What are the biggest rules debates?

[Hypersmurf]

So what's there to be undecided about?

Nope - I concede the point

I don't see any reason in the 3E core rules that an unarmed commoner should not threaten an area.

(The 3E FAQ disagrees, but FAQs are like that sometimes )

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I don't see any reason in the 3E core rules that an unarmed commoner should not threaten an area.

Odd, huh? So, by extension, should someone with a longbow.

Do you agree to that, dcollins?

 

[Hypersmurf]

So, by extension, should someone with a longbow.

Though they still couldn't use the longbow for an AoO.

-Hyp.

 

[atom crash]

Though they still couldn't use the longbow for an AoO.

Sure they could. But they couldn't fire an arrow as an AoO.

You could whack someone with the bow itself or stab someone with the arrow.

 

[dcollins]

Hyp, thanks for the discussion. It's helped refine my understanding of this aspect of the rules.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Hyp, thanks for the discussion. It's helped refine my understanding of this aspect of the rules.

That's what the forum's all about

-Hyp.

 

[glass]

Yes.

Wierd. I could have sworn that you didn't threaten unarmed even back in 3.0. Mind you, that was back before I learned not to trust the sage. Maybe that's how I got the WEOTS.


glass.

 

[diaglo]

a few debates i remember seeing alot of since 2000 (some have been amended with the revised ed):

cleave vs mirror image
polymorph
heal, harm, haste
telekinesis with shurikens
creating a no magic zone
code of ethics for a paladin

edit: invisibility vs undead