Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DracoSuave" data-source="post: 5727959" data-attributes="member: 71571">You've missed the point: Dropping below zero, and its intendant consequences, are resolved during the attack, not after.  You can't have finished resolving any attack without having resolved 'dropped below zero' because damage does not wait for the attack to be done with.Which doesn't jive with how abilities that react to bringing someone to bloodied work.If you have an attack:  'Hit: 2d6+8 damage, and daze the opponent if they become bloodied' then, by your insistance, becoming bloodied would occur after the attack resolved. Thusly, that attack could never bloody them, and thus, could never daze them.Lastly, this is not in concordance with the rules on how attacks are resolved anyways."5. Deal damage and apply other effects (page 276)."and:"DAMAGEWhen you hit with an attack, you normally dealdamage to your target, reducing the target’s hit points."Which means that the hit points are reduced during the resolution of the attack.  Dropping to zero hit points occurs at this time--meaning that if your trigger is 'dropped below zero hit points' then it must be resolved before the resolution of step 5 of resolving an attack.More over, your argument fails at this line:"Target has dropped below zero, so now has the dying condition"Notice the past tense:  You've admitted that the target has already dropped below zero which means that dropped below zero has already resolved.  Interrupts occur BEFORE trigger has resolved.  If you say 'You have dropped below zero hit points' then you're too late... you're now AFTER you've dropped below zero hit points.How is this difficult to reconcile?</blockquote>

Verification