Irritating Munchkin tricks your Players try to argue.

[Murrdox]

Well, as long as the wizard was able to make a jump check sufficient to jump 5' straight up from a standing position, I'd allow it.

I dunno how you come up with 12' though... that must be confusing as a DM to deal with. We don't even use a battlemat in our group (this is changing soon) but we measure everything in 5' increments. I'd have said he was 15' feet away.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

I dunno.. that makes casting a spell while jumping even harder than casting a spell while an orc is smashing you in the face with a mace.

Concentration DC 25 would be the same as trying to cast Burning Hands while taking 14 points of damage.

Well in my opinion the DC's for both Concentration Checks and Spellcraft Checks are way too low on the average.

 

[Skarp Hedin]

Well in my opinion the DC's for both Concentration Checks and Spellcraft Checks are way too low on the average.

Ahh, now that's different.. and I think I may be inclined to agree. With the exception of finding and disarming traps (no full rogue in the party, just a guy with 1 level in the class), my players basically succeed at anything they try (skills-wise), according to the DCs in the Player's Handbook. They're not even all that high level, average of 8. So I've been thinking maybe the DCs in general for skill checks are kind of low. That's a different topic entirely, however.

 

[Henry]

Daniel, you little rules-lawyer! Did you just weasel your way into taking a Concentration check for casting and springing???

Good job!


Seriously, I can see someone trying for something unusual in the name of fun and a good game, as long as everyone involved agrees that the DM's ruling for that game is final. In my campaigns, if someone wants to take up a ruling afterwards, it's fine, but holding up the game by arguing a point during it is a no-no.

 

[drnuncheon]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Irritating Munchkin tricks your Players try to argue.

You can cast a spell while on fire -- you can cast a spell from the back of a galloping horse -- you can cast a spell while someone's impaling you with a spear -- but you can't cast a spell while jumping? That would annoy the bejeezus out of me were I a player.

If you can't attack someone in the middle of your move without having a special feat (Spring Attack)...

...and you can't fire a bow in the middle of your move without having a special feat (Shot on the Run)...

...then why would you expect to be able to cast a spell in the middle of your move without having a special feat?

J

 

[Pielorinho]

Daniel, you little rules-lawyer! Did you just weasel your way into taking a Concentration check for casting and springing???

Hee hee! I'm arguing this halfway as a DM, halfway as a player here.

As a DM, I'd require an easy concentration check and a middling jump check to succeed at this (you'd have to jump at least 3' straight up if you wanted to catch even 12 inches of your opponent in the blast, in this case, and without the boots on, this is a DC 18 jump). I don't think skill checks are too easy -- in fact, I think the game is a lot more fun if people use their skills more often, so I think if anything they're too difficult. But this is obviously a play-style issue; neither of us are right or wrong on it.

As a player, I'd be perfectly happy if the DM let this action succeed automatically, and I wouldn't think that was a strange ruling: jumping in the air while casting a spell sounds only slightly more difficult than walking and chewing gum at the same time. But I wouldn't mind if the DM made me do some skillchecks to succeed at it. I *would* be annoyed, as a player, if the DM vetoed the idea outright, and I'd be peeved if the DM accused me of munchkinism because I tried to do something not entirely covered by the rules.

I agree, however, that a spell that erupts from the floor can't erupt from the ceiling. No harm in a player asking, but I'd probably rule against it.

If it were a spell like spike stones, however, I'd probably let it happen: in such a case, references to "ground" probably refer to any large, relatively flat stone surface.

Daniel

Daniel

 

[Pielorinho]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Irritating Munchkin tricks your Players try to argue.

If you can't attack someone in the middle of your move without having a special feat (Spring Attack)...

...and you can't fire a bow in the middle of your move without having a special feat (Shot on the Run)...

...then why would you expect to be able to cast a spell in the middle of your move without having a special feat?

J

Uh, because jumping isn't a move?

Imagine this situation: Bob is clinging to the ceiling of a room, his butt hanging down 8' above the floor. Frank hates Bob, comes into the room with a baseball bat and sees him on the ceiling. Frank swings at Bob, but discovers that he can't quite reach.

Frank's player says, "I want to jump in the air and smack Bob in the butt with my bat."

Would you, as a DM, say, "Nope, you don't have the spring attack feat"? I sure wouldn't: I love players who give me descriptions of what they do in combat, who do things slightly outside of the rules.

Similarly, if someone wanted to jump in the air so that that they could spike a volleyball over the net, I wouldn't require them to have the Shot on the Run feat.

In any case, as long as they're jumping 5' or less, it's not a MEA .

Daniel

 

[Orias]

Re: Re: Re: Irritating Munchkin tricks your Players try to argue.

The room was a cavern with an 18 foot ceiling.

The DMG has specified areas of effect for spells. The effect for Burning Hands begins immediatly in front of the caster.

Not allowing your caster to cast a spell which you are supposed to point out of fingers anywhere they can point is just silly.

The worst DMs are the rules-lawyer DMs. Who cares if it isn't exactly 100% word-for-word by the book? The game is supposed to be fun.

 

[Forrester]

First of all, I probably would have allowed the burning hands to hit the guy on the ceiling. If it's an 18 foot ceiling, then the thing is probably only 16-17 feet away.

And even if he's 18 feet away, damn, that's pretty damn close. I really don't think that counts as munchkinny. And trust me, I know it when I see it. Or do it:

munchkin clerc: spends all day walking around as a Sotne giant (cleric of Farlanghn - travel and Luck domains, of course).

Animated shield
"huge" morningstar, in a hewards handy haversack (draw as a free action)
rod of absorption in his other hand.

He is found of using doubly empowered Endurance, and Bull's Str, with one of his Beads of Karma

He uses the GWM/MV trick so all his armor, and weapons never have more than a +1 bonus. And since his caster level is so high (that bead of Karma, kicking ass again) - his stuff rarely gets dispelled.

all technially legal, by the way, just munchy

First of all, I have Gloves of Storing. Second of all, because of our Big Fat Jerk DM, he's making me use a stupid quarterstaff instead of a huge morningstar (which would do an extra d6 of damage).

Third, you were the one who insisted I go with Travel/Luck as my domains! I was thinking Protection, for the tasty Mind Blank and Prismatic Sphere. Shees.

Fourth, yeah, I'm munchin' it up, baby! He's damn close to immortal. If only our BFJ DM hadn't house ruled Gate away . . .

 

[Forrester]

Hmmm. Munchkinism I've seen . . .

Well, there's the orcish barbarian that pretty much took out a calculator every time he had to make a decision about whether to Rage.

There's the bard who insists that he can make a Diplomacy check as a standard action to make whoever he wants like him.

There's the sorcerer trying to get me to allow Divination to be more powerful than Legend Lore.

There's the kobold paladin who . . . okay, I don't really have anything there .

For the most part I've been blessed. Definite low munchkinism, at least as my campaigns are concerned. Well . . . for the most part, with most players.

Now, campaigns I've been a player in . . . ouch.