the device. If it fails by 4 or less, you have failed but can try again. If you fail by 5 or more, something goes wrong.

    The amount of time needed to make a Disable Device check depends on the task, as noted above. Disabling a simple device takes 1 round and is a full-round action. An intricate or complex device requires 1d4 or 2d4 rounds.
    Disable Device is not a fool-proof substitute for Open Lock. It takes longer and, even if successful, leaves you with a broken/jammed lock. If you just want to bypass the lock you don't even need Disable Device, a hammer and Power Attack will do just fine. But if you don't want to leave a hole where the lock used to be (assuming that it's not a padlock) or you think that locking the door behind you might be useful then you'll need Open Lock or the appropriate magic ability.
    Niven's Laws, #5
    If you've nothing to say, say it any way you like. Stylistic innovations, contorted story lines or none, exotic or genderless pronouns, internal inconsistencies, the recipe for preparing your lover as a cannibal banquet: feel free. If what you have to say is important and/or difficult to follow, use the simplest language possible. If the reader doesn't get it then, let it not be your fault.

  11. - Top - End - #161
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    I'm with Telok on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Random NPC View Post
    Ah, but the RAW is you can do either, from either position.
    For a given value of RAW, sure. If they'd used 'into' instead of 'in' I'd have agreed. Can go both ways as it is now, leaning on the intention that 'jam' means 'make stuck where it is'.

    And the RAI is Disable Device replaces Open Lock.
    Does it really seem that way to you? Because to me it seems quite the opposite. There's all the difference between Intimidate and Diplomacy as far as I can see.

    Also, if you know how to take the lock apart, you should know how to unlock it.
    Anyone with a big enough hammer can take the lock apart. That doesn't take much knowledge of locks. I can disassemble most of my electronic equipment, but even if I took careful notes, it might not work properly when I've assembled it again. Because I don't know why what goes where or what gets permanently wrecked if I take it apart.
    Also Disable Device does not, to me at least, read like an ability used for taking things carefully apart so you can reassemble them later. It's for wrecking things, albeit in subtle ways.

    Aside from that, the house rules at our table make OL and DD into a single skill (like MS/Hide and Spot/Listen). So it's not that I disagree with the idea as such.
    Last edited by hymer; 2012-11-20 at 06:54 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Sherman T. Potter
    The itch is mightier than the stench.

  12. - Top - End - #162
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Yomega's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Warforged are made of metal so a rust monster completly eats you after 2 rounds 3 if your lucky

  13. - Top - End - #163
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2009

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by hymer View Post
    I'm with Telok on this.
    For a given value of RAW, sure. If they'd used 'into' instead of 'in' I'd have agreed. Can go both ways as it is now, leaning on the intention that 'jam' means 'make stuck where it is'.
    We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

    Quote Originally Posted by hymer View Post
    Does it really seem that way to you? Because to me it seems quite the opposite. There's all the difference between Intimidate and Diplomacy as far as I can see.
    Rules Compendium page 44 says that the only reason we have Open Locks is due to legacy, and suggests you replace it with Disable Device.

    Quote Originally Posted by hymer View Post
    Anyone with a big enough hammer can take the lock apart. That doesn't take much knowledge of locks. I can disassemble most of my electronic equipment, but even if I took careful notes, it might not work properly when I've assembled it again. Because I don't know why what goes where or what gets permanently wrecked if I take it apart.
    Also Disable Device does not, to me at least, read like an ability used for taking things carefully apart so you can reassemble them later. It's for wrecking things, albeit in subtle ways.

    Aside from that, the house rules at our table make OL and DD into a single skill (like MS/Hide and Spot/Listen). So it's not that I disagree with the idea as such.
    You can make a DC 20 Disable Device check to disarm and reset a simple trap (note: although the book doesn't say simple trap, it is a DC 25 check to disarm a complex trap). That suggests to me a level of care that would help you take apart a lock and put it back together. Also it requires thieves tools so you'd probably be making the same kind of actions as opening the lock.
    See when a tree falls in the forest, and there's no one there to hear it, you can bet we've bought the vinyl.
    -Snow White

  14. - Top - End - #164
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    @ The Random NPC:

    I don't have the Rules Compedium, so I'll have to take your word for that. And, I agree, we disagree. :) Though it's almost entirely academic, of course, the best sort of disagreement.
    Quote Originally Posted by Col. Sherman T. Potter
    The itch is mightier than the stench.

