D&D 5E Disintegrate Vs. Druid

[Maxperson]

You literally just proved my position, in bold. When the DRUID hit's 0 hit points, not wild shape. If you druid has 50 HP, it's wild shape has 20, get's hit for 40, the wild shape takes 20, the DRUID takes 20 and has 30 HP left. Until the DRUID hits 0 hp, he does not turn to dust. Are you ignoring the DRUID part of that for some reason? It's there in bold and then there is the RAI on top of the clarification multiple times. You can't be turned to dust while still having HP. It's really simple!!! LOL

I'm wish I could say that I'm surprised that you didn't honor your statement to go with what the designers said about the rule.

 

[Maxperson]

That's really fishing. You must really really hate that druid. In 5e negative hp do not exist. This does not mean that the whole amount of damage is not applied if it is greater than the amount of hp remaining. It just means the excess damage is meaningless (with the specific exception of the animal form druid).

Correct. There are no negative hit points in 5e. In 5e once you hit 0 nothing more happens unless there are triggers involved with 0, such as disintegrate, wildshape, or massive death checks. You cannot apply more damage, because you cannot go below 0. The rest of the damage is usually meaningless unless a specific rule gives it meaning.

If you wish to apply "reasonable intelligence" then "reasonable intelligence" means accepting that the written word is often ambiguous and seeking to infer the intent of the writer (in a way a computer is incapable of doing). In which case, RAI means the druid survives. Either way the druid survives.

The druid only survives with RAI. Per RAW, it dies the instant the animal form hits 0. Your weak attempt to require the full damage to be applied before checking what happens at 0 hit points fails in the face of both RAW and the official word on what happens.

 

[Spastik]

I'm wish I could say that I'm surprised that you didn't honor your statement to go with what the designers said about the rule.

I did, per the quote you wrote, I wrote, and that is quite available to read. If a DRUID gets knocked to 0 hp, he and everything else is disintegrated. Just like any other creature. If the DRUID still has HP, it can't be disintegrated. If a Druid in not at 0, how can it be disintegrated? It's like saying if you get knocked to 0 temporary hp you get disintegrated since it didn't specify which hp pool has to be at 0. That is the argument you are making and is just as misguided. You asked for the PHB page, I gave it. You asked for the Sage advice, gave that to you as well. And finally showed you the quote from a game designer clarifying the sage advice as some people, such as yourself, couldn't figure out that that the DRUID hp is what he was referencing and NOT wildshape form (it is a form and not a creature btw, or it would be called wildshape creature). A creature cannot be disintegrated with any HP amount above 0, that's what they said and I will go with their ruling as they designed it. Homebrew whatever you like, kill someone off if they lose their temp hp too if it floats your boat. I'd just make sure you let you know all Druids playing your table that you have these houserules or you may have some unhappy people. Have fun gaming!

 

[Maxperson]

I did, per the quote you wrote, I wrote, and that is quite available to read. If a DRUID gets knocked to 0 hp, he and everything else is disintegrated.

Dude. Have you ever read wildshape? There's no Fing "the druid" distinction in it! It's beast form and normal form. "The druid" refers to both. So when the druid hits 0 in animal form, the druid hit 0. Now add in the absolute fact that the sage advice refers only to animal form with regard to whether it gets dusted or not, and you really need to own up to it and honor your word regarding the Sage Advice. If your word means anything that is. Your response to this will let everyone here know which it is.

 

[Harzel]

What happens if a druid using Wild Shape is reduced to 0 hit points by disintegrate? Does the druid simply leave beast form? The druid turns to dust, since the spell disintegrates you the instant you drop to 0 hit points.

That’s the literal interpretation of the rules (RAW). In contrast, the intent (RAI) is that a druid isn’t considered to be at 0 hit points for the purposes of an effect like disintegrate until the druid’s normal form is reduced to 0 hit points.

You literally just proved my position, in bold. When the DRUID hit's 0 hit points, not wild shape. If you druid has 50 HP, it's wild shape has 20, get's hit for 40, the wild shape takes 20, the DRUID takes 20 and has 30 HP left. Until the DRUID hits 0 hp, he does not turn to dust. Are you ignoring the DRUID part of that for some reason? It's there in bold and then there is the RAI on top of the clarification multiple times. You can't be turned to dust while still having HP. It's really simple!!! LOL

So your position seems to be that in the above, the sentence in blue refers to the case in which the damage is sufficient to take both the Wild Shape and the druid to 0 HP. But that case is completely obvious and not controversial; no one would bother asking about that case, let alone answering it. So your position leads to the conclusion that not only did Crawford spend the time to explain in a tweet something that didn't need explaining, but he also chose to put that completely useless explanation in the SA Compendium. Do you really believe that?

 

[Undrhil]

Such as deliberately OVERLOOKING certain phrases: "You automatically revert if you fall unconscious, drop to 0 hit points or die". The key word here is automatically. This implies that reversion cannot be prevented, disrupted, or interrupted. I.e. the instant the animal form hits zero you revert to human form and are no longer on zero hp. Then the residual damage is applied.

