Common new DM mistakes list...

[Jeff Wilder]

In D&D [...] even the "agnostics" aren't agnostics in the true sense so much as they just choose not to worship any of them.

Well, depends on your campaign. In campaigns where the gods literally walk alongside the mortals or directly meddle in their affairs, or have in living memory and common knowledge, you're right. But in campaigns where divine intervention is rare or nonexistent, true agnostic viewpoints are certainly possible. Divine magic and the like is not, despite the name, proof of the existence of deities (from the perspective of a fantasy inhabitant possessed of the ability to reason) ... it's only proof of the existence of magic that differs in minor ways from the arcane.


Jeff

 

[Diirk]

*nods* Right. Dodge bonuses are generally the only named bonuses that stack

From the SRD:

"Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don’t generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus works (see Combining Magical Effects, below). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one."

For example, a dwarf that gets a poison spell cast on him, gets a +4 to his save against it (+2 racial vs spells, +2 racial vs poison) not merely +2, as they both stack.

 

[Tatsukun]

From the SRD:

"Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don’t generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus works (see Combining Magical Effects, below). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one."

For example, a dwarf that gets a poison spell cast on him, gets a +4 to his save against it (+2 racial vs spells, +2 racial vs poison) not merely +2, as they both stack.

Updated

-Tatsu

 

[heggland]

3) While it is true that you have to activate an energy weapon (like a +1 flaming sword), the fire lasts forever, and you can sheath the weapon and leave it 'on' forever.

Yes. And if it has multiple energy powers (e.g., a flaming shock weapon), you can activate all of them at once in one standard action.

Are these really uncontested facts?

 

[Tatsukun]

Are these really uncontested facts?

Well, from the FAQ...

The new descriptions for the flaming, frost, and shock
weapon special abilities say that these weapons’ energy
effects work only on command. Why was this changed in
the revision? Does that mean that their wielders must use a
standard action to activate them for each attack? Or do the
energy effects last awhile? If so, how long do they last?
What’s the chance that you burn (or freeze or shock)
yourself when holding onto an activated weapon? Can you
put away an activated weapon without damaging the
scabbard where you store it? What happens if you have
ammunition with these effects? Do you have to activate
each piece of ammunition separately? What happens if you
have a flaming, frost, and shock weapon? Logically, such a
weapon couldn’t exist, but what if it did? Would you have
to activate each property separately? Finally, how does all
this affect flaming burst, icy burst, and shocking burst
weapons? Do these weapons’ flame, frost, and shock
properties have to be activated for the burst powers to
work?

The flaming, frost, and shock weapon special abilities
always have been command activated; the revision just
clarified that.
Activating an energy power requires a standard action, but
once you activate energy power, the power works until you use
another action to deactivate it. You can activate or deactivate
one of these powers on up to 50 pieces of ammunition at the
same time, provided that all the ammunition is in your
possession, all the ammunition is the same kind, and all the
ammunition has the same power.
Any attack you make with an activated weapon deals
energy damage to your foe if you hit—you don’t have to do
anything special to deal energy damage with an activated
weapon.
A burst weapon’s burst power is use activated and it works
even when the weapon’s energy power is not activated (see the
last sentence in each power’s description).
The energy from a flaming, frost, shock, flaming burst, icy
burst, or shocking burst weapon never harms you while you’re
wielding or carrying the activated weapon (see the power
descriptions), and it will not harm your equipment. If you lose
or set down an activated weapon, the energy it produces will
harm other objects it touches, so it is best to deactivate it first.
There’s nothing illogical about a flaming, frost, shock
weapon (at least not within any framework that allows weapons
to generate energy in the first place), and there’s no rule against
such weapons (think of the weapon as having fiery, frosty,
shocking flames). The character creating such a weapon
decides how it can be activated. Most such weapons probably
are made so that the wielders can activate all three powers
simultaneously, or activate them one at a time, as desired.

So, yeah, pretty clear to me.

-Tatsu

 

[Hypersmurf]

Well, from the FAQ...

Bad FAQ! Bad!

-Hyp.

 

[Darkness]

Thread tangent split off to House Rules.

If anyone has questions or comments, e-mail me.

 

[Elric]

I would like to point out that from what I have seen of the MMIII (mainly by having creatures in it used against the party), the designers have started to make the monsters more powerful, to the point where MMIII monsters seem designed for a party with better optimization and higher ability scores than the "not optimized 25 point buy standard."

This could be just seeing very high CR monsters from MMIII, but my guess is that it reflects to some extent a greater understanding of how players create PCs.

Also, I think this can't be emphasized enough: especially for fighter-types, NPCs are (and I mean vastly) inferior to monsters of the same CR unless optimized well. An NPC fighting type is always going to be inferior to a monster with class levels and elite ability scores (A War Troll Monk 2, for example, will be much, much better in combat than a Monk 14).

ECL is horribly messed up for this reason. An Ogre-type has a high ECL because no one wants to see PCs gain all of this extra power, even though none of its abilities are that much more useful for a PC than for a monster (like regeneration would be).

 

[Nail]

I would like to point out that from what I have seen of the MMIII ....(snip)....seem designed for a party with better optimization and higher ability scores than the "not optimized 25 point buy standard."

Agreed. Wholeheartedly agreed.

ECL is horribly messed up for this reason.

The main reason, IMO, is "equipment", rather than powers like regeneration. A significant fraction of a PCs durability (as distinct from "power"), comes from the PCs wealth/equipment. Add that to a monster's abilities, an' ya gots trouble.

Even a heavily optimized class-leveled NPC can't cut it; their lower wealth is a severe hindrance.

***********************
Back On-Topic:

One place new DMs really have problems is with grappling. Ouch.......

 

[reanjr]

Thinking that the Player's Handbook is a rulebook and not a set of guidelines?

Assuming that because Wizards publishes it, it is supposed to fit in every game?

Allowing the spiked chain?

...

(ok, maybe not the spiked chain thing)