Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?
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="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6599552" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>Yes. No. Yes. Potentially. Potentially. I don't understand the question. (In that order.)</p><p></p><p>Unless otherwise stated, "normal status is full health" is the default assumption of every group I've played in, witnessed, overheard, heard about, or in any other way received any information regarding, ever. So when an NPC is made to actually "exist" as a mechanical implementation rather than purely a narrative character (using my previous meaning of "exist"), that NPC will be assumed to be in default status. If, and only if, there is a narrative justification for deviation from that status, then there will be a change. For example, it's our second fight with a particular enemy in as many days, but this time the enemy has been given a dangerous alchemical potion that temporarily lets them shrug off wounds (perhaps with nasty, but delayed, side-effects). This is a perfectly valid narrative justification for a being which "exists," mechanically, to deviate from its default normal state (full health) to a different state (beyond normal health). Alternatively, we kicked this enemy's butt pretty hard last time, and for whatever reason they didn't get a chance to recover. That would be a perfectly valid justification for going the other way.</p><p></p><p>These changes CAN occur after initiative is rolled, but I consider it relatively unlikely that such narrative justifications could simply appear in the course of combat. Not impossible, but unlikely.</p><p></p><p>It really, truly is that different. Again: One is the DM deciding what will <em>enter into</em> mechanically-realized "existence." The other is tampering with things that *already* exist. Such tampering, unless it is explicitly called out (via narrative justification, presumably) inherently invalidates the players' ability to make informed decisions: the world is not what they think it is, but they are intentionally denied the ability to <em>learn</em> that the world is other than what they think it is. If the difference is in their favor, they will not learn what choices are bad or dangerous; if it is against them, then even their good choices may be thwarted. Either way, they will have a mistaken understanding of what makes their choices good or bad. And yes, I still hold that even knowing that "good choices" can be invalidated by especially unlucky rolls (from the players' perspective). If the choice involves a percentage chance of risk, that percentage chance <em>should be</em> factored into the choice; if it was not, then a lesson can be learned about accounting for the chance of terrible things maybe happening (which, over the long run of many D&D sessions, is essentially guaranteed <em>eventually</em>).</p><p></p><p>Edit:</p><p>Also, to explain the "I don't understand the question," I think I do know what you meant, but I see a different and equally valid interpretation of the question, and which interpretation I take would radically change my answer, so I cannot answer the question as stated. However, I hope that my above explanations have given an adequate answer nonetheless.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 6599552, member: 6790260"] Yes. No. Yes. Potentially. Potentially. I don't understand the question. (In that order.) Unless otherwise stated, "normal status is full health" is the default assumption of every group I've played in, witnessed, overheard, heard about, or in any other way received any information regarding, ever. So when an NPC is made to actually "exist" as a mechanical implementation rather than purely a narrative character (using my previous meaning of "exist"), that NPC will be assumed to be in default status. If, and only if, there is a narrative justification for deviation from that status, then there will be a change. For example, it's our second fight with a particular enemy in as many days, but this time the enemy has been given a dangerous alchemical potion that temporarily lets them shrug off wounds (perhaps with nasty, but delayed, side-effects). This is a perfectly valid narrative justification for a being which "exists," mechanically, to deviate from its default normal state (full health) to a different state (beyond normal health). Alternatively, we kicked this enemy's butt pretty hard last time, and for whatever reason they didn't get a chance to recover. That would be a perfectly valid justification for going the other way. These changes CAN occur after initiative is rolled, but I consider it relatively unlikely that such narrative justifications could simply appear in the course of combat. Not impossible, but unlikely. It really, truly is that different. Again: One is the DM deciding what will [I]enter into[/I] mechanically-realized "existence." The other is tampering with things that *already* exist. Such tampering, unless it is explicitly called out (via narrative justification, presumably) inherently invalidates the players' ability to make informed decisions: the world is not what they think it is, but they are intentionally denied the ability to [I]learn[/I] that the world is other than what they think it is. If the difference is in their favor, they will not learn what choices are bad or dangerous; if it is against them, then even their good choices may be thwarted. Either way, they will have a mistaken understanding of what makes their choices good or bad. And yes, I still hold that even knowing that "good choices" can be invalidated by especially unlucky rolls (from the players' perspective). If the choice involves a percentage chance of risk, that percentage chance [I]should be[/I] factored into the choice; if it was not, then a lesson can be learned about accounting for the chance of terrible things maybe happening (which, over the long run of many D&D sessions, is essentially guaranteed [I]eventually[/I]). Edit: Also, to explain the "I don't understand the question," I think I do know what you meant, but I see a different and equally valid interpretation of the question, and which interpretation I take would radically change my answer, so I cannot answer the question as stated. However, I hope that my above explanations have given an adequate answer nonetheless. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Would you change a monster's hit points mid-fight?
Top