Rules that don't make sense

[Devils_Advocate]

Hit points don't represent anything that anyone has in real life. They represent the ability of a cinematic fantasy hero to survive things that would kill real-life people extremely dead and be just fine.

Hit point loss isn't injury. It works like injury in that if enough of it happens to you, you eventually fall down. It works unlike injury in that it doesn't penalize your ability to do anything. You can lose an arbitrarily high amount of HP depending on your level, and so long as your current HP stays over zero, you function just fine. It takes a special weapon property (Wounding) to get people to actually bleed significantly when you slice them with your sword.

Hit point loss isn't dodging or rolling with punches. A character keeps his hit points when he's paralyzed. They protect a character from not only falling damage, but from being submerged in lava. And, of course, it takes more healing magic to heal a buttload of hit points worth of damage, indicating that a higher-level character's damage isn't more superficial.

It's fine to think of D&D as a simulation, so long as you remember that it's not remotely a simulation of the real world. It's a simulation of a fantastic world where even non-magical things don't work like stuff does in reality. It's a non-reductionistic world where thinks like Evil, Strength, Fire, Flight, etc. aren't just abstractions of lots of little things acting together, and most certainly do not interact with everything like they do in real life. So a character really can just go and improve her Ability to Weather Damage through practice without diminishing returns over time.

This all makes it rather comical when someone complains about hit points working unrealistically in 4th Edition in particular. They were completely realistic already! "Hit points don't work realistically" is a good criticism of D&D in general, but there's something wrong with your thinking if you think it's a way that 4th Ed is worse than 3rd. You can't have less realism than zero.

[Kemper Boyd]

Hit points do make a very limited for of sense when approached in a certain way. Something like "cumulative wounds imparing fighting ability" is very rarely seen in real life. You can't kill someone by slapping them on the cheek, regardless of much it hurts. An injury needs to be pretty substantial to actually stop someone cold.

If hitpoints represent bruises and nicks and fatigue from combat, they start making sense. Also this helps making magical healing more logical.

[Zeful]

Probably because that's one of the first rules that was based solely on "game balance" rather than on making sense.

It's magic, it's not supposed to make sense.

A related handwave was that wizards can't use swords because they aren't strong enough - regardless of what their actual strength score is.

Back in 2e sure, but 3e, wizards don't use swords because magic is simply better.

[Dixieboy]

Well they can, they just don't do it very well.

Not much point in training with a sword when you can chuck a fireball just by putting a match to bat poo.

[Kurald Galain]

It's magic, it's not supposed to make sense.

That's actually false. Whether the magic makes sense is one of the things that distinguishes good fantasy (e.g. Tolkien) from random pulp (e.g. Eragon).

[Curmudgeon]

Don't tell me someone with 2 dex can do intricate gestures with their arms/hands.

Surely they can. It just takes them much longer to learn those gesture patterns.

I've got a friend who's DEX-challenged. It takes her a long time to learn to use new tools. But she's a good typist because she invested the extra time needed for her to develop the skill.

D&D doesn't care about the details of learning skills -- just about the use of those skills when the fur is flying (in combat).

[Yuki Akuma]

That's actually false. Whether the magic makes sense is one of the things that distinguishes good fantasy (e.g. Tolkien) from random pulp (e.g. Eragon).

...What?

Magic in Tokien's work is about as "a wizard did it" as they come. At least Mr. Paolini tries to come up with some consistent rules.

[warmachine]

That the Elves' favoured class is Wizard, rather than Rogue. Consider the following racial features:-

+2 Dexterity, -2 Constitution
DEX is the primary attribute of Rogues whereas it's INT for Wizards.

Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats.
Better weapons are handy for classes that aren't full spellcasters but little benefit for Wizards, who rely on spells.

+2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it.
Essential skills for Rogues but cross-class skills for Wizards. The use of Search to find secret doors plays to a Rogue's strength but Wizards are grateful they can find their own spellbook in the morning.


So Elves have racial abilities that make them good scouts but their natural inclination is to read arcane texts. Right.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

That's actually false. Whether the magic makes sense is one of the things that distinguishes good fantasy (e.g. Tolkien) from random pulp (e.g. Eragon).

Yeah, no. Tolkien had no rules to his magic, it was just powerful and unknowable to the average person(and reader). Eragon at least has rules to the magic.

Note: I am not in any way supporting Eragon. Marty Stu, Dues ex Machina*oo, author's soapbox, and fridge logic all conspie to make it the worst assault on literature since Twilight, but at least the magic system made some sense.

[warmachine]

That Zombies, like Golems, have INT 0, making them mindless and incapable of moral choice, but, unlike Golems, are always Neutral Evil.

