|
If you completely ignore the text defining hit point damage that makes sense I suppose.Have we bludgeoned this to death yet? Hit point damage can come in two varieties: lethal and non-lethal.
When an ability says "you can choose to do non-lethal damage instead" it doesn't change to some magical "non-HP" based damage system. It is still HP damage. It is just a different type (non-lethal).
So yes, you can use Feats that deal HP damage on non-lethal attacks. (unless it specifically says otherwise). Remember the rule of generality we used to have? More general = accepted. Generally, lethal and non-lethal attacks both do HP damage, unless specified otherwise.
So you are intentionally being obtuse about this? It is not a hard concept. You have HP. Weapons deal damage, it is resolved in HP. If you CHOOSE to do non-lethal, then the damage to the HP goes to a "separate pool of HP" (ie. your non-lethal HP pool). It doesn't turn into magical mystery damage beyond the pale. It is still damage to HP (albeit a non-lethal HP pool). It isn't rocket science.
You don't "completely ignore" anything. You APPLY what you learned from the definition of the Loss of Hit Point section to the "special occasion" when you do non-lethal damage to someone, and thus read the rules for THAT section INCLUDING what you learned from the Loss of Hit Point entry.
"The most common way that your character gets hurt is to take lethal damage and lose hit points" - notice, it states that lethal damage is the most common way to get hurt. Not the only way. And note: damage is pre-typed with "lethal"... and then lose HP (there is no such thing as HP damage, it is lethal or non-lethal damage which reduces HP or stacks up to "fill" a pool of "non-lethal HP"). ...so maybe, if you aren't obtuse, you will also suppose an uncommon way to get hurt is to take non-lethal damage and gain points (to "fill" a non-lethal hp pool). Not rocket science.
Add this:" Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage:
You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.
Lethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Nonlethal Damage: You can use a weapon that deals nonlethal damage, including an unarmed strike, to deal lethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll."
The two are interchangeable at a character's whim. So explain to me again how they are not the same and simply applied to different HP pools as defined under the OPTION of doing non-lethal damage? Damage is done, then HP are resolved according to the type (lethal or non-lethal).
And the claim that it wouldn't apply to non-lethal attacks falls on it's face when you consider that non-lethal is treated like lethal if it exceeds total max HP. What? Do you roll damage, take out all the modifiers for power attack (including the roll to hit negative), then resolve it, see if you did enough damage to ADD IN the power attack damage as lethal, re-check to see if they actually missed entirely because of the -1, and then apply the power attack damage as lethal damage IF they did hit with the new calculations, because they exceeded the max HP only before the power attack damage was added? Silly stupidity. Quite obtuse.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have we bludgeoned this to death yet?
We most often use bludgeoning to do non-lethal.
Trolls have regeneration, so they cannot die from non-lethal./cevah
We aren't dismissing the text at all. We are reading it in a way that makes it consistent in every instance. Where as yours creates ad hoc variations in order to account for your interpretation.Your definition of hit point damage, the notion of it as a separate concept rulewise, and its application to power attack. All completely unreasonable. Only reasonable if you accept your baseline assumptions that are incorrect.It's not an assumption and it's not my definition; it's clearly denoted in the text.
It is an assumption to dismiss the text because you are sure that what was intended differs from what was written.
The text clearly defines hit point damage as damage that reduces hit points, any other interpretation is an assumption not based on the rules.
For example, you still haven't answered my question from several pages ago. Prove to me that nonlethal damage should ever convert to lethal damage at a ratio other than 1:1.
Ie, if I convert 1 point of nonlethal damage to lethal damage, where in the rules does it say I do anything other than 1 point of lethal damage.
I ask this, because if your rules interpretation means I do 2, 3, or any number other than 1, and you can't back that up. That means you're wrong, because your interpretation is leading to things that are impossibilities in the rules. I don't want an inference, I want an explicit example where the rules say this to back you up, or a dev explanation. If you can't provide that, you should admit that this is something you can't explain.
If this is based on the power attack example; the extra damage would be conditional, if the attack met the conditions it would apply if not it wouldn't. The same for sneak attack, critical hit and other forms of bonus damage.
And yes, it was a strawman. You literally replaced the argument about nonlethal, with a fictitious argument you...
