Results 1 to 25 of 25
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Telonius's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Wandering in Harrekh
    Gender
    Male

    Default Never noticed this rule before

    While wandering through the SRD, I came upon this strange rule:

    Quote Originally Posted by SRD
    Light Generation
    Fully 30% of magic weapons shed light equivalent to a light spell (bright light in a 20-foot radius, shadowy light in a 40-foot radius). These glowing weapons are quite obviously magical. Such a weapon canít be concealed when drawn, nor can its light be shut off. Some of the specific weapons detailed below always or never glow, as defined in their descriptions.
    I had truly never noticed this before. Anyone else have odd rules they only recently became aware of?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Ireland

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    That's one of my favourite rules. I always make sure my magic weapon glows .
    Dub Club in the Playground
    I need a new signature.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    useful for the cheap adventurer who can't afford light.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Zombie

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    The great state of denial

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    I prefer dunking my hair in shadow caster ink. Perfect for raves.
    Me: I'd get the paladin to help, but we might end up with a kid that believes in fairy tales.
    DM: aye, and it's not like she's been saved by a mysterious little girl and a band of real live puppets from a bad man and worse step-sister to go live with the faries in the happy land.
    Me: Yeah, a knight in shining armour might just bring her over the edge.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Orc in the Playground
     
    KevLar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Huh... never noticed that, either.

    My recent revelations are about incorporeality, etherealness, and the ghost template. I tried to make a ghost paladin for an arena in these lovely forums, and ended up shredding the character sheet. I learned a few things, though.

    For example, if you are a ghost and carry an incorporeal ghost touch weapon, your incorporeal attacks don't ignore armor, natural armor and shield, like the rest of your incorporeal attacks. Which is odd, because the whole purpose of a Ghost Touch weapon is to be, and I quote "more beneficial to the wielder". But that's how it is.

    The last rule I learned (and promptly quit, foaming with rage) is that when you are incorporeal, you don't lose only your natural armor bonus to AC, like the sections for Incorporeal Subtype, Incorporeality AND the Ghost template state. You also lose your armor bonus. And where does it say that, of all places? The PHB glossary. Nowhere else. Not even the Rules Compendium. And no one thought to include that bit to the SRD.

    For even more absurdity, the glossary mentions only armor and natural armor. Not shields. Which makes no sense whatsoever, is obviously an oversight, and I really wanted to hit these people for being so. bloody. sloppy.

    There, I got it off my chest. I feel much better now.
    Avatar lawfully nicked from this xkcd strip.

    And when I say goodnight
    The pictures in my head
    Will dance around my room
    And frolic in my bed

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    vegetalss4's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Land of Magic and Ponies

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by BobVosh View Post
    useful for the cheap adventurer who can't afford light.
    or the adventure that want to use a two-handed weapon but still need a light source
    Remember: Hope springs eternal. The dark days will pass and the sun will shine again.

    The best way to learn something is to ask, so ask without shame.

    Many thanks to smuchmuch for the awesome Ponytar.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by KevLar
    For even more absurdity, the glossary mentions only armor and natural armor. Not shields.
    Which is why most people would consider the main body of the rules to be of greater validity than the glossary. Since it's easy to gloss over (oh no!) in the editing process if you change a rule in the text but forget to change the glossary.

    And which is why RAW is a silly matter and unfit in many cases.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Troll in the Playground
     
    UserClone's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    I dunno, you don't always want to have a glowing neon sign that says, "The Heroes Are HERE!!" by having your weapon pre-drawn.

    Beguiler, you just got served.
    ALL hail DirtyTabs, creator of this wonderful UserClone TRONpony!
    *sigh*
    X Stat to Y Bonus
    Quotes:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by BRC
    Railroading isn't saying "There is a wall there", Railroading is when you say "There is a wall everywhere BUT there"


  9. - Top - End - #9
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Arguably this means two dozen magic arrows are really freakin' bright when you grab them all at once.

    EDIT: Spiked armor glows?

