Dysfunctional Rules VI: Magic Circle Against Errata

[Necroticplague]

Technically, it keeps the ignition bit even if the descriptor gets changed to [Cold] via that feat whose name I can't remember, so I'm not sure how relevant Immunity to Fire is.

Energy Substitution?

[Fax Celestis]

If you can't take damage from fire, are you really combustible, though?

Take a piece of paper. Cast energy immunity on it. It is now a combustible object that is immune to fire. Fireball would light it (ineffectively) on fire.

[georgie_leech]

Energy Substitution?

That's the one.

[nedz]

Take a piece of paper. Cast energy immunity on it. It is now a combustible object that is immune to fire. Fireball would light it (ineffectively) on fire.

Unfortunately combustible objects are not defined (Thread 1 - Page 44) so your paper is quite safe even without the magical protection.

[Curmudgeon]

Unfortunately combustible objects are not defined (Thread 1 - Page 44) so your paper is quite safe even without the magical protection.

That's not completely true. Some objects are stated as being combustible. The Dungeon Master's Guide refers to just a few items as flammable:

• (uncovered) barrels of oil
• a dried-out forest floor
• unprotected wood, paper, and cloth in a Fire-Dominant plane

A couple of spells provide additional items to the list.

Flammable materials, such as cloth, paper, parchment, and thin wood burn if the flames touch them.

A flame dagger can ignite combustible materials such as parchment, straw, dry sticks, cloth, and so on.

Stormwrack on page 31 has rules for the chances of parts of a wooden ship catching fire depending on the attack type. Beyond these few particulars it'll be an individual DM's call whether something is combustible. However, paper is definitely not safe from fire.

Having something listed as a dysfunction in the rules is not the same as being absent some proper attention in the RAW.

[deuxhero]

This one is probably just being obtuse but...

A disguise kit is "exhausted" after 10 uses. It's not "used up" it's "exhausted" so it "moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –6 penalty to Strength and Dexterity" (until it gets an hours rest) but you can still use it.

[Inevitability]

This one is probably just being obtuse but...

A disguise kit is "exhausted" after 10 uses. It's not "used up" it's "exhausted" so it "moves at half speed, cannot run or charge, and takes a –6 penalty to Strength and Dexterity" (until it gets an hours rest) but you can still use it.

No, no, obviously you can't use it anymore because it's Strength dropped below the point where it could carry all the grime, clothes and fake plastic familiars, so the kit now breaks open or something. See? Perfectly sensible!

[Venger]

Fiend of blasphemy's sponsor cultist ability has no mechanical effect whatsoever.

[The Viscount]

Animate with the Spirit is a bizarre spell that summons a celestial creature to possess a corpse, which is then treated as if it were alive. The spirit animating the corpse can make use of "innate abilities the creature possessed in life", mentioning troll's regeneration as an example. Weird wording but workable, so we get special qualities. But then "the spirit can't choose to activate the host body's extraordinary or supernatural abilities, and the host body's spells and spell-like abilities do not stay with the body." So I don't know what you get because there is contradiction here, and innate abilities are not defined beyond not being class derived.

[Gemini476]

Animate with the Spirit is a bizarre spell that summons a celestial creature to possess a corpse, which is then treated as if it were alive. The spirit animating the corpse can make use of "innate abilities the creature possessed in life", mentioning troll's regeneration as an example. Weird wording but workable, so we get special qualities. But then "the spirit can't choose to activate the host body's extraordinary or supernatural abilities, and the host body's spells and spell-like abilities do not stay with the body." So I don't know what you get because there is contradiction here, and innate abilities are not defined beyond not being class derived.

Isn't a troll's regeneration an entirely passive effect? I'm pretty sure that you don't actually need to activate it, although feel free to correct me.

[TypoNinja]

Fiend of blasphemy's sponsor cultist ability has no mechanical effect whatsoever.

Could you paste the text of the ability? Or at least tell us what book and page to go looking?

[Gemini476]

Could you paste the text of the ability? Or at least tell us what book and page to go looking?

It's from Fiend Folio, alongside the other Fiends of X that are moderately popular in the TO community.

Sponsor Worshiper (Su):A fiend of blasphemy that has reached at least 3rd level can channel spellcasting ability from its own fiendish master to mortals with levels in the cleric class. A fiend can sponsor a cleric whose level is no higher than twice the fiend’s class level. Thus, a 3rd-level fiend of blasphemy can sponsor a cleric of up to 6th level, who receives access to the full complement of cleric spells as well as any two domains selected from those offered by the fiend’s master.

It basically allows clerics to worship the Fiend of Blasphemy rather than a god or ideal. Since, y'know, the entire class is about it making a cult around itself.

I don't really see the dysfunction here - perhaps someone could elaborate?

[Erik Vale]

That mechanically it does nothing, as you can worship other people anyway.
At least, I think that's what is claimed.

[Gemini476]

That mechanically it does nothing, as you can worship other people anyway.
At least, I think that's what is claimed.

The idea is that you don't want them to worship other people, since luring souls away from the gods and into eternal damnation in the lower planes is the entire schtick of the Fiend of Blasphemy. Oh yeah, and you're specifically luring them into the "employ" of your fiendish master.

If they're worshipping a god and are devoted enough to get spells from them, that undermines it a bit.

[Necroticplague]

The idea is that you don't want them to worship other people, since luring souls away from the gods and into eternal damnation in the lower planes is the entire schtick of the Fiend of Blasphemy. Oh yeah, and you're specifically luring them into the "employ" of your fiendish master.

If they're worshipping a god and are devoted enough to get spells from them, that undermines it a bit.

