|
Here is the case:
Cleric has a cure spell cast w/ contingency on himself. The trigger is when he goes to negative hitpoints.
If the cleric goes to a negative hitpoint total in one hit that kills him, does the contingency cure have any effect?
I ruled that a cure spell that goes off after he dies has no effect. However, he argues that the single hitpoint loss is not instantaneous but happens as the sword progresses through the body.
Thoughts anyone? Or better yet an actual ruling from a designer?
|
In all cases, the contingency immediately brings into effect the companion spell, the latter being “cast” instantaneously when the prescribed circumstances occur.
It's ugly wording, but I'd personally rule it as the spell takes place as an immediate action when triggered. Having seen other instances involving being healed as an immediate action, (IE APG Paladin Spell "Hero's Defiance") if the healing is sufficient to bring the receiver up to or greater than negative con hit points, they aren't dead.
Creative Director
|
A contingency spell used to have a cure light/moderate/serious/critical wounds spell is a GREAT use of contingency. But if you are killed in one shot, you're dead. Only if you use contingency with breath of life can you save yourself in this way (and without the book in front of me, I can't recall if that's even a legal contingency spell choice).
It's probably better, just to be safe, to have that contingency heal effect kick in when you're dropped below 10 hit points. That way you have a good chance of not having to "waste" actions to stand back up once you're conscious again.
Obviously James just chimed in, it wouldn't work as once you are "dead" the "cure" spell wouldn't bring you back to life. It would try to cure your dead body, which isn't even a valid target at that time. You go from being a "creature" (alive) to being an object (dead corpse) before the contingency can go off (attack resolves and you are in negative hitpoints past your "deaths door" threshold at which point the contingency goes off).
Contingency and Create Undead.
Yaaa we killed the boss mob... oh wait whats that coming out of his body... Ghast !!!!
Contingency and Create Undead.
Yaaa we killed the mob boss ... oh wait whats that coming out of his body... Ghast !!!!
Fixed that for you.
"If you are killed in one shot, you're dead" - that sounds pretty clear to me. Your HP instantly drops to -83, you die, and then the contingency spell kicks in and fails to bring you back to life.
You don't have to follow the 13-year-old opinion of a Creative Director, but if he was GM you'd be dead.
I'd probably allow the spell to work, but I'm not the kind of GM who'd want to use something that deadly on the party in the first place.
|
A complaint definitely related to this thread
You aren't going to get a response from James (or anyone else). Even before PF1 stopped being officially supported (4 years ago) it had been about 6 years since Paizo designers responded to individual rules-specific complaints on anything like a regular basis.
Having said that, even when he was responding James took care on many, many occasions to say "I am not an official rules source." When he answered questions, they were off-the-cuff answers about what he would do in his games based on his quick interpretation. Though he was involved in the initial rules design his focus was on the lore and worldbuilding while others like Jason and SKR were more heavily invested in the mechanics.
I mentioned in the other thread that it sounds like you intended your contingency to act exactly like the paladin spell hero's defiance. I found the thread where we discussed that spell a couple of years ago. There are multiple interpretations that could be "RAW correct." Unusually, we came to a fairly broad consensus: use the simplest interpretation. Which was that it should be calculated simultaneously, like you proposed.
I suggest you try to have a calm, rational conversation with your GM. Key is being able to say "Reading through the rules, I can see how you can come to your conclusion. Can you see how I come to mine?" And discuss what is the simplest and most fun for everyone.
Don't rage-quit the whole campaign if the GM decides not to reverse his ruling. One of you is going to have to give a little bit. Even if the GM can't stand to be "wrong" and it has to be you that gives, then the GM should have seen what a crisis this precipitated and seek out more player-friendly interpretations in the future. And maybe he can come up with some way of working a reduced-price resurrection into the current situation.
Mr. Jacobs. Your answer is a bit unclear and led to a blow up in our game. The situation in our game was that I had set a contingency to go off with a Heal (110 hp) in the out of game language of "If I hit 0 HP" or in game terms "If any sort of damage knocks me unconscious". I had 117 hp total. I was at 87 hp or so and get hit with a Wail of the Banshee Spell for 170 hp (Failed save). My argument was that I set it to clearly go off before death (0 hp, not -13) so the +110 hp and the -170 hp should have been calculated simultaneously leaving me with roughly 20 points. Your response above makes it sound as if this is correct as the 10 hp and standing up part implies you can interrupt further damage. Had I set it to go off at -13 (Death) then yes, it would only be healing a dead body. Could you please be VERY VERY precise about your opinion?
They were very precise about it… you misunderstood. Contingency doesn’t interrupt damage. It triggers before damage is calculated or after damage is calculated depending on the triggering condition. Any trigger of “when I fall below X health” will trigger AFTER damage is calculated. As James Jacobs stated, if the damage is enough that it would normally kill you, you are still dead. Contingency will trigger after you died (after damage is calculated) and because you are now a corpse the heal fails. If you want it to trigger before damage then you want a trigger like “If I am hit while below X health”… this also runs the risk of being killed outright too, since if you took enough damage to drop from above your threshold to dead in one hit then you died without ever triggering contingency.
It depends on how you see damage being applied. Does it all simultaneously vanish as an atomic unit? Or does it quickly drain out over time as the damage is being dealt? The atomic interpretation is more "gamey", while the drain interpretation is more realistic. But Pathfinder rules are rarely based on realism.
The big take away from this is to run your contingencies by your GM before you use them. Your character should know which interpretation he's working with before it happens in combat.
Wail of the banshee is a 9th level death spell that allows a fortitude save to negate. You are either affected by the spell or it has no effect at all on the target. The all or nothing nature of the spell seems a good indication that the damage occurs instantly instead of over a short period of time. The spell is pretty much designed to kill things outright not damage them. There are very few characters that will survive most character under 16th level will usually be killed by the spell.
The spell Heal channels positive energy to wipe away injury and afflictions. It does not prevent damage from happening it only fixes the problem that are already there. If the damage and healing are applied simultaneously there is no injury for the spell to fix so it does nothing. The damage has to occur first or the triggering clause of the contingency never occurs.
Whatever your reasons, sometimes you just have to leave a party. It doesn't really matter if it's you or them being the problem. The whole point of playing this game is to have a good time. If you aren't having a good time then you probably shouldn't be there.