Bloodied vs. Dying

[LightPhoenix]

I agree that the PHB is ambiguous and open to interpretation. There is no line I could find that specifically says if they are mutually exclusive or not.

My argument would be the "Healing a Dying Character" box on p. 295, which states, "As soon as you have a current hit point total that's higher than 0, you become conscious and are no longer dying." That, to me, implies that Bloodied and Dying are two separate conditions, and not one condition track. If they were discriminate states, that sidebar would probably read something like "you become conscious and are bloodied." Basically, it would indicate that you move from Dying to Bloodied. Furthermore, nothing in the book indicates that they are discriminate states - there's no "HP track" specifically called out. I would think this is something that would be fairly well delineated if it were intended.

 

[Markn]

I'm siding with Subrosas in this deal *puts up dukes* the way I've seen health status is like this

Not bloodied - above 50% hp
Bloodied - below 50% hp
dying - below 0 hp
dead - below-50% hp

I really don't understand why the second and third would overlap.

This is how I view it.

Stalker0 - I have not had a single rule or power issue by going with this view. I can't even think of anything that would be affected by this. Can you provide some examples?

 

[Caliban]

So you are saying that healing should behave normally when applied to dead characters (not following the exception of raising hit points immediately above zero as in the special case of dying characters)?

Or are you saying that dead characters cannot be healed? Where in the actual rules is that written?

*sigh* I don't have enough patience for people who argue like this anymore. I'm out.

 

[keterys]

Depends - there's no dead condition, so are you trying to argue that you can stand and move around and take whatever actions you want once you're dead? They decided they really didn't need to clarify how damage worked on you when dead (you stop taking damage at -bloodied), or healing, or playing parcheesi. You're dead, caput, an ex-PC. Wait for a ritual or magic item to make it better.

Whether it makes sense to you or not, whether it makes one power work poorly or not, is neither here nor there on this particular rules interpretation of bloodied while dying. Now, it might be the intention that you're not bloodied while dying, but it would have been very easy to write the rule that way. After all, dying is already worded that way... from 0 to negative bloodied.

 

[Flipguarder]

ketereys are you really trying to say that since you die at your negative bloodied value, that implies you are still bloddied while dying?

EDIT: Because that's like saying you should only bake with a baker's dozen.

 

[keterys]

No, I'm saying that dying has clear wording that it begins at 0 and goes until negative bloodied.

Bloodied also has clear wording when it applies, and that status (below MaxHP/2) is still met at, say, -5 hp. It could have instead had wording that you're bloodied until 0, if that was desirable.

 

[subrosas]

Live by RAW, die by RAW

Ok, here's the deal. The RAW do not definitively tell us whether dying characters are still bloodied. At some point this may get resolved by WOTC (I haven't seen anyone claim that yet), and until then we can all believe whatever we like. But the whole "rules don't say otherwise" standard is a bad one - as I argued above, by that standard one could claim that dead characters are also bloodied and can be healed by consecrated ground.

My whole point is that the using what the rules do not say as proof of what their intent is == a dumb standard. It only makes sense if applied selectively, but by what standard do you choose to selectively apply it? Common sense?

I would guess we all agree that dead characters cannot be healed. Common sense overrides the idiotic "Unwritten RAW" standard here. But can we claim the same for dying vs. bloodied conditions?

I don't think so. Some people see it as obvious that dying characters are still bloodied, and some see it obvious that dying characters are not bloodied. The fact that you fall into one of these two camps does not itself make you correct. The only reasonable conclusion is that we all run it as we see fit until the issue gets resolved authoritatively.

My whole point is not to convince you that dying is a type of being bloodied or the opposite, but rather that the "RAW does not say otherwise and I believe it is so, QED stop debate and believe me" standard some were using earlier in this thread is a fallacy.

 

[Nail]

subrosas' basic point is sound: Absence of a specific rule about bloodied under the dying section doesn't mean or imply you are not bloodied when dieing.

Moreover, the rules neither say nor imply that bloodied is one stop along "status track", with dying at the end.

The rules DO say when a PC is bloodied, and the rules DO say when a PC is dieing. So unless you can come up with a rule that says you stop being bloodied when dieing, you've really got no (argument) legs to stand on.

If you have negative hp, you are both bloodied and dieing. You are probably also unconscious (depending on class powers) and helpless.

 

[Flipguarder]

Nail you are using the same fallacy Subrosas is talking about. The lack of a rule on bloodied status past dying does not in any way preclude that the rule is how you say it.

This was the point he was trying to make with the dying or bloodied past death. We say its ridiculous and therefore we know that dying and bloodied do NOT continue past death, but there is no official rule on it. If we use your logic in the same scenario it does because there is no rule on it. You think its ridiculous for dying to continue past death, we think its ridiculous that bloodied continues past 0 hp.

Thus the point is, the lack of a rule doesn't mean you get to impart your OWN logic on the situation and tell someone else that their logic is wrong.

 

[javcs]

I'm in agreement with dying means you're still bloodied (unless and until WotC comes out with something that makes someone dying above 1/2 max HP.

For those who argue that means that when you're dead (at or below negative bloodied or having failed 3 death saves) you are still bloodied and thus can be healed back to life - the character is no longer a valid target for healing - it's a corpse, an object - with a new HP pool that when depleted means the corpse is destroyed. That will usually never come into play, however, since destroying corpses usually happens out of combat and the specifics are generally handwaved.