D&D 5E No next turn, indefiniate effect?

[CapnZapp]

While I agree Bagpuss' dm is well....wrong, guys let's try to be a bit more positive in helping BP, give some more rules quotes and ways to convince the DM he is wrong.

Well, I have a better idea:

Bagpuss' DM is a troll. We don't feed trolls.

 

[Starglim]

In last night's game I got attacked by a Shadar-kai Gloomblade, he hit my character with Gloomstrike

If the shadar-kai gloomblade hits a target that can’t see him, the target is blinded until the end of the gloomblade’s next turn.

The Gloomblade then got slaughtered by the rest of the party, so never got to have a next turn, the DM ruled that since it didn't have a next turn I was blinded indefinitely.

I couldn't find anything in the rules to contradict him but this seems unfair.

Death is not necessarily the end in the DUNGEONS & DRAGONS game!

There's a rule quote right there, but if that's not enough for your DM, consider: The sentence following the above and the text of Raise Dead ("You can't restore life to a creature..that died of old age") show that a dead character remains a character and a dead creature is still a creature. It just happens to be dead.

If a creature is stunned, does it have a turn? If it is unconscious, does it have a turn? Just because a creature has a condition that prevents it taking any actions (in this case, the dead condition) doesn't mean it doesn't get a turn. It is just very quiet about it.

 

[fba827]

Isn't there something about how nonpermanent conditions/penalties (as opposed to permanent ones such as petrification) end at the end of the encounter?
I vaguely recall some example where someone is marked and then flees, but the mark ends at the end of the encounter rather than indefinately.

Or, from a similar perspective, there is the rule that beneficial effects that last until your next turn and such can't benefit you longer by delaying your turn, they end when your turn would have ended... so extrapolation from that may be the answer?

 

[jeffh]

Dead creatures still get their turns on their initiatives. It is, in fact, necessary for certain Epic Destinies to work.

Could you be more specific?

Even if the above isn't true, this is so obviously stupid I can't believe anyone would even consider it, except as a joke. What could possibly be the mechanism by which an effect that would otherwise end after six seconds instead continues indefinitely, just because its creator dies? If anything, wouldn't the exact opposite make more sense?

I realize 4E is the least simulation-oriented version of what was always a pretty gamist RPG, but the occasional question like the above still has its place as a sanity-check.

 

[Eldorian]

Dead creatures still get their turns on their initiatives. It is, in fact, necessary for certain Epic Destinies to work.

HAHA. This post caused me to realize that death isn't defined in the player's handbook. Well, it doesn't say that dead creatures DON'T get turns. So they do. They are definitely unconscious, because dying made them so.

edit: Btw, Bagpuss, DMs like yours makes me understand why some people believed in eugenics. Not that I agree with them, but I understand.

 

[DracoSuave]

Could you be more specific?

Undying Warrior is what I was thinking of.

Their level 30 says 'If you die, you can return to life at the beginning of your next turn.'

If you didn't get turns while dead, this epic destiny would not work.

 

[Bagpuss]

Excellent I'll point that out to him.

 

[azaroth42]

haha!

Bagpuss left out the fact that he, I and everyone else laughed at "The gloomblade doesn't have a next turn so you're blinded indefinitely" and then I asked Deree (our initiative keeper) when the gloomblade's initiative was so we could do the right thing (tm)


But it was a nice thread

 

[Bagpuss]

I still think you are in need of "A quick knee to the DMs groin".

 

[Nail]

haha!

Bagpuss left out the fact that he, I and everyone else laughed at "The gloomblade doesn't have a next turn so you're blinded indefinitely" and then I asked Deree (our initiative keeper) when the gloomblade's initiative was so we could do the right thing (tm)


But it was a nice thread

<chuckle>

The DM in question shows his face at last. I'm glad that's cleared up.