D&D 5E Mythic Odysseys of Theros

[dave2008]

Sounds like a good question for Twitter.

I'm not on twitter, could you ask for @DnD Warlord ?

 

[DnD Warlord]

I'm not twitter, could you ask for @DnD Warlord ?

I have been off twitter for over a month due to politics

 

[teitan]

I will ask later on for sure.

 

[dave2008]

I will ask later on for sure.

Thanks!

 

[dave2008]

I have been off twitter for over a month due to politics

no worries - @teitan's got us covered

 

[teitan]

I asked it. I'll post the response when and if I get one.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I like the Oath of Heroism, myself. I like the idea of a Paladin that is less a servant of a god or ideal, and more a person with a destiny of greatness.

What about the published version of the Oath of Glory gives you that impression?

 

[Li Shenron]

We will have to disagree. It says that they regain hp.:. If a PC stops it from regaining hp I see no way to not just end the fight.

I think this is the kind of unwanted results when the designers think it's clever to represent some idea using in-game jargon and strict rules.

The RAI is quite obviously that the "first instance" of the monster is defeated, but immediately you have to fight a "second instance" of it, which starts completely reset from the beginning with clean stats (full HP, no conditions, no expended resources) and some extra boosts. They should have just said something like that in natural language, but instead they thought it was better to explain it more "mechanically". The pitfall is that it is very hard to keep in mind everything (even just in the PHB) that can modify how a mechanics plays out, due to the "specific beats general" principle. A single cantrip (Chill Touch) can put a spanner in the works of the RAI, just because the authors/editors did not remember about it.

 

[dave2008]

I think this is the kind of unwanted results when the designers think it's clever to represent some idea using in-game jargon and strict rules.

The RAI is quite obviously that the "first instance" of the monster is defeated, but immediately you have to fight a "second instance" of it, which starts completely reset from the beginning with clean stats (full HP, no conditions, no expended resources) and some extra boosts. They should have just said something like that in natural language, but instead they thought it was better to explain it more "mechanically". The pitfall is that it is very hard to keep in mind everything (even just in the PHB) that can modify how a mechanics plays out, due to the "specific beats general" principle. A single cantrip (Chill Touch) can put a spanner in the works of the RAI, just because the authors/editors did not remember about it.

I mean I get @DnD Warlord 's frustration as it would have been easy to clarify in the stat block, but it is very clear from the rules of mythic monsters and mythic encounters what the intent is.

 

[Zardnaar]

Not likely. The specific mythic trait overrules the more general rule of chill touch. However, I agree the could have made it more clear. Personally, I rule that all conditions end and all abilities recharge when the mythic trait is activated, which I believe is the design intent if not specifically stated

Just checked and yeah chill touch counters the mythic trait.

They probably should have included the mythic HP in original HP and when HP falls below XYZ mythic actions switch on.

Power word kill also negates the mythic ability.