[Dixieboy]

That Zombies, like Golems, have INT 0, making them mindless and incapable of moral choice, but, unlike Golems, are always Neutral Evil.

It could be argued that it's the way they are brought into the world though.

But that's a silly excuse.

[AslanCross]

That the Elves' favoured class is Wizard, rather than Rogue. Consider the following racial features:-

+2 Dexterity, -2 Constitution
DEX is the primary attribute of Rogues whereas it's INT for Wizards.

Weapon Proficiency: Elves receive the Martial Weapon Proficiency feats for the longsword, rapier, longbow (including composite longbow), and shortbow (including composite shortbow) as bonus feats.
Better weapons are handy for classes that aren't full spellcasters but little benefit for Wizards, who rely on spells.

+2 racial bonus on Listen, Search, and Spot checks. An elf who merely passes within 5 feet of a secret or concealed door is entitled to a Search check to notice it as if she were actively looking for it.
Essential skills for Rogues but cross-class skills for Wizards. The use of Search to find secret doors plays to a Rogue's strength but Wizards are grateful they can find their own spellbook in the morning.


So Elves have racial abilities that make them good scouts but their natural inclination is to read arcane texts. Right.

Elves are the most confused race ever. This is why WOTC tried to separate them into the hippies (Elves) and snooties (Eladrin) in 4E. Not to say that I actually like what they did, but it makes more sense than the really bizarre "elves are better at everything" idea that 3.5 carries.

[Hat-Trick]

Because you can do them with 2 dex.

Don't tell me someone with 2 dex can do intricate gestures with their arms/hands.
There's also no rules prohibiting someone without arms from casting
Awakened (Insert animal here) can cast as well, no?
and i find that a fox should in fact be incapable of doing any intricate hand motions at all.

I have reasons for it being bull**** for every single excuse for it besides "Balance"

Try this in armor and tell me how you do.

0:30, 1:21, 1:39 are pretty intricate. Something akin to what a wizard might do.

Try this one as well at that speed with that accuracy in any kind of armor and gauntlets.

I know, I know. Naruto? But it's a good simulation of what a caster has to do to cast. In the middle of combat. With no mistakes. Also have to add in the arm waving. Don't for get the arm waving.

[Dixieboy]

Try this in armor and tell me how you do.

0:30, 1:21, 1:39 are pretty intricate. Something akin to what a wizard might do.

Try this one as well at that speed with that accuracy in any kind of armor and gauntlets.

I know, I know. Naruto? But it's a good simulation of what a caster has to do to cast. In the middle of combat. With no mistakes. Also have to add in the arm waving. Don't for get the arm waving.

now do it with paws

ohh and do it with the flaw "shaky"

with 2-3 dex.

see my point?

[Hat-Trick]

No argument, just saying that the arcane spell failure makes sense.

[Yuki Akuma]

now do it with paws

ohh and do it with the flaw "shaky"

with 2-3 dex.

see my point?

Note: a creature that learns to cast spells learns how to cast spells as whatever creature it is.

An Awakened Tiger who learns wizardry learns somatic components that involve flexing their forelegs, paws and claws.

[Dixieboy]

No argument, just saying that the arcane spell failure makes sense.

No?

You don't get a "spell failure" chance if you don't have fingers, you don't get one if you have 3 dex.

Only through armor

and you get it for leather armor.

[Yuki Akuma]

No?

You don't get a "spell failure" chance if you don't have fingers,

You don't need fingers to learn how to make somatic components. A tiger could do it. Or an octopus.

[Hat-Trick]

The rules do say hands or the caster's equivalent.

[Mystic Muse]

[QUOTE=Yuki_Akuma;6450849]

No?

You don't get a "spell failure" chance if you don't have fingers,/QUOTE]

You don't need fingers to learn how to make somatic components. A tiger could do it. Or an octopus.

I need an octopus wizard for my campaign.

[Devils_Advocate]

If hitpoints represent bruises and nicks and fatigue from combat, they start making sense. Also this helps making magical healing more logical.

What doesn't make sense there is that characters only ever suffer relatively minor wounds from near-misses instead of more serious injuries. There's a spell for restoring a lost limb, but no rules for losing a limb in the first place. Only half of that makes sense.

A caster can blind someone with a spell, and a Rogue can reduce someone's Strength with Crippling Strike, but a Fighter only chips away at hit points by making normal weapon attacks. This is why direct damage is so often a relatively poor strategy in 3E: It's unrealistically lacking in immediate effects.

