D&D 5E Disintegrate Vs. Druid

[seebs]

That's the only way to run it without making things up, tho. Disintegrate does not - nor does anything else, for that matter - administer its damage one point at a time. It deals its damage all at once, druid wildshape interrupts/reacts to the damage in its own way, and the result is that the druid's real hit points aren't leapfrogged by disintegrate's reduction effect.

There is no way to run it without making things up. Every resolution of the ambiguity occurs through making up a principle by which to resolve it. There are many resolutions, and they're all consistent with the rules. The problem here is the attempt to come up with the One True Answer, and then assert that none of the others could be right. They're all right, or all wrong, and generally indeterminate.

I've only seen one really good argument yet this thread, and that is "it wouldn't be fun to be killed outright by a disintegrate".

 

[Pssthpok]

There is no way to run it without making things up. Every resolution of the ambiguity occurs through making up a principle by which to resolve it. There are many resolutions, and they're all consistent with the rules. The problem here is the attempt to come up with the One True Answer, and then assert that none of the others could be right. They're all right, or all wrong, and generally indeterminate.

I've only seen one really good argument yet this thread, and that is "it wouldn't be fun to be killed outright by a disintegrate".

My point is that once you marshal all the facts, there's no ambiguity. You roll the damage for the spell, you add it up and apply it, as per the general rule for dealing damage. If there's enough to zero the druid's wildshape, the druid reverts to his own form and suffering the rest of the spell's damage, as per the specific rules for wildshape; if there's still enough to zero the druid's hp, he's vaped, as per the specific rules for disintegrate. You have to willfully move the order of operations around to say the vape happens if any amount of hit points are reduced to 0, which makes absolutely no sense, or to willfully ignore the rules for wildshape, which is on you.

Net effect: one class is particularly strong against one spell, sometimes.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

My point is that once you marshal all the facts, there's no ambiguity. You roll the damage for the spell, you add it up and apply it, as per the general rule for dealing damage. If there's enough to zero the druid's wildshape, the druid reverts to his own form and suffering the rest of the spell's damage, as per the specific rules for wildshape; if there's still enough to zero the druid's hp, he's vaped, as per the specific rules for disintegrate. You have to willfully move the order of operations around to say the vape happens if any amount of hit points are reduced to 0, which makes absolutely no sense, or to willfully ignore the rules for wildshape, which is on you.

Net effect: one class is particularly strong against one spell, sometimes.

the alternate way of reading this is "If disintegrate brings you to 0 you dust, and your wildshape form goes to 0, there for dust..." one class is particularly weak against one spell sometimes...

 

[seebs]

My point is that once you marshal all the facts, there's no ambiguity.

Yes, I know what your point is. I do not agree. Your point is based on adding rules which are not present in the system to resolve the ambiguity.

You roll the damage for the spell, you add it up and apply it, as per the general rule for dealing damage. If there's enough to zero the druid's wildshape, the druid reverts to his own form and suffering the rest of the spell's damage, as per the specific rules for wildshape; if there's still enough to zero the druid's hp, he's vaped, as per the specific rules for disintegrate.

This is your interpretation. It is not stated in the rules.

You have to willfully move the order of operations

There is no "order of operations" in the rules. The rules do not specify such a thing. The rules also don't have the terminology you use for things like "zero the druid's wildshape". The language used for polymorph effects doesn't make the wildshape into a distinct thing; it says you become that thing, so while you are wildshaped, that is your hit point pool, not "the wildshape's" hit point pool. Read the text again:

"When you transform, you assume the beast's hit points and Hit Dice. When you revert to your normal form, you return to the number of hit points you had before you transformed."

You have the beast's hit points, while transformed. The view that "your" hit points were never changed by any of this, it's just that the wildshape form existed, and then when it's gone, "your" hit points are unchanged, contradicts the text "you return to the number of hit points you had before you transformed".

Perhaps more importantly, you are apparently still not understanding the point of the counterargument, which is that the disintegrate spell does not say "if the ultimate result of the application of this damage is that the target is at 0 hit points", but "if this damage reduces the target to 0 hit points". If the druid had not been reduced to 0 hit points, there would have been no reversion. So clearly the damag[e reduces the target to zero hit points. That the target then undergoes other effects which change their current hit points doesn't change that. You have invented a rule that the disintegrate spell can only check for a final result of 0 hit points, but that is not what the spell description says.

Net effect: one class is particularly strong against one spell, sometimes.

You appear to have missed the part where it was pointed out that all polymorph-type effects share this rule. This is in no way specific to druids!

 

[Arial Black]

One point at a time .... woah ....

