D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 problematic rules list needed

[francisca]

FWIW, someone on the WotC boards started a thread for "problematic spells". A lot of the stuff he's posted has since been corrected, but you can find it here.

That's a pretty long list.

 

[Corlon]

That's a pretty long list.

look at the bottom, there's only 10 that they felt were good spells

 

[Kae'Yoss]

As for problem areas, I'd say a few spells count, like:

- Shapechange (this one is really, really powerful)

Is this before or after errata (errata makes it 1HD/CL, max 25 HD)

Does Vorpal trump Fortification on armor.
(No - yes, we're Vorpal haters)

The way I understand it, immunity from critical hits won't save you. Your head gets severed. It's just that many immune creatures don't have a head (like oozes and many aberrations) and others function just fine without one (most undead and constructs)

So your head would fall off even then.

Hence the advice to houserule (or ban) vorpal (a good house-rule is making a crit with a vorpal weapon a coup-de-grace)

Metamagic Rods and the Sudden metamagic feats.
(We cap these at maximum level castable)

I don't. Rods are magic items and should work - you paid for it, and, after all, a wizard 1 can use a wand of fireballs. And the other is one/day

 

[kjenks]

I am curious if their are any problematic rules that people have uncovered that aren't covered by the 3.5 FAQ or Rules of the Game that they have come up with solutions for.

In essence, every single post on this board meets those criteria. Ditto for the other D&D rules boards:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/Infinite_Monkeys/
http://boards1.wizards.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=8
http://p198.ezboard.com/fgameschat19968frm12

For each question asked, SOMEBODY felt the rules were unclear or hard to find.

For every answer, somebody suggested a solution.

 

[Wrathamon]

Exactly, it would be nice to start an Enworld faq that can be stickied.

But I am really only looking for the top 20 biggest offenders.


also thanks for the link. The D&D board doesnt have a search funcion and I dont have a search function here, it becomes very hard to find what you are looking for.

 

[Piratecat]

Anyone can sort the forums. Want to have some fun? Down at the bottom of the rules forum, set time to "since beginning" and then sort threads either by the number of replies or by the number of views. A lot of those are 3.0, but it's fun to see what the controversial topics have been.

 

[Impeesa]

Not to hijack the thread, but this is less of a problem than it appears;

One thing I've noticed reading these boards and the WotC ones is that this is incredibly common. The majority of complaints about the system seem to stem from a rule that's been modified or misinterpreted. It's not so bad when they recognize that they might be missing something (and I'm not even saying they always are), but people who come out swinging against things they don't like, and then later admit to extensive related houserules or a grievous misunderstanding of the core rules, really annoy me.

Not that this thread is one of those, so, uh... carry on, I guess. I think Wrathamon sort of created a mental image for me of one of those DMs that's actively seeking such a dispute.

--Impeesa--

 

[Wrathamon]

Not that this thread is one of those, so, uh... carry on, I guess. I think Wrathamon sort of created a mental image for me of one of those DMs that's actively seeking such a dispute.

--Impeesa--

Um well first I am not the DM I am one of the players. He hasnt run 3.5 yet and is coming from 3.0 as are all the other players but me.

2nd I am not looking for any disputes... I am looking for clarifications on often misunderstood rules or ones that are actually problematic (loop holes) and what are the common things that people have done to clarfiy or fix. I dont want this to turn into an arguement thread, that would be counter productive.

3rd keep your mental images to yourself buddy!!

 

[Talonne Hauk]

Whether Bluff: Feint trumps Uncanny Dodge.
Why is there no definitive answer for this?


Defining alignment where the rubber meets the road.
Exactly. Alignment should be either a strict mechanic or optional rule.


Mounted combat

Grappling (especially with natural weapons/unarmed strikes)



Those were all on my list, too.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

There are numerous cases where a strict literal reading of the rules appears to give an answer that seems to contravene the designers' intent due to poor wording. Hypersmurf is good at pointing out what an exceedingly literal reading of the rules can lead to; the FAQ also cites some examples. Strict Constructionist versus Original Intent is always a tricky issue.
I'd say these are a few of the core rules issues most likely to actually occur in a game:
1) The lance question. Is a lance wielded in one hand while mounted treated as a 1-handed weapon for all purposes? Big issue for mounted knights with Power Attack.
2) Does Animal Growth stack with wildshape? Are polymorph effects "size-altering magic" or does that term have a a more specific application?
3) Does Silence block the effect of Blasphemy, Holy Word, Word of Chaos, and Dictum?
4) Can Harm kill through massive damage? (the flaw in this is pointed out in the FAQ)

There are lots of things that come up in games that just don't seem to have a clear answer in the RAW - and a few literalist interpretations where "original intent" is a better recourse. The various supplemental books have a lot of half-developed and incompletely compatible material.