Inspire Greatness -- Bonus Hit Dice?

[Hypersmurf]

I vote "no" because PCs do not (normally) gain features based upon HD, they gain them based upon level.

Any PC who gains hit dice gains features based on them.

-Hyp.

 

[ardentmoth]

HD and HD-based features are biconditional. Hyp and the gang are right again.

 

[Nifft]

And so we have precedent that shows that 'bonus hit dice' is a way of describing hit dice that are added above one's normal complement. The phrase isn't a term of art; rather, 'bonus' is an adjective applied to the term of art, 'hit dice'.

The Bard's text is actually the preceding definition. If you insist that the three "bonus hit dice" effects are related, you must view the Bard's as without precedent, and instead consider the others mere modifications of it. I'm afraid precedent doesn't help your case, and could probably be twisted around to hurt it (e.g.: "Why must the Paladin's mount text go to such trouble to explain that the mount's bonus HD are the same as actual HD? Because the Bard's bonus HD are practically unrelated, of course!"). Sorry.

We have one instance of "Bonus HD" being used to indicate a thing that is equivalent to actual hit dice; we have another separate instance where "bonus hit dice" is used to indicate something undefined, except for one feature that is incongruent to actual hit dice, and one case where they can be counted as regular hit dice.

We have no glossary entry for "bonus hit dice". It's not a term of art (you're right about that), but that doesn't imply we must either consider all definitions identical, nor that we must default to the definition of the contained term. (For an example of a "contained term" being invalid, consider the shadow's "incorporeal touch" attack. "Incorporeal" is a term of art, "touch attack" is a term of art, but "incorporeal touch attack" is not a term of art, nor is it a "touch attack" under some conditions.)

Cheers, -- N

 

[Slaved]

The Bard's text is actually the preceding definition. If you insist that the three "bonus hit dice" effects are related, you must view the Bard's as without precedent, and instead consider the others mere modifications of it. I'm afraid precedent doesn't help your case, and could probably be twisted around to hurt it (e.g.: "Why must the Paladin's mount text go to such trouble to explain that the mount's bonus HD are the same as actual HD? Because the Bard's bonus HD are practically unrelated, of course!"). Sorry.

We have one instance of "Bonus HD" being used to indicate a thing that is equivalent to actual hit dice; we have another separate instance where "bonus hit dice" is used to indicate something undefined, except for one feature that is incongruent to actual hit dice, and one case where they can be counted as regular hit dice.

We have no glossary entry for "bonus hit dice". It's not a term of art (you're right about that), but that doesn't imply we must either consider all definitions identical, nor that we must default to the definition of the contained term. (For an example of a "contained term" being invalid, consider the shadow's "incorporeal touch" attack. "Incorporeal" is a term of art, "touch attack" is a term of art, but "incorporeal touch attack" is not a term of art, nor is it a "touch attack" under some conditions.)

Cheers, -- N

The lack of Text explaining every Function of Hit Dice for Inspire Greatness does not demonstrate a lack of Function for the Hit Dice. The Writers could have Intended for the Bardic Music Ability Inspire Greatness to not give all of the Abilities that come with Hit Dice but made a poor decision to use the Term Hit Dice that carries its own baggage or forgot to add on a sentence explaining that the Hit Dice do not Function as Normal Hit Dice. None of that Contradicts what Inspire Greatness says.

 

[Artoomis]

Any PC who gains hit dice gains features based on them.

-Hyp.

No...

Characters gain LEVELS and LEVEL features. Hit dice happen to be one of those thigns you gain with a level. Features dependent upon hit dice are described for monsters in that special monster improvement table. All that stuff happens with leveling by class when you are improving with class levels.

When one levels up from level 3 to 4 one gains a hit die, but one does NOT gain features based upon that hit die, oen gains features based upon LEVEL.

The monster improvment section also says once you gain levels, you do nor improve by hit die.

 

[Artoomis]

HD and HD-based features are biconditional. Hyp and the gang are right again.

No. When you gain a level you gain a HD, but not HD features. I suppose one could even make a character class where one did not gain a HD, but that would be more than a little odd.

 

[Slaved]

No. When you gain a level you gain a HD, but not HD features. I suppose one could even make a character class where one did not gain a HD, but that would be more than a little odd.

I am still having a hard time understanding your Position. Can you tell me what a Rule would have to say in order to Prove to you that Monster Characters and Player Characters follow the same Rules?

 

[Hypersmurf]

No...

Characters gain LEVELS and LEVEL features.

Yet if a character acquires a hit die from somewhere that is not a class level, he's not going to gain class level features; rather, he'll gain the benefits of greater hit dice.

When one levels up from level 3 to 4 one gains a hit die, but one does NOT gain features based upon that hit die, oen gains features based upon LEVEL.

Right. But if you gain a hit die that's not class-related, you can't look to the class features to determine how you improve.

The monster improvment section also says once you gain levels, you do nor improve by hit die.

The monster improvement section says that a monster who acquires a character class improves according to that class, not his type. It doesn't say he can never improve by type thereafter.

-Hyp.

 

[Nifft]

Characters gain LEVELS and LEVEL features. Hit dice happen to be one of those thigns you gain with a level.

After reading this carefully, it actually makes sense.

For example: a Savage Progression.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Hypersmurf]

The Bard's text is actually the preceding definition.

Because it's the first one to appear in the book? That's an artefact of alphabetical order, not a hierarchy of relevance! Detect Chaos appears before Detect Evil, but it refers you to the spell that appears later in the book to get the details.

If you insist that the three "bonus hit dice" effects are related, you must view the Bard's as without precedent, and instead consider the others mere modifications of it.

Why? You're saying that bonus hit dice aren't hit dice, and the paladin text shows that they are. The bard text's failure to clarify this doesn't mean that it isn't demonstrated elsewhere.

If "temporary hit points" in the bard text inherit definition from "temporary hit points" described later in the book, why not the "bonus hit dice" in the bard text?

I'm not saying that the bard's bonus hit dice behave identically to the paladin's mount's bonus hit dice. I'm saying that the paladin text shows that bonus hit dice are a form of hit dice, and thus the bard's bonus hit dice follow the rules for hit dice (not necessarily mount's hit dice), except where specified otherwise.

We have no glossary entry for "bonus hit dice". It's not a term of art (you're right about that), but that doesn't imply we must either consider all definitions identical, nor that we must default to the definition of the contained term. (For an example of a "contained term" being invalid, consider the shadow's "incorporeal touch" attack. "Incorporeal" is a term of art, "touch attack" is a term of art, but "incorporeal touch attack" is not a term of art, nor is it a "touch attack" under some conditions.)

I disagree that "incorporeal touch attack" is not a term of art. It is not a touch attack, and it has specific meaning as a phrase.

-Hyp.