D&D 5E Death and 0 Max HP

Maxperson · Jul 18, 2019

jaelis said:
It looks to me like you are basing your reading of the rule based on how you picture the vampire bite working, rather than vice versa. Which is totally fine, but not really grounds for a useful debate.

I picture the bite working as a vehicle for the necrotic damage. How do you picture it working?

Blue · Jul 18, 2019

Maxperson said:
So you're saying that the raised PC doesn't have a max hit points of 0 that was caused by the necrotic damage reducing it to 0?

I could have written that clearer. What I meant was that getting reduced by a vampire bite to 0 max HPs kills you. But having 0 max HPs from a vampire bite at a later point does not. There is no auto-kill at the later point just because you are at 0 max HPs, even if it had at a previous point been killed by a vampire. The "kill when reducing to 0 max HPs" from a vampire's bite is an effect right then. It is not a "and if you are raised a similar effect will auto-kill you again".

Maxperson said:
This is an obvious corner case man. They didn't consider this.

Because it doesn't need to be considered. It's only a corner case if what you are putting out is true, but the rules don't support your view.

Maxperson said:
This is a pretty blatant False Equivalence. Being drained to an amount of max hit points greater than 0 and then dying is completely different from dying when max hit points reaches 0. Of course Revivify will work. The PC doesn't have max hit points of ZERO.

Zero HP is not death. Max HP zero is not death. Trying to argue a rules point while not following the rules is pointless.

Okay, we know zero HPs is not death. If you don't believe that they you are too ignorant of the rules to talk to since it happens all the time to PCs. Or trying to hard to win an argument on the internet.

Zero max HPs just does the same - caps HPs at zero. Which we have already determined is not death. You can be at zero and stable, or even zero and making death saves - neither are dead.

As added evidence (though my bet is you respond just to this and ignore the rest), the Vampire's bite needs to add in "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0." Because that's not the normal effect.

Oofta · Jul 18, 2019

As @Blue said, the important thing is that even if you rule that raise dead does not override the 0 HP max, there is nothing in the description of the vampire bite that specifically states the raise dead spell does not work. You would simply be brought back to life with 0 HP. You can't gain that 1 HP because that would exceed the max. Since you are brought back to life with 0 HP, your HP cannot be reduced therefore you are not slain a second time.

Feel free to change the rule for your campaign if you want. In case I wasn't clear with my previous post, I may be doing so with long rest while unconscious mostly because I don't care and I'm not a slave to the letter of the rules.

Maxperson · Jul 18, 2019

Someone needs to tell Blue that he can't "Bet that you will respond to just this and ignore the rest" and then block me. LOL. The bet doesn't work if I can't respond.

Maxperson · Jul 18, 2019

Oofta said:
As @Blue said, the important thing is that even if you rule that raise dead does not override the 0 HP max, there is nothing in the description of the vampire bite that specifically states the spell does not work. You would simply be brought back to life with 0 HP. You can't gain that 1 HP because that would exceed the max. Since you are brought back to life with 0 HP, your HP cannot be reduced therefore you are not slain a second time.

Feel free to change the rule for your campaign if you want. In case I wasn't clear with my previous post, I may be doing so with long rest while unconscious mostly because I don't care and I'm not a slave to the letter of the rules.

I don't need to change any rule. The rule is that if at 0 max hit points due to being drained by the vampire's necrotic damage, you die. You can(and have) interpreted the rule differently. Your alternative interpretation doesn't mean I have to alter the rule at all.

jaelis · Jul 18, 2019

Maxperson said:
I picture the bite working as a vehicle for the necrotic damage. How do you picture it working?

Yes, delivering the necrotic damage itself is straightforward enough, I don't imagine there is much disagreement.

But I would guess that you see the effect of killing the target when it drops to zero as something like a curse or disease, which also manifests as the target rising as a spawn.

I see the instant-death effect as more of a system shock effect, killing you when it occurs, but separate from the "curse" effect of turning you into a vampire.

I don't need to change any rule. The rule is that if at 0 max hit points due to being drained by the vampire's necrotic damage, you die.

Perhaps you are right, but that is not a rule that is written down anywhere.

Maxperson · Jul 18, 2019

jaelis said:
Yes, delivering the necrotic damage itself is straightforward enough, I don't imagine there is much disagreement.

But I would guess that you see the effect of killing the target when it drops to zero as something like a curse or disease, which also manifests as the target rising as a spawn.

Sure. If it wasn't ongoing, there could be no spawn. It has to persist after death or there would be nothing to cause a spawn to come back.

I see the instant-death effect as more of a system shock effect, killing you when it occurs, but separate from the "curse" effect of turning you into a vampire.

Which is fine. I can see where you could interpret that way. I just don't myself. 5e is full of effects and abilities than can be, and are, interpreted multiple ways.

jaelis · Jul 18, 2019

Maxperson said:
Which is fine. I can see where you could interpret that way. I just don't myself. 5e is full of effects and abilities than can be, and are, interpreted multiple ways.

Yes, it is fine to interpret as you think best. But this is still not correct:

Maxperson said:
I don't need to change any rule. The rule is that if at 0 max hit points due to being drained by the vampire's necrotic damage, you die.

That is not a rule that is written down anywhere.

Oofta · Jul 18, 2019

Maxperson said:
I don't need to change any rule. The rule is that if at 0 max hit points due to being drained by the vampire's necrotic damage, you die. You can(and have) interpreted the rule differently. Your alternative interpretation doesn't mean I have to alter the rule at all.

The rule is quite clear. "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0". Once it's at 0 it can't be reduced any more.

Now your turn: "But it does so!"

Maxperson · Jul 18, 2019

Oofta said:
The rule is quite clear. "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0". Once it's at 0 it can't be reduced any more.

Only because they didn't consider this corner case. The reduces portion is not really relevant as it is only there to let us know that 0 max hit points from the necrotic damage causes instant death. All the conditions for death are still present. You can "rules lawyer" the technicality all you want. I'm going to go with RAI.