    Spiked shields would if they have Enhancement bonus as a weapon separate from Enhancement as a shield.
    Last edited by Tacoma; 2008-12-17 at 04:50 PM.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    starwoof's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Olympia, Washington
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by Telonius View Post
    While wandering through the SRD, I came upon this strange rule:



    I had truly never noticed this before. Anyone else have odd rules they only recently became aware of?
    I actually used this rule just last week! The party had forgotten torches and nobody had darkvision, but then I exclaimed "but wait! theres a 30% chance that magic weapons glow!" and sure enough, our rogue's sword was a glower.


    A few weeks ago my group had a guest player. We'd never played with him before, but he corrected us on the rules for charging. We always thought charging was +2 to hit, +2 to damage, and -2 to AC. Apparently it does not add to damage, but does add to str checks. We still play it our old way because that's the way we've been doing it for eight years, and we don't like change.
    I used to do avatars on request, feel free to use them.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Heliomance's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Huh. You're right. We play it with a +2 to damage, as well.
    Quotebox
    Spoiler
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalirren View Post
    The only person in the past two pages who has known what (s)he has been talking about is Heliomance.
    Quote Originally Posted by golentan View Post
    I just don't want to have long romantic conversations or any sort of drama with my computer, okay? It knows what kind of porn I watch. I don't want to mess that up by allowing it to judge any of my choices in romance.

    Avatar by Rain Dragon

    Wish building characters for D&D 3.5 was simpler? Try HeroForge Anew! An Excel-based, highly automated character builder. v7.4 now out!

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Orc in the Playground
     
    KevLar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by starwoof View Post
    We always thought charging was +2 to hit, +2 to damage, and -2 to AC. Apparently it does not add to damage, but does add to str checks.
    !
    Where does it say that? I thought it was only Bull Rush checks, not strength checks in general. (That would include Trip attacks, for example.)
    Avatar lawfully nicked from this xkcd strip.

    And when I say goodnight
    The pictures in my head
    Will dance around my room
    And frolic in my bed

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    I want to play in your games. :P

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by KevLar View Post
    !
    Where does it say that? I thought it was only Bull Rush checks, not strength checks in general. (That would include Trip attacks, for example.)
    It would also include Swim. CHARGE *bloosh* +2.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Banned
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Flawse Fell, Geordieland

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimp View Post
    That's one of my favourite rules. I always make sure my magic weapon glows .
    "Your sword's blowing glue!"

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    In addition, if Invisibility removes a torch but not the light it casts, then you could make your sword Invisible and make it look like you have a lightsaber.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by KevLar View Post
    The last rule I learned (and promptly quit, foaming with rage) is that when you are incorporeal, you don't lose only your natural armor bonus to AC, like the sections for Incorporeal Subtype, Incorporeality AND the Ghost template state. You also lose your armor bonus. And where does it say that, of all places? The PHB glossary. Nowhere else. Not even the Rules Compendium. And no one thought to include that bit to the SRD.

    For even more absurdity, the glossary mentions only armor and natural armor. Not shields. Which makes no sense whatsoever, is obviously an oversight, and I really wanted to hit these people for being so. bloody. sloppy.
    The Rules Compendium is one of the few documents that overrides Core Rules. I don't have my books at the moment to quote, but I'm pretty sure it states in the beginning of the Rules Compendium that it overrides ALL previous sources, including the PHB, DMG, and MM. So, if you have access to the Rules Compendium, only use other books for rules if the Rules Compendium does not cover it, as it has all of the latest errata (plus it is much handier for looking most stuff up).

    As for using the glossary, I seem to recall hearing that parts of the index and glossary were copy/pasted from the 3.0 PHB without being updated for 3.5.

    As for sloppy editing, I completely agree. WotC has never had the tightest editing. The 4th edition books are sadly much MUCH sloppier in editing/templating than 3.X books, despite the fact that powers and such are so much more standardized and require stricter editing and templating (in fact, I think this increased standard of templating is what makes the editing errors much more apparent).

