Author Topic: Defining Undefined D&D Terms  (Read 6026 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

PlzBreakMyCampaign

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1373
  • Immune to Critical Hits as a Fairness Elemental
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #40 on: October 01, 2010, 07:29:15 PM »
dread necro is still missing it
handbooks quoted as wizard. There was a giant list of these somewhere...
[Spoiler]
Quote
An interesting read, nice to see a civil discussion
The point of Spell Resistance is to make it harder to get buffed.
And healed. Don't forget that.
Huge amounts of people are fuckwits. That doesn't mean that fuckwit is a valid lifestyle.
[/Spoiler]

Old Geezer's Law of Hobby Taste: The more objectively inconsequential a hobby is, the more disagreements within the community will be expressed in outrageously insulting, overblown, and ludicrously emotionally laden terms.

More Funny than Humble[Spoiler]
Quote from: PlzBreakMyCampaign
Your a shifter... you have all you ever need.
It blows MoMF out of the water

But if your greedy for more [Wish] for something that only effects you, like another class level or two that doesn't count against your ECL.
Quote from: hungryhungryhippo987
Yes, I'm the 3.0 "Masters of the Wild" shifter, the awesome kind. My favorite form to take is Force Dragon. Yes, I am immortal ... My character is hands down the coolest guy in the campaign and there is nothing I could possibly want.
PBMC gets a cookie for DotA r

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #41 on: October 01, 2010, 07:57:56 PM »
That said, "Creature" is actually rather well defined as anything with a Wisdom and Charisma score (if it has one, it has both).  Yes, this means that intelligent items are technically creatures (in fact, they are stated as such), but they do have specific rules regarding them.

Really?  I thought there were golems and/or undead that didn't have either (I'd have to check).  Is there a source for this claim, or is it a general observation?

And man, the Epic Druid being a different class than the Druid is an interesting thought.  That does mean the Druid class is still 20 levels long... but is the Epic Druid a base class?  I notice the "Character Classes" link is only looking at base classes, except that epic classes are included as are all variant classes.  Does this mean "Character Class" is the same as base class (and that epic classes count as such) or is it its own definition?  

I notice "Character Class" does seem to get used interchangably with Base Class in a number of books.

Okay, so here's the challenge for the moment.  What I'm not sure of is whether Epic classes count as Base/Standard classes, or whether alternative classes count as standard classes (I'm pretty sure they're base classes at this point).  So I wonder if we can find references to the Epic classes as being either base or standard classes, and whether we can find Alternate Classes referred to as Standard Classes (though I think I've seen those terms used opposed, as in "here's some alternate classes to use instead of standard ones).  Certainly, that link to Character Classes showed that WotC considers alternate class features (including racial ones) to be whole other classes, which seem to be base classes.  That means we also have to somehow eliminate savage progressions from the base class definition without removing racial classes.

Right now I'm thinking "Standard Class" means base classes that don't use alternate class features, meaning a Factotum for example can't use Lion Totem Barbarian's pounce.  But I'm not sure whether base classes includes Epic classes (doesn't matter for the Factotum obviously, but still important to get right).

I like the idea of saying a base class is one with starting gold, but Epic Druids don't really have a starting gold if they're not the same class as a Druid (and I'm still figuring out if they're base classes), and I'd bet some other class is still missing its starting gold (I'll have to check on Dread Necromancers, and I bet other books have had that same problem).

EDIT:  Adding to the confusion, the SRD says "When a single-class epic character gains a level, he or she may choose to increase the level of his or her current class or pick up a new class at 1st level."  That certainly sounds like the Epic Druid is still considered the same class as the Druid... which also means Druid isn't 20 levels long.  Likewise, the DMG on page 206 says "this book expands each class's progression of class features beyond 20th level" in the epic section.

