Energy substitution

[werk]

The SRD defines the d20 ruleset, while the books define the D&D ruleset. They are not the same thing at all. That said, until they release the Complete Arcane under the OGL, the only d20 feat is the one listed in the SRD -- which allows sonic.

Humph, I hadn't looked at it that way. Probably because I play D&D and use the SRD as a quickreference (which has gotten me into trouble before).

From a D&D perspective, which takes precendence? Complete Arcane or uncorrected 3.0 material? ...from a RAW point of view.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Humph, I hadn't looked at it that way. Probably because I play D&D and use the SRD as a quickreference (which has gotten me into trouble before).

You're not the only one, to be sure. I don't keep a record of the differences, but be aware that there are a few. The most obvious, of course, are the creatures and certain Proper names that are missing. If you are a designer, the d20 is more important. If you are a regular gamer, then probably D&D is more important (or not, really).

From a D&D perspective, which takes precendence? Complete Arcane or uncorrected 3.0 material? ...from a RAW point of view.

I'd put my money on Complete Arcane because it's newer and the feat is less of an add-on. Btw, I wouldn't call it uncorrected. They did publish an update manual, so technically it's corrected.

 

[Artoomis]

Though I cannot find this on th WotC site any more:

Errata Rule: Primary Sources
When you find a disagreement between two D&D® rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees. Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The DUNGEON MASTER's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

So what is the primary source between the modified Dieties book, CA and the d20 3.5 SRD?

Obviously this question is of mere academic interest - it does seem that removing Sonic was a deliberate act done for game balance and so should be the rule one follows.

 

[IcyCool]

Though I cannot find this oin teh WotC site any more:

The primary source rule should be in the errata somewhere, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The discussion about RAW precendence of this SRD or that document is an unwanted diversion in this thread and moves into territory which we don't want in the Rules forum at the moment.

Discuss it in private email by all means, but no more in this thread.

Regards

 

[Artoomis]

The discussion about RAW precendence of this SRD or that document is an unwanted diversion in this thread and moves into territory which we don't want in the Rules forum at the moment.

Discuss it in private email by all means, but no more in this thread.

Regards

Well, fine.

If anyone WANTS to do the academic discussion of how rule precendence works here, start a new thread for it and maybe I'll join in, but I really don't think it's of enough value to even be bothered to do it myself.

FYI:

The precedence rule is indeed in the errata: PHB errata, to be exact.

Finally, to restate my posiiton, I do think the way it's meant to be played is per CA, i.e. without Sonic.