Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Salvag3 Feb 08, 2014 17:33:53	I wanted to ask a some questions and get some feed back from fellow gamers, I play 3.5 with my father in law and some family friends, and In recent games we have been butting heads on some game play actions. The problems arise around attacking and shooting into grapples and shooting into melee. The problem is that the my father in law has a habit of changing the rules of combat to make them more "realistic" to the point where it's making game play lose a lot of the fun and its really adding up because the changes happen when we are in combat after we have already picked feats and skills that he approved of us taking. Heres what he's changed in the last few games  "the rules say that shooting into melee incurs a -4 to hit because you have to take careful aim not to hit your teammate" so both the letter of the rule and the sprit of the rule is set up to make it impossible to hit friends with your attacks. He however he gives the cover bonus and then makes it pretty easy to hit your team mate by mistake. It pretty much makes shooting into melee to risky. and it also really breaks the role playing to even take the risk because our party is made of of good friends and who would really risk shooting their friend in the back with a crossbow. 2nd is I built a char that is based around grappling as a primary weapon in combat because the party was lacking a good form of crowd control, we needed a way to lock down powerful monsters so my Goliath ends up with a +17 to grapple and puts his first target in a pin in two rounds he says that despite the rules being set up to make it easy for teammates to attack the target your grappling he wants to impose penalties for attacking into grapples when in fact the rules say target should lose it's AC from dex bonus and be at -4 AC for being pinned. The 3rd question is more me trying to understand the wording used to describe starting out trip attacks, grapples and disarms, all 3 start with a melee touch attack when you do them unarmed and all provoke attacks of op from your target. These attacks can be prevented by taking the focus feats for each corresponding skill. The question here is since it's the unarmed attack it self that provokes the attack of op, best stated in the description of trip on page 158 of the 3.5 players hand book that reads " Making a trip attack: make a unarmed melee touch attack against your target. This provokes an attack of opportunity from your target as normal for unarmed attacks" shouldnt having improved unarmed strike prvent your target from getting a attack of op. However since you dont have the foucs in the skill directly you would still be open to counter trips or disarms and not get the +4 bonus to grapple/disarms/trips, I guess I see it applying to most of the things that are melee based like bull rushing and the like where your char is attacking with his body and that hes trained in the use of his body as a weapon but not focused in it. To put it in to more real world terms its like someone whos a boxer would have unarmed attack as a feat and be over all better when using his body as a weapon vs a Football player who would have improved grapple and bull rush but not really use his fists and legs in a fight as direct weapons in a fight.    Im trying to find a good way to explaine to him that I understand that hes the Dm and that its his world but chaning core game play mechanics  in the middle of the game when you knew someone had taken the feat is just so crappy.
#2 Krusk Feb 09, 2014 8:27:20	Shooting into melee - He is wrong, thats not what the rules say. What he is doing is house ruling. Thats OK if the group is OK with it. It sounds like this group isn't OK with it, so you need to have a conversation about it with him. "You are doing this, it makes the game less fun, and I'm not really interested in it. Please stop". Hopefully he does. repeat until he comes around. If he never does, bail on the game.   Gappling - He is wrong again. See above. If he really wants to make grappling a worse choice, ask him to roll up a non-grappler and play that instead.   "shouldnt having improved unarmed strike prvent your target from getting a attack of op." It provokes an attack using those rules, but it still provokes one. Even if you normally wouldn't for that situation. Gotta pay the feat tax. If you want to trip people without spending the feat, get a reach weapon (so they don't threaten you and you don't provoke).   The good way to explain it to him is in a conversation. Sit down and say "You are changing the rules after I picked my class. You made the rules unfun for me. Can I change my class with these new rules in mind? Or would you mind going back to the actual rules?" Repeat this conversation until one of you agrees either way. If no one ever does, you should probably decide that game isn't for you.
#3 DaBeerds Feb 09, 2014 8:39:13	Krusk wrote:
#4 RedSiegfried Feb 09, 2014 8:42:56	Krusk wrote:
#5 Noctaem Feb 10, 2014 11:23:39	I've played with a DM like this before, he would change rules arbitrarily based on his whims and it would sometimes screw over players.  I tried to talk to him about it but he rebuffed me saying no one else minded and everyone else liked his houserules (which he actually didn't believe were houserules).  I was placed in a position where I could either walk away and find another game or stick around and be frustrated when he screwed over his players session after session.  I ended up leaving the group.   I would try talking to your DM and explaining to him what his houserules are doing to you and your enjoyment of the game.  Try pointing to the rules themselves if it helps and show him that he's houseruling arbitrarily.  Tell him that if he wants to use houserules like this, he has to have player buy in and their agreement of how these houserules will work.  What my old DM didn't understand was that everyone at the table is there to have fun and work together.  The DM has authority over the table so long as the players give it to him/her, he/she can't force 5 people to do what they want simply because he's the DM of the game.  Everyone has to agree with it, it's a group activity.  In the end my old DM acted like a tyrant, he was completely unwilling to have someone question his way of doing things and even allow the players to vote if they wanted his houserules or not.  So he was removed from the DM spot and left the group, it was either his way or nothing.   Now I'm hoping that because you're family, your DM might come around and understand what I've just outlined and not act like my old DM did.  Best of luck.
#6 Storyteller-Zero Feb 11, 2014 22:56:15	@OP   I have a slight feeling that your father-in-law is subconsciously screwing you over on purpose due to a natural deep-seated resentment that all fathers probably feel towards their sons-in-law.   Now bring your mother-in-law into the game and let the fireworks commence.   :D
#7 ORC_Cricket Mar 24, 2014 17:05:00	We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.   You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct   Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.   Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.     Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.
#8 Noon Apr 01, 2014 23:05:09	Salvag3 wrote:
(Reply to #8) AaronOfBarbaria	Noon wrote: