WotC mistakes that cause you headaches -

[Gerion of Mercadia]

What WotC errors have caused you the most problems with regards to maintaining game balance and/or player understanding of the rules?

My personal top 5 list:

1. Saving throws Automatically fail on a 1 "omission"
2. Channeling Positive/Negative energy and "cure/inflict" spells
3. Flying Magic items
4. Time Stop
5. Arcane Casters don't get healing spells - yet Bards have CLW

 

[Numion]

1. Saving throws Automatically fail on a 1 "omission"

Your #1 gripe happens in 1/20th of the situations where the save DC is so low that only an 1 fails? That doesn't sound like too common.

5. Arcane Casters don't get healing spells - yet Bards have CLW

Bardic healing has caused balance problems and/or player confusion?

Eh, sorry, but if these two made your top 5 list, seems to me that the WotC errors aren't that serious or numerous

 

[Vegepygmy]

Your #1 gripe happens in 1/20th of the situations where the save DC is so low that only an 1 fails? That doesn't sound like too common.

In any given game session, perhaps not. But if you play often enough (and luckily for me, I do), this will come up many, many times.

 

[FireLance]

1. Saving throws Automatically fail on a 1 "omission"
2. Channeling Positive/Negative energy and "cure/inflict" spells
3. Flying Magic items
4. Time Stop
5. Arcane Casters don't get healing spells - yet Bards have CLW

Um, how are these "errors"?

 

[MerricB]

Um, how are these "errors"?

In 3e (not 3.5e), #1 was omitted from the rulebook, whilst still being referred to in FAQs and the like. It could be distracting.

#2 causes debates. Does being able to cast negative energy spells count for feats that have prereqs of "must channel negative energy" (per turning).

#3 is not an error, and is an error in the list.

#4 is not an error. Annoying it might be, but it isn't an error. Some of the explanations as to how it works, however, are "a bit" confusing.

#5 is not an error.

Cheers!

 

[Gerion of Mercadia]

How are they "errors"

When the Misunderstandings cause statements like these.

1. Rog w 28 dex and a pit trap... Its only DC 20, and My modified reflex save is a +20 ... I CAN'T fall in.

2. I'm a good guy, I can't cast Inflict spells - Lir (Pelor) will be mad at Me.

3. What - My Magic item is what? - not 30,000 gp?

4. (Self Explanatory)

5. I'm A Wizard - why can't I reasearch SOMETHING that achieves a curative effect? Heck, the Bard is an arcane caster and can use the CLW spell, and the darn thing is a conjuration anyway. It's not like its a Necromancy and deals with the energies of life and death, which would be a clerical thing.

 

[EditorBFG]

What WotC errors have caused you the most problems with regards to maintaining game balance and/or player understanding of the rules?

3.5.

 

[Hussar]

How are they "errors"

When the Misunderstandings cause statements like these.

1. Rog w 28 dex and a pit trap... Its only DC 20, and My modified reflex save is a +20 ... I CAN'T fall in.

2. I'm a good guy, I can't cast Inflict spells - Lir (Pelor) will be mad at Me.

3. What - My Magic item is what? - not 30,000 gp?

4. (Self Explanatory)

5. I'm A Wizard - why can't I reasearch SOMETHING that achieves a curative effect? Heck, the Bard is an arcane caster and can use the CLW spell, and the darn thing is a conjuration anyway. It's not like its a Necromancy and deals with the energies of life and death, which would be a clerical thing.

#1. Illiteracy on the part of the player is not a fault of the game. The rules are there. Just because some choose not to read them doesn't mean that it is WOTC's fault.

2. Illiteracy on the part of the player is not a fault of the game. The rules are there. Just because some choose not to read them doesn't mean that it is WOTC's fault.

3. Illiteracy on the part of the player is not a fault of the game. The rules are there. Just because some choose not to read them doesn't mean that it is WOTC's fault.

4. Not self explanatory. Time stop is not a problem.

5. Elements added into the game for pure balance reasons do not need to be explained. It would be nice if they were, but, they don't need to be. The arcane/divine split is a hold over from earlier editions. A unified spell list would be nice, but, I'm not holding my breath.

EditorBFG- considering all of the complaints above have been fixed by 3.5, what mistakes in 3.5 do you see as being problems?

 

[FireLance]

3. What - My Magic item is what? - not 30,000 gp?

4. (Self Explanatory)

I still don't understand these.

As for the rest, I think they are more "things that the rules or flavor are silent on or are not explained well enough" than "errors" or "mistakes" per se.

Why does an attack roll or saving throw always fail on a natural 1? The rules say so. It's the flip side of attack rolls and saving throws always succeeding on a natural 20. Presumably, it makes the game more interesting because there is always a small chance of success or failure for these rolls. As for the in-game reason, perhaps this is the way the goddess of luck makes her presence felt in the world (and every time this occurs, it is heralded by a visible sign of good or bad luck).

Does casting an inflict spell annoy a good-aligned deity? By the rules, inflict spells are not [Evil], so a good-aligned cleric could prepare and cast them. Whether or not this is something that would annoy his god could be a plot hook for the DM, or a role-playing hook for the player (a cleric of a god of healing might refuse to prepare inflict spells as a matter of principle, even though the doctrines of his church do not specifically prohibit this), or could be ignored if neither the player nor the DM is interested in making a big deal of it. After all, evil clerics can prepare and cast cure spells, too.

Can a wizard research a healing spell? If the DM doesn't want it to happen in his campaign, he can rule that arcane healing draws on the mystical Song of Life, which can only be invoked by someone who has been trained as a bard. After all, druidic and clerical training is distinct enough that a cleric of a god of nature cannot prepare magic fang, and a druid of the same god of nature cannot prepare magic weapon, even though both could prepare magic stone.

 

[Brian Gibbons]

As for the rest, I think they are more "things that the rules or flavor are silent on or are not explained well enough" than "errors" or "mistakes" per se.

Why does an attack roll or saving throw always fail on a natural 1? The rules say so. It's the flip side of attack rolls and saving throws always succeeding on a natural 20.

In 3e, saving throws auto-failing on a 1 was not in the rules. Depending on who you talk to, it was deliberately omitted. Skip Williams, however, decreed in the FAQ that a natural 1 auto-failed on a saving throw, based on pretty much nothing but that being the way he liked it. This became even more irritating when the errata came out for 3e, without any mention of this rule change, leading to much confusion.

(In 3.5e, however, for better or worse, it is clear in the rules that a natural 1 is an auto-fail on a saving throw.)

Personally, 1s auto-failing on saving throws is a bad thing. Randomness disfavors the PCs--they will be in many more encounters than any NPC and are more likely to have saving throws high enough that whether or not a natural 1 is an auto-fail or treated normally will matter.

The comparison to attack rolls is inapt. A single attack is generally not going to kill you (or if it can, it's unlikely the attacker would miss with a roll of 20, with or without auto-success); however, there exist a large number of spells that will immediately kill a PC. Given the adventuring career of PCs, they will more than likely be hit with more than 20 of them. Statistically, they will roll a natural 1 to at least one such spell.

(We'll also leave aside the other issues. For example, while the group of 20 1st level fighters might manage to deal their 2d6+6 hps damage the first round, that's not going to last very long, whereas a group of 20 1st level clerics casting Command, or worse, the group of 20 3rd level clerics casting Hold Person, will statistically cause anyone to fail their saving throws.)

My general feeling is that, if a PC manages to shore up one saving throw to an extent that a natural 1 would still save, I'm fine with them being invulnerable to that attack.