D&D 5E Death and 0 Max HP

[Oofta]

I think you're correct in that our main point of contention is in your #3. You say the effect that reduced the target's maximum hit points "is still working", but that doesn't seem right to me. In #1, you correctly identify the effect as reducing the target's hit point maximum by the amount of the necrotic damage taken, but once it has reduced the target's hit point maximum, the effect's work is done. It doesn't keep reducing the target's hit point maximum, so I don't see how it can be said that it's "still working".

I also don't understand why the target's maximum hit points being set at 0 would pose any hindrance to it being raised. The healing effect of a spell like revivify isn't a prerequisite to its effect that restores the target to life, so the spell should bring the target back to life with 0 hit points, and the 1 hit point of healing provided by the spell would simply be lost.

I agree. There is no "reduced maximum hp". It's "The[FONT=&quot] target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0". Dying is a direct result of the event of being reduced to 0 with no reason to indicate it's an ongoing effect any more than any other reason a creature could die.

But it's pointless to argue any more, apparently this cause and effect relationship is somehow different and permanent and anybody who disagrees is just a rules lawyer.[/FONT]

 

[Hriston]

The necrotic effect does not end instantly. Only the damage ends instantly. If the effect also ended, there could be no reduction in maximum hit points. There must be some sort of ongoing necrotic effect that reduces the maximum hit points and keeps them reduced. That ongoing effect is also what kills the PC at 0 maximum hit points.

On a hit, the target’s hit point maximum is reduced instantly. If that reduces the target’s hit point maximum to 0, the target dies instantly. No effect is required for a creature’s maximum hit points to stay the same. That’s what happens normally. An effect is only required to change the value of a creature’s maximum hit points, and once changed, they will stay the same until some further effect takes place, such as the effect of finishing a long rest on a creature that has had its maximum hit points reduced by a vampire’s bite, or the effect of a greater restoration spell.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

On a hit, the target’s hit point maximum is reduced instantly. If that reduces the target’s hit point maximum to 0, the target dies instantly. No effect is required for a creature’s maximum hit points to stay the same. That’s what happens normally. An effect is only required to change the value of a creature’s maximum hit points, and once changed, they will stay the same until some further effect takes place, such as the effect of finishing a long rest on a creature that has had its maximum hit points reduced by a vampire’s bite, or the effect of a greater restoration spell.

I think the real disagreement doesn't even hinge on whether or not the fact of the hp having been reduced counts as an ongoing effect. Rather, it's whether you stay dead as long as your max hit points are at zero (and/or die again whenever your max hit points become zero). Some people think there is an implied "remains dead" or "dies whenever it is true that their max hp is zero, which is true until they finish a long rest or receive greater restoration" in the feature even though it isn't explicitly stated such. Others (such as myself) believe that, regardless of whether the case of the max hp remaining zero is considered an ongoing supernatural effect or not, the dying when they hit zero is a one time thing that only applies when the bite happens.

 

[Hriston]

I agree. There is no "reduced maximum hp". It's "The target dies if this effect reduces its hit point maximum to 0". Dying is a direct result of the event of being reduced to 0 with no reason to indicate it's an ongoing effect any more than any other reason a creature could die.

But it's pointless to argue any more, apparently this cause and effect relationship is somehow different and permanent and anybody who disagrees is just a rules lawyer.

Well, the reason people are thinking there's an ongoing effect is because of how they're reading the sentence, "The reduction lasts until the target finishes a long rest." They're seeing it as establishing a duration for some effect that reduced the target's maximum hit points (and killed the target if its maximum hit points was reduced to 0), while to me it seems fairly obvious that this sentence places an additional end-point on a change to the value of the target's maximum hit points than would otherwise exist. Without this sentence, the only way to return the target's maximum hit points to normal would be through a spell like greater restoration. By allowing the maximum hit points value to be restored by a long rest, this sentence is making the effect of the bite less severe, not more so.

 

[Maxperson]

I think you're correct in that our main point of contention is in your #3. You say the effect that reduced the target's maximum hit points "is still working", but that doesn't seem right to me. In #1, you correctly identify the effect as reducing the target's hit point maximum by the amount of the necrotic damage taken, but once it has reduced the target's hit point maximum, the effect's work is done. It doesn't keep reducing the target's hit point maximum, so I don't see how it can be said that it's "still working".

If it doesn't keep working to keep the max hit points reduced, then there is no max hit point reduction at all. Hit point maximums don't remain reduced by themselves.

I also don't understand why the target's maximum hit points being set at 0 would pose any hindrance to it being raised.

It's the necrotic effect that kills when you reach 0 maximum hit points due to the nectrotic damage. 0 maximum hit points due to the necrotic damage are still reached until such time as the maximum rises. Whatever the effect was that killed you must remain or your max hit points would have gone back up when you died.

 

[Maxperson]

On a hit, the target’s hit point maximum is reduced instantly. If that reduces the target’s hit point maximum to 0, the target dies instantly. No effect is required for a creature’s maximum hit points to stay the same. That’s what happens normally.

