A Paladin use a pool of healing power points to restore HP, cure diseases or neutralize poison. A target without HP to restore, disease to cure or poison to neutralise shouldn't see any healing power points being expended.
Why not? WOuld you get your spell slot back if you cast cure wounds on a target that has full HP? If a Fighter attacks a creature that is immune to the fighter's damage, do the fighter get their attack back? If a character bribes someone with 25 gold when 10 would have been enough, do they get the extra 15 gold back? And so on.
A Paladin use a pool of healing power points to restore HP, cure diseases or neutralize poison. A target without HP to restore, disease to cure or poison to neutralise shouldn't see any healing power points being expended.
Why not? WOuld you get your spell slot back if you cast cure wounds on a target that has full HP? If a Fighter attacks a creature that is immune to the fighter's damage, do the fighter get their attack back? If a character bribes someone with 25 gold when 10 would have been enough, do they get the extra 15 gold back? And so on.
The DM would tell you that guy looks fine and that you don't have to heal him(which is the same for Paladin);no;no.
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
there is an entire section in Xanathar's about this. You cast charm person on a vampire: the DM tells you the vampire(who you think is a humanoid) succeded on a save.
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
there is an entire section in Xanathar's about this. You cast charm person on a vampire: the DM tells you the vampire(who you think is a humanoid) succeded on a save.
No, the DM tells you "ok". Charm Person is not a spell that reveals if the target passed or failed their save. However, you are out the slot, because you targeted an invalid target. If Lay On Hands was a spell - and it isn't - then you could use it on e.g. objects and you'd be out the resources for no benefit, and the DM wouldn't remark on anything because nothing observable would have happened (other than you being out the points). If Lay On Hands won't even attempt to work on objects, then you'll keep the points and you'll know immediately your target qualified for Lay On Hands not attempting to work. Since Lay On Hands isn't a spell, your DM can make either choice (or some third one) without contradicting the RAW, as the RAW doesn't explain itself, just as it didn't for spells pre-Xanathar's.
Lay on Hands is not a spell so the comparaison with it is not applicable.
But if you want to compare it with a cost to effect then
If a character normally spends 1 spell slot to cast a spell, if it doesn't cast a spell it shouldn't spend a slot.
If a character normally spends 1 feet of movement speed to move 1 feet, if it doesn't move 1 feet it shouldn't spends 1 feet of movement speed.
Of course it is comparable. LoH is a spendable resource, just like spell slots, arrows, gold or attacks. The fact that you ignored those other examples is dishonest of you. You are also making a flase comparison by saying "If a character normally spends 1 spell slot to cast a spell, if it doesn't cast a spell it shouldn't spend a slot." The premise was that the paladin actually did use LoH, not that it "doesn't cast a spell/doesn't use LoH".
Also, if it was possible to not spend any movement by moving less than 1 feet you basically get unlimited movement by just moving less than a feet a hundred times.
A Paladin use a pool of healing power points to restore HP, cure diseases or neutralize poison. A target without HP to restore, disease to cure or poison to neutralise shouldn't see any healing power points being expended.
Why not? WOuld you get your spell slot back if you cast cure wounds on a target that has full HP? If a Fighter attacks a creature that is immune to the fighter's damage, do the fighter get their attack back? If a character bribes someone with 25 gold when 10 would have been enough, do they get the extra 15 gold back? And so on.
The DM would tell you that guy looks fine and that you don't have to heal him(which is the same for Paladin);no;no.
False premise. The question is "what happens if I spend more HP than needed when using LoH" and NOT "what happens if I use LoH on a healthy target". And you are also ignoring the other examples.
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
there is an entire section in Xanathar's about this. You cast charm person on a vampire: the DM tells you the vampire(who you think is a humanoid) succeded on a save.
No, the DM tells you "ok". Charm Person is not a spell that reveals if the target passed or failed their save. However, you are out the slot, because you targeted an invalid target. If Lay On Hands was a spell - and it isn't - then you could use it on e.g. objects and you'd be out the resources for no benefit, and the DM wouldn't remark on anything because nothing observable would have happened (other than you being out the points). If Lay On Hands won't even attempt to work on objects, then you'll keep the points and you'll know immediately your target qualified for Lay On Hands not attempting to work. Since Lay On Hands isn't a spell, your DM can make either choice (or some third one) without contradicting the RAW, as the RAW doesn't explain itself, just as it didn't for spells pre-Xanathar's.
No-one has claimed that LoH is a spell. However, it IS a spendable resources and in D&D5E you can spend resources without getting any kind of return. Just like a fighter can make an attack against a creature that is immune to their damage, thus wasting the resource that is the attack, a Paladin can spend more than the required number of HP to heal a creature.
Comparing it to using LoH on an invalid target is actually irrelevant.
