Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 712891" data-attributes="member: 1465">I agree with you, IceBear, that they have messed up awfully with it: 3e was presented as a "rewrite" of the D&D game, and it is supposed to be a stand-alone game, which shouldn't require knowledge in previous editions to be played correctly. How could thay have been so lame to assume that the 'auto' rule for attack rolls was important to put into PHB, as it was important to point out that it doesn't apply to skill checks, and then completely missed to explicitly say it should apply to saving throws. How could they expect from me, who unfortunately didn't play 2ed, to imagine that I should apply 'autos' to saving throws as well?Then they had the chance to make an errata about it, if they intended from the start to apply 'autos' to saving throws, but they didn't, perhaps thinking that it wasn't needed? They wrote a FAQ, and I am as sure as you that the rule will be in 3.5e as well, but I dislike all this weak approach: if they had written that rules in PHB from the start, I would have never ever thought it shouldn't be, because honestly it does not change much in my game to have autofailures/successes in my game. I just despise the attitude; it sounds like they have never been sure themselves if the rule should have been YES or NO: was it so difficult to choose either and put the other as a variant in the DMG?A final word: let's not think too much if it makes better sense to have autos or not for ST. Some people say there should be because "magic is unpredictable", but if you think that I'm sure you also dislike HD caps to spells (why should Sleep ALWAYS fail?). And why not apply it to caster level checks, since they also regard magic? All these variants may have a sense, after all, but there should be 1 and only clear official rule.</blockquote>

Verification