Funny knock-out ruling

[Tarrab]

Well, players will always surprise you whit their attempts at bending the rules to their favor.

So, the Ranger Archer shoots an arrow at the evil Warlock Bladelock/Assassin and ends his plan on assassinating the Queen, yet all other players except him remembered they needed him alive for two reasons: 1) to know who hired him/controls him
2) to specify the poison he use to weaken the Queen´s daughter.

So when he is dead, the player tells me "wait, can´t I choose to knock him out instead of killing him?", and my answer is:

K n o c k i n g a C r e a t u r e O u t
Sometimes an attacker wants to incapacitate a foe,
rather than deal a killing blow. When an attacker
reduces a creature to 0 hit points with a melee attack,
the attacker can knock the creature out. The attacker
can make this choice the instant the damage is dealt.
The creature falls unconscious and is stable.

And he says: "It´s unfair it´s only melee attacks, which almost no one ever makes! Why can´t I just knock him out with my arrow?", I laugh "Cause I have never seen anyone been knocked out from an arrow to the head, have you?" and he says "No, but I could have shot a piece of rock over his head, or a pot near him to knock him out, or hit him in a particular spot in the neck that would knock him, or to his feet and make him fall prone and knock his head".

The worst thing... it was so funny that I ended up allowing it! Guess how all players now are buying ranged weapons... :smalleek:

[pwykersotz]

Nice. I like the imagery of shooting an arrow with a rope wrapped around the shaft that is tied to a pot. Fired above his head, the pot is at head level and *CLANG* knockout! Very Looney Toons-esque.

Just remember, don't let them run all over the game just because you let one thing slide once. If you regret the implications, rescind your ruling and talk with them about it. Maybe you could say that if they fire those arrows, they can't actually kill someone or have them do reduced damage and range from being imbalanced. Or just enforce the original rule. You might have to work with them a little if they feel strongly enough on this.

On the other hand, if you're happy with it and going along with the lolz, let it ride. :smallsmile:

[Tarrab]

Nice. I like the imagery of shooting an arrow with a rope wrapped around the shaft that is tied to a pot. Fired above his head, the pot is at head level and *CLANG* knockout! Very Looney Toons-esque.

Just remember, don't let them run all over the game just because you let one thing slide once. If you regret the implications, rescind your ruling and talk with them about it. Maybe you could say that if they fire those arrows, they can't actually kill someone or have them do reduced damage and range from being imbalanced. Or just enforce the original rule. You might have to work with them a little if they feel strongly enough on this.

On the other hand, if you're happy with it and going along with the lolz, let it ride. :smallsmile:

Yeah, if not next question is gonna be "Hey, why cannot I knock him out with a fireball??". I did rule that for a Ranged attack to knock out, it has to be done in no more a range than 30 feet though.

[Shining Wrath]

Is Shocking Grasp a melee attack? Can we knock people out with spells? :smallbiggrin:

And I'm afraid I would have ruled that you can't hit with the flat of an arrow, and that if he's calling his shot that's a much more difficult AC.

[Callin]

I would make them use special Padded and Blunted Tipped Arrows.

[Shining Wrath]

I would make them use special Padded and Blunted Tipped Arrows.

Or break the head off an arrow and shoot just the shaft.

[Atmosk]

I Imagine the archer just replaced the arrowhead with a brick.

[flakjkt]

If you like how it went all is cool. I think I would have reduced him to zero hp and allowed the players the chance to stabilize him. To the guy who said break off the tip the arrow....it has no balance and becomes nearly useless except close range and would still penetrate. I am a avid bow hunter so have plenty of real experience. I always love those "oh crap" moments from players though lol

[Magic Myrmidon]

Yeah, way to go on being open to player ideas. Makes for a cool story. You can always explain to your players if you want to take the ruling back.

Is there a "unconscious, but stable" state for NPCs anymore? As in, you don't do enough damage to kill by PC rules, but enough to bring them below zero?

[Tarrab]

Yeah, way to go on being open to player ideas. Makes for a cool story. You can always explain to your players if you want to take the ruling back.

Is there a "unconscious, but stable" state for NPCs anymore? As in, you don't do enough damage to kill by PC rules, but enough to bring them below zero?