I'm not arguing with you about temporary hit points. If you want to talk about temporary hit points, start a new thread.
Also, your comment about them is telling me what my argument is. Except I'm telling you that that isn't my argument. Between you and me, which of us is more likely to be right about what thoughts are in my head?
You say the power attack damage is conditional, and gets added in during the middle of the application of damage. Cite one source that tells you that this is the process. I've been asking for a source on this for several days now, and you haven't provided one.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you not understand the concept of an illustrative example? I was using the logic of your argument to make a similar argument. I was not replacing the argument about hit point damage with an argument about temporary hit points, I was using a similar argument about temporary hit points to show how the logic you used is flawed.
As stated before, the conditions of a conditional effect must be met for the effect to occur. If you are flanking you get sneak attack, if you confirm a crit you get critical damage, if you deal hit point damage you get the bonus damage from power attack. That is how conditional effects work.
The rules say that the bonus damage requires hit point damage to work, and that hit point damage is damage that reduces hit points. If an attack doesn't reduce hit points it is not lethal damage. Unless you can provide some rule to say otherwise that is how it works.
No, you aren't using the logic of my argument at all. You're using a fictitious argument that you want to be debating against, applying it to temporary hit points, and saying that that is an example. You are arguing in bad faith. Feel free to continue as much as you want, it isn't going to improve my opinion of you.
Here's the thing, I can find examples of having flanking described. There are even diagrams in the corebook.
Can you provide one written example of how Power Attack damage applies to a nonlethal hit that goes over the limit? Because this isn't intuitive (literally 90%+ of the people in this thread would get the example wrong), and so would need to be explained. Since this basic interaction is relatively old, perhaps you can dig up one example where a dev, or paizo employee explains how to calculate overflow nonlethal damage in a situation where someone is Power Attacking.
Also, how does the +1d6 damage from Merciful work? It says that it cannot deal lethal damage. So therefore, if a hit goes over the cap, then the +1d6 has to go away by your ruling. Is the +1d6 applied first? Last? When? If I PA with a Merciful weapon, what happens when I go over the cap by 1 point? Does the Merciful bonus go away first, meaning I don't go over the cap? Or does the PA bonus apply first, keeping me above the cap, but then the Merciful damage is taken out after?
So wait I might have missed something in the walls of text, are we now saying that Power attack also doesn't work if the target has Temp hp or is the temp hp thing just another tangent?
GA is attempting to insert a parallel between Temp HP and Non Lethal damage.
...I think.
I still maintain that Power Attack can be used with Non Lethal damage, just as my PFS character has been doing since level one.
Yep just wondering if we were now saying that temp hp also prevented the damage thus possibly complicating the math for PA.
No. He's saying that because hit points can be lost, all hit points are "temporary" and since Temporary Hit Points cannot be healed, no hit points can be healed.
Of course he's ignoring the logic of the rest of the nonlethal damage is hit point damage argument in order to arrive at this conclusion, which is why is analogy is incredibly flawed.
I don't know which of those things would bother me more
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's still not my argument. You keep claiming it is, but it isn't. There's two fundamental flaw in your comparison. I'll wait until you find out on your own though.
Because you consistently attribute to me ideas that I'm not saying, it's really easy for me to see how you're reading into the rules text things that aren't there.
GA-
As for Merciful, the weapon property states that if you deal lethal damage that you don't gain the +1d6 bonus damage. Since your interpretation tells us that certain kinds of lethal damage only turn on once lethal damage is dealt, than it follows that certain kinds of damage can also turn off. Merciful specifically calls out that the bonus damage doesn't apply to lethal damage, so according to your ruling, why does it NOT turn off, but Power Attack turns on?
|
I want to remind GA of my earlier point, that even though damage above Max HP with Non Lethal damage is converted to Lethal, the character is still dealing Non Lethal damage, despite the damage reverting to lethal. It is the target that has no more non lethal to take, not the attacker not trying to do the non lethal with the attack after the point of reaching Max HP of the target.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the argument you have used 5 times isn't your argument? I've read through your posts and I didn't see anything else based on rules/text that would back up your claim.It's still not my argument. You keep claiming it is, but it isn't. There's two fundamental flaw in your comparison. I'll wait until you find out on your own though.
