Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Disintegrate Vs. Druid
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="seebs" data-source="post: 6751733" data-attributes="member: 61529"><p>No. I would agree that you could get rid of <strong>this specific</strong> confusion.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No.</p><p></p><p>Systems of rules become prone to ambiguities or conflicts largely as a matter of scale. Basically, if you have 10 rules, there could be conceivably 45 different interactions of two rules. (There's 90 total pairs, but we ignore order, so it's only 45.) So rule 1 can interact with any of rules 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Rule 2 can interact with 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (and the interaction with 1 was already dealt with). If you have 20 rules, it's 190 interactions. If you have 30 rules, it's 435 interactions.</p><p></p><p>The reason that RPGs tend to have lots more complicated interactions is that their rules are both much more open-ended and much larger than the rules of most tabletop board games. The open-endedness means that the set of possible interactions grows dramatically, because you don't have a small fixed set of options at most points. The huge number of rules means there's that many more special cases that could conceivably be a clash.</p><p></p><p>If you just didn't <strong>have</strong> the disintegrate spell, there's only one possible-conflict I know of with wild shape, which is the question of what happens if the leftover damage is enough to outright kill the initial form, and I think the wording of the wild shape rule tells you that they are thinking about the left-over damage, because they tell you to do something else with it, which implies that it doesn't have the instant-kill possibility, probably.</p><p></p><p>But say you add another power, like a contingency spell that will fire off a cure wounds spell if you are dropped to zero hit points. Now you have two new questions: One, how does that interact with wild shape, two, how does that interact with disintegrate.</p><p></p><p>Oh, wait. I missed one. Look at the fiend pack warlock. "when you reduce a hostile creature to 0 hit points, you gain temporary hit points". Does that proc off a "temporary" reduction to zero hit points? If we assume the designer's intent is understood to be that wild shape happens before other things check for zero hit points, then probably not.</p><p></p><p>What about polymorph effects? Is a druid a "shapechanger"? Say that I am a 17th level wizard with 2 levels of druid, and I cast shapechange. If I assume a new shape, then assume another new shape, and I am reduced to zero hit points, do I end up back in my original form or in the second form I'd changed into?</p><p></p><p>Long story short: If you think you can write a system of rules this large and this flexible, which is not subject to ambiguities or confusions, you go right ahead and do that, and I know dozens of professional writers who will idolize you forever if you manage it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="seebs, post: 6751733, member: 61529"] No. I would agree that you could get rid of [b]this specific[/b] confusion. No. Systems of rules become prone to ambiguities or conflicts largely as a matter of scale. Basically, if you have 10 rules, there could be conceivably 45 different interactions of two rules. (There's 90 total pairs, but we ignore order, so it's only 45.) So rule 1 can interact with any of rules 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Rule 2 can interact with 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 (and the interaction with 1 was already dealt with). If you have 20 rules, it's 190 interactions. If you have 30 rules, it's 435 interactions. The reason that RPGs tend to have lots more complicated interactions is that their rules are both much more open-ended and much larger than the rules of most tabletop board games. The open-endedness means that the set of possible interactions grows dramatically, because you don't have a small fixed set of options at most points. The huge number of rules means there's that many more special cases that could conceivably be a clash. If you just didn't [b]have[/b] the disintegrate spell, there's only one possible-conflict I know of with wild shape, which is the question of what happens if the leftover damage is enough to outright kill the initial form, and I think the wording of the wild shape rule tells you that they are thinking about the left-over damage, because they tell you to do something else with it, which implies that it doesn't have the instant-kill possibility, probably. But say you add another power, like a contingency spell that will fire off a cure wounds spell if you are dropped to zero hit points. Now you have two new questions: One, how does that interact with wild shape, two, how does that interact with disintegrate. Oh, wait. I missed one. Look at the fiend pack warlock. "when you reduce a hostile creature to 0 hit points, you gain temporary hit points". Does that proc off a "temporary" reduction to zero hit points? If we assume the designer's intent is understood to be that wild shape happens before other things check for zero hit points, then probably not. What about polymorph effects? Is a druid a "shapechanger"? Say that I am a 17th level wizard with 2 levels of druid, and I cast shapechange. If I assume a new shape, then assume another new shape, and I am reduced to zero hit points, do I end up back in my original form or in the second form I'd changed into? Long story short: If you think you can write a system of rules this large and this flexible, which is not subject to ambiguities or confusions, you go right ahead and do that, and I know dozens of professional writers who will idolize you forever if you manage it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Disintegrate Vs. Druid
Top