I bet I can find the word can, in every single chapter. From how you cast spells to how you make an attack.
I guess those are not rules as they have the word 'can" in them. If the best argument you have to it is not a rule is it says "can" somewhere in the 5 pages of text. You really do not have much an argument.
|
I bet I can find the word can, in every single chapter. From how you cast spells to how you make an attack.
Yes, and you'll find tons of examples of how it is used to mean "you are permitted to" do whatever. And you'll find tons of examples of how it is used to mean "you have the choice/ability to" do whatever. They use it both ways throughout.
I bet I can find the word can, in every single chapter. From how you cast spells to how you make an attack.Yes, and you'll find tons of examples of how it is used to mean "you are permitted to" do whatever. And you'll find tons of examples of how it is used to mean "you have the choice/ability to" do whatever. They use it both ways throughout.
But for this instance where they do not present an alternative the can is used directionally, If it is a can or can not then more options must be provided
So like most of these arguements the fault lies in the pesky english language and its many, even sometimes opposite meanings for words. :)
To be honest however most people seem to forget page 9 of the Core book
The Most Important Rule
The rules in this book are here to help you breathe life into
your characters and the world they explore. While they are
designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might
find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your
gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours.
You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters
have a number of “house rules” that they use in their games.
The Game Master and players should always discuss any
rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how
the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the
final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared
experience, and all of the players should contribute their
thoughts when the rules are in doubt.
So like most of these arguements the fault lies in the pesky english language and its many, even sometimes opposite meanings for words. :)
To be honest however most people seem to forget page 9 of the Core book
No, you can not use rule zero in an argument about what is or is not in the rule. By invoking rule zero you forfeit any claim to what is RAW or any basis of an argument to that effect.
I don't know anyone that plays pure RAW and we all change things but that is not the point. The point is by RAW do you roll mounts and NPC HP or do you do like the book says and give him average hp's.
|
|
But for this instance where they do not present an alternative the can is used directionally, If it is a can or can not then more options must be providedI bet I can find the word can, in every single chapter. From how you cast spells to how you make an attack.Yes, and you'll find tons of examples of how it is used to mean "you are permitted to" do whatever. And you'll find tons of examples of how it is used to mean "you have the choice/ability to" do whatever. They use it both ways throughout.
There isn't room to provide every imaginable possible variation on how creatures and npc's can be created. That's why they chose one to put forward as what they believed was the easiest method. From day 1, the game has encouraged loose interpretation of the rules as written. And not just with Pathfinder - Gary Gygax himself was known to insist on numerous occasions that the "rules are just guidelines."
So like most of these arguements the fault lies in the pesky english language and its many, even sometimes opposite meanings for words. :)
To be honest however most people seem to forget page 9 of the Core book
The Most Important Rule
The rules in this book are here to help you breathe life into
your characters and the world they explore. While they are
designed to make your game easy and exciting, you might
find that some of them do not suit the style of play that your
gaming group enjoys. Remember that these rules are yours.
You can change them to fit your needs. Most Game Masters
have a number of “house rules” that they use in their games.
The Game Master and players should always discuss any
rules changes to make sure that everyone understands how
the game will be played. Although the Game Master is the
final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared
experience, and all of the players should contribute their
thoughts when the rules are in doubt.
This rule is always quoted and is useless in the rules forum, if someone argued a fighter gets spells because his group agreed they did would you tell all the new players this was right? I sure hope not
We never forget that page, it is highly used. The problem is you can't discuss this game without a basic idea of the rules that everyone can follow without having to be walked through every single persons interpretation.
My poorly made point was we seem to be arguing linguistic variation rather than rules and sadly the language we use to do this is so variable as to make arguing intent of a written word without the original author to tell you exactly what he means seems rather pointless.
The rule quote was just a reminder :)
Edit: Poor spelling in a post about language :0
There isn't room to provide every imaginable possible variation on how creatures and npc's can be created. That's why they chose one to put forward as what they believed was the easiest method. From day 1, the game has encouraged loose interpretation of the rules as written. And not just with Pathfinder - Gary Gygax himself was known to insist on numerous occasions that the "rules are just guidelines."
