Problem Rules - Help me out with this list of debatable rules.

[Artoomis]

Empower stuff added and updated.

Thanks.

 

[Nish]

Nish: yes, Enervation makes you lose 5 HP/negative level gained. Check the spell description and Page 280 of the PHB.

Well, mine doesn't have anything about a hitpoint loss in the spell description (2nd printing even). And apparently most other PH don't as well, because in another thread, IIRC, no one else saw anything about it in the spell description either.

And I do know about the definition of negative level on p. 280 of the PH. That's the whole point of my post: The description of negative levels for Enervation in my PH does not match the definition given in the glossary or in the SRD.

I noticed you're not from around these parts, 'o Skoteinos, do you have maybe a non-english language version of the PH that is more up to date than the second printing?

I've also checked the PH errata and DnD FAQ, they make no mention of this issue.

 

[kreynolds]

Nish: The PHB explains negative levels before the spell section. So, you're already supposed to know how negative levels work! Why would they bother printing it twice in the same book. Well, since they didn't specifically mention the hit point loss in enervation, or anything else for that matter, I think it's save to assume that "negative level" in regards to enervation means "ICE CREAM SANDWICH"? Give it a rest.

 

[kreynolds]

I've also checked the PH errata and DnD FAQ, they make no mention of this issue.

Hmmm...maybe because...it's not an issue? Doh!

 

[RedShirtNo5]

More questions

I've seen these debated or discussed from time to time, although I would consider A-C closed and unnecessary to list. Apologies if any have already been mentioned.

A. Do tiny creatures get an AoO on creatures that pass through their square? (Sage says yes)

B. Does Two-Weapon Fighting work with thrown melee weapons? (Sage says no)

C. Do you get an AoO if you took Total Defense? ( I believe Sage says yes)

D. Does burst damage replace or stack?

E. What happens with whirlwind and a reach weapon?

F. Can you cleave off a mirror image?

G. What happens if you are holding two weapons, have a sufficiently high BAB to make multiple attacks, don't want to make an "extra" attack, but still want to use the off-hand weapon for one of your multiple attacks.

H. Do you need to "announce" that you are making a 5' step or a double move, or are AoO determined retroactively based on what you've done? (Well, maybe I haven't seen much debate on this, but it is still an interesting issue).

-RedShirt

 

[Virago]

Some things I didn't see included:

• Combat Reflexes - one AoO per opponent or per opportunity?
• Readymongering: 5' steps? L-shaped runs and charges? This probably goes under partial actions in general.
• Boccob's Blessed Book and "freely."

I think a better thing to do with these rules and changes is to re-write things to make more sense and release it free under OGL as 3.1e

 

[Artoomis]

RedshirtNo5:Thanks, I added all those except:

What happens with whirlwind and a reach weapon? (No issue - the feat does say 5 feet specifically. Anything else would be a house rule.)

What happens if you are holding two weapons, have a sufficiently high BAB to make multiple attacks, don't want to make an "extra" attack, but still want to use the off-hand weapon for one of your multiple attacks. (No issue. You attack with your highest attack bonus modified for weapon, the use of two hands, etc. It's a Full Attack action since you've used more than one attack. The rules cover this just fine)

Do you need to "announce" that you are making a 5' step or a double move, or are AoO determined retroactively based on what you've done? (No real issue here. The rules are sufficiently clear for each DM to decide how they want to handle this.)

If there is a real issue with on of these that I've missed, let me know so I can properly identify the issue and I'll add it to the master list.


Virago: Thanks. I've aded those.

 

[RedShirtNo5]

What happens if you are holding two weapons, have a sufficiently high BAB to make multiple attacks, don't want to make an "extra" attack, but still want to use the off-hand weapon for one of your multiple attacks. (No issue. You attack with your highest attack bonus modified for weapon, the use of two hands, etc. It's a Full Attack action since you've used more than one attack. The rules cover this just fine)

Artoomis, I do think the rules are actually ambiguous here.
The PHB says "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. Fighting in this way is very hard, however, and you suffer ..."
The debate is, does "Fighting in this way" refer to wielding the second weapon, or to taking the extra attack?

Regarding whirlwind, you're right. The rule is not really debatable, but the question keeps getting asked just the same.

Also, completely unrelated:

What happens if you metamagically extend a heat metal spell?

For haste, do you get the extra partial action the same round that you cast the spell?

-RedShirt

 

[CRGreathouse]

For haste, do you get the extra partial action the same round that you cast the spell?

Yes.; This one's not debatable (except as a house rule).

 

[RedShirtNo5]

Yes.; This one's not debatable (except as a house rule).

I agree that you get the partial action, but I don't agree that it's not debatable.

The argument I've seen is: if you move and then cast, your turn is over when you finish casting. Thus, no extra partial action "on his turn". The argument is weak, but not laughable.

It's Artoomis's thread, he can add it to the list or not. My feeling is that we should be inclusive, since part of the exercise is to avoid the same rule question threads over and over.

-RedShirt