Draft Discussion Incapacitated [Archive] - Wizards Community

Draft Discussion Incapacitated [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Britt
02-12-07, 02:22 AM I'm finishing off my draft and mailing it to Tulach shortly, so any further discussion won't impact the LGCS. Feel free to keep discussing if you wish, though. If you want more closing comments, see my post near the end of the draft discussion thread:
http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11461316&postcount=758
Akhamshyy
02-12-07, 02:33 AM :clap: :clap:
cycloptic_squirrel
02-12-07, 02:45 AM Wait, no! We didn't even get around to discussion of frenzied berserker! What about potions of true strike? Would it be possible to add some cool critical hit tables? They'd really add to the excitement of the game. There's some really cool stuff in Secrets of Xen’drik that I thought would be really neat. There's still time to add stuff like that in, right? I want to bring all 37 followers to my next adventure and I can't do that if it's not covered in the new LGCS. Oh, and weapon focus is too powerful, you should ban it.
OK, I realize it's late in the night, but the few items that I can't convince you of tonight, I can bring up in next year's draft discussion, right? A dispel confusion in mid-march would be better. That could work, right? Right? ;)

:clap: Your patience is to be admired. Your work is greatly appreciated. Well done.
Mourningcloud
02-12-07, 03:00 AM Ummm, thanks for shutting down early ;) . I forgot my password, and just barely got myself logged in.....10 minutes too late. What happened to "until midnight"?

I am going to say this anyway, even though I doubt anyone will care. This is something that has bothered me for a while, and something I have wanted to see at least addressed.

There are many non-players handbook exotic weapons which have been seen in more than one source, for example the Elven thinblade and lightblade, seen in both the Complete Warrior and Races of the Wild. The newer of the two sources, Races of the Wild, includes text in the description of these weapons which allows feats such as weapon focus and weapon specialization from related weapons to also work when using these exotic weapons, so weapon focus longsword (and rapier) also works with the thinblade, etc. There is an optional rules sidebar in Complete Adventurer which recommends giving the same consideration with a list of exotic weapons and their non-exotic counterparts, such as longspear/greatspear, and heavy pick/dire pick.

I know it is an optional rule, so not something you would normally see in LG, but has there been any thought given to allowing this rule for the weapons listed in the sidebar in Complete Adventurer P. 116

The reason I ask is that, now with all of the exotic weapons on this list having tentatively open access, there will be quite a few players out there wondering why some of the weapons that got a "second look", such as the elven thinblade and lightblade, getting the benefit of this rule, but not the other weapons that were presented in Complete Warrior.
Morgen
02-12-07, 04:29 AM Oh crap! You forgot to add in Kobolds as a playable race Britt! o.o

(Don't hit me!)
Britt
02-12-07, 04:37 AM Oh crap! You forgot to add in Kobolds as a playable race Britt! o.o
Did we? Oops :( Too late now. I wish you would have mentioned it earlier.
clik_ml
02-12-07, 04:53 AM Now, these changes don't take effect until the new LGCS and such is posted, correct?

I've got a gaming session next weekend and need to figure out when I have to have my druid in that adventure up to regulation. Also, there were at least 2 other players who were intending to do crafting during that adventure, and the new rules will likely impact them as well (since I think one or both planned on crafting pearls of power using the level +2 rule).

I'll keep my eyes trained here til next saturday, just to make sure things are done on the up and up.
Britt
02-12-07, 05:01 AM It will be up and legal before this weekend, 100%.
darrell_uk
02-12-07, 07:40 AM To Britt and the rest of the Circle; thanks for listening...

Despite all the doom-sayers predictions of a done deal, or four days not being enough, it has been blatantly clear that we have been listened to. We may not always have liked the decisions, but your willingness to hear our opinions is appreciated.

Same time next year? :)
MichaelTLH
02-12-07, 09:00 AM "The NONC class is not going to be named. I have added some text to help clarify confusion, but we are not going to name the class of items. I have gone into detail about why this was done and as much as some people dislike it, it really needed to be done."

Yet you even call it "the NONC class" --- LOL :D
MichaelTLH
02-12-07, 09:01 AM It will be up and legal before this weekend, 100%.

Will it be legal for DDXP?
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 10:16 AM Will it be legal for DDXP?

