AoA Temp hit point buff, does it work with other temp hit points?

[Sutekh]

So AoA states that as long as you have -these- temporary hit points, people who hit you in melee suffer 5 cold damage.
What happens if I have another source of temp HP?
Can I choose to loose them first to bolster the duration of AoA?

[Rukelnikov]

If you lose THOSE temp hp from AoA then AoA is off. The only "temp hp" you can stack on to it is abjurers Ward which are not temp hp per se.

[Sutekh]

If you lose THOSE temp hp from AoA then AoA is off. The only "temp hp" you can stack on to it is abjurers Ward which are not temp hp per se.

Gotcha.
Seems like an odd ruling, but that's what the book says.

[Misterwhisper]

No form of THP stack, you can choose which you use though.

Ex you have 3 THP from AoA left and then receive 10 THP from a different spell, you may choose to keep the first 3 or take the 10 replacing it.

THP are always replaced not renewed.

However: arcane ward does stack because it is not THP it is a Shield. Honestly they did not probably do that intentionally and just took credit for it later, that or they intentionally made them broken because they are wizards.

Also resistance happens first.

If you get hit with 20 hp of damage.
Resistance can stop half, so you lose only 10 THP.
You could then use ward to absorb some ward hp instead of you want.

[MaxWilson]

Gotcha.
Seems like an odd ruling, but that's what the book says.

Yes, temp HP in 5E are extremely, extremely odd. If a Bard casts Heroism on you, either you reject the temp HP and the spell does nothing, or you accept the temp HP and your Armor of Agathys ice armor vanishes. Neither one really makes sense from a diegetic, in-game perspective, but from a RAW standpoint the interaction is clear.

[Sutekh]

Yes, temp HP in 5E are extremely, extremely odd. If a Bard casts Heroism on you, either you reject the temp HP and the spell does nothing, or you accept the temp HP and your Armor of Agathys ice armor vanishes. Neither one really makes sense from a diegetic, in-game perspective, but from a RAW standpoint the interaction is clear.

"I have a MILLION Temp HP's" MUHAHAHAHAHA
-I range cast a spell that gives you 10 -AND you have to use them-
Hey I just did almost a million damage in one spell!!

5E is very confusing to me, hence the noob questions :P

[MaxWilson]

"I have a MILLION Temp HP's" MUHAHAHAHAHA
-I range cast a spell that gives you 10 -AND you have to use them-
Hey I just did almost a million damage in one spell!!

5E is very confusing to me, hence the noob questions :P

You never have to accept the temp HP actually, by 5E rules--unless you're saying that your custom spell forces you to do so?

No worries, questions are part of learning a new (fairly complex) game system.

[Sutekh]

No form of THP stack, you can choose which you use though.

Ex you have 3 THP from AoA left and then receive 10 THP from a different spell, you may choose to keep the first 3 or take the 10 replacing it.

THP are always replaced not renewed.

Yet it mentions nothing about the EFFECT staying in play, that's my stumbling block.
AoA states "these HP's"
So if you replace them, they are not "these HP's" anymore, they are "new" HP's


However: arcane ward does stack because it is not THP it is a Shield. Honestly they did not probably do that intentionally and just took credit for it later, that or they intentionally made them broken because they are wizards.

Wizards, or WotC?


Also resistance happens first.

If you get hit with 20 hp of damage.
Resistance can stop half, so you lose only 10 THP.
You could then use ward to absorb some ward hp instead of you want.
Sure!!

[MaxWilson]

Yet it mentions nothing about the EFFECT staying in play, that's my stumbling block.
AoA states "these HP's"
So if you replace them, they are not "these HP's" anymore, they are "new" HP's

Yes, that's correct.

WotC probably should have written that rule more clearly but they didn't.


However: arcane ward does stack because it is not THP it is a Shield. Honestly they did not probably do that intentionally and just took credit for it later, that or they intentionally made them broken because they are wizards.

Also resistance happens first.

If you get hit with 20 hp of damage.
Resistance can stop half, so you lose only 10 THP.
You could then use ward to absorb some ward hp instead of you want.

This combo doesn't work. Your Arcane Ward does not have the same resistances as you, so while you can Blade Ward or Stoneskin to extend your Armor of Agathys, none of that will help your AoA last longer if your Arcane Ward soaks all the damage for you--they will just reduce the amount of damage you take if the Arcane Ward gets used up and some more damage bleeds over to your actual self.

[Sutekh]

You never have to accept the temp HP actually, by 5E rules--unless you're saying that your custom spell forces you to do so?

No custom spell, just force them to fail the save against what would normally be beneficial spell


No worries, questions are part of learning a new (fairly complex) game system.