    That's why I like the tone of 2nd edition. All of the books claim that the DM has final say and can override them at any time, but the tone of 2E versus 3E/4E is MUCH different. 3E/4E words the rules in such a way as to imply "These are the rules handed down by WotC, and you WILL follow them!", versus 2E which is more like "Here's kind of how we imagine the rules to be. We left some holes in here that you will need to fill in with your own stuff. If you don't like the main version, here are three other variant rules to choose from." Its a matter of Player empowerment (the player can expect the same rules for different DMs and can argue if the DM is "doing things wrong") versus DM empowerment (the DM has full control over the rules and the players don't even have an expectation of what the rules "should be").

    Ok, end of that side rant.

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Yeah I never thought about it like that, but in pretty much ever 2E game we play, we expect and accept that the house rules, classes and races and kits and "where-you're froms" available will change. It's the same game, but using a different salad of variant rules and house rules.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Mar 2007

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by BobVosh View Post
    useful for the cheap adventurer who can't afford light.
    a magic item for the most part is way more expensive then a stick with fire on it.


    As for the Incorp thing. Newer rules go before old rules. Meaning, if its not noted in the Rules Comp. then it's not that way anymore.
    My Current Works


    Quote Originally Posted by Serpentine View Post
    Also I'm pretty sure you're GLaDoS now.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by Innis Cabal View Post
    a magic item for the most part is way more expensive then a stick with fire on it.


    As for the Incorp thing. Newer rules go before old rules. Meaning, if its not noted in the Rules Comp. then it's not that way anymore.
    D&D 3.75?

    Also, a stick with fire on it is inconvenient. Any other light source he can jam into his greasy mop of adventurer's hair and call it a day.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by Innis Cabal View Post
    As for the Incorp thing. Newer rules go before old rules. Meaning, if its not noted in the Rules Comp. then it's not that way anymore.
    Actually, that is slightly imprecise. Core trumps expansion books in a rules disagreement. Obviously, errata to Core books trumps printed core books. The Rules Compendium is an exception to this rule, as it is the only printed book that trumps Core.

    The Rules Compendium was well edited (due to not being under the same time pressure that most "new material" books suffer from, and also vetted by prominent members of the WotC CharOp boards, which included one of my IRL friends), and I have yet to find any significant errors in it. Also, there is no Errata in the Rules Compendium that I am aware of, so you have the complete, most up-to-date rules in the Rules Compendium (including obscure uses for skills that were introduced in random splat books). My only regret was that they didn't get around to fixing drowning rules.

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    They could have if they produced E-book versions. You pay for the download at their site, and from then on you can download new versions. Hit a copy shop to print out the book and spiral-bind it. Cost you like $15 American per copy. And before it prints you can make all the edits you want if you think they got it wrong, or you have house rules.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Artanis's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    BFE
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by Tacoma View Post
    Also, a stick with fire on it is inconvenient.
    Unless it's a flaming club
    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    Girlfriend and Parents: Why do you spend so much money on that stuff?
    Me: Would you rather I spent all my money on alcohol like others in my peer group?
    G&P: You keep spending as much money as you want!
    Spoiler
    Show
    Bossing Around Mad Cats for Fun and Profit: Let's Play MechCommander 2!

    Kicking this LP into overdrive: Let's Play StarCraft 2!

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    OldWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by Tacoma View Post
    They could have if they produced E-book versions. You pay for the download at their site, and from then on you can download new versions. Hit a copy shop to print out the book and spiral-bind it. Cost you like $15 American per copy. And before it prints you can make all the edits you want if you think they got it wrong, or you have house rules.
    That is a really good idea. Of course, piracy would be made much easier (not that it isn't easy, but the average person would be able to copy the stuff easier). Big Corporations (like WotC's parent company, Hasbro) are afraid of this new-fangled e-book system and have the illusion that every single step must be taken to prevent piracy, like not having books an an easily available electronic form. I definitely know they'd hate the editing part. There'd be nothing to stop you from Copy/Pasting the book at giving it to all of your friends. Corporations LOVE control. Just look at the RIAA/MPAA (or, as I like to call them, the Movie And Film Industry Associasion of America, or MAFIAA). Plus, eBooks simultaneously have crappy DRM to stop lots of legitimate uses, and are easy for people to circumvent.