And once more. You can not invoke rule zero or your house rules as proof of how RAW works. You can change what you want, yes.
That has nothing to do with how the rules are written or this topic.
There isn't room to provide every imaginable possible variation on how creatures and npc's can be created. That's why they chose one to put forward as what they believed was the easiest method. From day 1, the game has encouraged loose interpretation of the rules as written. And not just with Pathfinder - Gary Gygax himself was known to insist on numerous occasions that the "rules are just guidelines."
Which means you can do it any way you can think up right? Cause that leads to some unbelievable animal companions.
Player: What do you mean my pet can't have Full HP every level plus double his CON mod? it is fully supported in the rules
DM: because I said so < weak argument
If everyone assumes "nothing is wrong with the rules the DM can fix it" you start getting players ticked off because their cool idea for a character isn't allowed because the DM says he can't do it cause "I do not want to come up with any counters for that, make a standard character"
We need more then guidelines, hard rules lead to home rules, if you want guidelines then the rules should be "think of a person with some cool powers and roll appropriate dice to determine how effective they did it"
Edit: +1 to above post and below (sheesh stop making me edit this ;))
My poorly made point was we seem to be argueing linguistic vairiation rather than rules and sadly the language we use to do this is so variable as to make argueing intent of a written word without the original author to tell you exactly what he means seems rther pointless.
It is clear how it is used. It did not give you an option, it was used directionally. It was very clear in how you worked the HP out. Someone brought up "can" as a loophole, when it is clear how it is used in that sentence. A sentence several pages before the relevant text.
|
|
There isn't room to provide every imaginable possible variation on how creatures and npc's can be created. That's why they chose one to put forward as what they believed was the easiest method. From day 1, the game has encouraged loose interpretation of the rules as written. And not just with Pathfinder - Gary Gygax himself was known to insist on numerous occasions that the "rules are just guidelines."And once more. You can not invoke rule zero or your house rules as proof of how RAW works. You can change what you want, yes.
That has nothing to do with how the rules are written or this topic.
Nevertheless, the hit point rule does not appear to be as rigid as you think. You are taking it out of context. Read back over that entire 7-step process. Note how much emphasis they give over and over again to the fact that they are suggesting shortcuts for the sake of simplicity. Give 'em spells (but you can leave out the lower level ones); Give 'em equipment (but you can leave that off if you want, and just fill in as needed); Give 'em feats (here, we've provided a short list that we think they'll find most useful). The recurring theme through that whole section is: do it as detailed as you want, but here are our suggestions to make a quick and simple npc.
Nevertheless, the hit point rule does not appear to be as rigid as you think. You are taking it out of context. Read back over that entire 7-step process. Note how much emphasis they give over and over again to the fact that they are suggesting shortcuts for the sake of simplicity. Give 'em spells (but you can leave out the lower level ones); Give 'em equipment (but you can leave that off if you want, and just fill in as needed); Give 'em feats (here, we've provided a short list that we think they'll find most useful). The recurring theme through that whole section is: do it as detailed as you want, but here are our suggestions to make a quick and simple npc.
Okay so by RAW what are the other options for determining HP?
|
|
There isn't room to provide every imaginable possible variation on how creatures and npc's can be created. That's why they chose one to put forward as what they believed was the easiest method. From day 1, the game has encouraged loose interpretation of the rules as written. And not just with Pathfinder - Gary Gygax himself was known to insist on numerous occasions that the "rules are just guidelines."
Which means you can do it any way you can think up right? Cause that leads to some unbelievable animal companions.
Player: What do you mean my pet can't have Full HP every level plus double his CON mod? it is fully supported in the rules
DM: because I said so < weak argument
If everyone assumes "nothing is wrong with the rules the DM can fix it" you start getting players ticked off because their cool idea for a character isn't allowed because the DM says he can't do it cause "I do not want to come up with any counters for that, make a standard character"
We need more then guidelines, hard rules lead to home rules, if you want guidelines then the rules should be "think of a person with some cool powers and roll appropriate dice to determine how effective they did it"
Edit: +1 to above post and below (sheesh stop making me edit this ;))
Oh please, let's have done with the slippery slope fallacies, okay?
Eh your argument is the whole book + the bestiary are not rules. One instance of "assume average HP would be a mere short cut. But every instance it talks about Non player character class?
Every time it talks of that in both books it uses the wording "Assume average HP's. This is not an offhand one time "short cut" It uses the same wording more then once. The very same method.
|
|
Okay so by RAW what are the other options for determining HP?
Nevertheless, the hit point rule does not appear to be as rigid as you think. You are taking it out of context. Read back over that entire 7-step process. Note how much emphasis they give over and over again to the fact that they are suggesting shortcuts for the sake of simplicity. Give 'em spells (but you can leave out the lower level ones); Give 'em equipment (but you can leave that off if you want, and just fill in as needed); Give 'em feats (here, we've provided a short list that we think they'll find most useful). The recurring theme through that whole section is: do it as detailed as you want, but here are our suggestions to make a quick and simple npc.
Rolling. Maxing. Averaging. Take your pick, they're all mentioned in the book.
Edit: mentioned where?
Rolling. Maxing. Averaging. Take your pick, they're all mentioned in the book.
No. Page numbers for NPC hp's method that does not use "Assume average" That is the argument. I have posted page numbers and the relevant text to support my claim. Can you do the same?
|
|
Eh your argument is the whole book + the bestiary are not rules. One instance of "assume average HP would be a mere short cut. But every instance it talks about Non player character class?
What "every instance" are you talking about? You've shown us only one instance where it mentions hit points for NPCs. And one where it mentions hit points for monsters. In fact, the bestiary also seems to suggest (but not require) using average hp: "You can also use Table 1–5 to determine a creature’s average hit points." That implies that it is an option, not a requirement. The only mention of assuming average hit points in the bestiary is where they are talking about how they came up with the hit points in the bestiary stat blocks (i.e. generic and ready-to-run versions of the monsters). Nowhere does the Bestiary say that a GM-created monster has to use average hit points.
Every time it talks of that in both books it uses the wording "Assume average HP's. This is not an offhand one time "short cut" It uses the same wording more then once. The very same method.
I don't know how many times it mentions "assume average hit points" in the core rulebook. You guys have shown us only one example, and that was included in a section that made it obvious they were making suggestions for the sake of simplicity. And in the Bestiary, it appears exactly one time, and not in connection with creating a new creature.
|
|
No. Page numbers for NPC hp's method that does not use "Assume average" That is the argument. I have posted page numbers and the relevant text to support my claim. Can you do the same?
Rolling. Maxing. Averaging. Take your pick, they're all mentioned in the book.
Tell you what, why you do one better: show me where it says "assume average hit points" in a context that isn't rife with obvious suggestions for simplicity's sake? You guys would benefit well from some critical reading skills, I think.
Ok ignoring my previous posts and looking at the rules the fixed hps of monsters seems to be based in the CR system and game balance.
By that thinking animal companions and such should follow those rules too as they are supposed to balance with the rest of the game and the folks at paizo have worked hard to balance them.
Not sure if i like this but it is in all the monster creation rules as well as npc so personally i figure i'll concede the by RAW and even possibly the RAI on this.
|
|
Not sure if i like this but it is in all the monster creation rules as well as npc so personally i figure i'll concede the by RAW and even possibly the RAI on this.
It's not in the monster creation rules. It's in the monster stat block description, when they are explaining how they arrived at the hit points for the bestiary entries, which are average monsters of their kind. In the monster creation rules, it suggests the option of using average hit points.
Tell you what, why you do one better: show me where it says "assume average hit points" in a context that isn't rife with obvious suggestions for simplicity's sake? You guys would benefit well from some critical reading skills, I think.
So your argument is, I can't find my argument so you guys have to show MORE proof of yours?
|
|
So your argument is, I can't find my argument so you guys have to show MORE proof of yours?
Tell you what, why you do one better: show me where it says "assume average hit points" in a context that isn't rife with obvious suggestions for simplicity's sake? You guys would benefit well from some critical reading skills, I think.