JaronK
« Last Edit: October 01, 2010, 08:07:04 PM by JaronK »

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #42 on: October 01, 2010, 08:07:50 PM »
I still think the "multiplies skill points at first level" is the way to go.  Prestige classes don't list that, after all.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Widow

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 469
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #43 on: October 01, 2010, 09:29:54 PM »
You need to break into the fun of spell level verse spell slot.  So many things use the term spell level when they probably should say spell slot.  The arcane fusion/sanctum spell threads always highlight this.

It does not help when metamagic can:

Increase spell slot, no change on spell level
Increase spell slot, increase spell level
No Increase in spell slot, increase or decrease in spell level
No increase in spell slot, no increase in spell level


BeholderSlayer

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1258
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #44 on: October 01, 2010, 09:40:23 PM »
All of this depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Hi Welcome
[spoiler]
Allow me to welcome you both with my literal words and with an active display of how much you fit in by being tone deaf, dumb, and uncritical of your babbling myself.[/spoiler]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #45 on: October 01, 2010, 10:28:11 PM »
I still think the "multiplies skill points at first level" is the way to go.  Prestige classes don't list that, after all.

Interesting catch.  But annoyingly enough, Paragon classes do give multiplied skill points at first level, and they're not a Character Class or Base Class or Standard Class.  Still, that's one way to keep out epic classes.

My current thinking is that Character Classes are any class that isn't a Prestige Class, Paragon Class, or Savage Progression.  A Base Class is any Character Class that can be taken at level 1.  A Standard Class is any Base Class that does not include any Alternate Class Features.

At least, I think that's how it works right now.  Anyone have any contradictions?

JaronK

snakeman830

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3494
  • BG's resident furry min/maxxer
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #46 on: October 01, 2010, 11:30:06 PM »
That said, "Creature" is actually rather well defined as anything with a Wisdom and Charisma score (if it has one, it has both).  Yes, this means that intelligent items are technically creatures (in fact, they are stated as such), but they do have specific rules regarding them.

Really?  I thought there were golems and/or undead that didn't have either (I'd have to check).  Is there a source for this claim, or is it a general observation?
I know it's either in the MM1 or the DMG, but my books are unavailable right now, so I can't get a page refrence.
I am constantly amazed by how many DM's ban Tomb of Battle.  The book doesn't even exist!

Quotes:[spoiler]
By yes, she means no.
That explains so much about my life.
hiicantcomeupwithacharacterthatisntaghostwhyisthatamijustretardedorsomething
Why would you even do this? It hurts my eyes and looks like you ate your keyboard before suffering an attack of explosive diarrhea.
[/spoiler]

If using Genesis to hide your phylactry, set it at -300 degrees farenheit.  See how do-gooders fare with a liquid atmosphere.

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #47 on: October 02, 2010, 01:13:34 AM »
All of this depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Are you being purposely annoying or just that innocently curious?

"Is" cannot be defined. It is an one of humans' elementary concepts and means the word preceding "is" is similar to the word following "is" but the reverse is not true (IE: Squares are rectangles).

You're not allowed to use a word in its own definition because every word in a definition must be previously defined to understand the definition. Note how you must use "is" in every definition. So "is" cannot be defined.

I theorize humans intrinsically understand the concept of drawing similarity relationships between two objects/actions (unless mentally retarded). This allows us to expand knowledge by using definitions containing simple words to define more complex words. We understand other concepts like "verb" and "noun" inherently as well, meaning we actually have things we can draw relationships between. The rest is our neocortex, which no other animal possesses and does a lot of cool shit for us.

Sorry if I sound incoherent. Late nite post, amirite?
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

Bauglir

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2346
  • TriOptimum
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #48 on: October 02, 2010, 01:27:56 AM »
All of this depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Are you being purposely annoying or just that innocently curious?

"Is" cannot be defined. It is an one of humans' elementary concepts and means the word preceding "is" is similar to the word following "is" but the reverse is not true (IE: Squares are rectangles).

You're not allowed to use a word in its own definition because every word in a definition must be previously defined to understand the definition. Note how you must use "is" in every definition. So "is" cannot be defined.