    Or, a more amusing explanation of the problem with your suggestion using a popular form:

    Spoiler
    Show

    Your proposal advocates a

    ( ) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante

    approach to fixing poor-editing/using home-rules. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

    (X) Pirates can easily use it to make more copies of books
    ( ) Legitimate gamer uses would be affected
    ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    ( ) It will stop poor-editing for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    ( ) Players of D&D will not put up with it
    (X) WotC/Hasbro will not put up with it
    ( ) The police will not put up with it
    (X) Requires too much work on part of the players
    ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    ( ) Many Players cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    (X) Most players do not care about this issue
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

    Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for players
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    (X) Crippling DRM in eBooks
    (X) ***hats
    ( ) Jurisdictional problems
    ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    (X) Huge existing investment in Printed Books
    (X) Susceptibility of eBook DRM being broken
    (X) Unwillingness of players to put in an effort of their own
    (X) Armies of pirates
    (X) Eternal arms race involved in pirates and DRM
    (X) Extreme profitability of piracy
    ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
    ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with pirates
    (X) Control-issues on the part of WotC/Hasbro themselves
    (X) Bandwidth costs of hosting eBooks
    (X) Amount of effort in editing an entire Book

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
    been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    (X) Proofreading and hand-editing printed errors in an eBook is hard work.
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    ( ) Playing games should be free
    ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    (X) Professionally printed books are superior to Kinko's printed books
    ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time gamer addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government playing my games
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, ***h0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
    house down!
    Last edited by TMZ_Cinoros; 2008-12-17 at 06:34 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    Default Re: Never noticed this rule before

    Quote Originally Posted by TMZ_Cinoros
    That is a really good idea. Of course, piracy would be made much easier (not that it isn't easy, but the average person would be able to copy the stuff easier). Big Corporations (like WotC's parent company, Hasbro) are afraid of this new-fangled e-book system and have the illusion that every single step must be taken to prevent piracy, like not having books an an easily available electronic form. I definitely know they'd hate the editing part. There'd be nothing to stop you from Copy/Pasting the book at giving it to all of your friends. Corporations LOVE control. Just look at the RIAA/MPAA (or, as I like to call them, the Movie And Film Industry Associasion of America, or MAFIAA).

    Or, a more amusing explanation of the problem with your suggestion using a popular form:

    Spoiler
    Show

    Your proposal advocates a

    ( ) technical ( ) legislative (X) market-based ( ) vigilante

    approach to fixing poor-editing/using home-rules. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

    (X) Pirates can easily use it to make more copies of books
    ( ) Legitimate gamer uses would be affected
    ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    ( ) It will stop poor-editing for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    ( ) Players of D&D will not put up with it
    (X) WotC/Hasbro will not put up with it
    ( ) The police will not put up with it
    (X) Requires too much work on part of the players
    ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    ( ) Many Players cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    (X) Most players do not care about this issue
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

    Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for players
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    (X) Crippling DRM in eBooks
    (X) ***hats
    ( ) Jurisdictional problems
    ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    (X) Huge existing investment in Printed Books
    (X) Susceptibility of eBook DRM being broken
    (X) Unwillingness of players to put in an effort of their own
    (X) Armies of pirates
    (X) Eternal arms race involved in pirates and DRM
    (X) Extreme profitability of piracy
    ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
    ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with pirates
    (X) Control-issues on the part of WotC/Hasbro themselves
    (X) Bandwidth costs of hosting eBooks
    (X) Amount of effort in editing an entire Book

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
    been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    (X) Proofreading and hand-editing printed errors in an eBook is hard work.
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    ( ) Playing games should be free
    ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    (X) Professionally printed books are superior to Kinko's printed books
    ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time gamer addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government playing my games
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
    house down!
    This is a large Win with a side of Win.

    Also, there are PDFs of every book WoTC puts out within a couple weeks of release. If that. One Player who shall remain anonymous mentioned having every 3E/3.5E book, including splatbooks and many third party books, in a heavily compressed PDF library that would almost fit on a CD. He just brought his laptop to game, having bought many of those books but deciding to leave them at home to save on weight. I make no comment on the possibility that he bought them legitimately from RPGNow or something. Who knows?

Posting Permissions

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