So far you haven't shown ANY proof of yours. My argument is based on the notion that you can use regular hit point rolling methods for npc's and monsters, because nowhere in the books does it say you can't. Your argument is that the core rulebook says you can't, but the context of the entire section in which that sole mention is found blows your argument out of the water. And your secondary argument, that it also says it in the monster creation rules in the bestiary is patently false, because it doesn't say it in that section, it just offers it as a suggestion. The only place in the bestiary where the phrase "assume average hit points" is even mentioned is in the stat block description at the beginning of the book, describing how they came up with the hit points for their generic monster entries. So, until you guys learn to read in context, I'm not going to worry too much about giving you page numbers for stuff you already know.
Doing it your way means I have the option of giving my AC max hit points every level, or twice that, it doesn't say I can't
once again your misusing the word assume. It means it should be this way except for special circumstances, and the Animal companions give no special circumstances that I can find
The monster creation rules give you the appoximate Hit Point total in step 2 while Hit Dice isn't even determined till step 4.
While this isn't really a rule it clearly indicates the fixed HP intent in the CR system i would say
-hp: The creature's hit points, followed by its Hit Dice (including modifiers from Constitution, favored class levels, creature type modifiers, and the Toughness feat). Creatures with PC class levels receive maximum hit points for their first HD, but all other HD rolls are assumed to be average. Fast healing and regeneration values, if any, follow the creature's HD.
This is from the Stat black section of the Bestiary.
-Stat Block
This is where you'll find all of the information you need to run the monster in an encounter. A stat block is organized as follows. Note that in cases where a line in a stat block has no value, that line is omitted.
Note what the stat block entry is for, not rules, but a break down of how the stats in the book where done. It has nothing to do with your argument.
-Aside from the players, everyone else in the game world is a non-player character (NPC). These characters are designed and controlled by the GM to fill every role from noble king to simple baker. While some of these characters use player classes, most rely upon simple NPC classes, allowing them to be easily generated. The following rules govern all of the NPC classes and include information on generating quick NPCs for an evening’s game.
So this section is for making quick easily generated npc's.
-In either case, the process for creating these NPCs can be performed in seven simple steps.
It says you can perform 7 simple steps or maybe you just make the npc as detailed as you want.
-Step 7: Details
Once you have assigned all of the NPC's gear, all that remains is to fill out the details. Determine the character's attack and damage bonuses, CMB, CMD, initiative modifier, and Armor Class. If the character's magic items affect his skills or ability scores, make sure to take those changes into account. Determine the character's total hit points by assuming the average result. Finally, fill out any other important details, such as name, alignment, religion, and a few personality traits to round him out.
Keep in mind this section is for quick npc's and it says to assume average hit points. It does not read that all npc's must have average hit points. It is just a simple method for quick npc creation not a hard fast rule.
-HD
This is the total number of eight-sided (d8) Hit Dice the animal companion possesses, each of which gains a Constitution modifier, as normal.
This is straight from the druid animal companion, no where does it state that they only get average hit points, they of course do not get maximum hit points at first level.(Since its not a PC Class such as Fighter,Wizard, etc.)
|
I thought I'd jump in on this fun little debate...
Hit Dice (HD): Hit Dice represent a creature’s general
level of power and skill. As a creature gains levels, it gains
additional Hit Dice. Monsters, on the other hand, gain
racial Hit Dice, which represent the monster’s general
prowess and ability. Hit Dice are represented by the
number the creature possesses followed by a type of die,
such as “3d8.” This value is used to determine a creature’s
total hit points. In this example, the creature has 3 Hit
Dice. When rolling for this creature’s hit points, you would
roll a d8 three times and add the results together, along
with other modifiers.
Hit Points (hp): Hit points are an abstraction signifying
how robust and healthy a creature is at the current moment.
To determine a creature’s hit points, roll the dice indicated
by its Hit Dice. A creature gains maximum hit points if its
first Hit Die roll is for a character class level. Creatures
whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his
race roll their first Hit Die normally. Wounds subtract hit
points, while healing (both natural and magical) restores
hit points. Some abilities and spells grant temporary hit
points that disappear after a specific duration. When a
creature’s hit points drop below 0, it becomes unconscious.
