TRPG General Chat

LitheOhm

20:00

If you have an example for your hypothetical non-con max HP increase I'm all ears

KRyan

@LitheOhm the question is tagged [dnd-3.5e], not [houserules] or [LitheOhm's-dnd-3.5e]

LitheOhm

in the meantime, it doesn't disprove anything. Negative evidence does not a premise reinforce, nor a conclusion

And answers based on experience are allowed. I've got a meta link, if you'd like

until I see where someone with my understanding of "wounds" and current HP could have false weight, I'll maintain my metaphors

KRyan

@LitheOhm yeah, and you should indicate the difference. You at no point state "this is how we've always done it" or "this is how I think of it," you say "this is how it is"

and that's inaccurate

LitheOhm

and continue answering questions with them

I don't have to; The fact that I post the answer and not "Wizards of the Coast" or "KRyan" or "Official 3.5 rules" means it's my answer

as I've done it

as I do it

KRyan

@LitheOhm I have no problem with metaphors. I have a problem with metaphors that are inaccurate and misleading, and this one is.

LitheOhm

20:02

I don't agree

KRyan

@LitheOhm and I will downvote you every time you imply that "as you do it" is "how the rules read" because it misleads readers.

LitheOhm

Show me how the metaphor doesn't hold up, without adding nonexistent hypotheticals. It will alter not only my answer but also how I view that scenario. In the meantime, I will answer as I have played the game

Now I know who it was :) regardless, it's not that big of a deal.

Wizards forbid we actually argue about something useful

shatterspike1

Like drowning-revivals...

KRyan

@LitheOhm oh yeah, answering questions accurately and without misleading users, particularly those who are unfamiliar with the rules and need an answer to the question, that isn't useful. It's only the entire purpose of the site. Nothing important about that.

LitheOhm

That ninja debate from months ago was cool, though

I don't see how it's misleading, as I don't see that metaphor having any negative implication on the rules. If I encounter a rule or instance where "wounded characters" ceases to be pragmatic, then that metaphor will be ditched

in the meantime, it's plenty pragmatic

If you've got that example, you can change my mind. If not, don't cite it as evidence

KRyan

20:06

@LitheOhm for you, but you have no idea who is using it or what situations they'll be in, what they'll have to deal with or questions they'll have.

you're not answering the question for yourself, you're answering it for those who read it

LitheOhm

And this answer worked for me, so I shared it with others

shatterspike1

Err... It's pretty clearly indicated which part of the answer is actual rules text.

KRyan

"Your wounds are -5, from your max. Taking con damage to reduce your maximum leaves you with 15/20, because your current wounds are subtracted from your maximum."

that statement is entirely inaccurate

and it is stated as "this is how it works"

it is not how it works

LitheOhm

@shatterspike1 I believe so too

KRyan

"your current wounds" are not "subtracted from your maximum"

LitheOhm

20:08

What happens when a barbarian who is raging suddenly stops raging at the same time as bear's endurance expires, and they drop to -10 or lower?

shatterspike1

Every time I play, I find it easier to use "death points". When they equal my max hit points, I go down.

LitheOhm

Let's say 10th level. During the rage and buff, they are at 10.

KRyan

@LitheOhm he dies because when his Max HP is reduced from lost Con, his Current HP is also reduced by the same number

LitheOhm

So his wounds remain and don't expire just because his max hp dropped? But what about the fact that his max hp didn't drop below his current?

KRyan

@shatterspike1 given that there are effects that are predicated on your current HP, that sounds extremely ill-advised even as a personal shorthand

@LitheOhm no. His HP is reduced by the same number as his max HP, that is it. That's what the rule says. "Wounds" don't exist to expire.

shatterspike1

20:11

@KRyan It's decently easy to calculate if it needs calculating, current hp = max hp - death points

It usually doesn't.

KRyan

@shatterspike1 it is but why bother? how much HP you have left is usually the more relevant number than how much damage total you've taken.

LitheOhm

@KRyan Awfully dry for a game where mechanics are supposed to mean something in game

shatterspike1

Addition is slightly faster in my head than subtraction.