D&D isn't "new" to me, the interactions of 5E ARE.
I'm a TTRPG fossil!!

[MaxWilson]

No custom spell, just force them to fail the save against what would normally be beneficial spell

Heroism doesn't have a save. You can still reject the temp HP though, because whenever something grants you temp HP you get to choose whether to keep your old temp HP or accept the new ones. The rules for this are in the PHB, somewhere in the Combat chapter.


D&D isn't "new" to me, the interactions of 5E ARE.
I'm a TTRPG fossil!!

That's fine--the (fairly complex) game system I was referring to was 5E specifically. Knowledge of AD&D or OD&D or D&D 3E/4E can be helpful, although in some cases it can also be misleading--for example, if you've played AD&D you may read the Warlock's 14th level Create Thrall ability and notice that it lets you permanently charm another humanoid, and you'll get excited because Charm Person is an awesome spell in original D&D and AD&D and I think probably in 3E... but in 5E the charmed condition does very little, so Create Thrall isn't as awesome as you think.

There are other little pitfalls too, like the various interactions between bonus actions (especially spellcasting with bonus actions) and the fact that you actually only get one "bonus action" per turn, whereas the name "bonus action" makes it sound like it somehow doesn't count against your action total and you should be able to use as many as you want. They should have called it "secondary action" or something instead.

IMO 5E is a significantly more mechanically-complex game than AD&D, overall, although at least you don't need to look up your saving throws and thief skills on a table.

(Well actually, 5E is more complex when it comes to combat, and almost devoid of rules for anything outside of combat. That doesn't make it simpler to do stuff like hire followers or research new spells, but it does mean the DM will have to steal rules from AD&D or elsewhere or make up his own, so 5E is less predictable outside of combat than AD&D is and relies more on reading your current DM's mind.)

[Sutekh]

Heroism doesn't have a save. You can still reject the temp HP though, because whenever something grants you temp HP you get to choose whether to keep your old temp HP or accept the new ones. The rules for this are in the PHB, somewhere in the Combat chapter.

Found it, still seems off given the interactions.




That's fine--the (fairly complex) game system I was referring to was 5E specifically. Knowledge of AD&D or OD&D or D&D 3E/4E can be helpful, although in some cases it can also be misleading--for example, if you've played AD&D you may read the Warlock's 14th level Create Thrall ability and notice that it lets you permanently charm another humanoid, and you'll get excited because Charm Person is an awesome spell in original D&D and AD&D and I think probably in 3E... but in 5E the charmed condition does very little, so Create Thrall isn't as awesome as you think.

Charm person never exited me, it was a pretty crap spell in 1st, basic, second AND 3rd, at least in the thrall sense. It was good for battlefield control, but not much more. (just because of the end of duration backlash)


There are other little pitfalls too, like the various interactions between bonus actions (especially spellcasting with bonus actions) and the fact that you actually only get one "bonus action" per turn, whereas the name "bonus action" makes it sound like it somehow doesn't count against your action total and you should be able to use as many as you want. They should have called it "secondary action" or something instead.

Sure, but secondary action is an old 2nd ed term, so you might get the same confusion.


IMO 5E is a significantly more mechanically-complex game than AD&D, overall, although at least you don't need to look up your saving throws and thief skills on a table any more.
Given enough time, you didn't have to do that either (percentile skills for thieves, I'll grant you, they were a little stupid)

[MaxWilson]

Sure, but secondary action is an old 2nd ed term, so you might get the same confusion.

Huh. I don't remember that term from 2nd edition--it must not have come up very often, certainly not as pervasively as "bonus action" in 5E, and I doubt people would assume that they can make an unlimited number of secondary actions each turn the way they tend to do for bonus actions, because "secondary" implies 2, and adding a third would be tertiary. But okay, maybe.


Given enough time, you didn't have to do that either (percentile skills for thieves, I'll grant you, they were a little stupid)


Yeah, saving throw tables aren't really all that bad, especially if you're not the DM so you only have to keep track of a few numbers, and THAC0 isn't bad either, but I was trying to be nice to 5E by pointing out one way in which it isn't more complex than AD&D (2nd edition--I don't know 1st very well).

AD&D also has a more complex magic system, although I tend to view that as a plus both as a player and as a DM because you can construct more interesting scenarios.

5E's tactical complexity is also a boon for the Fighter, because it tends to make weapons-only combat more interesting (and quite a bit easier actually) than the equivalent AD&D combats. Complete Fighters's Handbook is nice and has some cool options, but 5E probably has about 50% more interesting choices for a given fighter to make on any given round in combat than AD&D does, at least prior to the Combat and Tactics era which I never played.

