Search results

Definitions. Rules define what they do. Being destroyed has no definition and doesn't tell you what actually happens, so we have to default to the general rule of destroyed equaling killed, which in turn equals being reduced to 0 hit points. Edit: or put another way, if any damage destroys a...

There's nothing in the minion rules precluding being knocked out. Destroyed = killed. Killed = being able to be knocked out. Without some specifically defined meaning for destroyed that does preclude it, it's just another way to say killed, which in 4e means reduced to 0 hit points.

5e very specifically does not have all meat hit points. You don't even take so much as a scratch before half your hit points are lost, and you don't take a direct hit until you are reduced to 0. So no one is beaten, bludgeoned, cut, or burned down to death's door. Instead they are skilled...

They are both included there, but I don't see where that makes a difference. The rules don't preclude you from knocking out a non-minion zombie or golem when you reduce it to 0, so you can still knock out creatures that aren't alive and would be "destroyed."

No. Just reinforce what you are saying. I'm not always arguing with you! :P

Destroyed has no definition. Language in the DMG shows that destroyed and killed are used interchangeably, so destroyed doesn't do anything to alter the more general rule regarding creatures who are killed. How are minions killed/destroyed? Damage. What does damage do? Hit point loss. Minions...

As I pointed out above, there is language in the 4e DMG that shows that destroyed and killed are interchangeable.

Looking at the 4e books, destroy is typically used to indicate objects and not anything alive, however it's used with minions, and again interchangeably with kill when referring to gods. There's no reason for me to think that it's not also used interchangeably with minions which are creatures...

Destroyed isn't defined anywhere that I can find. Since it's not defined, and a creature(which a minion 100% is) reduced to 0 can be rendered unconscious instead of killed, destroyed effectively equals dead. Edit: Language from the DMG also indicates that they are interchangeable. "However...

What's the difference between destroyed and killed? I've looked through the first three books and I don't see destroyed defined anywhere.

Well, then I misunderstood something you said a while back. Disregard.

Right. The amount of money that it would take up front in order to be able to overcome that inertia is immense. Companies with the money won't want to take that chance, because if they spend that amount of money, they could easily still fail and be out the cash. Individuals might want to take...

This statement agrees with us that rules are just guidelines that can be overridden by having a will. That's what a guideline is. A guideline is just a rule that can be overridden if the DM and/or group has a reason to do so. This is incorrect. A well written rule that I and/or the group...

If I sit down to play Catan, there are no exceptions to any of the rules that come up through odd corner case game play. A 7 results in the robber being placed by the player rolling it. Cards are discarded according to the rules. A card is possibly stolen according to the rules. A roll other...

The bolded is irrelevant since the DM doesn't act on whim with rules changes. The rule(har har har) is that the suggested rules are followed and any changes are the result of reason, not whim, and the overwhelming majority of the time are not done in the moment. The rare corner case bad DM...

He also proudly states that natural consequences that stem from player agency is a railroad when it isn't. He doesn't seem to understand what railroading really is. If the king hired the PCs to save his daughter who would be killed if not rescued, and the players decided to have their PCs...

Yep. With my group we discuss any changes to the rules and generally do not adopt any rule that the majority of us does not approve of. I only say generally because very rarely, like once or twice in 20 years rarely, I will institute a house rule unilaterally. And never without good reason.

It's actually very common. If the rules aren't just suggestions, then the DM can't change any of them. Yet he can, so they are just suggested rules. Most people I've interacted with here understand that the DM can change or add rules, which makes RAW just suggested rules to follow. That said...

There's a pretty stark difference between "The DM can add or change rules of a game" and "The DM is not following any rules and is just unfairly pretending to follow rules." Bloodtide didn't say the latter. At least not in the post you just quoted.