Swimming/drowning/holding breath errata - where? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Swimming/drowning/holding breath errata - where? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
jamie_noone
04-11-07, 02:56 AM The PHB says under the description for the Swimming skill that PCs can hold their breath for a number of rounds equal to their Con score. The DMG states, under the description of drowning, that PCs can hold their breath for a number of rounds equal to twice their Con score. Which is it? I know this has been settled somewhere, but I didn't see it in either the PHB or the DMG errata.

Thanks in advance,
Jamie
Marcus Majarra
04-11-07, 02:47 PM There is no official errata on this subject, but drowning rules defer to the DMG (the PHB defers to it), making it the primary source on the subject. You can thus hold your breath for a number of rounds equal to twice your Con score. Taking a standard or full-round action reduces this duration by 1 round.
leroy_brown
04-12-07, 08:56 AM Actually, if you check the errata, the primary source of the rule is the one that should be enforced, ie in this case the one in the PHB (look at the Wizards website)
Marcus Majarra
04-12-07, 12:23 PM How is the PHB the primary source for drowning rules when drowning rules are entirely covered in the DMG? Holding your breath is not a purview of the Swim skill; it's merely an accessory to it. The reasoning is simple too: you are sometimes forced to hold your breath in non-aquatic environments (such as in a room without air or filled with noxious gas). As such, holding your breath defers to the drowning and suffocation rules, in the DMG. The DMG is the primary source here.

If you'll look at the glossary on the Wizards website, you'll find the following entry:

Any character can hold her breath for a number of rounds equal to twice her Constitution score. After this period of time, the character must make a DC 10 Constitution check every round in order to continue holding her breath. Each round, the DC increases by 1.

When the character finally fails her Constitution check, she begins to drown. In the first round, she falls unconscious (0 hp). In the following round, she drops to -1 hit points and is dying. In the third round, she drowns.

It is possible to drown in substances other than water, such as sand, quicksand, fine dust, and silos full of grain.

I believe this should solve all issues here. Just so you know, the glossary quotes the DMG in this instance.
leroy_brown
04-13-07, 08:44 AM I was going off this, which is in the errata. Wizards seem quite good at contradicting themselves don't they. Depends what you think are more accurate I suppose (but I'm not starting that thread...:confused: )

Errata Rule: Primary Sources
When you find a disagreement between two D&DŽ rules
sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the
primary source is correct. One example of a
primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over
a table entry. An individual spell description takes
precedence when the short description in the beginning
of the spells chapter disagrees.
Another example of primary vs. secondary sources
involves book and topic precedence. The Player's
Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing
the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class
descriptions. If you find something on one of those
topics from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide or the
Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's
Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is
the primary source. The DUNGEON MASTER's Guide is the
primary source for topics such as magic item
descriptions, special material construction rules, and so
on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for
monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural,
extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. Note: The most
recent updates are shaded like this.
meabolex
04-14-07, 03:18 AM As an aside to this, I do believe that holding your breath for twice your Constitution score is a little hard to believe. An average human (Con 10) can hold their breath underwater for 2 minutes? And then, they get a save every round (with a cumulative DC - 10/20, 11/20, etc.), where finally they get 3 rounds to actually die.

Here's a fun experiment: open your computer clock and hold your breath 2 minutes. It's fairly difficult to do even when sitting perfectly still. Now imagine moving around underwater and being under stress. I simply do not believe that a human with Con 10 can do this. Yes, this is a fantasy game, but this mechanic is a reflection of real process.

I suggest melding both the systems based around the swim skill. With, say, 5 - 10 ranks in swim, you can hold your breath 2 x Constitution, otherwise 1 x Constitution. This makes sense because swimmers are better at holding their breath.
Pegasos989
04-14-07, 04:38 AM As an aside to this, I do believe that holding your breath for twice your Constitution score is a little hard to believe. An average human (Con 10) can hold their breath underwater for 2 minutes? And then, they get a save every round (with a cumulative DC - 10/20, 11/20, etc.), where finally they get 3 rounds to actually die.

Here's a fun experiment: open your computer clock and hold your breath 2 minutes. It's fairly difficult to do even when sitting perfectly still. Now imagine moving around underwater and being under stress. I simply do not believe that a human with Con 10 can do this. Yes, this is a fantasy game, but this mechanic is a reflection of real process.