I am pretty sure that that is the whole reason why it will be done this week :)
Aoibin
02-12-07, 10:33 AM Britt,

I thought I should ask here, because I just noticed this. I know some PC's have stuff from books like Draconomicon, Libris Mortis, and others that were allowable for the campaign last year. Since these books have been removed from the list of allowable sources for the campaign, do we lose access to items from those sources? Do we have to sell items/armor/weapons from those sources, and if so, for how much? I know that a number of items from the Draconomicon have been in the campaign for the last year or two, cause my PC's have a couple.

John Evans
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 10:33 AM Also Britt I know its somewhat to late but, all of the classes of magic except Illusion got their feats from Complete Mage. The feat I didnt see listed was Dazzling Illusion. Is it possible it was just an oversight ?
MichaelTLH
02-12-07, 10:36 AM I am pretty sure that that is the whole reason why it will be done this week :)

You'd think that would be the case... however, a lot of people are leaving on Tuesday or Wednesday for DDXP and will have little or no access to the Intartubes in order to download and peruse such a document unless it's posted up before that. :cool:
chesspiece
02-12-07, 10:43 AM Oh crap! You forgot to add in Kobolds as a playable race Britt!

Did we? Oops :( Too late now. I wish you would have mentioned it earlier.

I also want world peace, a kobold duskblade, and an LGCS that nobody complains about.

[cough] ;)

Great job. Thanks for all your hard work. Also thanks to your colleagues that (although less visible on the boards) obviously put a lot of time and discussion into the changes that were made. Cheers! :clap:
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 10:54 AM You'd think that would be the case... however, a lot of people are leaving on Tuesday or Wednesday for DDXP and will have little or no access to the Intartubes in order to download and peruse such a document unless it's posted up before that. :cool:

I am sure that someone will have internet access at the con or will have a printed copy of the new LGCS available for you. You have the basics with the draft anyhow.
Aoibin
02-12-07, 11:07 AM Also, I missed this, but just got my PHB II. Will the revised animal companion list from the PHBII be allowed now? I looked, but didn't see this anywhere.
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 11:33 AM Also, I missed this, but just got my PHB II. Will the revised animal companion list from the PHBII be allowed now? I looked, but didn't see this anywhere.

I do not believe per the LGCS that any sidebar items or optional rules are valid in LG. This table unfortunately happens to be a sidebar
Britt
02-12-07, 01:56 PM The revised animal companion list is not included. If it had been mentioned, we probably would have talked about it, but none of us brought it up internally. Dazzling Illusion was left off because of ambiguity. Until it receives an errata, there's no way to tell exactly how it functions. It will be legal for DDXP. The list of books in the LGCS now explicitly says that it is only a list of the Open options in the LGCS, not all the player-available options that may come out. I think there will be some printed copies at DDXP.
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 02:10 PM The revised animal companion list is not included. If it had been mentioned, we probably would have talked about it, but none of us brought it up internally. Dazzling Illusion was left off because of ambiguity. Until it receives an errata, there's no way to tell exactly how it functions. It will be legal for DDXP. The list of books in the LGCS now explicitly says that it is only a list of the Open options in the LGCS, not all the player-available options that may come out. I think there will be some printed copies at DDXP.

I dont see how its ambiguous. I cast a spell of the Illusion type and all enemies within 30 feet of me are dazzled. If the creature is blind or doesnt have eyes then the arent affected.

Dazzled: The creature is unable to see well because of over stimulation of the eyes. A dazzled creature takes a –1 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks.

Not like its all powerful or anything. Each of the other feats does something for a single round also.
Britt
02-12-07, 02:15 PM of me
Except the "of me" isn't in the feat. It just says within 30'. That could mean within 30' of you, within 30' of the illusion, within 30' of the person affected by the illusion, or maybe within 30' of something else.
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 02:25 PM Except the "of me" isn't in the feat. It just says within 30'. That could mean within 30' of you, within 30' of the illusion, within 30' of the person affected by the illusion, or maybe within 30' of something else.

See people need to really read the feats for more than just the Prereq, Benefit and Special. They dont just put that text there for the hell of it. Otherwise they wouldnt put it there at all.

"Casting illusions causes the air about you to be filled with flashing colors that dazzle your foes."

From the PHB (PG 89) under Feat Descriptions headings it provides the Template of how feats are written in the book.

Feat Name (Type of Feat)

Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language.

Prerequisite .........

Benefit .......

Normal ........

Special .......

