Search results

Fair enough. Good gaming!

Interestingly, use of "effect" in the singular in the preceding does not exist in 3.0, only 3.5. As usual, lots of stuff that was clear in the original gets muddied in the revision.

Actually, in context, I always see "effect" used in reference to a magical ability. Consider the Glossary for "fear effect", "line of effect", etc. Or in the PHB under "Special Abilities": "These effects come in two types: spell-like and supernatural". To my knowledge, every place in the core...

I'll try one more time. Pricing new magic items is a creative design process. There are no rules for pricing thems -- only suggestive guidelines. (Exceptions: Potions, scrolls, and wands, as ruled in the PHB.) You may as well ask "How did they price a courtier's outfit at 30 gp?"

It's priced at the level the designers think is the value of the item. From the DMG, "Behind the Curtain: Magic Item Gold Piece Values":

Fair enough. Now, the only way I can personally make descriptive sense out of "Cleave", is if it's a blow so bloody and destructive that it creates a blinding mess, and so shocking that it stuns another enemy in the area into momentarily letting his guard down (and hence a free attack). With...

Your second option is how it was handled in 1st & 2nd Edition. Your first option is how it is handled in 3.0 & 3.5 Edition.

Good point. Clearly it doesn't get used for anything except the minimum-on-the-creator requirement. Oh, wait... (Note that this issue is, again, a 3.5-only confusion.)

How so? It says under "Aiming a Spell" that an "effect" may by mobile, such as "a summoned monster". It doesn't say "summoned monster(s)".

3.0 DMG p. 69, "Movement": Duly stressed. :)

Also yes! Note that's fundamentally the same language copy-and-pasted since 1st Ed. AD&D.

...and that they refuse to fix or clarify them. That's up for you to decide, by arguing about what's "Primary Source" for this versus that. Or, arguably, the Primary Source Rule would not be correct, per the supplements. Like the FAQ? Like 3.0 supplements updating polymorph rules? Etc.

Keep in mind that I mostly still play 3.0, but I keep informed on 3.5 changes and debates. When I saw the 3.5 "Errata Rule: Primary Sources", my heart immediately sank, and it became case study #1 as to why I would have to avoid the 3.5 rules set. When I read it I could see: (1) WOTC confessing...

Counterspelling really amazes me by how limited it is (and hence what a bad bet it is to use it under any circumstances I've thought of). I've had a number of threads recently about counterspelling, and every time there's a new limitation outlined. Among them: (1) Need for caster to ready an...

Because that's how they wrote the variant.

FAQ says yes. Don't like the ruling.

3.0 DMG p. 62, "Keeping Things Moving: Simultaneity": This is one of those times.

From the Hypertext SRD ( http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#otherClassVariants ): That is, the wildshape ability is gained at the same levels as for Druid.

How about accompaniment with another instrument? As was recently said in a band practice I was at, "When you screw up alone, you screw up the whole song; if you screw up in a band of 4 people, 75% of the song is still there."

#1, Yes. Rarely.