Did you know that, like, 30 or so comments ago someone (was it Arial Black) was arguing the exact opposite extrapolation from Zeno's movement paradoxes to support the same end interpretation you are arguing for?

It was me, and I argued he same way, not the opposite way.

When you draw a nine in blackjack, you don't get to add one point at a time until you get the total you like and avoid going bust. And disintegrate (or any other amount of damage in the game!) does not allow you to avoid doing all of the damage you rolled just so you can meta-game the dust check.

Applying the damage means applying all of the damage, instantaneously. It first reduces the beast form hp and then reduces the druid's, but this takes no in-game time; this is still instantaneous. There is a before and an after, but no 'during'. There is nothing to check 'before' the damage is applied, therefore the dust check must be made 'after' the damage is applied, and it is applied to a reverted druid.

 

[Maxperson]

That's the only way to run it without making things up, tho. Disintegrate does not - nor does anything else, for that matter - administer its damage one point at a time. It deals its damage all at once, druid wildshape interrupts/reacts to the damage in its own way, and the result is that the druid's real hit points aren't leapfrogged by disintegrate's reduction effect.

There is no rule that says that damage is all or nothing.

 

[Maxperson]

It was me, and I argued he same way, not the opposite way.

When you draw a nine in blackjack, you don't get to add one point at a time until you get the total you like and avoid going bust. And disintegrate (or any other amount of damage in the game!) does not allow you to avoid doing all of the damage you rolled just so you can meta-game the dust check.

And when you hit the gas, your speed goes up one mile an hour at a time. See? I can bring up examples of things that are irrelevant, too.

 

[Arial Black]

There is no rule that says that damage is all or nothing.

The spell says, "...On a failed save, the target takes 10d6+40 force damage..." Lets say your total is 80 points of damage.

The spell then says, "...If this damage reduces the target to 0 hit points, it is disintegrated..."

'This damage' is 80 points. If you haven't applied all 80, then you haven't applied 'this damage'. There is no rule that even allows you to do less than the damage you rolled. Just like in blackjack you have no permission to add less than the full value of the drawn card.

You can only check for dust if you have applied 'this damage'. You don't have permission to check for dust until you have applied 'this damage'.

This defines the 'order of operations' for this spell. Apply 'this damage', then check to see if 'this damage' has reduced you to 0 hp. For our druid, his beast form has run out of hp and now he's into his own, but since his own hp have not been reduced to 0 hp, he is not dust.

At any time, in beast or druid form, he only has one hp total. But when the beast form has taken enough damage to lose all its hp, then there is no beast form with 0 hp; there is only a druid with whatever he has left. The 0 hp of the beast form is not his hp; the beast form's hp ceased to be the druid's hp as soon as they went below 1 hp. The druid has not been reduced to 0 hp, he has been reduced to...27, or whatever. When you check to see if 'this damage' has reduced the druid to 0 hp, the answer is no, 'this damage' has reduced him to 27 hp.

There is no rule allowing you to do less (or more) damage than the spell says it does, just because you want to. You must have an actual game mechanic that allows you to do that. You can't cast fireball, roll 30 damage, then realise that you killed some innocent kids and sat, "Actually, I'll only do 3 damage instead!" You can't roll 80 damage for your disintegrate spell and say, "Actually, I'll only do 53 damage instead!"

When you apply 'this damage' to the beast form, it instantaneously eliminates the beast form, leaving a damaged (but still conscious) druid who has been reduced to 27 hp.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Maxperson]

The spell says, "...On a failed save, the target takes 10d6+40 force damage..." Lets say your total is 80 points of damage.

Show me the rule that says damage is all or nothing.

The spell then says, "...If this damage reduces the target to 0 hit points, it is disintegrated..."

"This damage" can be partial damage. Let me use an analogy. Say a car hits someone. I can point to that car and say, "This car hit that man.", even though the entire car did not hit him, but only the front of the car which is a fraction of the whole. It's the same with disintegrate. Without a rule directing you to use all of the damage, you don't have to use all of it.

Show me that rule.

You can only check for dust if you have applied 'this damage'. You don't have permission to check for dust until you have applied 'this damage'.

Unlike Blackjack, you have no rule that says you must use the entire value.

There is no rule allowing you to do less (or more) damage than the spell says it does, just because you want to. You must have an actual game mechanic that allows you to do that. You can't cast fireball, roll 30 damage, then realise that you killed some innocent kids and sat, "Actually, I'll only do 3 damage instead!" You can't roll 80 damage for your disintegrate spell and say, "Actually, I'll only do 53 damage instead!"

If "this mountain" falls on your head, only a small fraction actually hit you. You are attributing properties to "this damage" that aren't there. There is no requirement in the spell or the rules to apply all damage before an effect can trigger.