The Kingdom of the Emerald Hills

1. The issue of some people "tossing" (throwing) their shields to intercept spell balls.
Shields may not be thrown to avoid being hit by spellballs, throwing weapons, or any other projectile weapon. A throw is defined as "Propelling an object through the air with a motion of the hand or arm."

2. Modifying the size requirements of shields
Delete Lines 7 & 8 of the rules on shields, removing limitations on dimensions. Overall sizes the shields shall remain the same.

3. Monk weapons class
Add "Reach" to the weapons classes available to Monk.

4. Peasant Class
Add to limitations: Peasant may not wear enchantments.

_________________
A person is smart. People are stupid, panicky, dangerous animals, and you know it. - Agent K.

1. I don't care about the underlying problem one way or the other, but this change is horribly written. (1) "may not" is not enough - it needs to explain what happens if you do. As it is, the only option here is to remove the player from play - I find that stupidly excessive. (2) The definition of throw comes straight out of a dictionary, which is stupid for several reasons - first, when we don't know what a word means, our first resort is the dictionary, second, the definition is overbroad - nothing about this definition indicates that the shield may no longer be attached to the arm, and third, the definition does allow you to drop your shield, as long as you aren't "propelling it," which is going to cause a TON of arguments - if the problem is intercepting spellballs with a non-wielded shield, the answer should have to do with whether the shield is attached to an arm, and not whether or not the player is "propelling" it.

Like I said, I don't care about whether we're allowed to dodge entangles by flinging our shields at them; I just don't think this wording is the right way to achieve it.