D&D 5E Death and 0 Max HP

[Hriston]

He was thinking that while she would be in a coma, she would be getting a long rest maybe? I don't know I'd have to ask him.

Sorry for my cross-editing. As I’ve posted up-thread, I don’t think a long rest is possible at 0 hit points, the most readily available (to me) in-fiction reason being that you can’t sleep/trance while unconscious.

 

[jaelis]

What do you think about a wizard changing prepared spells after a long rest that started at 0. I admit if you just say "can't happen" then I've switched to your side of the argument. But you debate honestly so I think if you do see it as different you'd say so.

Based on how I read the rules, I would indeed say that you can't prepare spells after a long rest that you haven't benefited from. In an actual game, I would let someone do it, but that is sort of a separate question.

I agree it is good question. And at some level I agree with the distinction you are making, such as in your contrived example. I just think we really have to read "benefit" broadly here, otherwise there are all kinds of things that fall apart. IE, if an effect could reasonably be considered a benefit of a long rest, I think we are obliged to treat it as a benefit of a long rest. (Otherwise how do we decide the spell slot question?)

 

[WaterRabbit]

Sorry for my cross-editing. As I’ve posted up-thread, I don’t think a long rest is possible at 0 hit points, the most readily available (to me) in-fiction reason being that you can’t sleep/trance while unconscious.

A person can always take a long rest (1 / 24 hours). However, to gain the benefits enumerated, one must have 1 hp. There is nothing preventing taking a long rest at 0 hp.

Also, you don't seem to understand how trance (i.e., elves) works in game and how unconsciousness works IRL. People don't just stop healing because they are unconscious.

 

[jaelis]

Sorry for my cross-editing. As I’ve posted up-thread, I don’t think a long rest is possible at 0 hit points, the most readily available (to me) in-fiction reason being that you can’t sleep/trance while unconscious.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but I would have said that you are unconscious while you sleep? Not that you are necessarily sleeping while unconscious, but you seem to be making the distinction here differently than I would.

 

[WaterRabbit]

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.

Well the rule does limit you to one long rest per 24-hour period. Even if it didn't, you wouldn't be much use as a wizard if you took three 8 hour naps as you will have slept all day. So at most you could take two and still cast spells. But since you are a wizard, arcane recovery seems to be just as good. Next you will be suggesting that your coffee lock should be able to take 24 short rests per day.

 

[DND_Reborn]

As a matter of fact, we have pretty strong circumstantial evidence that this works just fine if you are brought back. Consider the case you didn't address - where a character is drained by a vampire, killed due to normal HP loss and three failed death saves, and then revivified. I think everyone expects that to work. There's nothing in the description of the vampire's bite to support your claim that the long rest portion only applies to characters who remained alive.

Of course it would work in that case because the necrotic damage delivered by the bite attack doesn't reduce the target to max 0 hp. When the character is revivified with 1 hp, their maximum hp was also 1 point or greater when they failed their death saves. The character takes a long rest, and max hp is restored. So, no problem there. I am not sure why you brought it up, actually, unless I missed part of your discussion with Maxperson.

To be clear, the "bite" does piercing damage and maybe people are using it as synonymous with the necrotic damage that lingers and has killed a target reduced to max 0 hp. The same is true of a Wraith attack and if it reduces a target to max 0 hp. While you might believe the death end the effect of the necrotic damage, others feel it remains until removed via powerful magic or a long rest, which as has been covered, a corpse can't take.

Anyway, this could go round-and-round, back-and-forth, for years with no clear answer. RAW interpretations will differ, which is fine of course, but no one is going to win this debate.

 

[Blue]

Based on how I read the rules, I would indeed say that you can't prepare spells after a long rest that you haven't benefited from. In an actual game, I would let someone do it, but that is sort of a separate question.

I agree it is good question. And at some level I agree with the distinction you are making, such as in your contrived example. I just think we really have to read "benefit" broadly here, otherwise there are all kinds of things that fall apart. IE, if an effect could reasonably be considered a benefit of a long rest, I think we are obliged to treat it as a benefit of a long rest. (Otherwise how do we decide the spell slot question?)

Okay, you convinced me. So after the revivify it would take a Greater Restoration or similar effect to bring back their max HPs.

 

[jaelis]

Okay, you convinced me. So after the revivify it would take a Greater Restoration or similar effect to bring back their max HPs.

Yay!

 

[Blue]

Anyway, this could go round-and-round, back-and-forth, for years with no clear answer. RAW interpretations will differ, which is fine of course, but no one is going to win this debate.

Actually, [MENTION=60210]jaelis[/MENTION] just won it for the "long rest at 0 won't make it come back" side.

I had the concept of "what happens because of a long rest" and "what happens after a long rest occurs", which is supported reading the Long Rest section of the PHB and the Vampire's bite entry. But he called on me to look at other things that come back after a long rest, and the verbiage of them differed from the Long Rest section and matched the Vampire's bite section.

So I was wrong. It would take a Greater Restoration or similar after the Revivify.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Actually, @jaelis just won it for the "long rest at 0 won't make it come back" side.

I had the concept of "what happens because of a long rest" and "what happens after a long rest occurs", which is supported reading the Long Rest section of the PHB and the Vampire's bite entry. But he called on me to look at other things that come back after a long rest, and the verbiage of them differed from the Long Rest section and matched the Vampire's bite section.

So I was wrong. It would take a Greater Restoration or similar after the Revivify.

Well, I guess I never realized that was your issue. IMO it has been long established that Greater Restoration would be needed in some capacity and why our party needs a Cleric high enough level for that. With Gentle Repose also working, our DM would allow Revivify to work as well once Greater Restoration is in play. Of course, we are going with Raise Dead if we can at that point because our house-rule for Revivify is risky.