False. The word "automatically" means it happens without the Druid having to do anything to make it happen. The word you *want* to be in the place of 'automatically' for it to work the way you want it to work is 'immediatley'.

The wording of the Disintegrate spell is "the target takes 10d6+40 force damage. If this damage reduces the target to 0 hit points the target is disintegrated". "If" in this case implies that the check for zero hp applies after the whole of the damage has been applied. Not part way through.

Thus there is no conflict between RAW and RAI: In both cases the druid can only be disintegrated by reducing them to 0 hp in their natural form.

How does 'If' imply anything of the sort? When a target takes enough damage to be reduced to 0 hp, that's it. There's no other check needed. That's 0 hp. A wildshaped Druid would ordinarily have something that happens at 0 hp; however, as soon as they hit 0 hp as the beast form, they are reduced to ash. Reading it any other way is intentionally twisting the words.

 

[Maxperson]

So your position seems to be that in the above, the sentence in blue refers to the case in which the damage is sufficient to take both the Wild Shape and the druid to 0 HP. But that case is completely obvious and not controversial; no one would bother asking about that case, let alone answering it. So your position leads to the conclusion that not only did Crawford spend the time to explain in a tweet something that didn't need explaining, but he also chose to put that completely useless explanation in the SA Compendium. Do you really believe that?

It also completely ignores the second portion of the question, "Does the druid simply leave beast form?" which means that without a doubt, his response is about the animal form being dropped to 0 by disintegrate. If the answer meant after reversion, then the answer would completely fail to answer that question and it would not been included in the Sage Advice.

 

[Maxperson]

False. The word "automatically" means it happens without the Druid having to do anything to make it happen. The word you *want* to be in the place of 'automatically' for it to work the way you want it to work is 'immediatley'.

Even the word immediately wouldn't stop the druid from being dusted. Crawford has stated that turning to dust isn't a form change as the rules use the term, so you can both revert to normal form AND be turned to dust.

 

[epithet]

Even the word immediately wouldn't stop the druid from being dusted. Crawford has stated that turning to dust isn't a form change as the rules use the term, so you can both revert to normal form AND be turned to dust.

And there's your problem.

You can't both revert to normal and be turned to dust at the same time. I get that you and Jeremy seem to think that you should read the rule completely literally, you've both made that abundantly clear. The problem is that being that literal--too literal--inevitably leads to nonsensical results. This is why the rule "as written" is ambiguous, because it is pretty obvious that the intent was for wild shape to fortify the druid and make him unkillable, until and unless you exhaust the hit points of both the beast shape and the humanoid character. That's the purpose of words, you know... whether "as written" or "as spoken." They convey the intent of the speaker or the writer. One of the almost magical aspects of language is that I can ramble on like a drunkard and you can still make sense of what I'm saying, because rather than carefully parse each word in every disjointed sentence, you are understanding the intent.

Picking apart the words to reach a literal meaning that is contrary to the speaker or writer's intent is a kind of "gotcha" approach to language which really only serves to start arguments. When you reach the point where you're arguing, with conviction, that a druid character can be both reverted to normal and disintegrated, or that reading a rule in accordance with the intent of its writer is making up a new "house rule," then maybe it's time to step back and consider what, if anything, you're trying to accomplish here.

 

[Maxperson]

You can't both revert to normal and be turned to dust at the same time.

You don't return to normal. That's not what druids do. They return to normal FORM, which means human, elf, dwarf, etc. That form can be dust, though. Dust is not a change of form. Just like you can be a paralyzed druid elf, you can be a dusted druid elf.

I get that you and Jeremy seem to think that you should read the rule completely literally, you've both made that abundantly clear.

As opposed to inventing stuff, yeah.

The problem is that being that literal--too literal--inevitably leads to nonsensical results.

There is no nonsense result. A pile of elven druid dust makes perfect sense.

This is why the rule "as written" is ambiguous, because it is pretty obvious that the intent was for wild shape to fortify the druid and make him unkillable, until and unless you exhaust the hit points of both the beast shape and the humanoid character. That's the purpose of words, you know... whether "as written" or "as spoken."

There is no ambiguity. You've admitted above that you have to invent things that aren't there to be right, and then rationalized it with an accusation of being too literal. Here is the definition of literal as I am using it with these rules "Free from exaggeration or distortion." Feel free to exaggerate or distort the rules to reach RAI. It's your game.

Picking apart the words to reach a literal meaning that is contrary to the speaker or writer's intent is a kind of "gotcha" approach to language which really only serves to start arguments. When you reach the point where you're arguing, with conviction, that a druid character can be both reverted to normal and disintegrated, or that reading a rule in accordance with the intent of its writer is making up a new "house rule," then maybe it's time to step back and consider what, if anything, you're trying to accomplish here.

Um, no picking apart of words is happening. The wildshape rules very clearly say that the animal form hits 0 hit points. The disintegrate rules very clearly say being reduced to 0 hit points dusts you. I've had to pick apart nothing, and be "too literal" about nothing. It's clear, basic language.