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
there is an entire section in Xanathar's about this. You cast charm person on a vampire: the DM tells you the vampire(who you think is a humanoid) succeded on a save.
Bold emphasis mine. You're talking if you cast charm person while i'm talking if you don't cast it. If you don't cast a spell, you don't spend a spell slot.
The premise was that the paladin actually did use LoH, not that it "doesn't cast a spell/doesn't use LoH".
I never said the Paladin is not using Lay on Hand i said there would be no points drawn from the pool if there's no HP to restore, disease to cure or poison to neutralise when using it.
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
This is what I'm talking about. Um... how do you not cast a spell? I'm not saying choosing you don't want to cast a spell, but are the actions attack, dash, disengage, use an item, and don't cast a spell?
With Lay of Hands, you have a pool of healing power that you expend to restore a total number of hit points equal to it. Restore means to bring back, which you don't do when full having no HP to restore. You restore 1+ HP by expending an equal number, meaning 0 restored = 0 expended
You don't cast spell when you're not. With Lay of Hands, you have a pool of healing power that you expend to restore a total number of hit points equal to it. Restore means to bring back, which you don't do when full having no HP to restore. You restore 1+ HP by expending an equal number, meaning 0 restored = 0 expended
Your blessed touch can heal wounds. You have a pool of healing power that replenishes when you take a long rest. With that pool, you can restore a total number of hit points equal to your paladin level × 5.
As an action, you can touch a creature and draw power from the pool to restore a number of hit points to that creature, up to the maximum amountremaining in your pool.
Why say "draw power from the pool"? Why comment on an amount "remaining in your pool"? The simplest explanation is that some power can be drawn from the pool in a way that could potentially permit some power to remain.
Having players waste their lay on hands healing adds nothing to the game other than resentment. Sure hit points are an abstraction... but so is divine healing channeled through a person's body.
With Lay of Hands, you have a pool of healing power that you expend to restore a total number of hit points equal to it. Restore means to bring back, which you don't do when full having no HP to restore. You restore 1+ HP by expending an equal number, meaning 0 restored = 0 expended
You're moving the goalpost and still ignoring the points being made. ALL resources (or at least everyone I can think of) in D&D can be spent without neccesarily having the desired effect. Why should LoH be special?
Having players waste their lay on hands healing adds nothing to the game other than resentment. Sure hit points are an abstraction... but so is divine healing channeled through a person's body.
Not any more than attacking and missing or using a third level spell slot when a first level spell slot would've sufficed or any other situation when you spend more resources than needed. If you don't want to overspend, make sure you underspend.
You're moving the goalpost and still ignoring the points being made. ALL resources (or at least everyone I can think of) in D&D can be spent without neccesarily having the desired effect. Why should LoH be special?
Please stop accusing me of being dishonest and moving the goal post when i'm not, it is not appreciated.
[REDACTED]
That was to show that there are plenty of resources, LoH just being one of them, that can be spent over overspent without the wanted results being achieved. Do you deny this is the case?
You don't cast spell when you're not. With Lay of Hands, you have a pool of healing power that you expend to restore a total number of hit points equal to it. Restore means to bring back, which you don't do when full having no HP to restore. You restore 1+ HP by expending an equal number, meaning 0 restored = 0 expended
Your blessed touch can heal wounds. You have a pool of healing power that replenishes when you take a long rest. With that pool, you can restore a total number of hit points equal to your paladin level × 5.
As an action, you can touch a creature and draw power from the pool to restore a number of hit points to that creature, up to the maximum amountremaining in your pool.
Why say "draw power from the pool"? Why comment on an amount "remaining in your pool"? The simplest explanation is that some power can be drawn from the pool in a way that could potentially permit some power to remain.
It seems to be able to leave points worth of power "remaining".
You're moving the goalpost and still ignoring the points being made. ALL resources (or at least everyone I can think of) in D&D can be spent without neccesarily having the desired effect. Why should LoH be special?
Please stop accusing me of being dishonest and moving the goal post when i'm not, it is not appreciated.
[REDACTED]
That was to show that there are plenty of resources, LoH just being one of them, that can be spent over overspent without the wanted results being achieved. Do you deny this is the case?
I don't think it is.
Can you point me to the rule in the PHB that says it is special and completely differnt to pretty much every other resource? Or give ANY kind of argument to why it should be other than "I don't think so"?
Yes, I never claimed I didn't. That was to show that there are plenty of resources, LoH just being one of them, that can be spent over overspent without the wanted results being achieved. Do you deny this is the case?
There's things that can be wasted. But other ressources that aren't expanded to restore or bring back stuff are not the same as Lay on Hands.
Notes: Please keep comments on-topic and constructive
Why not? WOuld you get your spell slot back if you cast cure wounds on a target that has full HP? If a Fighter attacks a creature that is immune to the fighter's damage, do the fighter get their attack back? If a character bribes someone with 25 gold when 10 would have been enough, do they get the extra 15 gold back? And so on.
