Contingency Healing

[Phoenix]

Yea, apparantly the rules do not support it either way (hey we are talking about a system that has many missing explanations). Here is what brought my thought process into being.

You have a knife, you start cutting your body - as the knife penetrates the first inch of skin you take 1 dmg, then next inch is another 1, the next inch is another 1. So every inch is one point. When someone attacks you with the knife, the knife isn't six inches in your body instantly - quickly but not instantly - so you take that damage as the knife goes deeper and deeper. So that is where my thought process comes in.

Should that be the case than Damage Reduction 1/- would make you effectively invulnerable to all attacks. Luckily it is not. This is common sense, and i do believe that common sense is enough to support ALL of the arguements above against your Contingency plan.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

So the player get's attacked and would naturally be dropped to -30 HP. Contingency Heal kicks in, but is the player already dead or does he benefit from it?

He's dead.

The closest thing to an explicit rule on this point I can think of is (from the Renewal domain's special power): "If you fall below 0 hit points, you regain a number of hit points equal to 1d8 + your Charisma modifier. This supernatural ability functions once per day. If an attack brings you to -10 or fewer hit points, you die before this power takes effect."

 

[JimAde]

So how would you phrase such a contingency, assuming the DM doesn't like meta-game wording. You can't say "if I'm knocked unconscious" because that's way too close the the edge (resulting in the above problem). You can't say "when I get to 30 HP" because it's a metagame concept. You can't say "when I'm about to take a lethal hit" because that's reacting to something that hasn't happened yet.

I actually have a house-rule for damage in my game that would address this, but in the RAW how would you do it?

 

[Artoomis]

So how would you phrase such a contingency, assuming the DM doesn't like meta-game wording. You can't say "if I'm knocked unconscious" because that's way too close the the edge (resulting in the above problem). You can't say "when I get to 30 HP" because it's a metagame concept. You can't say "when I'm about to take a lethal hit" because that's reacting to something that hasn't happened yet.

I actually have a house-rule for damage in my game that would address this, but in the RAW how would you do it?

When you get to 30 hit points would work with most DMs, otherwise I'd express it as (lest's assume a max of 90 hit points), "when I feel like about 1/3 of my total potential for life is gone.." or something liek that. It's tough, because hit points represent so many things.

 

[Infiniti2000]

So how would you phrase such a contingency, assuming the DM doesn't like meta-game wording.

Doesn't like or doesn't allow? Big difference. He might not like it, but he'll have to live with it. If he doesn't allow it, then you have far bigger issues, such as with just about every spell out there (what grid intersection to place a spell, how much damage you do with magic missile, what's the DC of that charm person, etc.). In some cases, you have to allow for game mechanic terms to be used. It doesn't always mean metagaming, which is generally derogatory.

 

[andargor]

Here's another quote:

Damage

When your attack succeeds, you deal damage. The type of weapon used determines the amount of damage you deal. Effects that modify weapon damage apply to unarmed strikes and the natural physical attack forms of creatures.

Damage reduces a target's current hit points.

Current HP - Damage = New HP. Your character is dead.

Andargor

 

[Delemental]

So how would you phrase such a contingency, assuming the DM doesn't like meta-game wording. You can't say "if I'm knocked unconscious" because that's way too close the the edge (resulting in the above problem). You can't say "when I get to 30 HP" because it's a metagame concept. You can't say "when I'm about to take a lethal hit" because that's reacting to something that hasn't happened yet.

I'd argue that a Contingency has to be able to react to things that haven't happened. The example in the book is a Contingent feather fall if "I fall more than 10 feet", or something along those lines. Obviously, the contingency (feather fall) is a reaction to something that hasn't happened (falling).

Where the problem lies is in specifying a "lethal" hit. Obviously, a hit can't be defined as 'lethal' unless it actually kills you, in which case the heal is useless. It'd be like having the feather fall contingent on "if I suffer a fatal fall"

 

[Sejs]

There is no indication that damage is applied in incremental stages, one hit point at a time. There is plenty of indication ('round about all of it, in fact) that damage is applied in lump sums. Evidence the numerous quotes already posted that relate as such.

If damage were a chart or graph, such as in Shadowrun, there could be an argument made for incremental damage. As it stands, it isn't. Damage in D&D isn't a graph, it's an equation. Passing through intervening points is not part of the process.

 

[JimAde]

I'd argue that a Contingency has to be able to react to things that haven't happened. The example in the book is a Contingent feather fall if "I fall more than 10 feet", or something along those lines. Obviously, the contingency (feather fall) is a reaction to something that hasn't happened (falling).

Where the problem lies is in specifying a "lethal" hit. Obviously, a hit can't be defined as 'lethal' unless it actually kills you, in which case the heal is useless. It'd be like having the feather fall contingent on "if I suffer a fatal fall"

That feather fall example isn't in the SRD and I don't have my PH here, but I seem to remember it says "more than 5 feet." In that case, it can react when you've already fallen the 5 feet, since that won't damage you.

I guess the question for the original poster, rather than quibbling about whether hit points are lost one at a time, is: Is there ANY time between when you take a lethal wound and when you actually die? Realistically, of course, there generally is. Without getting too morbid, if you get shot through the heart I imagine your brain keeps functioning at some level for at least a few seconds. Plenty of time for a contingency to go off, even though the rules say no such thing. As a GM I would allow the "if I take a fatal wound" contingency and just rule that the spell goes off in the split second between the wound being inflicted and the character's actual death.

Now someone will point out that I said "the rules say no such thing and this is the rules forum so get lost," but there you go.

 

[The Iron Mark]

If you have exactly 200 HP and your Heal will give you 150 HP, why aren't you having it go off at 50 or less HP?