When a creature’s hit points reach a negative total equal to
its Constitution score, it dies.
Most of the rules that have been quoted are for simplifying hp's. But nowhere has it said you HAVE to take the average result of the HD (except for PFS). Whereas this says to roll them.
I thought I'd jump in on this fun little debate...
Most of the rules that have been quoted are for simplifying hp's. But nowhere has it said you HAVE to take the average result of the HD (except for PFS). Whereas this says to roll them.Hit Dice (HD): Hit Dice represent a creature’s general
level of power and skill. As a creature gains levels, it gains
additional Hit Dice. Monsters, on the other hand, gain
racial Hit Dice, which represent the monster’s general
prowess and ability. Hit Dice are represented by the
number the creature possesses followed by a type of die,
such as “3d8.” This value is used to determine a creature’s
total hit points. In this example, the creature has 3 Hit
Dice. When rolling for this creature’s hit points, you would
roll a d8 three times and add the results together, along
with other modifiers.
Hit Points (hp): Hit points are an abstraction signifying
how robust and healthy a creature is at the current moment.
To determine a creature’s hit points, roll the dice indicated
by its Hit Dice. A creature gains maximum hit points if its
first Hit Die roll is for a character class level. Creatures
whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his
race roll their first Hit Die normally. Wounds subtract hit
points, while healing (both natural and magical) restores
hit points. Some abilities and spells grant temporary hit
points that disappear after a specific duration. When a
creature’s hit points drop below 0, it becomes unconscious.
When a creature’s hit points reach a negative total equal to
its Constitution score, it dies.
I'm in complete agreement.
Good post, Eric.
I almost agree entirely. And in fact, I have my people roll for these things. ( as stated in original post ) But, I believe there is one spot where the RAW can be interpreted otherwise. And that is the section on page 454 on determining NPC hitpoints. My belief, as I have contended earlier, is that this is only a process for creating NPC's quickly. But I believe, the introduction to the section is vague enough to be argued both ways.
Once again, I argue it as a tool for creating NPC's quickly that do not require to be fleshed out thoroughly. I also believe, it is OBVIOUSLY intended that way. But sometimes, what I think is obvious, others do not. I thought cohorts and followers were obviously controled by the DM. Turns out that the Paizo staff do not think that way, as well as MANY others. So I do think this deserves clairification by clicking on the FAQ. I can see Seeker's arguement, even though I hope and think he is mistaken.
Greg.
I favor averages for consistency's sake; also, there's no penalty for releasing an animal companion and getting a new one except spending a little time, so if you're starting a druid and end up with that wolf that tossed two ones on its HD, you can just get another until you roll well. Gamey (although in this case I wouldn't blame the player for taking advantage, given otherwise they'll be pretty much guaranteed to get their companion killed). Averages are better and that's why the rules strongly suggest using them, as quoted numerous times in this thread. I'm not convinced you're actually breaking the rules if you roll, though.
Page 454 of the Core Rulebook states (in the NPC creation section):
"Step 7: Details
Once you have assigned all of the NPC’s gear, all that remains is to fill out the details. Determine the character’s attack and damage bonuses, CMB, CMD, initiative modifier, and Armor Class. If the character’s magic items affect his skills or ability scores, make sure to take those changes into account. Determine the character’s total hit points by assuming the average result. Finally, fill out any other important details, such as name, alignment, religion, and a few personality traits to round him out."
Emphasis mine. I think I'll wait to see what other have to say before commenting.
Sorry to jump in but if we are quoting text and argueing meaning then i feel i must note from before step 7 in the same section
Creating NPCs
The world that the player characters inhabit should be full
of rich and vibrant characters with whom they can interact.
While most need little more than names and general
descriptions, some require complete statistics, such as
town guards, local clerics, and wizened sages. The PCs
might find themselves in combat with these characters,
either against them or as allies. Alternatively the PCs
might find themselves relying on the skills and abilities
of the NPCs. In either case, the process for creating these
NPCs can be performed in seven simple...