LitheOhm

No way, which potion to drink is more about how much damage you've taken

KRyan

and again, it doesn't really matter to me how you do it or think of it in your head, it matters to me what you tell readers who are unfamiliar with the material

@LitheOhm whether or not to waste a turn healing in the first place needs to be decided first, and that depends on how much buffer you have left.

LitheOhm

20:13

It's pragmatic. I share pragmatic solutions.
What about my "necromancers can be good" answer? I cite a lot of experience in that, feel free to downvote. Very little of it is RAW.

KRyan

@shatterspike1 it is in just about everyone's heads, but that's part of the reason why it is the way it is: because how much HP you have left is usually more relevant, they don't want you to have to perform subtraction to get it.

actually, game design tries to avoid non-addition mathematics as much as possible, and addition should be kept to small numbers

doubling and tripling are OK too

halving is sometimes OK but that's getting dangerous

Alex P

("I know! Let's represent your character's health and ability to keep fighting with an abstract mechanic," they said. "It will be a lot simpler than actually having concrete mechanics representing individual wounds and endurance," they said. "This way you won't have fiddly rules and stupid edge cases," they said.)

2

KRyan

dividing by anything other than 2 or 10 is a recipe for slowing down the game and causing mistakes

shatterspike1

@KRyan I actually agree with that design philosophy

C>A>S>M>D

KRyan

@LitheOhm actually, they're really not supposed to mean anything, despite what the books might say. Particularly where HP is concerned. There is no conceivable concrete meaning for HP that makes any kind of sense. Basically, in short, as I was discussing earlier with @BESW, D&D lies to you

but I have no problem with your stating something like "this rule means that the total damage you've taken isn't reduced when your max HP goes down. In other words, losing max HP isn't going to heal wounds."

because then it's clear that you're explaining the rule

not claiming a separate rule

LitheOhm

20:18

In a real-world perspective, sure. I'm a fan of Anime, video games etc. where there is a decent model for lost health. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles where bosses start turning funny colors just before they die, for instance.

I don't claim wounds as a separate rule. Not once do I go off and say "that's this way because of the wound rule..." I use the word "wound" to refer to damage taken from max HP.

That's both the long and short of it

Not that I advocate technicolor beholderkin.

KRyan

@LitheOhm yes, but that's still wrong. "your current wounds are subtracted from your maximum" is not an accurate statement; that's not what happens.

LitheOhm

@KRyan But we come to the same exact result, you and I

KRyan

@LitheOhm in this case, it's mathematically the same, but the implications are different

LitheOhm

I fail to see how.

KRyan

because you imply that the rules reference the damage you've taken.

they don't

actually, I don't think they ever do

LitheOhm

20:21

Show me where my "wound" understanding is not practical

Where does it introduce pathology into 3.5?

KRyan

@LitheOhm when somebody goes digging through the SRD looking for the rules for "wounds"

and because you imply that this is generally true, rather than simply a function of changing Constitution

LitheOhm

cure spells, a variant..

bearded devil

a psionic power

KRyan

right, all of which are not referencing what you're talking about

LitheOhm

I don't know, that psionic power is kind of on my side.

KRyan

not really, it just uses the word "wounds" to refer to damage in the intro fluff section

your answer wouldn't be any more correct if you'd used the word "damage" instead of "wounds"

LitheOhm

20:25

shield other, injury and death

KRyan

where does it say that when your max HP changes, subtract your current total damage taken from your new max HP?

that is the question someone reading your answer might have

and if they spend any time thinking about that, wondering about that, or looking for that

you have done them a disservice

because you're supposed to be explaining

and you have made them think something that is not true

LitheOhm

What of the answers that fill in gaps where RAW is concerned? We should edit all of those to say "Wizards doesn't say."

I'm for experience-based answers, but you knew this

If they're searching first this site then the SRD, they're not really going about it in the proper order are they?

