D&D 5E Hex Shenanigans

[FlyingChihuahua]

Also:

1. What you described is not guaranteed. Likely yes, guaranteed? Not even close.

So in a game, why not let the rules decide? Heck in 5e it's an auto crit and very likely to kill a low level character (but not certain) - what's the problem?

2. As I said way up thread, context and genre matters:

Isn't it a running joke that Banner has basically tried every way he can think of to kill himself, but thanks to the Hulk - nothing works?

Have you heard of the trope Like Reality Unless Noted? I feel like a lack of understanding of that idea might be happening here.

 

[Mort]

Well here we are then, we're at that old bugaboo known as Personal Opinion and Interpretation.

Because, in my opinion, if someone in well, any story, shot themselves in the head and came out with only minor injuries, I'd be upset.

Although, there might be something else where I feel that something like that killing you is so blindingly obvious that it shouldn't at all be stated, but you have the (perfectly valid) opinion that if I don't mention that shooting yourself in the head causes massive damage at the very least, then that means that sort of rule is not in play at all.

It might be slightly on me for not saying straight up that taking a bullet to the brain is lethal, but it might also be on you because well, taking a slug to the dome and dying should be blindingly obvious.

It seems you're bringing the real world into the game. The game is not the real world.

But let's get real for a moment. If a player had a character take a gun and try to blow his brains out, I'd ask why - because this is not something that should be happening in game!

This is the player likely acting out. And is not really something that should be resolved in game but needs an out of game real discussion.

 

[Mort]

Have you heard of the trope Like Reality Unless Noted? I feel like a lack of understanding of that idea might be happening here.

The fact that the mage just cast fireball or that that guy next to you just shrugged off a hit from a fist the size of an elephant should clue most people in that a change to reality has been noted!

But again, NOT THE POINT. The point is making a ruling contrary to the rules, with no notice, that is harmful to the PC - is not ideal DMing. That's it.

 

[Arial Black]

Y'all must play with much more hard core DMs than I do. I might kill a PC, but a player has to really piss me off before I kill them.

Like by daring to play a warlock.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

The fact that the mage just cast fireball or that that guy next to you just shrugged off a hit from a fist the size of an elephant should clue most people in that a change to reality has been noted!

But again, NOT THE POINT. The point is making a ruling contrary to the rules, with no notice, that is harmful to the PC - is not ideal DMing. That's it.

But is it really contrary to the rules?

First off, there's the Massive Damage rules, both the PHB version (if the damage you take takes you down to negative your hit point maximum, your dead, no saving through) and the DMG' addition (taking a certain amount of high damage does something permanent, up to instant death).

Now, regarding the idea of "putting a gun to your head and pulling the trigger" I don't the makers of the rules felt the need to address that. Partially because firearms aren't usually in D&D, but also because it's blindingly obvious what happens when you do that.

At this point I am seriously leaning towards the opinion that you're seeking to know all the rules so you can game them to your advantage, because otherwise you wouldn't be asking so many things about a situation and resolution that is, again, blindingly obvious to almost everyone.

Like by daring to play a warlock.

So because he doesn't give you absolute freedom, that means he must hate it?

As I am very sure you are aware, given how much you cling to them, there are rules, and if you don't follow them, expect to be punished, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, otherwise you could just do anything with the caveat of "well I didn't know we were ruling that way" despite it, for the third time, being blindingly obvious.

 

[Oofta]

Like by daring to play a warlock.

If someone actually played a warlock instead of just taking 2 levels it wold definitely reaffirm my faith in humanity. Until then I'll just stew in bitterness, yelling at those kids to get that warlock off my lawn.

 

[Oofta]

I usually play that the game is a simplified version of reality with magic added in and the rules are just there to implement that.

So no, to me, it's not a game first, it's a dumbed-down fantasy world simulator. But people play for different reasons and with different perspectives.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

If someone actually played a warlock instead of just taking 2 levels it wold definitely reaffirm my faith in humanity. Until then I'll just stew in bitterness, yelling at those kids to get that warlock off my lawn.

well I have two pure warlock ideas that I think would be fun.

If I ever end up in one of your games, I'll use one of them, if only to stave off the despair for someone else.

 

[Mort]

But is it really contrary to the rules?

First off, there's the Massive Damage rules, both the PHB version (if the damage you take takes you down to negative your hit point maximum, your dead, no saving through) and the DMG' addition (taking a certain amount of high damage does something permanent, up to instant death).

The rules address the situation? Then why are you bothering to add arbitrary rulings?

Now, regarding the idea of "putting a gun to your head and pulling the trigger" I don't the makers of the rules felt the need to address that. Partially because firearms aren't usually in D&D, but also because it's blindingly obvious what happens when you do that.

Yes, it's blindingly obvious that you take a lot of damage and will likely die. But why are you DECLARING it's a certainty? What's the point of doing so other than basically yelling "I am the law!"

At this point I am seriously leaning towards the opinion that you're seeking to know all the rules so you can game them to your advantage, because otherwise you wouldn't be asking so many things about a situation and resolution that is, again, blindingly obvious to almost everyone.

Ad hominem? Really?

So because he doesn't give you absolute freedom, that means he must hate it?

As I am very sure you are aware, given how much you cling to them, there are rules, and if you don't follow them, expect to be punished, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, otherwise you could just do anything with the caveat of "well I didn't know we were ruling that way" despite it, for the third time, being blindingly obvious.

I'm not "clinging to the rules," I'm saying they shouldn't be arbitrarily changed. As, I've stated, repeatedly, I'm happy to change them, if they are bad - with notice And for the fun of the game.

And stop with the "blindingly obvious" nonsense, it's insulting and completely inaccurate.

 

[MGibster]

It seems you're bringing the real world into the game. The game is not the real world.

Are you familiar with verisimilitude? It means giving the appearance of reality. Most works of fantasy or science fiction contain fantastical elements as part of the setting requiring the audience to suspend their disbelief in order to enjoy it. That doesn't mean the audience will just accept something without some sort of explanation. I can accept the dead rising to feast upon the flesh of the living in The Walking Dead but if Rick Grimes shrugged of three gunshots to the chest it's going to stretch my ability to suspend disbelief beyond it's breaking point. This will have a negative impact on my ability to enjoy the show. On the flip side there are other genres where a character can take three gunshots to the chest without blinking and I'm fine with those.

But let's get real for a moment. If a player had a character take a gun and try to blow his brains out, I'd ask why - because this is not something that should be happening in game!

Yes, let's get real. I've never participated in a game where a player just decided to have their character jump off a cliff knowing it wouldn't do permanent damage just for the lulz. Likewise, I've never had a player character decide to just shoot themselves in the head for some reason. However, if they did, I'd ask them what they were trying to accomplish. Odds are good that there's some underlying problem behind their decision. But if they were hellbent on following through I'd make it clear that they were going to kill their character rules be damned.