Because you consistently attribute to me ideas that I'm not saying, it's really easy for me to see how you're reading into the rules text things that aren't there.
Yes, because there are 2 fundamental flaws to your comparison that make it wrong.
Here's a hint at the first one.
Me: All salmon are fish.
You: No, you're wrong, because not all fish are salmon.
So... you can keep repeating this error all you like, but I don't find it very convincing.
GA-
As for Merciful, the weapon property states that if you deal lethal damage that you don't gain the +1d6 bonus damage. Since your interpretation tells us that certain kinds of lethal damage only turn on once lethal damage is dealt, than it follows that certain kinds of damage can also turn off. Merciful specifically calls out that the bonus damage doesn't apply to lethal damage, so according to your ruling, why does it NOT turn off, but Power Attack turns on?
A merciful weapon deals an extra 1d6 points of damage, but all damage it deals is nonlethal damage. On command, the weapon suppresses this ability until told to resume it (allowing it to deal lethal damage, but without any bonus damage from this ability).There is nothing that says if you deal lethal damage it turns off automatically. It says the user can suppress the ability on command, but that isn't the same thing. Nonlethal damage over max HP would be converted to lethal including the extra 1d6.
But the damage has to be nonlethal. Once you convert it to lethal damage, the bonus damage has to turn off (by your argument), because it is exclusive. They are separate damage types, and this ability says that to deal lethal damage, the bonus damage has to be suppressed. In the parenthetical, it says "allowing it to deal lethal damage, but without any bonus damage". Once you're dealing lethal damage, the bonus damage shouldn't be applied.
It makes just as much sense as Power Attack not applying to nonlethal (according to you), because it specifically calls out hit point damage, and doesn't explicitly include nonlethal.
Merciful explicitly excludes lethal, and does so MUCH MORE CLEARLY than anything you've claimed about Power Attack excluding nonlethal. So if a clearer example of exclusion isn't exclusionary, I don't see how your much muddier example of exclusion could possibly be right.
Not really relevant to the flaw in your logic that we should ignore the text used to define a term and how the term is used and instead focus on the words that make up the term divorced from context.So the argument you have used 5 times isn't your argument? I've read through your posts and I didn't see anything else based on rules/text that would back up your claim.It's still not my argument. You keep claiming it is, but it isn't. There's two fundamental flaw in your comparison. I'll wait until you find out on your own though.
Because you consistently attribute to me ideas that I'm not saying, it's really easy for me to see how you're reading into the rules text things that aren't there.
Yes, because there are 2 fundamental flaws to your comparison that make it wrong.
Here's a hint at the first one.
Me: All salmon are fish.
You: No, you're wrong, because not all fish are salmon.So... you can keep repeating this error all you like, but I don't find it very convincing.
I'm not ignoring any text. I am interpreting it in a way that is consistent with all game play to date. There is no section of the rules that my interpretation violates.
By the way, I'm still waiting on one example from the past 10 years where a Paizo employee explains how to calculate damage on a nonlethal attack that overflows to lethal damage, where the value of the overflow changes due to Power Attack. Considering this would be a unique instance of damage calculation, it should be explained how it happens somewhere. Have you found one yet?
There's lots of text that suggests nonlethal is hit point damage. You just ignore it. It's been linked and discussed to death though, so I'm not going to bother reposting, because you'll just ignore it again.
Merciful clearly has exclusionary clauses for lethal damage. They're much more clear than Power Attack and nonlethal (where nonlethal isn't even mentioned). So, you're trying to tell me that clear exclusionary clauses don't apply, but vague exclusionary clauses do apply. Yeah, sure buddy.
There's lots of text that suggests nonlethal is hit point damage. You just ignore it.
But no places where it is defined.
It's Damage.Lethal. Damage. It effects HP.
Non Lethal. Damage. It effects HP.
One kills you, one knocks you out.
*Drops Mike* Peace.
No where is is stated that Non-lethal affects HP. In fact, it is explicitly defined as not affecting HP.
And again, Gallant Armor appears to be correct RAW. Though, I agree with the group that nonlethal is considered HP damage RAI, I can admit that it is a RAI interpretation.
|
Damage
Damage
If your attack succeeds, you deal damage. The type of weapon used determines the amount of damage you deal.Damage reduces a target's current hit points.
Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of nonlethal damage.
Strength Bonus: When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result. A Strength penalty, but not a bonus, applies on damage rolls made with a bow that is not a composite bow.
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.
Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed: When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus (Strength penalties are not multiplied). You don't get this higher Strength bonus, however, when using a light weapon with two hands.
Multiplying Damage: Sometimes you multiply damage by some factor, such as on a critical hit. Roll the damage (with all modifiers) multiple times and total the results.
Note: When you multiply damage more than once, each multiplier works off the original, unmultiplied damage. So if you are asked to double the damage twice, the end result is three times the normal damage.
Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon's normal damage are never multiplied.
Ability Damage: Certain creatures and magical effects can cause temporary or permanent ability damage (a reduction to an ability score).
Hit Points
When your hit point total reaches 0, you're disabled. When it reaches –1, you're dying. When it gets to a negative amount equal to your Constitution score, you're dead. See Injury and Death, for more information.
Nonlethal Damage
Nonlethal damage represents harm to a character that is not life-threatening. Unlike normal damage, nonlethal damage is healed quickly with rest.Dealing Nonlethal Damage: Certain attacks deal nonlethal damage. Other effects, such as heat or being exhausted, also deal nonlethal damage. When you take nonlethal damage, keep a running total of how much you've accumulated. Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points. It is not "real" damage. Instead, when your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you're staggered (see below), and when it exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious.
Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage: You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.
Lethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Nonlethal Damage: You can use a weapon that deals nonlethal damage, including an unarmed strike, to deal lethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.
Staggered and Unconscious: When your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you're staggered. You can only take a standard action or a move action in each round (in addition to free, immediate, and swift actions). You cease being staggered when your current hit points once again exceed your nonlethal damage.
When your nonlethal damage exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious. While unconscious, you are helpless.
Spellcasters who fall unconscious retain any spellcasting ability they had before going unconscious.
If a creature's nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage is treated as lethal damage. This does not apply to creatures with regeneration. Such creatures simply accrue additional nonlethal damage, increasing the amount of time they remain unconscious.
Healing Nonlethal Damage: You heal nonlethal damage at the rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. When a spell or ability cures hit point damage, it also removes an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
So I found nothing that mentions that non lethal damage isn't hit point damage. Interestingly enough, under healing non lethal damage, it says non lethal heals at a rate of 1 Hit Point per Hour. That implies to me that it is in fact hit points unless I can see a quote otherwise.
Last shot in the dark.
Power attack provides bonus damage on “all melee damage rolls” but doesn’t work on “touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage”.
Going a bit earlier in the combat chapter, we learn that the effect of a successful attack is damage to hit points (or what you might choose to otherwise call hit point damage because you’re writing casual game rules not a technical manual where each word or group of words must always mean exactly the same thing throughout).
The later section on injury and death includes the nonlethal damage modification, but it never indicates that it replaces the damage rules, which clearly state that damage is done to hit points.
So, either nonlethal damage is in the wrong section of the chapter (because if it’s a different type of damage it should really be in the damage rules), or power attack is self-condradictory and only applies to lethal hit point damage rather than “all melee damage rolls”, or nonlethal damage is a modification to lethal damage where it differs but is otherwise the same.
One of these is simple and doesn’t need any rules to be changed, the other two do.
|
|
It's Damage.Lethal. Damage. It effects HP.
Non Lethal. Damage. It effects HP.
One kills you, one knocks you out.
*Drops Mike* Peace.
No where is is stated that Non-lethal affects HP. In fact, it is explicitly defined as not affecting HP.
And again, Gallant Armor appears to be correct RAW. Though, I agree with the group that nonlethal is considered HP damage RAI, I can admit that it is a RAI interpretation.
It is tracked against HP, if the total of Lethal and Non Lethal go beyond max HP, ya got knocked out. Not sure how this is not HP.
Peace.
It is tracked against HP, if the total of Lethal and Non Lethal go beyond max HP, ya got knocked out. Not sure how this is not HP.
Peace.
Sure, I can explain it with a question.