Presumably, they come here because they didn't find what they wanted in the SRD

regardless, both of our answers now cite the same portion of the SRD

KRyan

@LitheOhm I make a point of always indicating whether I am stating a rule (which I try to cite) and when I am discussing alternatives, additions, or changes to the rules, and I think every answer on the site should, and I will always downvote an answer that I think is likely to make someone think that something is a rule when it is not

LitheOhm

and both are indistinguishable in their end result

yay redundancy

KRyan

I am all for experience-based answers

but they must be identified

to do otherwise is deceptive

sometimes context is quite sufficient

it is not here

shatterspike1

20:29

I thought the rules citation was the context

LitheOhm

same here @shatterspike1

KRyan

@shatterspike1 it's hard to establish context with a statement that comes after the misleading one

Garden path sentence

A garden path sentence is a grammatically correct sentence that starts in such a way that a reader's most likely interpretation will be incorrect; the reader is lured into a parse that turns out to be a dead end. Garden path sentences are used in psycholinguistics to illustrate the fact that when human beings read, they process language one word at a time. "Garden path" refers to the saying "to be led down the garden path", meaning "to be misled". According to one current psycholinguistic theory, as a person reads a garden path sentence, the reader builds up a structure of meaning one wor...

LitheOhm

so... you want to change the order of my answer?

KRyan

@LitheOhm and I want to make it clear that the bit about wounds is an understanding of what the rules means for the characters, rather than "what the rule says"

LitheOhm

and I should be qualifying everything I post based on my own experience?

but... what about the fact that it's my avatar attached to each answer?

KRyan

20:31

@LitheOhm as I said, in many cases, context makes it clear and nothing needs to be explicitly said

LitheOhm

That's like prefacing everything I say with "I think." It's sort of a no-brainer

KRyan

@LitheOhm and if somehow it was universally known that every answer you made would have no thought for the rules but just be whatever you liked, that might mean something, but most readers aren't going to know who you are, and moreover I don't think you have no thought for the rules.

@LitheOhm it is not.

because there is what you think, and what the rules actually say.

they don't have to (and oftentimes shouldn't) be the same

you should be clear which is which

LitheOhm

@KRyan er, would you explain this last part to me?

KRyan

it is not automatically assumed that every answer on this site is personal opinion

particularly for rules questions, the assumption is that the answer is coming from the rules

someone asks "how would you rule this?" then the default is probably experiential and rules only as a secondary consideration

LitheOhm

"I don't think you have no thought for the rules" I'm still stuck on that so would you explain to me what you mean?

KRyan

20:34

but when someone asks "what happens here?" the assumption is that they want to know what the rule is

@LitheOhm oh, I just was saying that I'm not accusing you of ignoring the rules entirely

LitheOhm

k, got it

KRyan

similarly, the thing with the necromancer

that's about backstory, fluff, and so on

there are some relevant rules that should maybe be considered

but it's not the major part of the question

LitheOhm

If they asked for RAW specific then either I would have eschewed the question due to time constraints or sought the RAW rule.
"What happens.." doesn't imply strict RAW to me.

KRyan

context there is clear that what you're saying is based more on opinion and personal experience

@LitheOhm you think that, by default, people are interested in your personal opinions of how the game works? I really doubt that. I'm pretty sure the default thing they're interested in how the official rules work. It's important to remember that the official rules are the only things that are automatically common between tables. No matter our preferences, playstyles, houserules, or setting details, the official rules written in the books are the same for each of us.

Our houserules might change or waive some of those rules

but the rules text in our books stays the same

it's entirely valid to say "this is the official rule but I don't like it because X"

LitheOhm

No, experience with how the game works. Mine isn't a houserule, either -- it's a different understanding for how a particular rule works. It works for me. If it works for them, they adopt it. Otherwise there's other answers, now yours is included.

Constitution can change frequently in the game. My grasp of the function doesn't diminish it nor add to it in any way, it's just a metaphor.

KRyan

20:41

@LitheOhm you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

LitheOhm

Once more, I like metaphors. Until I encounter a spot where that metaphor detracts from the game, it'll remain.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/metaphor

KRyan

metaphor is definitely the wrong term here; I get what you mean but it's been driving me nuts this entire conversation

LitheOhm

This is the understanding I have of it.

KRyan

trust me, yes, I know what the word metaphor means

LitheOhm

Sorry about that, didn't pick up on that.

How is it not one of those, as you view it?

KRyan

20:42

oh, the "I do not think it means what you think it means" line is a reference to The Princess Bride (which is a fantastic movie, if you haven't seen it you should)

LitheOhm

love it :)

KRyan

@LitheOhm a metaphor is, for one thing, explicitly a comparison between two things, which isn't what you're doing

you aren't making a comparison

LitheOhm

It is a comparison of this abstract concept of less-than-normal hit points and "wounds." Hardly a decent metaphor, but a comparison nonetheless

The SRD doesn't name them anything other than "hit points lost" or something similar. I call them "wounds" with the understanding that it's D&D, not Vampire

KRyan

@LitheOhm ...my objection is really only tangentially related to the use of the term "wounds"

yes, that term might be misleading

LitheOhm

Obscurely.

KRyan

20:46

but the more serious thing is the simple fact that, as you just pointed out, D&D does not care about how much damage you've taken, only how much HP you've got left

the difference between your current HP and your max HP does not ever get referenced by any rule that I'm aware of

and there are reasons for that

one of them is, as @shatterspike1 pointed out, subtraction is problematic at a tabletop

LitheOhm

and I do care about how much damage has been taken. Again, cures. Everyone is low-level and hanging out by the fire. "Who needs a cure light and who needs a cure mod?" Wounds are the applicable numbers, and quicker than max - current HP

@KRyan yes, which brings in the "wounds" concept nicely

shatterspike1

Algorithims. Attack Roll -> Damage Roll -> AC comparison -> subtraction of damage from current HP

vs. Attack Roll -> Damage Roll -> AC comparison -> addition of death points

LitheOhm

@shatterspike1 aye

KRyan

@LitheOhm you really should never use cure moderate wounds, or anything bigger than cure light wounds, particularly when you're just sitting around a campfire, but that's besides the point.

@LitheOhm only if you track both and then you have to perform two operations every time your HP changes, which is not a good solution

LitheOhm

-_-

KRyan

20:52

@shatterspike1 you forgot "subtraction of death points from HP to see how much HP you've got left."

LitheOhm

this just got boring

later

KRyan

yeah, bye

BESW

I has a sad now.

shatterspike1

21:04

@KRyan Actually, comparison works. Subtraction is only necessary if you're in one of those circumstances where HP total matters.

Also, what's your sad about BESW

?

BESW

@shatterspike1 Look what I just woke up to.

[gestures expansively upward]

shatterspike1

Ah, that whole argument. I'd recommend ignoring it.

I certainly didn't.

BESW

So far as I can tell, it boils down to "I think your answer would be clearer if you re-ordered it and added I think this means that to the start of one sentence."

shatterspike1

I think that's fairly accurate.

BESW

And really. If you think an answer's wrong, choose at least one: downvote it, leave a comment saying why, and leave a better answer. If you think an answer needs improvement, choose at least one: downvote it, leave a comment saying how, and edit it.

shatterspike1

21:16

I think the reason that went on for as long as it did was more due to a love of argument than anything else

BESW

@shatterspike1 Which has no more place in SE than any of the postulated problems with that answer.

One of the lovely things about SE is that it is not about convincing an individual.

Alex P

Also it's really easy to make small edits to other posts to spruce up their language to make them sound a bit more technical.

BESW

I'm going to work now. I might sign on during breaks. ttfn.

Zachiel

21:47

pfffft. Big 30HD CR19 undead (orb wraith), casts destruction on the wizard. Got the spell reflected, dead undead.

Discipol

22:57

gentlemen ^_^

1

Q: How do I make an optimal inflict wounds rogue in pathfinder?

In 3.5 I made a rogue / cleric / invisible blade that dealt sneak attacks through inflict wounds. This made the attack both a touch attack, and on a feinted character, which was basically a roll against 10 (some monsters had deflection and such), with negative energy, something only a select few...

pathfinder

I have this week's challenge :D

BESW

@Zachiel Spell reflection is... usually anticlimactic.

Zachiel

23:56

@BESW The wizard killed the big monster of the session while effectively doing nothing. Then he got ahead for a little see-invisible scouting, got hit by two guards and downright blasted them out of existence, then they attacked a Lich and the cleric and the wizard acted first, woth going for destruction. First one got counterspelled, second one not.

I'm not sad for the wizard killing a CR19 and three CR17 monsters alone. I'm sad for the druid sitting in an angle

And he has improved initiative

he just botched all initiative rolls

Next time the wizard is going to try Mordenkainen's Dinjunction in a room with two artifacts. I'm wondering if a level 40 goddess is too much for a lvl 17 party

Transcript for