Dysfunctional Rules IX: 1d3 Dysfunctions from the 8th Level List

[No brains]

Doesn't that run aground of the rules of Line of Effect? I thought LoE needed a 1-foot aperture for the effect to pass through. Is that a thing in 3.5?

[Jormengand]

While a fireball can score a critical hit in this circumstance, it doesn't actually do anything - the effect of a normal hit is the fireball passing through the narrow opening, which can't really be doubled.

That's not what a critical hit means:

A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together.

It multiplies the damage dealt by the attack, not the effect of the attack hitting.

[InvisibleBison]

That's not what a critical hit means:



It multiplies the damage dealt by the attack, not the effect of the attack hitting.

Yes, but the attack roll that enables the fireball bead to pass through a small opening doesn't do any damage. So a critical would make it do twice nothing, which is still nothing.

[Nifft]

Yes, but the attack roll that enables the fireball bead to pass through a small opening doesn't do any damage. So a critical would make it do twice nothing, which is still nothing.

On a critical hit, the virtual fireball particle behaves like two separate wave-forms, and interferes with itself.

[Jormengand]

Yes, but the attack roll that enables the fireball bead to pass through a small opening doesn't do any damage. So a critical would make it do twice nothing, which is still nothing.

No attack roll ever deals any damage. The attack, however, deals 1d6 points of fire damage per level, which is rolled twice and combined in case of a critical hit. A critical hit mutliplies the damage dealt by the attack, not by the attack roll, because attacks, not attack rolls, deal damage. It's not the attack roll which scores a critical hit, but the attack itself:

"A spell that requires an attack roll can score a critical hit. A spell attack that requires no attack roll cannot score a critical hit."
"If an attack that causes ability damage scores a critical hit..."

The damage which is doubled is the damage the attack deals, not the damage that is dealt as a direct consequence of the attack roll succeeding.

[georgie_leech]

An archer critically hits a puddle of oil to set it on fire with a flaming arrow. Does it deal 1d3 or 2d3 fire damage per round?

[Nifft]

An archer critically hits a puddle of oil to set it on fire with a flaming arrow. Does it deal 1d3 or 2d3 fire damage per round?

Ooo ooo use a Flaming Burst arrow.

[Jormengand]

An archer critically hits a puddle of oil to set it on fire with a flaming arrow. Does it deal 1d3 or 2d3 fire damage per round?

The oil being on fire is not an attack. Fireball is an attack.

[Nifft]

The oil being on fire is not an attack. Fireball is an attack.

Setting the oil on fire did require an attack roll.

Getting the fireball inside an arrow slit did require an attack roll -- but the fireball would cause damage to an area even if you missed the "attack", since the only thing the attack roll determines is the location of detonation. The damage isn't determined by the attack, merely the area of effect. On a crit, should ~two~ areas be affected?

If determining the fireball's location counts as an attack, how is setting the oil on fire not an attack?

[Jormengand]

An archer critically hits a puddle of oil to set it on fire with a flaming arrow. Does it deal 1d3 or 2d3 fire damage per round?

1d3, because puddles of oil are not subject to critical hits.

Serious answer: 1d3, because the attack is critically hitting, not the oil. Dealing 1d3 points of fire damage per round is a property of oil, not part of the attack you're making with the arrow.

If, however, you attempted to use a meteor swarm to set the oil on fire, and the oil were somehow subject to critical hits, then the fire damage would be multiplied, not just the bludgeoning damage.

EDIT: I didn't realise I sent the first version of this - stupid internet - but this stands as my response.

EDIT EDIT: To be clear, all the critical hit does is double the damage from the attack. I have no idea where you're getting "Two areas are affected" from.

[georgie_leech]

And if I instead set it on fire with Scorching Ray? Then a spell involving an attack roll is doing the critical-ing

[Jormengand]

And if I instead set it on fire with Scorching Ray? Then a spell involving an attack roll is doing the critical-ing

Yes, so your spell will deal double damage to the oil, namely 8d6. The oil, on the other hand, will not hit anyone at all, let alone critically, and therefore will deal normal damage with its burning effect. Similarly, a creature taking an attack of opportunity against you will not deal double damage (unless they hit critically) because neither of those is damage dealt by the spell, even if they are at length things which have come to pass due to the spell. The oil catching on fire is also one of many "Effects of the attack roll", incidentally, because if you'd missed then the oil wouldn't have caught on fire either. On the other hand, if you take the "Effects of the attack roll are doubled" line - which seems to have been made up on the spot - then the oil will catch on fire and catch on fire.