[Sutekh]

Huh. I don't remember that term from 2nd edition--it must not have come up very often, certainly not as pervasively as "bonus action" in 5E, and I doubt people would assume that they can make an unlimited number of secondary actions each turn the way they tend to do for bonus actions, because "secondary" implies 2, and adding a third would be tertiary. But okay, maybe.

IIRC, it made a splash in the "complete" splat books for 2nd ed.



Yeah, saving throw tables aren't really all that bad, and THAC0 isn't bad either, but I was trying to be nice to 5E by pointing out one way in which it isn't more complex than AD&D.

I'm not feeling so nice, hence my questions about 5E interactions.
I am a big fan of "DM final arbiter" in a very loose system, but when you want to make it complex, don't go half way into it, do it PROPERLY.


AD&D also has a more complex magic system, although I tend to view that as a plus.
As do I.
I want systems to be consistant, it's either hard and explained, or loose and flexible. Either works, and can work WELL, but they should not try to blend the two, and I guess that is where my greatest issues with 5e are coming in.

[MaxWilson]

IIRC, it made a splash in the "complete" splat books for 2nd ed.

I'm not feeling so nice, hence my questions about 5E interactions.
I am a big fan of "DM final arbiter" in a very loose system, but when you want to make it complex, don't go half way into it, do it PROPERLY.

As do I.
I want systems to be consistant, it's either hard and explained, or loose and flexible. Either works, and can work WELL, but they should not try to blend the two, and I guess that is where my greatest issues with 5e are coming in.

It sounds like maybe you should consider playing a TSR-era (A)D&D game instead of a WotC-era D&D game. Card games are in WotC's DNA, and it very much shows in 5E's design: characters are exception-based widget decks. It can make for interesting tactical combat but as a TTRPG it leaves many things to be desired, and the last time I introduced a group of new players to D&D I wound up regretting having used 5E as my ruleset.

[Sutekh]

It sounds like maybe you should consider playing a TSR-era (A)D&D game instead of a WotC-era D&D game. Card games are in WotC's DNA, and it very much shows in 5E's design: characters are exception-based widget decks. It can make for interesting tactical combat but as a TTRPG it leaves many things to be desired, and the last time I introduced a group of new players to D&D I wound up regretting having used 5E as my ruleset.

See, regretting the current rules says mountains about them.
I played V:TES for decades and never once regretted using that system to introduce a card game to people because it was a tight, well written system.
M:TG I have regretted using.

4th turned me off because it was MMO lite.
I was hoping 5th, being a kind of fusion of 3 and 4 would have learned a few things.
I love D&D, been playing it for some 35 years, so I am somewhat mentally invested in it. I have played a hell of a lot of other systems in that time, but D&D (in a red box, or a well worn hardcover) has a special place in my gaming history.

[Tanarii]

Charm person never exited me, it was a pretty crap spell in 1st, basic, second AND 3rd, at least in the thrall sense. It was good for battlefield control, but not much more. (just because of the end of duration backlash)
Charm Person was absolutely amazing in classic and AD&D. It was the best 1st level spell, and better than many higher level spells.

[MaxWilson]

See, regretting the current rules says mountains about them.

To be clear: the players had a good time, and probably came away with a positive impression of 5E as a system. But they also came away with an impression of it as a complex system that probably made them feel a little bit bad about not understanding all the jargon and rules for concentration and bonus actions and all the things written in the skill section of their character sheets, etc., and as DM I noticed that the things they really enjoyed in the session were e.g. trying to decoy away giant rats by catching alley cats and attempting to feed them to the rats. They weren't interested in looking for combat synergies in their builds, they were interested in exploring a fantasy world.

My takeaway at the end was that the game would have played out equally well or better in Expert D&D. 5E has some fun toys to offer but not to these players.

[Sutekh]

Charm Person was absolutely amazing in classic and AD&D. It was the best 1st level spell, and better than many higher level spells.

For -battle- I would agree, for social settings, it's crap.
A bit bad for a spell with the description Charm Person

[MaxWilson]

For -battle- I would agree, for social settings, it's crap.
A bit bad for a spell with the description Charm Person

That's not how I remember it--"any word or action will be viewed in the most favorable way." Incredibly useful. And of course in oD&D it was even stronger--Bigby was originally an enemy NPC until Mordenkainen Charmed him into an ally.

http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2012/12/spells-through-ages-charm-person.html?m=1

[Chronos]

Another thing that will stack with Armor of Agathys or other temporary HP is Aid. Though it won't help you make AoA last longer, because Aid increases your "real" HP, and you won't start taking damage to those until all of your temporary HP are gone.

