Examples serve as an alternative way of explaining rules. One _could_ argue it becomes rules as intent but if the intention is to back up the rules as written then it must be the rule. The example provides concrete supporting evidence to support the rule in question.
Right. They are not themselves rules, but explanations to show how the rules are used. If, for example, you had a power Fireball that did '5d6 fire damage' and an example said 'and the white dragon's resistance protects it from 15 of the 17 fire damage', you should infer any of the following rules changes from that example
1) White dragons get fire resistance
3) Resistance to fire blocks 15 damage
2) fireball deals 17 fire damage
Ie, when a rule and an example differ, the rule always trumps the example. Fwiw, in addition to the actual rule, p294's example also cites that the character is bloodied when her hit points drop to '48 or lower', making no proviso for no longer being bloodied at 0 or lower. Is that somehow meaningful? Does it somehow defeat the argument from the other example? p295's healing example has someone at -15 of 52 hp get healed to 19, but it doesn't say he's now bloodied. Does that mean he isn't bloodied because he lost bloodied when he went to 0, and still isn't bloodied when healed up past 0? After all, his hp weren't reduced below half again and there's no rule for someone becoming bloodied by gaining hp above 0...
Ends up, it doesn't matter because examples don't create rules. Trying to argue a rules position from an example doesn't work, and there are other examples which contradict your position in equally inconclusive fashion.
Can you explain how you you find the example not inclusive? Whats missing? Since 4e is exception based, the example sets out the general frame as its supposed to happen excluding special circumstances regarding powers and/or abilities. You mentioned that prone should be in the sentence - I showed that it actually is. Is there something else that should be in there? Bloodied was intentionally left out because it was meant to be.
Or bloodied was left out for any number of reasons, ranging from it not being important, to space considerations, to having already been stated that he was bloodied so being unnecessary.
Lots of things aren't said in these examples - when knocked unconscious you fall prone if possible... so did he? Unconsciousness does not equal prone, after all. In the Otyugh example, was he grabbed by a tentacle at any point? Did he stand from prone after falling in the pit, or the 295 example when healed from -15? The only way to prove that bloodied goes away would be for it to be specifically say the character is no longer bloodied, not because it wasn't listed.
For example, 'he is no longer bloodied and is now unconscious and dying'. Much like if bloodied said 'half hp or less, but greater than 0' or 'no longer bloodied when reduced to 0' or any number of ways to say it.
As an aside, do you think the game breaks down in anyway or has specific issues if you were to agree to bloodied not working while dying?
Sure, Purple Worm was already given, and there are other 'when bloodied' triggers that would get odd if you contended that someone who went from greater than half hp to 0 or below never became bloodied at all, so they wouldn't trigger.