Lay on Hands is not a spell so the comparaison with it is not applicable.
But if you want to compare it with a cost to effect then
If a character normally spends 1 spell slot to cast a spell, if it doesn't cast a spell it shouldn't spend a slot.
If a character normally spends 1 feet of movement speed to move 1 feet, if it doesn't move 1 feet it shouldn't spends 1 feet of movement speed.
The DM would tell you that guy looks fine and that you don't have to heal him(which is the same for Paladin);no;no.
1: actually, that spell slot would be wasted
2: depends on the DM
If you dont cast a soell you dont spend a slot. You confuse with casting a spell that has no effect, which is not the same thing as not casting a spell.
there is an entire section in Xanathar's about this. You cast charm person on a vampire: the DM tells you the vampire(who you think is a humanoid) succeded on a save.
No, the DM tells you "ok". Charm Person is not a spell that reveals if the target passed or failed their save. However, you are out the slot, because you targeted an invalid target. If Lay On Hands was a spell - and it isn't - then you could use it on e.g. objects and you'd be out the resources for no benefit, and the DM wouldn't remark on anything because nothing observable would have happened (other than you being out the points). If Lay On Hands won't even attempt to work on objects, then you'll keep the points and you'll know immediately your target qualified for Lay On Hands not attempting to work. Since Lay On Hands isn't a spell, your DM can make either choice (or some third one) without contradicting the RAW, as the RAW doesn't explain itself, just as it didn't for spells pre-Xanathar's.
Of course it is comparable. LoH is a spendable resource, just like spell slots, arrows, gold or attacks. The fact that you ignored those other examples is dishonest of you. You are also making a flase comparison by saying "If a character normally spends 1 spell slot to cast a spell, if it doesn't cast a spell it shouldn't spend a slot." The premise was that the paladin actually did use LoH, not that it "doesn't cast a spell/doesn't use LoH".
Also, if it was possible to not spend any movement by moving less than 1 feet you basically get unlimited movement by just moving less than a feet a hundred times.
False premise. The question is "what happens if I spend more HP than needed when using LoH" and NOT "what happens if I use LoH on a healthy target". And you are also ignoring the other examples.
No-one has claimed that LoH is a spell. However, it IS a spendable resources and in D&D5E you can spend resources without getting any kind of return. Just like a fighter can make an attack against a creature that is immune to their damage, thus wasting the resource that is the attack, a Paladin can spend more than the required number of HP to heal a creature.
Comparing it to using LoH on an invalid target is actually irrelevant.
Bold emphasis mine. You're talking if you cast charm person while i'm talking if you don't cast it. If you don't cast a spell, you don't spend a spell slot.
I never said the Paladin is not using Lay on Hand i said there would be no points drawn from the pool if there's no HP to restore, disease to cure or poison to neutralise when using it.
This is what I'm talking about. Um... how do you not cast a spell? I'm not saying choosing you don't want to cast a spell, but are the actions attack, dash, disengage, use an item, and don't cast a spell?
Exactly.
Lay on Hands
Your blessed touch can heal wounds. You have a pool of healing power that replenishes when you take a long rest. With that pool, you can restore a total number of hit points equal to your paladin level × 5.
As an action, you can touch a creature and draw power from the pool to restore a number of hit points to that creature, up to the maximum amount remaining in your pool.
Why say "draw power from the pool"? Why comment on an amount "remaining in your pool"? The simplest explanation is that some power can be drawn from the pool in a way that could potentially permit some power to remain.
Having players waste their lay on hands healing adds nothing to the game other than resentment. Sure hit points are an abstraction... but so is divine healing channeled through a person's body.
I dunno. As long as a DM is clear about their house rules, there should be no reason for resentment.
RAW, the pool can empty subtly and gradually no question.
Thematically paladins are blasty types by nature.
You're moving the goalpost and still ignoring the points being made. ALL resources (or at least everyone I can think of) in D&D can be spent without neccesarily having the desired effect. Why should LoH be special?
Not any more than attacking and missing or using a third level spell slot when a first level spell slot would've sufficed or any other situation when you spend more resources than needed. If you don't want to overspend, make sure you underspend.
I don't think it is.
It seems to be able to leave points worth of power "remaining".
Can you point me to the rule in the PHB that says it is special and completely differnt to pretty much every other resource? Or give ANY kind of argument to why it should be other than "I don't think so"?
There's things that can be wasted. But other ressources that aren't expanded to restore or bring back stuff are not the same as Lay on Hands.
Ki points are similarly used point by point.
For me, the keywords of the LoH's text are "from" and "remaining".
Can you point me to the rule in the PHB that says that the LoH feature should be treated like a spell?
Ki points
Sorcery points
Arcane ward's reducing HP buffer
Armour of Agythys' reducing HP buffer