The point is that a cleric can already worship you and manage to draw spells from it anyway, regardless of your own abilities. Plus, archfiends already have their own explicit abilities that let them grant spells, so your ability is irrelevant. Heck, you don't even have to exist for a cleric to be able to draw their spells from worshiping you (just ask the Becoming God).

[illyahr]

The point is that a cleric can already worship you and manage to draw spells from it anyway, regardless of your own abilities. Plus, archfiends already have their own explicit abilities that let them grant spells, so your ability is irrelevant. Heck, you don't even have to exist for a cleric to be able to draw their spells from worshiping you (just ask the Becoming God).

Agreed. Mechanically, this ability does nothing. It doesn't give you extra abilities, it doesn't provide any statistical advantage.

However, lack of mechanical function is only a dysfunction when it is supposed to have a mechanical function. This is just a normal fluff ability

[georgie_leech]

Agreed. Mechanically, this ability does nothing. It doesn't give you extra abilities, it doesn't provide any statistical advantage.

However, lack of mechanical function is only a dysfunction when it is supposed to have a mechanical function. This is just a normal fluff ability

In other words, it's the designers underestimating how loosely their language on worshipping Causes can be interpreted. Their idea of a Cause was Righteousness or Justice or Suffering or Sacrifice. It was not Tony Who Lives Down the Street.

[Chronos]

I'm not sure if this one was intended or not... but the Planar Familiar spell can only be cast on your class-feature companion, such as a familiar, animal companion, or mount. And what spell list is it found on? Only cleric, the one caster who doesn't have such a companion. It's not completely unusable, since there are multiclassed clerics, and anyone else could UMD a scroll of it, but it seems odd to have a cleric-only spell that can't be used by a straight cleric.

[Venger]

Berserker's beast shape has a number of daily uses, but has no duration.

[NeoPhoenix0]

Berserker's beast shape has a number of daily uses, but has no duration.

Are you talking about the Berserk from deities and demigods?

If so, then as i understand it once you use beast shape you can use it to transform between hybrid and animal form but there is no mechanic for ever returning to human form without magic, or maybe a magic dead zone.

edit: found the can always turn back into a human text. so the uses just let you turn back and forth more often. doesn't seem all that dysfunctional.

[Venger]

Are you talking about the Berserk from deities and demigods?

If so, then as i understand it once you use beast shape you can use it to transform between hybrid and animal form but there is no mechanic for ever returning to human form without magic, or maybe a magic dead zone.

edit: found the can always turn back into a human text. so the uses just let you turn back and forth more often. doesn't seem all that dysfunctional.

Yes, that's what I'm talking about.

Although, once you morph into a whale, why would you ever want to change back?

[Chronos]

So you can talk, use items, and walk around on land?

[nedz]

I'm not sure if this one was intended or not... but the Planar Familiar spell can only be cast on your class-feature companion, such as a familiar, animal companion, or mount. And what spell list is it found on? Only cleric, the one caster who doesn't have such a companion. It's not completely unusable, since there are multiclassed clerics, and anyone else could UMD a scroll of it, but it seems odd to have a cleric-only spell that can't be used by a straight cleric.

It also works on special mounts and animal companions too — which aren't very common Cleric class features.

Also, why did you use https in your link ? My browser had a fit.

[Venger]

So you can talk, use items, and walk around on land?

pearl of speech, hand of the man, and flight item of choice.

[Chronos]

Also, why did you use https in your link ? My browser had a fit.

Because that's the version of the link Google sent me to. But if it works without, I'll remove it, because there's no reason to need security on that page.

Incidentally, it also appears that both the old links and the archive ones work now. I used the archive version because who knows when WotC will switch back.

[Sith_Happens]

Denizens of the Playground, I come bearing good news! I have found what may very well be the only existing example of what "spellcaster level" is supposed to mean:

Necromancer (Ex): The yathrinshee has unsurpassed power over death. When she casts spells from the school of necromancy, all her spellcaster levels stack for the purpose of determining her effective caster level. She does not gain higher-level spells any faster than normal or gain any additional spells per day, but the spells she casts are much more effective.

For example, a 5th-level cleric/3rd-level wizard/3rd-level yathrinshee has gained two effective level increases in both her cleric class and her wizard class, giving her the spellcasting ability of a 7th-level cleric and a 5th-level wizard. Thus, when she casts any necromancy spell, whether it is arcane or divine, her effective caster level is 12th (cleric 7th + wizard 5th).

Assuming the bolded is authoritative (which it should be given the previously-demonstrated lack of any conflicting definitions), your "spellcaster level" in a given class is your effective level in that class for the purpose of determining spells per day.

[Lightlawbliss]

Denizens of the Playground, I come bearing good news! I have found what may very well be the only existing example of what "spellcaster level" is supposed to mean:



Assuming the bolded is authoritative (which it should be given the previously-demonstrated lack of any conflicting definitions), your "spellcaster level" in a given class is your effective level in that class for the purpose of determining spells per day.

small (actually, rather big) problem: it says "For example". I'm sure we all know how well Wizards does with examples.

[georgie_leech]

small (actually, rather big) problem: it says "For example". I'm sure we all know how well Wizards does with examples.

Lacking contradictory rules text, the example would be defining. Unless we can actually find rules text it holds, and if we can find such text... well, problem solved.

[Telonius]

Here's one I just noticed: the item descriptions of the Epic items don't contain any alignment components. So, while Demon Armor has the [Evil] descriptor, Armor of the Abyssal Horde does not. (EDIT: Not sure what the page notation is in the Epic Level Handbook, I'm going from the SRD).

[Brookshw]

Has anyone discussed Catapults yet? Strikes me as a bit odd they're specifically exempted from the line of sight fules due to the shot being sent high into the air and then coming down. And yet they have no such rules exempting them from line of effect. At least that's something I noticed on the SRD. Catapults, can't shoot over walls