Let's say you have 10 HP. You take 1 nonlethal damage.
How much HP do you have left?
So I found nothing that mentions that non lethal damage isn't hit point damage. Interestingly enough, under healing non lethal damage, it says non lethal heals at a rate of 1 Hit Point per Hour. That implies to me that it is in fact hit points unless I can see a quote otherwise.
I think I stated this earlier in the thread, but the one of the two major arguments here is...
"Nonlethal Damage is damage that is measured in hit points, and is therefore, hit point damage."
Dealing Nonlethal Damage: Certain attacks deal nonlethal damage. Other effects, such as heat or being exhausted, also deal nonlethal damage. When you take nonlethal damage, keep a running total of how much you've accumulated. Do not deduct the nonlethal damage number from your current hit points. It is not "real" damage. Instead, when your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you're staggered (see below), and when it exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious.
Nonlethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Lethal Damage: You can use a melee weapon that deals lethal damage to deal nonlethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.
Lethal Damage with a Weapon that Deals Nonlethal Damage: You can use a weapon that deals nonlethal damage, including an unarmed strike, to deal lethal damage instead, but you take a –4 penalty on your attack roll.
Staggered and Unconscious: When your nonlethal damage equals your current hit points, you're staggered. You can only take a standard action or a move action in each round (in addition to free, immediate, and swift actions). You cease being staggered when your current hit points once again exceed your nonlethal damage.
When your nonlethal damage exceeds your current hit points, you fall unconscious. While unconscious, you are helpless.
Spellcasters who fall unconscious retain any spellcasting ability they had before going unconscious.
If a creature's nonlethal damage is equal to his total maximum hit points (not his current hit points), all further nonlethal damage is treated as lethal damage. This does not apply to creatures with regeneration. Such creatures simply accrue additional nonlethal damage, increasing the amount of time they remain unconscious.
Healing Nonlethal Damage: You heal nonlethal damage at the rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. When a spell or ability cures hit point damage, it also removes an equal amount of nonlethal damage.
I have emphasized some evidence from the healing nonlethal damage section. Here, it states when you heal hit point damage, you also remove an equal amount of nonlethal damage. Here, how to treat "hit point damage" and how to treat "non-lethal damage" are differentiated it.
Is it possible, that the developers are using hit point damage in reference to the most common way to lose hit points?
The most common way that your character gets hurt is to take lethal damage and lose hit points.Second; as the non-lethal damage rules are tracked differently than lethal damage, it makes sense to specify that healing spells heal both at the same rate.
1. I don't see how this impacts my statement. The sentence is saying that healing hit point damage also heals nonlethal damage. Which implies, but does not prove, that nonlethal damage is NOT hit point damage.
2. Without this rule, it would impossible for heal spells to heal nonlethal damage, as nonlethal damage does not damage hit points... because it isn't hit point damage.
I'll answer with another question, what happens when you take 9 lethal damage? or 10?
If you have 10 HP and 1 nonlethal damage, and you take 9 lethal damage, you have 1 HP remaining.
If you have 10 HP and 1 nonlethal damage, and you take 10 lethal damage, you have 0 HP remaining.
If you have followed this specific conversation, you will see that nonlethal damage does not affect hit points as I have claimed.
|
|
It is tracked against HP, if the total of Lethal and Non Lethal go beyond max HP, ya got knocked out. Not sure how this is not HP.
Peace.
Sure, I can explain it with a question.
Let's say you have 10 HP. You take 1 nonlethal damage.
How much HP do you have left?
So I found nothing that mentions that non lethal damage isn't hit point damage. Interestingly enough, under healing non lethal damage, it says non lethal heals at a rate of 1 Hit Point per Hour. That implies to me that it is in fact hit points unless I can see a quote otherwise.I think I stated this earlier in the thread, but the one of the two major arguments here is...
"Nonlethal Damage is damage that is measured in hit points, and is therefore, hit point damage."
** spoiler omitted **...
You didn't address the point that the healing Non-Lethal damage rules on the PRD clearly state that Non-Lethal damage heals at a rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. That was cut and paste directly from the Non-Lethal damage section, and clearly states that Non-Lethal is a form of Hit Point damage. Your quote about magical healing do not address this at all.