Its that part that people tend to ignore.
Britt
02-12-07, 02:39 PM We did read it, and the rules are ambiguous. You can infer the meaning of the rules by referring to the flavor text, but that is not a part of the rules. Until the feat is clarified, we felt it would cause too many arguments to make it Open. You can disagree all you want, but that doesn't change our opinion or the state of it in the LGCS.
Mithreinmaethor
02-12-07, 03:01 PM We did read it, and the rules are ambiguous. You can infer the meaning of the rules by referring to the flavor text, but that is not a part of the rules. Until the feat is clarified, we felt it would cause too many arguments to make it Open. You can disagree all you want, but that doesn't change our opinion or the state of it in the LGCS.

I doubt that you will see an Errata or a FAQ on this. They figure that people are smart enough to understand the format as they have written it. It is not flavor text it is a part of the feat description itself. This is true of every feat and they have not as of yet changed this format in all of the books they have written. It doesnt say in the example of the format "Insert flavor text here" it clearly states what it is. Apparently Law school has muddled your mind on what PLAIN LANGUAGE means :)

FEAT DESCRIPTIONS
Here is the format for feat descriptions.

FEAT NAME [TYPE OF FEAT]
Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language.

Prerequisite: A minimum ability score, another feat or feats, a
minimum base attack bonus, a minimum number of ranks in one or
more skills, or a class level that a character must have in order to
acquire this feat. This entry is absent if a feat has no prerequisite. A
feat may have more than one prerequisite.

Benefit: What the feat enables the character (“you” in the feat
description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once,
its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description.
In general, having a feat twice is the same as having it once.

Normal: What a character who does not have this feat is limited
to or restricted from doing. If not having the feat causes no
particular drawback, this entry is absent.

