>>Am I missing something blindingly obvious, or can any
>>of you come up with a situation in which you'd say, "The vampire fails her
>>Con check, so X happens"?
>
>First off, you need to find a situation where someone without an ability
>score would have to make that check.
That's exactly what I'm asking for. :) I still haven't seen one.
>Or, if an undead monster was infected with a magical disease; the very
>concept of a disease is so foreign to the undead's creature
>pseudo-metabolism that it had no defense against it, and automatically fails.
Except that diseases, magical and otherwise, are already covered under
Fortitude saves.
>P.S. Anyone else notice how the really great ideas come when you're
>helping someone else understand the rules...
I have no problem understanding the rules (aside from the one oversight
concerning undead using Charisma for Concentration checks). I'm just
baffled by how to read one sentence that seems counter-intuitive at
best. Perhaps I'm getting overly Talmudic, but if a rule is in the book, I
like to know how it could apply.
Ken Marable suggested that it's in their for the sake of completeness, and
that someone, somewhere might come up with a use for it. That seems like
an odd guiding philosophy for the writers of the rules to follow: "*We*
can't think of any use for this to be here, but maybe someone will, so
we'll put it in even though it doesn't seem to make much sense." It kind
of makes me suspicious of their motivations for the rules in the rest of
the book. :)
-G.