I suggest melding both the systems based around the swim skill. With, say, 5 - 10 ranks in swim, you can hold your breath 2 x Constitution, otherwise 1 x Constitution. This makes sense because swimmers are better at holding their breath.

Not unbelievable at all. I have a friend (18 years old) who can pretty easily hold his breath for three minutes. I seriously doubt his con is 15, let alone 30!

It is all about technique. You are not meant to just breath in and start holding. Then again, it is true that the techniqe could be under swim ranks...

It would be unbelievable if he were to fight holding his breath for 3 minutes but fighting shortens the duration.

(EDIT: BTW, the said friend coniders going as a combat diver in the army so I am quite certain that he was not just bull******** when telling about thr three minutes. He described the technique as something like... You should hyperventilate fast and stop, making your body think you have excess oxygen, letting you stay concious for longer.)
JustinA
04-17-07, 03:38 PM How is the PHB the primary source for drowning rules when drowning rules are entirely covered in the DMG? Holding your breath is not a purview of the Swim skill; it's merely an accessory to it. The reasoning is simple too: you are sometimes forced to hold your breath in non-aquatic environments (such as in a room without air or filled with noxious gas). As such, holding your breath defers to the drowning and suffocation rules, in the DMG. The DMG is the primary source here.

Just for fun, the PHB includes a rule which supplements the drowning rules found in the DMG without directly contradicting them:

"You can hold your breath for a number of rounds equal to your Constitution score, but only if you do nothing other than take move actions or free actions. If you take a standard action or a full-round action (such as making an attack), the remainder of the duration for which you can hold your breath is reduced by 1 round. "

This is a good rule and should be used.

This is why I wish WotC would pick one location for a rule and then have other rules reference that locaiton, rather than the haphazard "we'll reproduce some, but not all, of the rules in multiple locations".

Justin Alexander
http://www.thealexandrian.net
Marcus Majarra
04-18-07, 02:08 PM Actually, WotC has already selected a location for a rule. Only the reference was misquoted. As stated above, the PHB explicitly states to defer to drowning rules in the DMG and the D&D glossary on the website confirms this.
JustinA
04-18-07, 02:32 PM Actually, WotC has already selected a location for a rule. Only the reference was misquoted. As stated above, the PHB explicitly states to defer to drowning rules in the DMG and the D&D glossary on the website confirms this.

So you're saying that the rule regarding taking standard actions or full round actions in the PHB should be ignored?

Of course, this isn't the only example of WotC spreading rules around willy-nilly.

And the online glossary is notably inaccurate in many cases.
Marcus Majarra
04-18-07, 02:47 PM No, I'm saying that this rule is a contradiction to printed rules that take precedence over this rule. According to errata guidelines, DMG trumps PHB in this contradiction.

And I'd like to see some examples of where the glossary is inaccurate, if you don't mind.
JustinA
04-18-07, 02:51 PM No, I'm saying that this rule is a contradiction to printed rules that take precedence over this rule. According to errata guidelines, DMG trumps PHB in this contradiction.

Can you quote the rule it actually contradicts?

EDIT: Okay, hang on. I just went back and re-read my original message and realized I quoted more than I'd intended to from the PHB. The rule I was specifically trying to call attention to was this one:

"If you take a standard action or a full-round action (such as making an attack), the remainder of the duration for which you can hold your breath is reduced by 1 round."

This is the specific rule I think should be used, since it doesn't directly contradict the DMG rule and is just a good idea in general.

And I'd like to see some examples of where the glossary is inaccurate, if you don't mind.

Hmm... Well I'm getting VB errors trying to load the glossary just now. But when it comes back, check the glossary entry for "action". It neglects to mention "swift" and "immediate" actions because it's citing the PHB. But, according to the errata rules, the PHB has been explicitly contradicted in this regard. This glossary entry is therefore, by RAW, incorrect/incomplete.
Marcus Majarra
04-18-07, 06:00 PM I never stated that the last quote you supplied contradicts the DMG. If you'll look at the OP, the issue is about whether a character can hold his breath for a number of rounds equal to the character's Con score or twice that value. Since DMG wins over PHB on the matter of suffocation and drowning rules, it's twice the Con score in rounds. This is confirmed by the glossary, which makes a fine point of combining the duration limit from the DMG with the reduction on it caused by taking standard/full-round actions, as stated in the PHB.

