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="Arial Black" data-source="post: 6763711" data-attributes="member: 6799649"><p>Seebs, you have stated a position in this debate, but your posts actually undercut your own stated intent.</p><p></p><p>Your stated position is that the rules in question, the words that are written, could reasonably be interpreted either way. Given this, you should be arguing against those who claim the words can only be understood one way and support (or at least not counter) those who agree that they could be understood in two ways.</p><p></p><p>Nothing wrong so far.</p><p></p><p>But Maxperson continues to assert that the words can only be interpreted one way, but you say nothing to him.</p><p></p><p>I agree with you that the words could, on their face, be understood either way. But which way is the right way? They cannot both be correct, even if the wording leads to ambiguity</p><p></p><p>So I <strong>then</strong> explore <em>both</em> interpretations, and reach, through reason, that only one of the interpretations stand up to scrutiny. And yet you criticise me (erroneously) by accusing me of denying that the words could have two interpretations.</p><p></p><p>Using reason to explore each interpretation to get an answer is the only way forward in cases where the text is ambiguous like this (unless you ask the writer-which we did!). It is not 'making up new rules' when you use logic to understand that a rule 'cannot' mean A, therefore B, however unlikely, must be true.</p><p></p><p>We know that Wild Shape rules that, when you take damage, you revert to druid form at 0 hp. We know that, at 0 hp, you fall unconscious/die. The game includes effects that remove their own trigger, like <em>shield</em> or the orc/barbarian abilites, that mean the trigger condition is replaced by a different condition. But is Wild Shape like that? If it isn't, then the beast form dropping to zero would cause unconsciousness/death by massive damage, and <em>also</em> revert the druid. But this does not happen. So, logically, it <em>must</em> be that the reversion to druid happens <em>instead of</em>, rather than <em>in addition to</em>, falling to 0 hp. The druid doesn't actually die and then <em>heal</em> to his druid hp total; his beast form goes away and his true form gets damaged. There is no healing involved.</p><p></p><p>The logical extrapolation of existing rules is a different thing than 'just making stuff up'.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Arial Black, post: 6763711, member: 6799649"] Seebs, you have stated a position in this debate, but your posts actually undercut your own stated intent. Your stated position is that the rules in question, the words that are written, could reasonably be interpreted either way. Given this, you should be arguing against those who claim the words can only be understood one way and support (or at least not counter) those who agree that they could be understood in two ways. Nothing wrong so far. But Maxperson continues to assert that the words can only be interpreted one way, but you say nothing to him. I agree with you that the words could, on their face, be understood either way. But which way is the right way? They cannot both be correct, even if the wording leads to ambiguity So I [b]then[/b] explore [i]both[/i] interpretations, and reach, through reason, that only one of the interpretations stand up to scrutiny. And yet you criticise me (erroneously) by accusing me of denying that the words could have two interpretations. Using reason to explore each interpretation to get an answer is the only way forward in cases where the text is ambiguous like this (unless you ask the writer-which we did!). It is not 'making up new rules' when you use logic to understand that a rule 'cannot' mean A, therefore B, however unlikely, must be true. We know that Wild Shape rules that, when you take damage, you revert to druid form at 0 hp. We know that, at 0 hp, you fall unconscious/die. The game includes effects that remove their own trigger, like [i]shield[/i] or the orc/barbarian abilites, that mean the trigger condition is replaced by a different condition. But is Wild Shape like that? If it isn't, then the beast form dropping to zero would cause unconsciousness/death by massive damage, and [i]also[/i] revert the druid. But this does not happen. So, logically, it [i]must[/i] be that the reversion to druid happens [i]instead of[/i], rather than [i]in addition to[/i], falling to 0 hp. The druid doesn't actually die and then [i]heal[/i] to his druid hp total; his beast form goes away and his true form gets damaged. There is no healing involved. The logical extrapolation of existing rules is a different thing than 'just making stuff up'. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Disintegrate Vs. Druid
Top