1: Because it is the most common, it is used interchangeably with lethal damage, not exclusively mind, so specifics for certain other types of damage are needed to be made.
2: Yet according to the spell
When laying your hand upon a living creature, you channel positive energy that cures 1d8 points of damage + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Since undead are powered by negative energy, this spell deals damage to them instead of curing their wounds. An undead creature can apply spell resistance, and can attempt a Will save to take half damage.So, it heals "damage" not hit point damage, just damage, which is non-lethal as well, but in order to specify, they list it in the healing section of Non-Lethal damage to make sure.
Take 9: you are staggered, (much as if you had taken a total of 10 lethal damage).
Take 10, you are unconscious (again, as if you had taken a total of 11 lethal damage, with the exception that you are not dying). So, yes non-lethal does affect hit points.
1. Can you please provide evidence where hit point damage is used for nonlethal? This would prove that it wasn't exclusive.
2.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.
According to the HP rules, healing restores hit points. Nonlethal rules have a specific rule that says that healing hit points removes an equal amount of hit points.
Nonlethal damage does not affect hit points.
As for the other conversation:
Someone made the claim that nonlethal affects hit points. As I have made clear, it doesn't. Although, it does change your status. Nonlethal can knock unconscious or stagger when compared against your remaining HP, but it doesn't effect HP. The state of your HP is completely independent of any increase or decrease to nonlethal damage.
You didn't address the point that the healing Non-Lethal damage rules on the PRD clearly state that Non-Lethal damage heals at a rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. That was cut and paste directly from the Non-Lethal damage section, and clearly states that Non-Lethal is a form of Hit Point damage. Your quote about magical healing do not address this at all.It is tracked against HP, if the total of Lethal and Non Lethal go beyond max HP, ya got knocked out. Not sure how this is not HP.
Peace.
Sure, I can explain it with a question.
Let's say you have 10 HP. You take 1 nonlethal damage.
How much HP do you have left?
So I found nothing that mentions that non lethal damage isn't hit point damage. Interestingly enough, under healing non lethal damage, it says non lethal heals at a rate of 1 Hit Point per Hour. That implies to me that it is in fact hit points unless I can see a quote otherwise.I think I stated this earlier in the thread, but the one of the two major arguments here is...
"Nonlethal Damage is damage that is measured in hit points, and is therefore, hit point damage."
** spoiler omitted **...
The rules don't say many things. The rules don't say that we can't let a dog play basketball, so we can do that right?
The line of magical healing implies (but does not prove) they are different. Which is better than "it doesn't say it isn't hit point damage," in my opinion.
If it was explicitly stated anywhere, it wouldn't be an argument.
We need to let one of the two threads die, so the conversation can take place in one thread.
|
|
Nonlethal hit points are not the same as hit points in the same way that nonlethal damage is not the same as damage.You didn't address the point that the healing Non-Lethal damage rules on the PRD clearly state that Non-Lethal damage heals at a rate of 1 hit point per hour per character level. That was cut and paste directly from the Non-Lethal damage section, and clearly states that Non-Lethal is a form of Hit Point damage. Your quote about magical healing do not address this at all.It is tracked against HP, if the total of Lethal and Non Lethal go beyond max HP, ya got knocked out. Not sure how this is not HP.
Peace.
Sure, I can explain it with a question.
Let's say you have 10 HP. You take 1 nonlethal damage.
How much HP do you have left?
So I found nothing that mentions that non lethal damage isn't hit point damage. Interestingly enough, under healing non lethal damage, it says non lethal heals at a rate of 1 Hit Point per Hour. That implies to me that it is in fact hit points unless I can see a quote otherwise.I think I stated this earlier in the thread, but the one of the two major arguments here is...
"Nonlethal Damage is damage that is measured in hit points, and is therefore, hit point damage."
** spoiler omitted **...
Ah, but Gallant, you just said that Nonlethal Hit points are a thing. I am damaging them. This is Hit Point damage for Power Attack. Power Attack merely states that it doesn't work on things that don't cause Hit Point damage. If you wanted it to only work on Lethal Hit Point damage, PA would need to state that.
+1 for Irontruth's suggestion. Let one of the threads die, this BS is clogging my attention in a way it doesn't need to.