Regarding the action entry, it does not mention swift and immediate actions, as you stated. The glossary holds, nonetheless, up-to-date entries for both swift actions and immediate actions (the former explicitly indicating that you can take a swift action at any time you would be allowed to take a free action, which is included in the action entry). This constitutes addenda.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jamie_noone 04-11-07, 02:56 AM	The PHB says under the description for the Swimming skill that PCs can hold their breath for a number of rounds equal to their Con score. The DMG states, under the description of drowning, that PCs can hold their breath for a number of rounds equal to twice their Con score. Which is it? I know this has been settled somewhere, but I didn't see it in either the PHB or the DMG errata. Thanks in advance, Jamie
Marcus Majarra 04-11-07, 02:47 PM	There is no official errata on this subject, but drowning rules defer to the DMG (the PHB defers to it), making it the primary source on the subject. You can thus hold your breath for a number of rounds equal to twice your Con score. Taking a standard or full-round action reduces this duration by 1 round.
leroy_brown 04-12-07, 08:56 AM	Actually, if you check the errata, the primary source of the rule is the one that should be enforced, ie in this case the one in the PHB (look at the Wizards website)
Marcus Majarra 04-12-07, 12:23 PM	How is the PHB the primary source for drowning rules when drowning rules are entirely covered in the DMG? Holding your breath is not a purview of the Swim skill; it's merely an accessory to it. The reasoning is simple too: you are sometimes forced to hold your breath in non-aquatic environments (such as in a room without air or filled with noxious gas). As such, holding your breath defers to the drowning and suffocation rules, in the DMG. The DMG is the primary source here. If you'll look at the glossary on the Wizards website, you'll find the following entry: Any character can hold her breath for a number of rounds equal to twice her Constitution score. After this period of time, the character must make a DC 10 Constitution check every round in order to continue holding her breath. Each round, the DC increases by 1. When the character finally fails her Constitution check, she begins to drown. In the first round, she falls unconscious (0 hp). In the following round, she drops to -1 hit points and is dying. In the third round, she drowns. It is possible to drown in substances other than water, such as sand, quicksand, fine dust, and silos full of grain. I believe this should solve all issues here. Just so you know, the glossary quotes the DMG in this instance.
leroy_brown 04-13-07, 08:44 AM	I was going off this, which is in the errata. Wizards seem quite good at contradicting themselves don't they. Depends what you think are more accurate I suppose (but I'm not starting that thread...:confused: ) Errata Rule: Primary Sources When you find a disagreement between two D&DŽ rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees. Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player's Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for playing PC races, and for using base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the DUNGEON MASTER's Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player's Handbook, you should assume the Player's Handbook is the primary source. The DUNGEON MASTER's Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities. Note: The most recent updates are shaded like this.
meabolex 04-14-07, 03:18 AM	As an aside to this, I do believe that holding your breath for twice your Constitution score is a little hard to believe. An average human (Con 10) can hold their breath underwater for 2 minutes? And then, they get a save every round (with a cumulative DC - 10/20, 11/20, etc.), where finally they get 3 rounds to actually die. Here's a fun experiment: open your computer clock and hold your breath 2 minutes. It's fairly difficult to do even when sitting perfectly still. Now imagine moving around underwater and being under stress. I simply do not believe that a human with Con 10 can do this. Yes, this is a fantasy game, but this mechanic is a reflection of real process. I suggest melding both the systems based around the swim skill. With, say, 5 - 10 ranks in swim, you can hold your breath 2 x Constitution, otherwise 1 x Constitution. This makes sense because swimmers are better at holding their breath.
Pegasos989 04-14-07, 04:38 AM	As an aside to this, I do believe that holding your breath for twice your Constitution score is a little hard to believe. An average human (Con 10) can hold their breath underwater for 2 minutes? And then, they get a save every round (with a cumulative DC - 10/20, 11/20, etc.), where finally they get 3 rounds to actually die. Here's a fun experiment: open your computer clock and hold your breath 2 minutes. It's fairly difficult to do even when sitting perfectly still. Now imagine moving around underwater and being under stress. I simply do not believe that a human with Con 10 can do this. Yes, this is a fantasy game, but this mechanic is a reflection of real process. I suggest melding both the systems based around the swim skill. With, say, 5 - 10 ranks in swim, you can hold your breath 2 x