No it's not. what happens normally is your hit point maximum is unaffected entirely. There is no "normally" when talking about maximum hit points being reduced. Something reduced them, and something is keeping them reduced or there would not be continued reduction.

An effect is only required to change the value of a creature’s maximum hit points, and once changed, they will stay the same until some further effect takes place, such as the effect of finishing a long rest on a creature that has had its maximum hit points reduced by a vampire’s bite, or the effect of a greater restoration spell.

Why is max hit points reduced in the first place? It's not necrotic damage that does it, because lots of things do necrotic damage and max hit points don't get reduced.

 

[Hriston]

I think the real disagreement doesn't even hinge on whether or not the fact of the hp having been reduced counts as an ongoing effect. Rather, it's whether you stay dead as long as your max hit points are at zero (and/or die again whenever your max hit points become zero). Some people think there is an implied "remains dead" or "dies whenever it is true that their max hp is zero, which is true until they finish a long rest or receive greater restoration" in the feature even though it isn't explicitly stated such. Others (such as myself) believe that, regardless of whether the case of the max hp remaining zero is considered an ongoing supernatural effect or not, the dying when they hit zero is a one time thing that only applies when the bite happens.

I think it comes from confusing the "reduction" with "this effect". They aren't the same thing. The "reduction" is the state of having your maximum hit points lower than it was. "This effect" is the thing that reduces your maximum hit points in the first place. The fact that "this effect" can also kill you if it reduces your maximum hit points all the way to 0 means that you stay killed until you've finished a long rest for those who see the "reduction" and "this effect" as synonymous.

 

[Maxperson]

I think it comes from confusing the "reduction" with "this effect". They aren't the same thing. The "reduction" is the state of having your maximum hit points lower than it was. "This effect" is the thing that reduces your maximum hit points in the first place. The fact that "this effect" can also kill you if it reduces your maximum hit points all the way to 0 means that you stay killed until you've finished a long rest for those who see the "reduction" and "this effect" as synonymous.

Nobody on our side is confusing anything. Disagreement with you does not imply confusion. It's just a different, but valid opinion we have about how the attack works.

 

[Hriston]

If it doesn't keep working to keep the max hit points reduced, then there is no max hit point reduction at all. Hit point maximums don't remain reduced by themselves.

There’s no rule that says your hit point maximum bounces back to its former value in the absence of an ongoing effect that keeps it down. Your hit point maximum is whatever value the rules say it is. Except for specific monster and spell effects, there are only two general rules in the game that change your hit point maximum: you add the total of a Hit Die roll to your hit point maximum when you level up, and your hit point maximum increases by 1 per level when your CON modifier increases by 1. Neither of those say it rebounds in the absence of an effect that lowered it.

The effect in question just does what it says it does. It doesn’t say it keeps working to keep the target’s hit point maximum reduced. It just says it reduces the target’s hit point maximum by the amount of the necrotic damage taken. Once it has done that, it’s work is over, and the target’s hit point maximum is at a new, lower value.

It's the necrotic effect that kills when you reach 0 maximum hit points due to the nectrotic damage. 0 maximum hit points due to the necrotic damage are still reached until such time as the maximum rises. Whatever the effect was that killed you must remain or your max hit points would have gone back up when you died.

The effect that killed you was that your hit point maximum was reduced to 0 by being reduced by the amount of the necrotic damage taken. Once that happened, no further reduction took place. The effect had done what it said it would do and was done. Your hit point maximum didn’t jump back up on its own because that requires a casting of greater restoration, or in this case finishing a long rest works just as well.

 

[Maxperson]

There’s no rule that says your hit point maximum bounces back to its former value in the absence of an ongoing effect that keeps it down. Your hit point maximum is whatever value the rules say it is. Except for specific monster and spell effects, there are only two general rules in the game that change your hit point maximum: you add the total of a Hit Die roll to your hit point maximum when you level up, and your hit point maximum increases by 1 per level when your CON modifier increases by 1. Neither of those say it rebounds in the absence of an effect that lowered it.

The effect in question just does what it says it does. It doesn’t say it keeps working to keep the target’s hit point maximum reduced. It just says it reduces the target’s hit point maximum by the amount of the necrotic damage taken. Once it has done that, it’s work is over, and the target’s hit point maximum is at a new, lower value.

The effect that killed you was that your hit point maximum was reduced to 0 by being reduced by the amount of the necrotic damage taken. Once that happened, no further reduction took place. The effect had done what it said it would do and was done. Your hit point maximum didn’t jump back up on its own because that requires a casting of greater restoration, or in this case finishing a long rest works just as well.

Your interpretation is equally valid. I just don't agree with you that the hit point maximum is mystically reduced by nothing. All the bite does is necrotic damage and we know that necrotic damage does not reduce maximum hit points. My interpretation that there is some other effect going on that is reducing maximum hit points, and since necrotic damage doesn't kill at 0 max hit points, is also responsible for the death, is just as reasonable.