Special: Additional facts about the feat that may be helpful when
you decide whether to acquire the feat.
Britt
02-12-07, 03:10 PM Have you not seen how many arguments arise about whether certain rules are bound by various bits of text that may or may not be part of the "official" rules for the item? Sure, I know exactly how I would rule it in a home game, or in LG if it were legal. That doesn't mean a lot of people aren't going to try to say it is 30' from the source of the illusion rather than the person, and that the first part doesn't bind the rules. A lot of people think that the "Benefit" section is the only official description of what the feat does. It's the same rationale for why I won't give access to a ring of force shield; I don't want the arguments.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Britt 02-12-07, 02:22 AM	I'm finishing off my draft and mailing it to Tulach shortly, so any further discussion won't impact the LGCS. Feel free to keep discussing if you wish, though. If you want more closing comments, see my post near the end of the draft discussion thread: http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=11461316&postcount=758
Akhamshyy 02-12-07, 02:33 AM	:clap: :clap:
cycloptic_squirrel 02-12-07, 02:45 AM	Wait, no! We didn't even get around to discussion of frenzied berserker! What about potions of true strike? Would it be possible to add some cool critical hit tables? They'd really add to the excitement of the game. There's some really cool stuff in Secrets of Xen’drik that I thought would be really neat. There's still time to add stuff like that in, right? I want to bring all 37 followers to my next adventure and I can't do that if it's not covered in the new LGCS. Oh, and weapon focus is too powerful, you should ban it. OK, I realize it's late in the night, but the few items that I can't convince you of tonight, I can bring up in next year's draft discussion, right? A dispel confusion in mid-march would be better. That could work, right? Right? ;) :clap: Your patience is to be admired. Your work is greatly appreciated. Well done.
Mourningcloud 02-12-07, 03:00 AM	Ummm, thanks for shutting down early ;) . I forgot my password, and just barely got myself logged in.....10 minutes too late. What happened to "until midnight"? I am going to say this anyway, even though I doubt anyone will care. This is something that has bothered me for a while, and something I have wanted to see at least addressed. There are many non-players handbook exotic weapons which have been seen in more than one source, for example the Elven thinblade and lightblade, seen in both the Complete Warrior and Races of the Wild. The newer of the two sources, Races of the Wild, includes text in the description of these weapons which allows feats such as weapon focus and weapon specialization from related weapons to also work when using these exotic weapons, so weapon focus longsword (and rapier) also works with the thinblade, etc. There is an optional rules sidebar in Complete Adventurer which recommends giving the same consideration with a list of exotic weapons and their non-exotic counterparts, such as longspear/greatspear, and heavy pick/dire pick. I know it is an optional rule, so not something you would normally see in LG, but has there been any thought given to allowing this rule for the weapons listed in the sidebar in Complete Adventurer P. 116 The reason I ask is that, now with all of the exotic weapons on this list having tentatively open access, there will be quite a few players out there wondering why some of the weapons that got a "second look", such as the elven thinblade and lightblade, getting the benefit of this rule, but not the other weapons that were presented in Complete Warrior.
Morgen 02-12-07, 04:29 AM	Oh crap! You forgot to add in Kobolds as a playable race Britt! o.o (Don't hit me!)
Britt 02-12-07, 04:37 AM	Oh crap! You forgot to add in Kobolds as a playable race Britt! o.o Did we? Oops :( Too late now. I wish you would have mentioned it earlier.
clik_ml 02-12-07, 04:53 AM	Now, these changes don't take effect until the new LGCS and such is posted, correct? I've got a gaming session next weekend and need to figure out when I have to have my druid in that adventure up to regulation. Also, there were at least 2 other players who were intending to do crafting during that adventure, and the new rules will likely impact them as well (since I think one or both planned on crafting pearls of power using the level +2 rule). I'll keep my eyes trained here til next saturday, just to make sure things are done on the up and up.
Britt 02-12-07, 05:01 AM	It will be up and legal before this weekend, 100%.
darrell_uk 02-12-07, 07:40 AM	To Britt and the rest of the Circle; thanks for listening... Despite all the doom-sayers predictions of a done deal, or four days not being enough, it has been blatantly clear that we have been listened to. We may not always have liked the decisions, but your willingness to hear our opinions is appreciated. Same time next year? :)
MichaelTLH 02-12-07, 09:00 AM	"The NONC class is not going to be named. I have added some text to help clarify confusion, but we are not going to name the class of items. I have gone into detail about why this was done and as much as some people dislike it, it really needed to be done." Yet you even call it "the NONC class" --- LOL :D
MichaelTLH 02-12-07, 09:01 AM	It will be up and legal before this weekend, 100%. Will it be legal for DDXP?
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 10:16 AM	Will it be legal for DDXP? I am pretty sure that that is the whole reason why it will be done this week :)
Aoibin 02-12-07, 10:33 AM	Britt, I thought I should ask here, because I just noticed this. I know some PC's have stuff from books like Draconomicon, Libris Mortis, and others that were allowable for the campaign last year. Since these books have been removed from the list of allowable sources for the campaign, do we lose access to items from those sources? Do we have to sell items/armor/weapons from those sources, and if so, for how much? I know that a number of items from the Draconomicon have been in the campaign for the last year or two, cause my PC's have a couple. John Evans
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 10:33 AM	Also Britt I know its somewhat to late but, all of the classes of magic except Illusion got their feats from Complete Mage. The feat I didnt see listed was Dazzling Illusion. Is it possible it was just an oversight ?
MichaelTLH 02-12-07, 10:36 AM	I am pretty sure that that is the whole reason why it will be done this week :) You'd think that would be the case... however, a lot of people are leaving on Tuesday or Wednesday for DDXP and will have little or no access to the Intartubes in order to download and peruse such a document unless it's posted up before that. :cool:
