D&D 5E Death and 0 Max HP

jaelis · Jul 16, 2019

Hriston said:
My contention is that you can’t finish a long rest unless you had at least 1 hit point when you started it.

I think they worded it as they did, in terms of benefiting, because they don't want to imply that you can't lie down and sleep for 8 hours if you are at 0 hp.

Blue · Jul 16, 2019

jaelis said:
I don't think there is any reason to conclude that the benefits listed in the PHB are an exclusive list. For instance, that section doesn't say anything about recovering spell slots, but I guess you would not allow someone to recover spells if they started the long rest at 0 hp?

There's benefits from a Long Rest, and then there are things that happen because a long rest was taken, of which could be a benefit.

Let's try this. Akar and Brandar are cursed, they lose two point of strength after each long rest, for three long rests.

Two long rests past, and at the start of the third one Brandar has been reduced to zero HPs. The long rest finishes. The curse kicks off, reducing both of their STR by two points. And the curse ends.

What is being argued is that the curse running out is a benefit, so Brandar will suffer then penalty at the end fo the long rest but still have it continue, losing more strength than anyone else even though it was of the same duration.

When really what is happening is that end of a long rest is just when the curse is done.

Blue · Jul 16, 2019

Oofta said:
The problem is the interpretation of what the PHB means when states under Long Rest "a character must have at least 1 hit point at the start of the rest to gain its benefits".

Did they really have a long rest if they can't gain any benefits from it? Note that I'm not disagreeing with you, I'd certainly allow it. Dying is enough of a penalty in and of itself.

Absolutely. That is completely clear in the PHB. It's not that you can't take a long rest, it's that you don't gain those benefits from it. That a long rest can be taken even at 0 HPs isn't a question if you read the PHB.

jaelis · Jul 16, 2019

Blue said:
There's benefits from a Long Rest, and then there are things that happen because a long rest was taken, of which could be a benefit.

That distinction seems like slicing the cheese pretty fine...

Let's try this. Akar and Brandar are cursed, they lose two point of strength after each long rest, for three long rests.

Two long rests past, and at the start of the third one Brandar has been reduced to zero HPs. The long rest finishes. The curse kicks off, reducing both of their STR by two points. And the curse ends.

What is being argued is that the curse running out is a benefit, so Brandar will suffer then penalty at the end fo the long rest but still have it continue, losing more strength than anyone else even though it was of the same duration.

When really what is happening is that end of a long rest is just when the curse is done.

I think I agree with you here, but boy that is a pretty contrived example. In contrast, I think that regaining spell slots, eliminating levels of exhaustion, making saving throws against a disease and ending effects that are reducing your max hp are all straightforwardly benefits of resting.

So do you think you recover spell slots if you take a long rest while at 0 hp?

Hriston · Jul 16, 2019

jaelis said:
I think they worded it as they did, in terms of benefiting, because they don't want to imply that you can't lie down and sleep for 8 hours if you are at 0 hp.

Well, you’re unconscious, and unconscious people aren’t really sleeping, but laying down is about all you can do. I still wouldn’t call that a long rest because none of the effects of a long rest will proceed from that episode of laying down.

Oofta · Jul 17, 2019

Hriston said:
Well, you’re unconscious, and unconscious people aren’t really sleeping, but laying down is about all you can do. I still wouldn’t call that a long rest because none of the effects of a long rest will proceed from that episode of laying down.

If you couldn't take a long rest if you were at 0 HP it would say "If you have 0 HP you can't take a long rest". It doesn't say that. You just don't get the benefits enumerated above. You don't regain HP and hit dice.

Anyway that's how I'd rule. Dying because your max HP is reduced to 0 (and not getting any HP back from a long rest) is penalty enough.

Maxperson · Jul 17, 2019

jaelis said:
No, being at 0 hp is not a condition for instant death. Being bitten by a vampire and getting reduced to 0 hp is. Not "having been bitten by a vampire," but actually being taken to 0 hp by a bite. Just like in "When all your walls turn to jell-o, the house collapses" the condition for collapsing is being turned to jello, not being jello.

Yes it is the condition. You are trying to make two things into one, and that doesn't work. The vehicle for the death is a separate item. Being bitten doesn't cause death. It's just the vehicle for the necrotic damage. The one and only condition for death is to have your hit point maximum hit 0 due to the necrotic damage. Look at it like this. If I inject you with a deadly poison, the needle didn't kill you. The poison is what killed you. If you then come back due to an electric paddle or CPR, you will die again due to the poison, despite no needle being present at all.

That's what is happening with the vampire bite and the death effect. If someone is raised, they still have a 0 hit point maximum due to the necrotic damage and die again. There's no need for the bite to be a part of it as it's irrelevant except as a vehicle for the deadly attack.

Maxperson · Jul 17, 2019

Oofta said:
Either they are raised to 1 HP and there is no issue. Specific overrides general, the max HP of 0 is ignored and the person is alive with 1 HP. Go take a long rest.

There is no general. The 0 hit point max is also a specific rule.

The other option is that they can not be raised to 1 HP because their max is 0. They're still brought back to life because there's no reason to negate that part of the spell. They're unconscious at 0 HP and need a greater restoration (you can't long rest while at 0 HP). Their max HP remains unchanged, therefore the clause "if this effect reduces it hit point maximum to 0" is not invoked and they are not slain.

This is a False Dichotomy. It's not one or the other of those two options, especially since the effect of having max hit points due to the necrotic damage is still present, which we all know causes death. That's a third option right there that is more likely than either of the other two.

Personally I'd rule the former works, it's specific wording of the spell that overrides the general max HP. The latter also works. Or just allow a greater restoration on the corpse even though it is no longer considered a creature.

Anyway, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

And this is fine. Ultimately, there is no rule for specific vs. specific, so as the DM you have to come up with a ruling. Go with what works for you.

Maxperson · Jul 17, 2019

Blue said:
You are conflating the specifically laid out benefits of a long rest, with a benefit that happens because a long rest has passed. They are not the same.

And you die if you have 0 hit points due to the vampire bite. Clearly the long rest portion of the bite section wasn't intended for PCs who are at 0 max hit points, but for those who are drained and remain alive. You are in a grey area, so you really can't treat it as normal with regards to resting. You can certainly rule it that way for your table, but those who are viewing it as a benefit are just as right as you are.

Hriston · Jul 17, 2019

Blue said:
You are conflating the specifically laid out benefits of a long rest, with a benefit that happens because a long rest has passed. They are not the same.

The benefits of a long rest are clearly laid out in the PHB on page 186. The vampire's bite is not part of that.

Rather the description of the max HP reduction for the vampire has a condition for when it returns. "The reduction lasts until the target finishes a long rest." Absolutely clear language. Did you finish a long rest? Then the reduction is no longer continuing.

Oofta said:
If you couldn't take a long rest if you were at 0 HP it would say "If you have 0 HP you can't take a long rest". It doesn't say that. You just don't get the benefits enumerated above. You don't regain HP and hit dice.

Anyway that's how I'd rule. Dying because your max HP is reduced to 0 (and not getting any HP back from a long rest) is penalty enough.

I don’t think anyone has answered [MENTION=60210]jaelis[/MENTION]’s question about regaining spent spell slots when taking a long rest with 0 hit points. I’d be interested to know what your answers would be.

If finishing a long rest and gaining its benefits are not the same thing, then I’m sure you’d both have no problem with my wizard taking multiple 8-hour naps throughout the day and getting all his spent spell slots back.