Similarly, if you use meteor swarm to set the oil on fire, the meteor in question will deal double damage to everyone - 4d6 bludgeoning and 12d6 fire to the oil and 12d6 fire to everyone else - and the oil will still only do damage once.

[PallentisLunam]

Vampire clerics gain the ability to rebuke undead but if they do, they both rebuke themselves because they're the closest undead and recoil from themselves because a vampire recoils from any creature presenting a holy symbol which is necessary to rebuke undead.

Well then it's probably in the vampire's best interest to invest in alternative uses for their turning attempts or simply stick to bolstering undead, and they do not have to recoil because turning undead merely requires presenting your holy symbol and vampires only recoil from strongly presented holy symbols

Alternatively even if the same procedure is required for two different actions they are still different actions. Just because holding a vampire at bay and turning undead are both standard actions that require the use of a holy symbol they are separate and distinct actions and doing one is not the same as doing the other.

[Jormengand]

Irrespective of whether presenting your holy symbol is a different type of action from strongly presenting your holy symbol...

Vargouilles are weird: they can turn all manner of creatures (including other vargouilles?) into vargouilles via a transformation which makes no sense if the target isn't vaguely humanoid or at least mammalian.

Apostles of peace may wear, but not own, magic items that protect them because they all have Vows of Poverty.

[Nifft]

Apostles of peace may wear, but not own, magic items that protect them because they all have Vows of Poverty.

Now I'm picturing a chain-gang composed of enslaved Apostles of Peace.

Magical chains, of course. The chains are worn, but not owned.

[Sgt. Cookie]

If a "lack of a rule covering this" counts as a dysfunction, there aren't actually any rules covering powerful waves. Of the "crashing over the coast and into you" kind. Not even in Stormwrack. Nada. Apparently, tsunamis don't exist in D&D.

[Jormengand]

Talismans of pure good and ultimate evil have 6 charges but don't expend any to function.

[Inevitability]

If a "lack of a rule covering this" counts as a dysfunction, there aren't actually any rules covering powerful waves. Of the "crashing over the coast and into you" kind. Not even in Stormwrack. Nada. Apparently, tsunamis don't exist in D&D.

There's the druid spell...

Maybe all tsunamis are created by awakened shark druids?

[Luccan]

There's the druid spell...

Maybe all tsunamis are created by awakened shark druids?

This guy?

[Nifft]

A Caryatid Column (FF, p.30) will automatically break any non-magical melee weapon used to attack it. A level 3 (or lower) Monk's unarmed strike is both a natural and manufactured melee weapon. If a level 3 (or lower) Monk attacks a Caryatid Column, the Monk's unarmed strike automatically breaks and becomes useless.

[PallentisLunam]

I'm away from my books atm so working off the SRD, ignore this if the wording is different, but it would appear that a barbarian with the Whirling Frenzy ACF doesn't actually get a bonus to their AC while frenzied.

Evidence:

A barbarian with this variant form of rage doesn't gain the normal bonuses when he enters a rage. Instead, when a barbarian with whirling frenzy enters a rage, he temporarily gains a +4 bonus to Strength and a +2 dodge bonus to Armor Class and on Reflex saves... Whirling frenzy is otherwise identical to the standard barbarian rage in all other ways.

Emphasis mine. However, a standard barbarian's -2 to AC while raging is not a bonus, so it would be retained meaning that a frenzy barbarian's AC has a net 0 modifier while frenzied.

[Debatra]

I'm away from my books atm so working off the SRD, ignore this if the wording is different, but it would appear that a barbarian with the Whirling Frenzy ACF doesn't actually get a bonus to their AC while frenzied.

Evidence:



Emphasis mine. However, a standard barbarian's -2 to AC while raging is not a bonus, so it would be retained meaning that a frenzy barbarian's AC has a net 0 modifier while frenzied.

Hmm, I believe you're right.

[Jormengand]

A Caryatid Column (FF, p.30) will automatically break any non-magical melee weapon used to attack it. A level 3 (or lower) Monk's unarmed strike is both a natural and manufactured melee weapon. If a level 3 (or lower) Monk attacks a Caryatid Column, the Monk's unarmed strike automatically breaks and becomes useless.

I tried that with VoPeace, but unfortunately it doesn't work:

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

As far as someone with VoPeace is concerned, destroying a weapon may be in some sense "Improving" it. I don't know whether the caryatid column has the same sensibilities. In any case, that's clearly not what enhance or improve means.

[Boggartbae]

In Pathfinder, when a creature with the Ferocity special ability goes below 0 HP, with zero points of nonlethal damage marked, it will fall unconscious because its nonlethal damage total, which in this case is zero, is higher than its hotpoint total, which would be a negative number. This is because Ferocity only prevents you from going unconscious due to your hit point total going below zero, but it doesn't do anything to stop nonlethal damage at all.