  15. - Top - End - #165
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    AssassinGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2009

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Yeah, the Rules Compendium is basically errata that you have to pay for, but I find it useful, being the rules lawyer I am.
    See when a tree falls in the forest, and there's no one there to hear it, you can bet we've bought the vinyl.
    -Snow White

  16. - Top - End - #166
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Goblin

    Join Date
    Nov 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    My DM Interpreted that the Warlock was able to activate magic items equipped on other people including enemies.

  17. - Top - End - #167
    Titan in the Playground
     
    TuggyNE's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Pondering turns of phrase
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by javijuji View Post
    My DM Interpreted that the Warlock was able to activate magic items equipped on other people including enemies.
    Necklace of Fireballs: the gift that keeps on giving.
    Quote Originally Posted by Water_Bear View Post
    That's RAW for you; 100% Rules-Legal, 110% silly.
    Quote Originally Posted by hamishspence View Post
    "Common sense" and "RAW" are not exactly on speaking terms
    Projects: Homebrew, Gentlemen's Agreement, DMPCs, Forbidden Knowledge safety, and Top Ten Worst. Also, Quotes and RACSD are good.

    Anyone knows blue is for sarcas'ing in"Take 10 SAN damage from Dark Orchid"Use of gray may indicate nitpickingGreen is sincerity

  18. - Top - End - #168
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Kelb_Panthera's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Yomega View Post
    Warforged are made of metal so a rust monster completly eats you after 2 rounds 3 if your lucky
    Oh ick that is a bad one.

    Please tell me someone corrected him and/or smacked the taste out of his mouth.
    I am not seaweed. That's a B.

    Praise I've received
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by ThiagoMartell View Post
    Kelb, recently it looks like you're the Avatar of Reason in these forums, man.
    Quote Originally Posted by LTwerewolf View Post
    [...] bringing Kelb in on your side in a rules fight is like bringing Mike Tyson in on your side to fight a toddler. You can, but it's such massive overkill.
    A quick outline on building a homebrew campaign

    Avatar by Tiffanie Lirle

  19. - Top - End - #169
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Starbuck_II's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelb_Panthera View Post
    Oh ick that is a bad one.

    Please tell me someone corrected him and/or smacked the taste out of his mouth.
    Don't worry, page 23 of ECS book says he take damage from a Rust monster, 2d6 damage Reflex 1/2 DC 17 (instead of being destroyed like normal metal).

  20. - Top - End - #170
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    toapat's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelb_Panthera View Post
    Oh ick that is a bad one.

    Please tell me someone corrected him and/or smacked the taste out of his mouth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck_II View Post
    Don't worry, page 23 of ECS book says he take damage from a Rust monster, 2d6 damage Reflex 1/2 DC 17 (instead of being destroyed like normal metal).
    Why would composite plated WF be eaten by a rust monster? only their Internal structual skeleton is made of metal, the rest is rope and wood, so why would a rust monster go for the chew disgusting fiber guy instead of the fighter's longsword?


    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    I use Red when I'm angry, I use blue when I'm excited.
    Drow avatar @ myself

  21. - Top - End - #171
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Starbuck_II's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    Why would composite plated WF be eaten by a rust monster? only their Internal structual skeleton is made of metal, the rest is rope and wood, so why would a rust monster go for the chew disgusting fiber guy instead of the fighter's longsword?
    I'm guessing it is like metal alloy over wood, so the rust monbster eats the alloy?

  22. - Top - End - #172
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Kelb_Panthera's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2009

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck_II View Post
    Don't worry, page 23 of ECS book says he take damage from a Rust monster, 2d6 damage Reflex 1/2 DC 17 (instead of being destroyed like normal metal).
    I know, that's why he can be corrected as well as smacked, instead of just smacked for making a bad houserule.
    I am not seaweed. That's a B.

    Praise I've received
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by ThiagoMartell View Post
    Kelb, recently it looks like you're the Avatar of Reason in these forums, man.
    Quote Originally Posted by LTwerewolf View Post
    [...] bringing Kelb in on your side in a rules fight is like bringing Mike Tyson in on your side to fight a toddler. You can, but it's such massive overkill.
    A quick outline on building a homebrew campaign

    Avatar by Tiffanie Lirle

  23. - Top - End - #173
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    toapat's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck_II View Post
    I'm guessing it is like metal alloy over wood, so the rust monbster eats the alloy?
    Composite plating is Bark


    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    I use Red when I'm angry, I use blue when I'm excited.
    Drow avatar @ myself

  24. - Top - End - #174
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lord Vukodlak's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007

    Default Re: Worst interpretation of the rules ever?

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    Composite plating is Bark
    No it isn't, first if you look at the picture of a warforged it clearly has metal on its outer body. And as stated above the campaign setting book says warforged are vunerable to rusting attacks.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •