Official D&D Errata Updated (Nov 2018)

Monster Manual: http://media.wizards.com/2018/dnd/downloads/Mm-Errata.pdf

DMG: http://media.wizards.com/2018/dnd/downloads/DMG-Errata.pdf

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Two questions:

Was this ever in doubt. And why the sad face?

(To me, anything else would be completely bewildering. Monsters aren't just there to be killed. If you can heal up by resting, so should the goblins and owlbears.)

When you fire an arrow at an owlbear, and the attack roll is successful so we know for a fact that your attack actually hit the owlbear and caused damage, I like to describe the owlbear as having an arrow sticking out of it. I can't imagine that this position is controversial at all.

The difference between an owlbear and a barn owl is not the difference between an epic hero and some peasant. Regardless of how HP work for PCs and NPCs, animals have HP which represent their bulk, because you need to inflict significant amounts of physical trauma before they stop moving.

 

[dave2008]

When you fire an arrow at an owlbear, and the attack roll is successful so we know for a fact that your attack actually hit the owlbear and caused damage, I like to describe the owlbear as having an arrow sticking out of it. I can't imagine that this position is controversial at all.

The difference between an owlbear and a barn owl is not the difference between an epic hero and some peasant. Regardless of how HP work for PCs and NPCs, animals have HP which represent their bulk, because you need to inflict significant amounts of physical trauma before they stop moving.

Emphasis mine. We do not know that for a fact. What we do know for a fact is: The hit points of animals, monsters, and PCs work the same.

I am familiar with your preference (and honestly mine too - that is why i house rule), but an arrow that "hits" an owl bear need not be sticking into it or even physically damage it (to an extent that it hinders the beast) to cause hit point damage. Just like PCs. In fact it is pretty clear these are not meat points as different animals of the same size can have vastly different hit points.

 

[CapnZapp]

When you fire an arrow at an owlbear, and the attack roll is successful so we know for a fact that your attack actually hit the owlbear and caused damage, I like to describe the owlbear as having an arrow sticking out of it. I can't imagine that this position is controversial at all.

The difference between an owlbear and a barn owl is not the difference between an epic hero and some peasant. Regardless of how HP work for PCs and NPCs, animals have HP which represent their bulk, because you need to inflict significant amounts of physical trauma before they stop moving.

I have zero objections to any of that.

What I was talking about is how I like that monsters can heal up between fights (in the rare case they survive) the same way heroes can, using their hit dice.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Emphasis mine. We do not know that for a fact. What we do know for a fact is: The hit points of animals, monsters, and PCs work the same.

Which is actually still reasonable... ish... if you use the optional rule that requires a medkit in order to spend hit dice.

I am familiar with your preference (and honestly mine too - that is why i house rule), but an arrow that "hits" an owl bear need not be sticking into it or even physically damage it (to an extent that it hinders the beast) to cause hit point damage. Just like PCs. In fact it is pretty clear these are not meat points as different animals of the same size can have vastly different hit points.

Would you seriously try and argue that a whale (or kraken, if you prefer) could be "missed" by a hundred arrows, and then succumb to one that hits it in a vital spot?

I would consider such an explanation to be absurd. A vast beast does not fall from the first weapon that impact it; there's a lot of meat to dig through, before you can impair it enough to stop moving. If the rules are seriously trying to convey such a narrative, then the rules are also absurd, and deserve to be criticized to the full extent possible.

 

[CapnZapp]

99% of the sage advice will still be applicable, mostly in things that aren't touched.

Obviously I was talking about the individual Sage Advice items that are impacted by any given errata.

 

[Blue]

Obviously I was talking about the individual Sage Advice items that are impacted by any given errata.

Actually, that's not obvious at all. Because to do that, they would need to go through the Sage Advice compendium, determine which ones are affected, and issue a new Sage Advice compendium.

And if they were going to put int hat much effort, the only "obvious" solution is to fix them instead of depreciating them - it's slightly more work for much better results.

It can't be us players depreciating them, for the reason I outlined in my earlier email where once another version comes out and the [New] tags are gone, we have no easy way to tell what supersedes what.

 

[dave2008]

Which is actually still reasonable... ish... if you use the optional rule that requires a medkit in order to spend hit dice.

What is reasonable is a matter of perspective. The medkit may make it seem more reasonable to you, but that is not a requirement.

Would you seriously try and argue that a whale (or kraken, if you prefer) could be "missed" by a hundred arrows, and then succumb to one that hits it in a vital spot?

I would consider such an explanation to be absurd. A vast beast does not fall from the first weapon that impact it; there's a lot of meat to dig through, before you can impair it enough to stop moving. If the rules are seriously trying to convey such a narrative, then the rules are also absurd, and deserve to be criticized to the full extent possible.

No, I would not, nor do I think you need to. The HP rules are intentionally amorphous. Any individual arrow need not be stuck in its side, but clearly some must have. It is not an all or nothing proposition. Gygax did a pretty good job of describing hit points in the 1e DMG and I think it still applies to 5e. Some of it is "meat" and some is luck, endurance, etc. If you want consequences for "meat" damage, use the lingering injuries rules (or house rule like I do) and slow healing rules and apply them to PCs and monsters. This would do a pretty good job. Regardless the standard rules seem "reasonable" to the majority of gamers, even if that doesn't include you and me.

Personally I like to separate "hit points" from "meat points" so we have a house rule for that.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

No, I would not, nor do I think you need to. The HP rules are intentionally amorphous. Any individual arrow need not be stuck in its side, but clearly some must have. It is not an all or nothing proposition.

If any of those arrows had penetrated, then the specific damage from that arrow would not be susceptible to healing via nap mechanics. Since the creature can take a nap and remove all of the damage, it necessarily means that none of the damage was substantially physical in any way.

Amorphous Hit Points worked significantly better under any ruleset that Gygax would have used, since naps didn't heal anything at all unless you were dealing with a supernatural creature or a superhuman Constitution score, and thus there was room to describe some of those hits as partially physical. Under slow healing, damage can by any combination of meat and fatigue. Under fast healing, damage cannot be meat.

 

[Dausuul]

Isn't the obvious solution to deprecate Sage Advice given before a particular set of errata?

Personally, I deprecated Sage Advice a while ago.

 

[dave2008]

If any of those arrows had penetrated, then the specific damage from that arrow would not be susceptible to healing via nap mechanics. Since the creature can take a nap and remove all of the damage, it necessarily means that none of the damage was substantially physical in any way.

Amorphous Hit Points worked significantly better under any ruleset that Gygax would have used, since naps didn't heal anything at all unless you were dealing with a supernatural creature or a superhuman Constitution score, and thus there was room to describe some of those hits as partially physical. Under slow healing, damage can by any combination of meat and fatigue. Under fast healing, damage cannot be meat.

As I mentioned in my post. People with your mindset can use the variant rules which work better for that type of approach. The rules are their to recreate that Gygax feel (even better maybe). The fact is, the vast majority of people don't care and WotC is going to serve the vast majority, not you and me. That is why I use a house rule.