I theorize humans intrinsically understand the concept of drawing similarity relationships between two objects/actions (unless mentally retarded). This allows us to expand knowledge by using definitions containing simple words to define more complex words. We understand other concepts like "verb" and "noun" inherently as well, meaning we actually have things we can draw relationships between. The rest is our neocortex, which no other animal possesses and does a lot of cool shit for us.

Sorry if I sound incoherent. Late nite post, amirite?

It's a reference to Bill Clinton who apparently, when asked "Is it true that you're having a sexual relationship with this woman?" or something of that nature replied with that, because he was not, at that moment, having sexual relations with her. I'm not sure if it's true or not, but.
So you end up stuck in an endless loop, unable to act, forever.

In retrospect, much like Keanu Reeves.

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #49 on: October 02, 2010, 02:06:32 AM »
Yeah, it was just a cultural reference.  And yes, he really did say that.  Anyway, I'll keep looking for this Wisdom or Charisma reference.

Spell Slot and Spell Level seem worth defining too.

JaronK

Saxony

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 742
  • My avatar is from the anime "Pani Poni Dash!".
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #50 on: October 02, 2010, 02:31:50 AM »
All of this depends on what the definition of "is" is.
Are you being purposely annoying or just that innocently curious?

"Is" cannot be defined. It is an one of humans' elementary concepts and means the word preceding "is" is similar to the word following "is" but the reverse is not true (IE: Squares are rectangles).

You're not allowed to use a word in its own definition because every word in a definition must be previously defined to understand the definition. Note how you must use "is" in every definition. So "is" cannot be defined.

I theorize humans intrinsically understand the concept of drawing similarity relationships between two objects/actions (unless mentally retarded). This allows us to expand knowledge by using definitions containing simple words to define more complex words. We understand other concepts like "verb" and "noun" inherently as well, meaning we actually have things we can draw relationships between. The rest is our neocortex, which no other animal possesses and does a lot of cool shit for us.

Sorry if I sound incoherent. Late nite post, amirite?

It's a reference to Bill Clinton who apparently, when asked "Is it true that you're having a sexual relationship with this woman?" or something of that nature replied with that, because he was not, at that moment, having sexual relations with her. I'm not sure if it's true or not, but.

Pah. Like I know what Bill Clinton said :whistle
If I say something about real world physics, and someone disagrees, assume I am right 90% of the time. This number goes up to 100% if I am late night posting - trust me, my star dust sibs.

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #51 on: October 02, 2010, 03:16:54 AM »
"Is" cannot be defined.
Is: Present tense of the verb "to be".
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #52 on: October 04, 2010, 04:27:41 PM »
Moved to defining operators now eh? Err...

Quote from: PHB's Glossary
character class
And yes, part of me wants to mention books > google again.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #53 on: October 04, 2010, 04:48:27 PM »
Yeah yeah, the DMG has a faulty definition of Base Class too (that it's one of the classes in the PHB).  However, that's not how it's used now, and the point of this thread is to find how the terms are actually used by the designers.

JaronK

SorO_Lost

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
  • I'll kill you before you're born.
Re: Defining Undefined D&D Terms
« Reply #54 on: October 04, 2010, 05:01:26 PM »
Then how about: Character Class = all class levels regardless of type. Fits the glossary, accounts for later expansion of new types, and is probably highly accurate given the probability of disproving a general term not being used to mention something.
Tiers explained in 8 sentences. With examples!
[spoiler]Tiers break down into who has spellcasting more than anything else due to spells being better than anything else in the game.
6: Skill based. Commoner, Expert, Samurai.
5: Mundane warrior. Barbarian, Fighter, Monk.
4: Partial casters. Adapt, Hexblade, Paladin, Ranger, Spelltheif.
3: Focused casters. Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Martial Adapts, Warmage.
2: Full casters. Favored Soul, Psion, Sorcerer, Wu Jen.
1: Elitists. Artificer, Cleric, Druid, Wizard.
0: Gods. StP Erudite, Illthid Savant, Pun-Pun, Rocks fall & you die.
[/spoiler]