Death Saving Trows, gotta love´em-

[RealCheese]

I've been playing with the, I guess house-, rule that anyone who deals the finishing blow can decide it is non-lethal, they just have to describe what happens. And just cause an arrow penetrates doesn't mean it has to kill. Finishing shot to the shoulder anyone?

[Bubzors]

Is Shocking Grasp a melee attack? Can we knock people out with spells? :smallbiggrin:

And I'm afraid I would have ruled that you can't hit with the flat of an arrow, and that if he's calling his shot that's a much more difficult AC.

Shocking grasp=modern day stun gun

[unwise]

I tend to rule that zero HP is not necessary unconscious as in passed out, there are lots of types of "incapacitated and not paying attention". An arrow in the kidney tends to have that effect. The guys not going to die any time soon, but sure as heck is not fighting anymore. I tend to let melee guys KO people, ranged attacks and spells can just be less-lethal, like a gut shot that will kill somebody slowly without aid, but will give an NPC who would not normally get death saving throws the ability to take them.

[7heprofessor]

Well, players will always surprise you whit their attempts at bending the rules to their favor.

So, the Ranger Archer shoots an arrow at the evil Warlock Bladelock/Assassin and ends his plan on assassinating the Queen, yet all other players except him remembered they needed him alive for two reasons: 1) to know who hired him/controls him
2) to specify the poison he use to weaken the Queen´s daughter.

So when he is dead, the player tells me "wait, can´t I choose to knock him out instead of killing him?", and my answer is:

Did the Ranger do enough damage to KILL the Assassin? Remember, "When damage reduces you to 0 hit points and there is damage remaining, you die if the remaining damage equals or exceeds your hit point maximum."

My 3rd level PCs have an average of HP maximum of ~20. That means an attack will have to do at least 20, but more likely 25-30 damage to outright kill them in one hit. Currently running HotDQ, nothing is capable of doing that much damage in one hit yet, so the party is a bit brazen at this point.

After all, it's only a Wisdom (medicine) check DC 10 to stabilize someone. In fact, no on has failed more than one death saving throw in 3 levels except for:

the Paladin that agreed to fight Cyanwrath failing two death saves by being stabbed while unconscious


Either way...just my 2 cp

[Yagyujubei]

TL;DR the other posts, but have you never heard of Judo arrowheads? there are more than one type of arrowhead that are designed to create blunt trauma and not pierce the target.

[WickerNipple]

TL;DR the other posts, but have you never heard of Judo arrowheads? there are more than one type of arrowhead that are designed to create blunt trauma and not pierce the target.

Were a player to ask me ahead of time about some sort of knock-out arrow and craft/get special ones made... then sure, of course, I'm all about player agency and cool fun. Or if they wanted to wound/cripple the guy and pin his shoulder to the wall so he couldn't do the evil deed... that I might allow too, with disadvantage.

But that's really not what happened here.

This is much more like:

I'll solve things! (rolls dice dice dice) Woooo he's dead!

Dude we needed him alive!

Uhhhhhh magic rules time machine? Anyone???

No.

[Yagyujubei]

Were a player to ask me ahead of time about some sort of knock-out arrow and craft/get special ones made... then sure, of course, I'm all about player agency and cool fun. Or if they wanted to wound/cripple the guy and pin his shoulder to the wall so he couldn't do the evil deed... that I might allow too, with disadvantage.

But that's really not what happened here.

This is much more like:

I'll solve things! (rolls dice dice dice) Woooo he's dead!

Dude we needed him alive!

Uhhhhhh magic rules time machine? Anyone???

No.

yeah i agree, my DM (and myself when I DM) would say "too bad suckers, shoulda thought of that before you rolled attack"

which is something that has come up multiple times in my main campaign because two of our members are trigger happy, and will just go "i attack this b*tch" when the rest of us are trying to plan/be diplomaticetc.

normally i dont mind cuz its funny and not THAT inconveniencing, but there it is. no take backs bro.

was just saying, there are arrows that would work for non-lethal attacks so it's a totally viable thing.

[Once a Fool]

I've been playing with the, I guess house-, rule that anyone who deals the finishing blow can decide it is non-lethal, they just have to describe what happens. And just cause an arrow penetrates doesn't mean it has to kill. Finishing shot to the shoulder anyone?

I do this too. Hasn't hurt the game any. I do require nonlethal intent to be expressed ahead of time, though.