Search results

  1. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Ok. so, if "when" is non-exclusive, then it includes being killed. Thus, the rule for not dealing lethal damage applies. You can't have it both ways. Either destroyed includes "killed" (non-exclusive interpretation), which means you are wrong, or destroyed doesn't include killed (exclusive...
  2. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Again, this is a very good example of the 6 impossible things before breakfast. It doesn't matter that the first six things are identical to the seventh thing. We make exceptions for the first six things because no one made us actually think about them before. But, that seventh one is right...
  3. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Again, it makes perfect sense when you've decided that this is the hill you are going to die on and no amount of evidence will shift your perspective. As I said, @clearstream's interpretation means that minions are immortal, never need to eat or sleep, and are utterly immune to diseases. The...
  4. 1756522644180.webp

    1756522644180.webp

  5. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Except that dying is rules defined and you're somehow trying to argue that those definitions don't apply to "destroyed" mostly because that specific interpretation supports your argument. You are rejecting any other interpretation. In other words, you're playing semantic silly buggers in order...
  6. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Except that in no version of D&D can you actually kill a summoned entity. They just poof back to wherever they were summoned from. Now, are you trying to claim that a summoned creature may never be incapacitated? Where is that interpretation coming from?
  7. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Well, apparently you do since you have decided that "destroyed" doesn't mean killed but some other form of death that is somehow undefined but still exactly the same as dying. 🤷
  8. Hussar

    Worlds of Design: The Great Divide

    Just a point about the length of genre fiction. The thing is, before 1980, there was just so little genre fiction at all. Pre-1980, most years you were lucky to get a couple dozen genre titles. At least at the novel length. You quite easily could read every single fantasy novel published in...
  9. Hussar

    Worlds of Design: The Problem with Space Navies, Part 2

    Another thought I had about space navies. Physics are going to play such a huge role. The presumption that an enemy could approach from any direction depends so much on how the ships move. In something like Star Wars or Star Trek, where the ships effectively "teleport" to a location, sure...
  10. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Oh the irony. The only reason you have any leg to stand on is an insistence on a very specific interpretation of the rules that is not actually supported anywhere else in the rules. The rule is, players can decide if their attacks kill a target. Full stop. There is no specific rule that...
  11. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Only when edition warring.
  12. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Ahh, edition warring. How I missed thee. @clearstream, feel free to have to last word because this level of sophistry is just beyond me.
  13. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Again, that is wrong. A minion is only "destroyed" AFTER it's HP are reduced to zero. There is no other way to "destroy" a minion. Thus the PC's would always have the choice of killing a minion or not. There is nothing in the description of minions that contradicts the point that the PC can...
  14. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Is this meant to argue with me? If they are interchangeable, then the rules for PC's not killing something would be in force.
  15. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Your character has 50 HP. He takes 5 points of damage. What happened? Same character takes 49 points of damage. What happened? What narrative can you give for either effect that cannot be used interchangeably with the other damage? For something to be diegetic, it has to be actually seen by...
  16. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    The difference is, we can twist "destroyed" into some sort of mechanical meaning that suits a specific interpretation that is not supported otherwise. After all, the specific rule is that the player can always choose (in 4e) not to kill something. But, if we insist that "destroyed" is some...
  17. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    Again, you're insisting that I'm stating a preference. I have zero problems with the mechanic. The mechanics are perfectly fine. Good grief, I have and do play D&D for a very, very long time. I obviously don't have a problem with the mechanics. My problem is this interpretation of the...
  18. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    To be fair, I just checked the 4e PHB, and it appears that you can choose not to kill things with energy attacks. I stand corrected. Page 295 says you can knock creatures unconscious when you reduce it to 0 or less HP. Which is the rule that over rules the Minions description, as it is an...
  19. Hussar

    D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

    See, again, this is the whole 6 impossible things before breakfast. HP make zero sense. AC is an abstraction that makes virtually no sense. Rounds, turns, all make no sense. Stop motion combat makes no sense. Classes do not exist in the game world. Skills do not exist in the game world -...
Top