chesspiece 02-12-07, 10:43 AM	Oh crap! You forgot to add in Kobolds as a playable race Britt! Did we? Oops :( Too late now. I wish you would have mentioned it earlier. I also want world peace, a kobold duskblade, and an LGCS that nobody complains about. [cough] ;) Great job. Thanks for all your hard work. Also thanks to your colleagues that (although less visible on the boards) obviously put a lot of time and discussion into the changes that were made. Cheers! :clap:
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 10:54 AM	You'd think that would be the case... however, a lot of people are leaving on Tuesday or Wednesday for DDXP and will have little or no access to the Intartubes in order to download and peruse such a document unless it's posted up before that. :cool: I am sure that someone will have internet access at the con or will have a printed copy of the new LGCS available for you. You have the basics with the draft anyhow.
Aoibin 02-12-07, 11:07 AM	Also, I missed this, but just got my PHB II. Will the revised animal companion list from the PHBII be allowed now? I looked, but didn't see this anywhere.
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 11:33 AM	Also, I missed this, but just got my PHB II. Will the revised animal companion list from the PHBII be allowed now? I looked, but didn't see this anywhere. I do not believe per the LGCS that any sidebar items or optional rules are valid in LG. This table unfortunately happens to be a sidebar
Britt 02-12-07, 01:56 PM	The revised animal companion list is not included. If it had been mentioned, we probably would have talked about it, but none of us brought it up internally. Dazzling Illusion was left off because of ambiguity. Until it receives an errata, there's no way to tell exactly how it functions. It will be legal for DDXP. The list of books in the LGCS now explicitly says that it is only a list of the Open options in the LGCS, not all the player-available options that may come out. I think there will be some printed copies at DDXP.
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 02:10 PM	The revised animal companion list is not included. If it had been mentioned, we probably would have talked about it, but none of us brought it up internally. Dazzling Illusion was left off because of ambiguity. Until it receives an errata, there's no way to tell exactly how it functions. It will be legal for DDXP. The list of books in the LGCS now explicitly says that it is only a list of the Open options in the LGCS, not all the player-available options that may come out. I think there will be some printed copies at DDXP. I dont see how its ambiguous. I cast a spell of the Illusion type and all enemies within 30 feet of me are dazzled. If the creature is blind or doesnt have eyes then the arent affected. Dazzled: The creature is unable to see well because of over stimulation of the eyes. A dazzled creature takes a –1 penalty on attack rolls, Search checks, and Spot checks. Not like its all powerful or anything. Each of the other feats does something for a single round also.
Britt 02-12-07, 02:15 PM	of me Except the "of me" isn't in the feat. It just says within 30'. That could mean within 30' of you, within 30' of the illusion, within 30' of the person affected by the illusion, or maybe within 30' of something else.
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 02:25 PM	Except the "of me" isn't in the feat. It just says within 30'. That could mean within 30' of you, within 30' of the illusion, within 30' of the person affected by the illusion, or maybe within 30' of something else. See people need to really read the feats for more than just the Prereq, Benefit and Special. They dont just put that text there for the hell of it. Otherwise they wouldnt put it there at all. "Casting illusions causes the air about you to be filled with flashing colors that dazzle your foes." From the PHB (PG 89) under Feat Descriptions headings it provides the Template of how feats are written in the book. Feat Name (Type of Feat) Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language. Prerequisite ......... Benefit ....... Normal ........ Special ....... Its that part that people tend to ignore.
Britt 02-12-07, 02:39 PM	We did read it, and the rules are ambiguous. You can infer the meaning of the rules by referring to the flavor text, but that is not a part of the rules. Until the feat is clarified, we felt it would cause too many arguments to make it Open. You can disagree all you want, but that doesn't change our opinion or the state of it in the LGCS.
Mithreinmaethor 02-12-07, 03:01 PM	We did read it, and the rules are ambiguous. You can infer the meaning of the rules by referring to the flavor text, but that is not a part of the rules. Until the feat is clarified, we felt it would cause too many arguments to make it Open. You can disagree all you want, but that doesn't change our opinion or the state of it in the LGCS. I doubt that you will see an Errata or a FAQ on this. They figure that people are smart enough to understand the format as they have written it. It is not flavor text it is a part of the feat description itself. This is true of every feat and they have not as of yet changed this format in all of the books they have written. It doesnt say in the example of the format "Insert flavor text here" it clearly states what it is. Apparently Law school has muddled your mind on what PLAIN LANGUAGE means :) FEAT DESCRIPTIONS Here is the format for feat descriptions. FEAT NAME [TYPE OF FEAT] Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language. Prerequisite: A minimum ability score, another feat or feats, a minimum base attack bonus, a minimum number of ranks in one or more skills, or a class level that a character must have in order to acquire this feat. This entry is absent if a feat has no prerequisite. A feat may have more than one prerequisite. Benefit: What the feat enables the character (“you” in the feat description) to do. If a character has the same feat more than once, its benefits do not stack unless indicated otherwise in the description. In general, having a feat twice is the same as having it once. Normal: What a character who does not have this feat is limited to or restricted from doing. If not having the feat causes no particular drawback, this entry is absent. Special: Additional facts about the feat that may be helpful when you decide whether to acquire the feat.
Britt 02-12-07, 03:10 PM	Have you not seen how many arguments arise about whether certain rules are bound by various bits of text that may or may not be part of the "official" rules for the item? Sure, I know exactly how I would rule it in a home game, or in LG if it were legal. That doesn't mean a lot of people aren't going to try to say it is 30' from the source of the illusion rather than the person, and that the first part doesn't bind the rules. A lot of people think that the "Benefit" section is the only official description of what the feat does. It's the same rationale for why I won't give access to a ring of force shield; I don't want the arguments.