I think..the "assume" rules were for quick and disposable NPC creation. Its not a "you HAVE to..just this is the easy way.
I thought I'd jump in on this fun little debate...
Most of the rules that have been quoted are for simplifying hp's. But nowhere has it said you HAVE to take the average result of the HD (except for PFS). Whereas this says to roll them.
See finally someone posts something other then "Nah ugh," Thank you. However. If you notice your section just tells you what they are. Explaining what the meaning of the words are.
The section I quoted deal directly with he manner at hand. So we have one instance of saying "Rolling" and at lest two instances where it says rolling means assume average roll.
I am still gonna say by RAW yes you take average, Just like by RAW you get max HP for your first class level HP. The book stills says for NPC's and monsters "Assume the rolls are average" at lest twice.
The book stills says for NPC's and monsters "Assume the rolls are average" at lest twice.
It probably also says something along the lines of: "when a number is expressed in dice, you should roll those dice and total it up" at least twice two, though.
That you roll dice for, well, dice is kind of one of the core assumptions of the game.
What I always find interesting in these threads are the people with their lives at stake on making sure everyone agrees with their interpretation of RAW.
Person A : This is RAW, and if you do it any other way, you are <insert tone one usually reserves for finding sewage in your salad when halfway through eating it>houseruling.
Person B : No, I am using RAW. Your way is <insert tone one usually reserves for people on a federal watch list>wrong.
Person c : <looking at A & B like they walked into an argument between the Marquis De Sade and Reverand Billy Graham> Uhm, you realize that both interpretations are just that right? The rules are just ambiguous due to two different people writing two different sections, compounded by the fact some of it's copied from 3.5 SRD, while the rest is new PF material rewrites of existing rules?
Person A & B : <looking at each other, then Person C> HEATHEN! Get out of here! IDIOT!
Eh I don't mind how they do it at home. But you need to look at how it would be done if you for instance made a adventure. By the rules do you max hp's, roll hit or assume average for NPC?
This thread came about as many people roll hp's for NPC's then claim said NPC/class feature is over powered , when if you do it as written like other NPC's it has no where near as many hp's as you gave it.
The rules assume such critters have been averaged, not given max and not rolled. The rules assume they have a set amount at any set level.
This is the augment.
"7) Determine Your Characters Hit Points (HP).
A character or creature gains maximum hit points at 1st level or if its first Hit Die roll is for a character class level.
To determine a character or creature's hit points for levels beyond 1st, roll the dice indicated by its Hit Dice. Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally."
That's from character creation outline. It says npc roll their first hit die normally.
"Hit Dice (HD)
Hit Dice represent a creature's general level of power and skill. As a creature gains levels, it gains additional Hit Dice. Monsters, on the other hand, gain racial Hit Dice, which represent the monster's general prowess and ability. Hit Dice are represented by the number the creature possesses followed by a type of die, such as “3d8.” This value is used to determine a creature's total hit points. In this example, the creature has 3 Hit Dice. When rolling for this creature's hit points, you would roll a d8 three times and add the results together, along with other modifiers.
Hit Points (hp)
Hit points are an abstraction signifying how robust and healthy a creature is at the current moment. To determine a creature's hit points, roll the dice indicated by its Hit Dice. A creature gains maximum hit points if its first Hit Die roll is for a character class level. Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally. Wounds subtract hit points, while healing (both natural and magical) restores hit points. Some abilities and spells grant temporary hit points that disappear after a specific duration. When a creature's hit points drop below 0, it becomes unconscious. When a creature's hit points reach a negative total equal to its Constitution score, it dies."
Those are from the common terms section of the book, you know the part that explains how certain rules function. Seems like those are a better example than a single sentence in the bestiary stat block section and the quick and easy npc creation section.
The rules assume such critters have been averaged, not given max and not rolled. The rules assume they have a set amount at any set level.The rules assume they do. The rules do not require they do. They assume they do for ease of use for a DM.
The rules assume fighters do not caster spells and wizards do not gain full BAB.
