[Pathfinder] Positive-Energy Plane and Overhealing

[Krika]

I have found myself in an argument with a friend of mine over specifics here. He claims that any healing, such as from a wand of CLW should grant THP if used on the PEP, and thus add THP towards the boom-total. The written rules do not support this, but he claims that it has to work because CLW derives its healing from the PEP, and so is subject to the same rules.

This is, to me, a pretty obvious case of personal interpretation of how the rules "should" work over RAW (maybe a case of RAI, I dunno), but can I get some source or support one way or the other?

[TuggyNE]

I have found myself in an argument with a friend of mine over specifics here. He claims that any healing, such as from a wand of CLW should grant THP if used on the PEP, and thus add THP towards the boom-total. The written rules do not support this, but he claims that it has to work because CLW derives its healing from the PEP, and so is subject to the same rules.

This is, to me, a pretty obvious case of personal interpretation of how the rules “should” work over RAW (maybe a case of RAI, I dunno), but can I get some source or support one way or the other?

The rules don't attempt to make any general statement about what positive energy effects do on the PEP, only the effect the PEP's ambient positive energy itself does. Since we know that the PEP's positive energy works rather differently than normal, there's no particular reason to suppose that it's because the PEP forces all positive energy to act weird; it could simply be that the PEP is "wild" and spell energy is controlled, and that the PEP's wildness is not enough to make spells act wild as well (any more than taking a trained dog into the wilds of Alaska will abruptly turn them into a wolf). Without such a specific, explicit or strongly implicit reason, the explicit rules elsewhere still have their usual effect: his personal interpretation has no basis in RAW, and is at most an interesting houserule.

Or, in short, absence of evidence against a reading is not evidence that that reading is correct. Readings are wrong by default (the null hypothesis), and must be shown to be necessary from the text.

TL/DR: He should put up rules quotes or shut up.