[MaxWilson]

Another thing that will stack with Armor of Agathys or other temporary HP is Aid. Though it won't help you make AoA last longer, because Aid increases your "real" HP, and you won't start taking damage to those until all of your temporary HP are gone.

Heroes Feast also increases your "real" maximum HP by a small amount.

Blade Ward is fun with Armor of Agathys, although it isn't necessarily more effective than outright attacking.

[Sutekh]

That's not how I remember it--"any word or action will be viewed in the most favorable way." Incredibly useful. And of course in oD&D it was even stronger--Bigby was originally an enemy NPC until Mordenkainen Charmed him into an ally.

http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2012/12/spells-through-ages-charm-person.html?m=1

Are you suggesting Bigby is still charmed? (a archmagi is still influenced by a 1st lvl spell?) What would your players do with that?

Again, in a 1 minute combat, charm person is great, better in a low level setting, but it is, and always has been crap in a social setting due to the person getting more than a little PO'ed for being mind ****ed. People don't like getting their heads screwed with, would you?

[MaxWilson]

Are you suggesting Bigby is still charmed? (a archmagi is still influenced by a 1st lvl spell?) What would your players do with that?

Not my players--Gary Gygax's players. I'm telling you where Bigby originally came from, back in the 1970s.

[Sutekh]

Not my players--Gary Gygax's players. I'm telling you where Bigby originally came from, back in the 1970s.

OK
I'm asking weather your players, or you as a DM would accept that.

[MaxWilson]

OK
I'm asking weather your players, or you as a DM would accept that.

In oD&D? Sure. Presumably if I'm playing oD&D it's because I like bonkers stuff like that--but in AD&D I'd go by the AD&D rules, which still make it plenty powerful. If an NPC will view all of your words and actions in the most favorable light possible, and basically treat you like their man-crush... yeah, that's definitely exploitable in social situations. It means that all you have to do as a player is think up vaguely-plausible reasons for needing to know e.g. the Evil Overlord's jogging route, and the DM is likely to shrug and play along, because Charm Person.

"Oh, man! I forgot my wallet! Do you think you could pay for these supplies for me? I'll pay you right back, I just don't want to risk someone else buying this stuff first."

"I know, I know, I'm not supposed to be in here without a security clearance. But demons are attacking the Citadel and the lieutenant is screaming for reinforcements, and he grabbed me and told me to come here and tell you guys to get down there, pronto! I'll show you the way. Hurry!"

That sounds like fun to me.

[Sutekh]

In oD&D? Sure. Presumably if I'm playing oD&D it's because I like bonkers stuff like that--but in AD&D I'd go by the AD&D rules, which still make it plenty powerful. If an NPC will view all of your words and actions in the most favorable light possible, and basically treat you like their man-crush... yeah, that's definitely exploitable in social situations. It means that all you have to do as a player is think up vaguely-plausible reasons for needing to know e.g. the Evil Overlord's jogging route, and the DM is likely to shrug and play along, because Charm Person.

"Oh, man! I forgot my wallet! Do you think you could pay for these supplies for me? I'll pay you right back, I just don't want to risk someone else buying this stuff first."

"I know, I know, I'm not supposed to be in here without a security clearance. But demons are attacking the Citadel and the lieutenant is screaming for reinforcements, and he grabbed me and told me to come here and tell you guys to get down there, pronto! I'll show you the way. Hurry!"

That sounds like fun to me.

You can do all kinds of "fun stuff" with charm person, no doubt, but the backlash is important. If your DM ignores that, then that's on them.
1 minute later, the target is PO'ed, and will respond as a PO'ed person. If you want to ignore that, well that's again DM choice.
You can charm your way into the castle, you can't charm your way out of the guard's response.

[MaxWilson]

You can do all kinds of "fun stuff" with charm person, no doubt, but the backlash is important. If your DM ignores that, then that's on them.
1 minute later, the target is PO'ed, and will respond as a PO'ed person. If you want to ignore that, well that's again DM choice.
You can charm your way into the castle, you can't charm your way out of the guard's response.

What are you talking about? In AD&D, Charm Person lasts for days, even against a highly-intelligent target, and against a dim target it lasts for months. Where is this "one minute backlash" stuff coming from?

Are you thinking of 5E? 5E spells usually have really short durations, but even in 5E it lasts for an hour.

Edit: oh, are you talking about the relationship backlash a la "Why did you lie to me about demons attacking the castle?" probably followed shortly by a realization that "Hey, where did he go?" or possibly "Why did he just scream and keel over apparently dead?" In that scenario I'm just trying to break into a secure vault or something, and getting the guards out of the secure area momentarily is good enough to be fun and useful. What more could you possibly expect from a Charm spell?