Cure Minor on self when disabled

[Darkness]

A quickened cure minor wounds with a cure minor wounds will still result in you being on 0 hp.

I said that first.

 

[dvvega]

Darkness: yeah but I quothed the SRD so mine looks more official

Elephant: no other way to say this ... by SRD text ... your statement is in error. The SRD is extremely clear. You will lose a hp after the act, no matter what.

Look at it this way: you make this huge effort while weakened to cast a spell, your body reacts badly to it. You cure 1 hp of damage but your body is still aching, and you lose 1.

D

 

[Saeviomagy]

Elephant: no other way to say this ... by SRD text ... your statement is in error. The SRD is extremely clear. You will lose a hp after the act, no matter what.

dvvega: No other way to say this... by SRD text... your statement is in error. The SRD is extremely clear. After healing up to positives you become fully functional, just as if you'd never been reduced to 0 or fewer hitpoints.

So the rules about "what happens after you use a standard action when you're on 0" are NEVER referenced and are therefore irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Darkness]

Darkness: yeah but I quothed the SRD so mine looks more official

True, true.

 

[dvvega]

Saeviomagy: ummm actually no .. I'll do this again:

From SRD
Taking move actions doesn’t risk further injury, but performing any standard action (or any other action the DM deems strenuous, including some free actions such as casting a quickened spell) deals 1 point of damage after the completion of the act. Unless the action increased the disabled character’s hit points, she is now in negative hit points and dying.

It does not say anywhere within that quote if you are positive hit points you are suddenly immune to the effects of taking an action on 0 hp.

It specifically states deals 1 point of damage after the completion of the act. It does not state "only if they are still on 0".

Where are you getting your statements from?

The fact that I heal 1 hp doesn't make me immune to the damage clause. I might be fine and dandy (1 hp makes me perfectly healthy) however I now have to take the 1 point of damage because I performed a strenuous activity while on 0 hp. The SRD specifically states that it will occur, without a conditional.

D

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

It does not say anywhere within that quote if you are positive hit points you are suddenly immune to the effects of taking an action on 0 hp.

I think it does. It's in the clause, "just as if you’d never been reduced to 0 or fewer hit points." It's not just that you were disabled and now you're not. It's that now it's as if you never had been disabled. If you never had been disabled (which is what it's like) you don't take any damage.

The general rule is that you take damage. Healing is a specifically stated exception to the general rule.

 

[dvvega]

There is no stated exception except for the dying statement:

"Unless the action increased the disabled character’s hit points, she is now in negative hit points and dying."

If you didn't receive hit points you lose a hit point and are dying due to negative hit points. It does not say you are immune to hit point loss. It is stating that you better get some healing with the action or you're going to be dying.

A cure minor wounds heals you 1 hp, you take 1 hp damage for strenuous activity, you're not dying. All according to the SRD.

Unless I'm looking at the wrong SRD or something.

The statement regarding healing:

The SRD is extremely clear. After healing up to positives you become fully functional, just as if you'd never been reduced to 0 or fewer hitpoints.

Does not avoid the 0 hp rule at all. Why? Because you performed an action while on 0 hp. You will take 1hp damage after the action is completed. The 1 hp damage is not because you were disabled, it is because you took an action while disabled.

The fact is the SRD rule does not state "you take 1 hp damage after the action completes only if you're still disabled".

If you are healed above 0 your are no longer disabled and able to function normally thereafter, however you were disabled, you took a stenuous action, you suffer 1 hp damage.

D

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I'll just quote the whole portion on Disabled from the SRD.

DISABLED (0 HIT POINTS)

When your current hit points drop to exactly 0, you’re disabled. You can only take a single move or standard action each turn (but not both, nor can you take full-round actions). You can take move actions without further injuring yourself, but if you perform any standard action (or any other strenuous action) you take 1 point of damage after the completing the act. Unless your activity increased your hit points, you are now at –1 hit points, and you’re dying.

Healing that raises your hit points above 0 makes you fully functional again, just as if you’d never been reduced to 0 or fewer hit points.

You can also become disabled when recovering from dying. In this case, it’s a step toward recovery, and you can have fewer than 0 hit points (see Stable Characters and Recovery, below).

That's the whole thing. As you'll see, the "Healing that raises your hit points above 0 makes you fully functional again, just as if you’d never been reduced to 0 or fewer hit points." part is right there in the Disabled description. It's not pulled from other parts of the SRD and applied to this area, it is contained specifically in the disabled section of the SRD.

Healing is an instant. You instantly go from 0 to 1 hp and upon reaching 1hp are no longer Disabled. Being no longer Disabled the clauses that occur AFTER (specifically AFTER) the standard action would no longer apply. You instantly left Disabled behind when the spell raised your HP beyond 0.

--fje

 

[Vigwyn the Unruly]

There is no stated exception except for the dying statement:

"Unless the action increased the disabled character’s hit points, she is now in negative hit points and dying."

There is one in the very next sentence in the PHB.

If you didn't receive hit points you lose a hit point and are dying due to negative hit points. It does not say you are immune to hit point loss. It is stating that you better get some healing with the action or you're going to be dying.

It does say that it's as if you'd never been disabled. If you've never been disabled, you're not losing hp.

Because you performed an action while on 0 hp. You will take 1hp damage after the action is completed. The 1 hp damage is not because you were disabled, it is because you took an action while disabled.

Except that now, it's as if you never were disabled in the first place.

The fact is the SRD rule does not state "you take 1 hp damage after the action completes only if you're still disabled".

You're right, but healing doesn't just make you not disabled anymore, it makes it as if you never were disabled.

If you are healed above 0 your are no longer disabled and able to function normally thereafter, however you were disabled, you took a stenuous action, you suffer 1 hp damage. [emphasis mine]

The point is it's now like you never were disabled, hence you take no damage for having been disabled.

 

[dvvega]

I would 100% agree with you if the SRD stated

but if you perform any standard action (or any other strenuous action) you take 1 point of damage after the completing the act if you are still disabled.

but it doesn't.

It doesn't matter if you're not disabled after your act (cure minor wounds), you will still take the damage. It states that if you perform an action while disabled take the damage after the action. You are disabled when you perform the action. Thus the criteria has been met to take 1 hp of damage after the action is completed. Instantaneous or otherwise.

The healing statement is there to indicate that if you get above 0 hit points you can do whatever you feel like because you are no longer disabled. So if another character heals you, you can act freely.

D