That Zombies, like Golems, have INT 0, making them mindless and incapable of moral choice, but, unlike Golems, are always Neutral Evil.

That "mindless" automatons like zombies and golems are either capable of understanding their masters' orders, or capable of following orders without understanding them. Int 0 creatures should not respond more intelligently to language than INt 2 creatures.

It could be argued that it's the way they are brought into the world though.

Alignment is supposed to represent a creature's general moral and personal attitudes, or its behavior, or... something. Actually, it's not clear what it's supposed to represent -- and that lack of clarity is itself something that doesn't make sense, since the alignment system is supposed to be usable. But there's no interpretation of alignment under which golems and zombies ought to have different alignments, if they're both just blindly obedient automatons.

[Dixieboy]

soooo

what you're saying is that it's harder to do these movements while wearing padded armor, than with 3 dex, being drunk, having got your fingers cut off and shaking?

[Ravens_cry]

A larger size category weapon doesn't give you reach. I know arms count for something, but your telling me if I am holding an animesque BFS Gargantuan Greatsword, I can still only attack the guy right in front of me?

[Godskook]

...What?

Magic in Tokien's work is about as "a wizard did it" as they come. At least Mr. Paolini tries to come up with some consistent rules.

I'm in full agreement on this one. Tolkien magic is all "It just works, ok? Don't ask how!"

[Yuki Akuma]

soooo

what you're saying is that it's harder to do these movements while wearing padded armor, than with 3 dex, being drunk, having got your fingers cut off and shaking?

That is indeed what I'm saying.

[MickJay]

I recently spent two weeks recovering from a combat injury that happened when there was no one else with a weapon within about fifteen feet of me. Pulled a calf muscle making a sudden sharp turn in a melee. I was using my spear as a walking staff for the rest of the day, because my leg wouldn't take my weight, and limping for a week. It's still not 100%, but I was able to fight with only minor twinges last Sunday, two weeks and a day after the injury.

And I once dislocated another fighter's shoulder with a polearm blow to his shield. Took him the better part of a month to recover from that. On another occasion, I very nearly popped out the same guy's other shoulder with a (one-handed!) greatsword blow that he parried with his sword, too.

Yes, but these were actual injuries. The way HP is often considered means that you would have to rest for a longer period even after some actions that did not leave any physical injuries. This could make sense once in a while, there's stress, or shock, but in D&D adventuring it just happens too often (not to mention, it would eventually turn HP into "emo points"). What you described can be - reasonably - patched up with healing spells, but it wouldn't be much different (again, in D&D terms) from receiving a minor wound. At the end of the day, it might just be best to assume that the positive energy channelled by the healing spells works on what needs to be fixed, whether it's the body, mind or "aura".

[Dixieboy]

That is indeed what I'm saying.

I'm sorry but you failed to convince me.

[Yuki Akuma]

I'm sorry but you failed to convince me.

Basically: wizards are trained in making somatic gestures without wearing armour. Even if their Dexterity is 2, they learn how to do the gestures through rigorous training. Wizards have the highest starting age of any class for a reason.

Wearing armour interferes with these rote gestures, so they sometimes get them wrong.

Bards, warmages and duskblades, meanwhile, train to perform these rote gestures while wearing armour, so it doesn't interfere, because they're used to it.

(Divine magic, meanwhile, doesn't require such expansive gesturing.)

[Riffington]

Alignment is supposed to represent a creature's general moral and personal attitudes, or its behavior, or... something. Actually, it's not clear what it's supposed to represent -- and that lack of clarity is itself something that doesn't make sense, since the alignment system is supposed to be usable. But there's no interpretation of alignment under which golems and zombies ought to have different alignments, if they're both just blindly obedient automatons.

Well, there's multiple things that give a creature/thing an alignment.
A pattern of behavior (or a very strongly aligned single deed) is reflected in an intelligent being's alignment. The favor of the deities can be reflected in one's alignment. Additionally, certain types of energies can inherently suffuse spells, objects, or creatures. A typical golem has no alignment from any of these sources. A zombie typically has an evil alignment from the third source, but not from the other two.

/not the way I'd do it.

[Dixieboy]

Basically: wizards are trained in making somatic gestures without wearing armour. Even if their Dexterity is 2, they learn how to do the gestures through rigorous training. Wizards have the highest starting age of any class for a reason.

Wearing armour interferes with these rote gestures, so they sometimes get them wrong.

Bards, warmages and duskblades, meanwhile, train to perform these rote gestures while wearing armour, so it doesn't interfere, because they're used to it.

(Divine magic, meanwhile, doesn't require such expansive gesturing.)

And being drunk does not, having got your fingers cut off does not?