Constitution, otherwise 1 x Constitution. This makes sense because swimmers are better at holding their breath. Not unbelievable at all. I have a friend (18 years old) who can pretty easily hold his breath for three minutes. I seriously doubt his con is 15, let alone 30! It is all about technique. You are not meant to just breath in and start holding. Then again, it is true that the techniqe could be under swim ranks... It would be unbelievable if he were to fight holding his breath for 3 minutes but fighting shortens the duration. (EDIT: BTW, the said friend coniders going as a combat diver in the army so I am quite certain that he was not just bull******** when telling about thr three minutes. He described the technique as something like... You should hyperventilate fast and stop, making your body think you have excess oxygen, letting you stay concious for longer.)
JustinA 04-17-07, 03:38 PM	How is the PHB the primary source for drowning rules when drowning rules are entirely covered in the DMG? Holding your breath is not a purview of the Swim skill; it's merely an accessory to it. The reasoning is simple too: you are sometimes forced to hold your breath in non-aquatic environments (such as in a room without air or filled with noxious gas). As such, holding your breath defers to the drowning and suffocation rules, in the DMG. The DMG is the primary source here. Just for fun, the PHB includes a rule which supplements the drowning rules found in the DMG without directly contradicting them: "You can hold your breath for a number of rounds equal to your Constitution score, but only if you do nothing other than take move actions or free actions. If you take a standard action or a full-round action (such as making an attack), the remainder of the duration for which you can hold your breath is reduced by 1 round. " This is a good rule and should be used. This is why I wish WotC would pick one location for a rule and then have other rules reference that locaiton, rather than the haphazard "we'll reproduce some, but not all, of the rules in multiple locations". Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Marcus Majarra 04-18-07, 02:08 PM	Actually, WotC has already selected a location for a rule. Only the reference was misquoted. As stated above, the PHB explicitly states to defer to drowning rules in the DMG and the D&D glossary on the website confirms this.
JustinA 04-18-07, 02:32 PM	Actually, WotC has already selected a location for a rule. Only the reference was misquoted. As stated above, the PHB explicitly states to defer to drowning rules in the DMG and the D&D glossary on the website confirms this. So you're saying that the rule regarding taking standard actions or full round actions in the PHB should be ignored? Of course, this isn't the only example of WotC spreading rules around willy-nilly. And the online glossary is notably inaccurate in many cases.
Marcus Majarra 04-18-07, 02:47 PM	No, I'm saying that this rule is a contradiction to printed rules that take precedence over this rule. According to errata guidelines, DMG trumps PHB in this contradiction. And I'd like to see some examples of where the glossary is inaccurate, if you don't mind.
JustinA 04-18-07, 02:51 PM	No, I'm saying that this rule is a contradiction to printed rules that take precedence over this rule. According to errata guidelines, DMG trumps PHB in this contradiction. Can you quote the rule it actually contradicts? EDIT: Okay, hang on. I just went back and re-read my original message and realized I quoted more than I'd intended to from the PHB. The rule I was specifically trying to call attention to was this one: "If you take a standard action or a full-round action (such as making an attack), the remainder of the duration for which you can hold your breath is reduced by 1 round." This is the specific rule I think should be used, since it doesn't directly contradict the DMG rule and is just a good idea in general. And I'd like to see some examples of where the glossary is inaccurate, if you don't mind. Hmm... Well I'm getting VB errors trying to load the glossary just now. But when it comes back, check the glossary entry for "action". It neglects to mention "swift" and "immediate" actions because it's citing the PHB. But, according to the errata rules, the PHB has been explicitly contradicted in this regard. This glossary entry is therefore, by RAW, incorrect/incomplete.
Marcus Majarra 04-18-07, 06:00 PM	I never stated that the last quote you supplied contradicts the DMG. If you'll look at the OP, the issue is about whether a character can hold his breath for a number of rounds equal to the character's Con score or twice that value. Since DMG wins over PHB on the matter of suffocation and drowning rules, it's twice the Con score in rounds. This is confirmed by the glossary, which makes a fine point of combining the duration limit from the DMG with the reduction on it caused by taking standard/full-round actions, as stated in the PHB. Regarding the action entry, it does not mention swift and immediate actions, as you stated. The glossary holds, nonetheless, up-to-date entries for both swift actions and immediate actions (the former explicitly indicating that you can take a swift action at any time you would be allowed to take a free action, which is included in the action entry). This constitutes addenda.