They assume you use the default rule. Not that you must, but when things are written down they use average HP. Which makes it the default method.
Everything I have read shows average is the method for npc's and non player HD.
Seeker read my above post go to those sections and read them. It states otherwise.
The rules assume fighters do not caster spells and wizards do not gain full BAB.Everything I have read shows average is the method for npc's and non player HD.
These things aren't equivalent.
Seeker read my above post go to those sections and read them. It states otherwise.
It does not. It explains what a HD is, and how a player rolls his HP. What I posted specifically cover both NPC's and non player HD.
What you posted does not make what I posted invalid.The text I linked stats "Roll" means assume average of the dice.
What I posted is talking about the subject at hand. Now can you show me where it says NPC's and monsters roll and not to assume average?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
These things aren't equivalent.
The rules assume fighters do not caster spells and wizards do not gain full BAB.Everything I have read shows average is the method for npc's and non player HD.
Yes they are. I showed you where in the rules it says NPC's and monster assume average roll on HPs. This is in both books.
You may not use them but they are there.
Edit; Anyhow guys hit the FAQ as we are going round and round here.
"Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally."
Why would they roll their first hit die if they only use average hit points?
"When rolling for this creature's hit points, you would roll a d8 three times and add the results together, along with other modifiers."
Why would we be rolling for a creature if they are an npc and by your logic only use average hit points?
"Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally."
Once again why would the npc be rolling for their first hit die if they use only average hit points?
Also it has both PC and NPC in the examples.
Also i have three, count them, three examples of npcs not using average hit points.
Now Seeker lets see how you blindly disregard those rules in favor of your examples in the stat block of the bestiary and NPC creation, where one is just a break down of stat blocks and the other is assumed to work.
Seeker read my above post go to those sections and read them. It states otherwise.It does not. It explains what a HD is, and how a player rolls his HP. What I posted specifically cover both NPC's and non player HD.
Incorrect. Players are not allowed to have racial hit dice in the standard, core rules, and yet the listed quote specifically mentions that racial hit points are rolled.
"Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally."
Why would they roll their first hit die if they only use average hit points?
Because, roll means assume average. Roll is the term for determine the dice outcome. We know on NPC's this means assume average. On a d10 that is 5 hp, at level 1, 6 hp at level 2, 5 hp at level 3, 6 hp at level 4 and so on.
"When rolling for this creature's hit points, you would roll a d8 three times and add the results together, along with other modifiers."Why would we be rolling for a creature if they are an npc and by your logic only use average hit points?
See first reply
"Creatures whose first Hit Die comes from an NPC class or from his race roll their first Hit Die normally."Once again why would the npc be rolling for their first hit die if they use only average hit points?
Again see first reply
Also it has both PC and NPC in the examples.Also i have three, count them, three examples of npcs not using average hit points.
No. You have one. Count them one example that does not invalided a single thing I have said.
Your hinging on the word roll, which we know in NPC's means "Assume the average count of the die". We know this as both books tell us this.
You have yet to show where it says an NPC roll is not "Assume average"
Seeker are you delusional?
You can't just make something up like;
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Because, roll means assume average. Roll is the term for determine the dice outcome. We know on NPC's this means assume average. On a d10 that is 5 hp, at level 1, 6 hp at level 2, 5 hp at level 3, 6 hp at level 4 and so on.
and then tell me that all the rules i found to support my claim are wrong.
I have three different rules saying that NPC's roll hit points; Hit Dice, Hit Points, and Character Creation.
What do you have? Nothing.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
No. I quoted the rule that stated how you determined a "Roll" for both NPC and monster HD. A "Roll" by the rules for theses HD are assumed to be average.
It states you roll 3d8 yes. Then when you look at both the NPC creation and monster creation and the monster HD/HP rule it states "Rolls" are assumed to be average.
Three places that tell you a "Roll" for those HD are average. You are showing me where it says roll. I am showing you where it says how the roll is determined. Your 3d8 roll is 13+ con mod by the rules that we have in both books.
Again show me the page where it says to ignore the rules I quoted and not to assume the roll is average.