I can't say that I understand this. If the rules don't define the imaginary world, what does? If a fighter knows he can survive jumping down a cliff, why wouldn't he? Sure it would hurt, you wouldn't do it on a lark. Or, in mechanical terms, its not a trivial amount of damage. But if that's what you need to do to accomplish your goal, it would break immersion for me if you refused (barring some in game character reason like a fear of heights).Because you're not thinking of this as rules for a game that happen to take place in an imaginary world.
Instead, you are trying to say that the rules define this imaginary world.
In other words, in your conception, a 20th level fighter says, "Hey, I don't have time to wait for feather fall, so I'll just jump down that 200' chasm since I know it won't kill me, and I don't feel pain, or anything like that."
It's a completely different understanding of, um, playing D&D. It's okay, but it's different.
That's not my perspective on the question, but maybe it ties into how others think of it. More like "rules are a metagame construct" vs "rules actually describe how the fictional setting works."Oh boy, another round of "classes are a metagame construct" versus "classes actually exist in the fictional setting".
This is a novel and interesting discussion.
It's narrower than that: we're splitting hairs on whether warlocks (etc) have a concept of "short rests" as in "you get you magic back after a short rest." Are warlocks aware of how that works? If not, what do they understand / what is their understanding?Oh boy, another round of "classes are a metagame construct" versus "classes actually exist in the fictional setting".
This is a novel and interesting discussion.
I'm not sure that is at the heart of the issue for Fanelialae and Snarf.It's narrower than that: we're splitting hairs on whether warlocks (etc) have a concept of "short rests" as in "you get you magic back after a short rest." Are warlocks aware of how that works? If not, what do they understand / what is their understanding?
Agreed but it still brings up interesting questions.All stemming form a discussion of an 'exploit' that actually provides no benefit.
Y'know if you don't like the conversation you can just... ignore it?Oh boy, another round of "classes are a metagame construct" versus "classes actually exist in the fictional setting".
This is a novel and interesting discussion.
So the only possible reason one wouldn't jump off a cliff is because of a fear of heights? Am I getting that correctly?I can't say that I understand this. If the rules don't define the imaginary world, what does? If a fighter knows he can survive jumping down a cliff, why wouldn't he? Sure it would hurt, you wouldn't do it on a lark. Or, in mechanical terms, its not a trivial amount of damage. But if that's what you need to do to accomplish your goal, it would break immersion for me if you refused (barring some in game character reason like a fear of heights).
There are an infinitude of reasons not to jump off a cliff, and I can't say I've ever experienced a rash of cliff jumping in one of my games. But if there was a good reason to jump off a cliff, I'd say a character would need an equal compelling reason not to do it in that situation. I mean, was Anakin being a munchkin when he jumped out of his aircar in Attack of the Clones?So the only possible reason one wouldn't jump off a cliff is because of a fear of heights? Am I getting that correctly?
It's narrower than that: we're splitting hairs on whether warlocks (etc) have a concept of "short rests" as in "you get you magic back after a short rest." Are warlocks aware of how that works? If not, what do they understand / what is their understanding?
All stemming form a discussion of an 'exploit' that actually provides no benefit.
No argument from me, even if you can't really explain why you think it is silly. But I think its important to recognize the player might not see why it is silly, so there's no reason to get mad at them about it. (Not saying that you would.First, is it silly. As a DM, I get to define what is silly in home games that I run.
This to me is a perfectly understandable explanation.Second, what is the definition of "creature". If a creature has to have at least 1 HP because of how different abilities and spells are worded then I would say that a standard chicken is not a creature; for all practical purposes it does not have HP.
There are an infinitude of reasons not to jump off a cliff, and I can't say I've ever experienced a rash of cliff jumping in one of my games. But if there was a good reason to jump off a cliff, I'd say a character would need an equal compelling reason not to do it in that situation. I mean, was Anakin being a munchkin when he jumped out of his aircar in Attack of the Clones?