So I was running a scenario the other night and one of my party members decided to take the to-hit penalty to do non-lethal damage in hopes of interrogating someone who was actively trying to kill them. He succeeded. But we ran in to an interesting situation: The creature has DR against bludgeoning weapons, and the player doing non-lethal was wielding a slashing weapon (a sword of some kind, I forget exactly).
It seemed to me that the damage would be bludgeoning, because the only way to deal non-lethal damage with a sword is to hit with the flat (or maybe the pommel). The player believed that the damage was still slashing, because it was coming from a slashing weapon, and there's no rules mechanic for changing types of damage.
The villain in question was pretty much toast anyway, so I didn't worry about it at the time, but flavor-wise, that seems really weird. One suggestion from the table was "maybe he just stabs him in the shoulder, or does those cheek cuts from Princess Bride, or something" but since non-lethal damage heals overnight, that's obviously not congruent. Does anybody know if there is an actual ruling on this sort of thing, and (if it's that damage doesn't change type when it becomes non-lethal) how that's supposed to look in character?
because the only way to deal non-lethal damage with a sword is to hit with the flat (or maybe the pommel)
Chinese 1000 cut torture disagrees.
As do masochists everywhere.
You can cut A LOT of a person without doing any significant damage.
Magic?
because the only way to deal non-lethal damage with a sword is to hit with the flat (or maybe the pommel)Chinese 1000 cut torture disagrees.
As do masochists everywhere.
You can cut A LOT of a person without doing any significant damage.
1. Yes, through delicate operations. Not with a sword, in the midst of a chaotic melee.
2. Those cuts don't heal overnight.
No, but they're also not really damage either. They're more cosmetic, the pain (which you could see as non-lethal) would fade by morning.
And you could see the hits as face cuts or such manoeuvres seen in sword fighting films.
Like the blow that knocked out the enemy could simply have been such a bad gash that the sight of that much lost blood caused the enemy to faint.
You just have to look at non-lethal a little more abstractly.
Doing nonlethal doesn't change the type of damage being done and a big enough nonlethal hit can still kill someone as well. The main difference is how quickly some recovers from it basically.
No, but they're also not really damage either. They're more cosmetic, the pain (which you could see as non-lethal) would fade by morning.
...
Like the blow that knocked out the enemy could simply have been such a bad gash that the sight of that much lost blood caused the enemy to faint.
You just have to look at non-lethal a little more abstractly.
Okay, that's fair. I can work with that.
Doing nonlethal doesn't change the type of damage being done and a big enough nonlethal hit can still kill someone as well.
This is also a good point. Heh. I hope I get to do that to some PCs some day. "But we were just punching him!" "Yep ... and now you've punched him to death. Smooth."
The HP system in these games was always meant to be a lot more abstract than most of us use it.
We got used to a more video game portrayal of HP where it was our lifepool.
Where as in reality not every loss of HP is supposed to represent a physical wound. It's instead supposed to be both vitality and also battle moral and stamina.
Your first 50% of HP is more you taking a bad shot on a shield, or having to dodge so fast you pulled a muscle, or things like that.
Only the last 50% is supposed to start representing physical wounds.
It's why they added a "bloodied" state in 4th edition to try and emphasise the abstract nature of HP that had been lost over the years by most.
Yeah, but that complicates DR. "I can dodge real good except for silver!"
Honesty I always like the wound/vitality setup from SW/WoT etc for that very reason.
Yeah, those systems definitely work better for realism.
|
Careful with trying to insert too much "realism" with various houserules.
It will be end very badly.
I find the proper description of various acts, is really all that is needed to maintain the "realism" factor.
Let your imagination be the glue that binds your reality.
Without imagination, we are all names and numbers.
Also the critical hit/fumble decks are good for descriptive purposes. It has also made combat last a little longer in most cases (less huge hits from crits more status/penalties). At least if you are looking for that.
In reality ... one does not simply knock people out with a bop on the head. Sometimes they don't get up... And when a really strong guy does the bopping.
"Sorry, Inigo. I didn't mean to jog him so hard."
in 3.5 it was bludgeoning, you would hit someone with the flat of your blade, or what ever you were using. in pathfinder.. i dont know.