[ShurikVch]

I tried that with VoPeace, but unfortunately it doesn't work:

As far as someone with VoPeace is concerned, destroying a weapon may be in some sense "Improving" it. I don't know whether the caryatid column has the same sensibilities. In any case, that's clearly not what enhance or improve means.

For what it's worth, Caryatid Column's Break Weapon (unlike the VoPeace) doesn't says "manufactured weapon", just "melee weapon".
Unarmed Strike is certainly a melee weapon - thus qualify, "manufactured" or not

[Malimar]

In Pathfinder, when a creature with the Ferocity special ability goes below 0 HP, with zero points of nonlethal damage marked, it will fall unconscious because its nonlethal damage total, which in this case is zero, is higher than its hotpoint total, which would be a negative number. This is because Ferocity only prevents you from going unconscious due to your hit point total going below zero, but it doesn't do anything to stop nonlethal damage at all.

I think the same is true of the Diehard feat (in both editions), which has probably been covered before.

[Nifft]

I tried that with VoPeace, but unfortunately it doesn't work:

As far as someone with VoPeace is concerned, destroying a weapon may be in some sense "Improving" it. I don't know whether the caryatid column has the same sensibilities. In any case, that's clearly not what enhance or improve means.

Contrary to that, I read the ab--

For what it's worth, Caryatid Column's Break Weapon (unlike the VoPeace) doesn't says "manufactured weapon", just "melee weapon".
Unarmed Strike is certainly a melee weapon - thus qualify, "manufactured" or not

--ility to apply to, what's that?

I've been Swordsage'd?

I didn't feel a th-- *dies*

[nailbudday]

I vaguely remember this being mentioned in one of the other threads but it's not in the handbook and I'm terribly lazy. Anyhoo-

Level 5 warshapers get either Flashmorph, which allows you to assume your alternate form as a move action, and Multimorph, which allows them to change form multiple times in a single usage as a standard action. Which one you get is determined based on how you get to the alternate form: with Shapechanger subtype, Change Shape and Polymorph as an SLA(only as an sla, this may or may not break something if you enter with it as Su but I couldn't find anything that had that) you get Flashmorph; and Polymorph as a spell, Polymorph as an SLA useable less often than at will and Wildshape get Multimorph.

The issue then, is that a Polymorph SLA useable not-at-will qualifies for BOTH abilities. This isn't solved by choosing the one you want because there's no choice you just get assigned the one that fits at level-up. One says form changing is a move action, and one says you can swap forms as a standard action. So which one is it?



Edit: Not only has this already been mentioned in this thread, I was the one that mentioned it. Serves me right for posting late at night I suppose.

[Blue Jay]

I vaguely remember this being mentioned in one of the other threads but it's not in the handbook and I'm terribly lazy. Anyhoo-

Level 5 warshapers get either Flashmorph, which allows you to assume your alternate form as a move action, and Multimorph, which allows them to change form multiple times in a single usage as a standard action. Which one you get is determined based on how you get to the alternate form: with Shapechanger subtype, Change Shape and Polymorph as an SLA(only as an sla, this may or may not break something if you enter with it as Su but I couldn't find anything that had that) you get Flashmorph; and Polymorph as a spell, Polymorph as an SLA useable less often than at will and Wildshape get Multimorph.

The issue then, is that a Polymorph SLA useable not-at-will qualifies for BOTH abilities. This isn't solved by choosing the one you want because there's no choice you just get assigned the one that fits at level-up. One says form changing is a move action, and one says you can swap forms as a standard action. So which one is it?

Edit: Not only has this already been mentioned in this thread, I was the one that mentioned it. Serves me right for posting late at night I suppose.

I think you've just misread the text.

A 5th-level warshaper gains one of two class features. If the warshaper has the ability to change form at will, such as from the change shape ability, the shapechanger subtype, or a polymorph spell-like ability, it gains the flashmorph class feature, allowing it to change form as a move action.

It doesn't say "...change form at will or polymorph SLA"; it says "...change form at will, such as polymorph SLA." So, the actual criterion is "at will," and a polymorph SLA is just one possible example of such an ability. So, Flashmorph is for abilities that are usable at will, and Multimorph is for abilities that are not usable at will.

[nailbudday]

You're right about Polymorph SLAs, but that still doesn't address stuff like Slyth(slyth don't actually have the shapechanger subtype despite having Alternate Form apparently) Hengeyokai Druids, who would get both options.