| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
There seems to be a bit of an argument over a line pulled from the Death Attacks description, that seems to be worded as a universal rule. But given where it is, exactly, it's a mite unclear.
It states that "In case it matters, a dead character, no matter how he died, has hit points equal to or less than his negative Constitution score."
So my question is: What HP do people killed by instakill effects that are NOT Death Effects/Attacks have?
Are they:
-At negative Constituition?
-At the HP they had when they died (Ex: Someone has 100 HP, and is Coup De Graced. The attack deals 20 damage, and he dies from failing the Fort save.)?
-Something else?
-Con seems to be the developers intent.
It makes no sense to have HP which represent how much more you can take literally remain the same.
The placement of the rule is odd, but it seems very clear that it is a universal rule from the phrasing.
Exactly this. The text under the "death attack" ability is pretty explicit that it's talking about all characters who have the 'dead' condition, and not just ones made 'dead through a death attack.
So taking that into account, it seems like it would work thus:
-If you gain the dead condition through taking damage, then you subtract the total damage dealt by the killing blow(s) from your current HP, and whatever number you wind up with (which will always be at minimum -CON) is your current hit points. So if you're at 1 HP and you have a CON of 15, and you take 20 damage, then you're at -19 HP
-If you gain the dead condition through a death effect or any other manner besides taking damage, then your hit points are most likely set equal to
-CON exactly; so in the above example, if our CON 15\1 HP remaining character is successfully targeted by a Death Attack ability (that does no additional damage), then he gains the dead condition and immediately goes to -15 CON.
Does this mean that trolls regenerate starting from their -Con rather than -HP? If so, that means they are a lot harder to keep down then some surmised.
Does this mean that Breath of Life is a bit more effective than people initially gave it credit for?
Does this mean that trolls regenerate starting from their -Con rather than -HP? If so, that means they are a lot harder to keep down then some surmised.
Does this mean that Breath of Life is a bit more effective than people initially gave it credit for?
If they died to a death effect, they are dead. Regeneration won't repair them if they died of fright from a phantasmal killer.
Yes.
Does this mean that trolls regenerate starting from their -Con rather than -HP? If so, that means they are a lot harder to keep down then some surmised.
Does this mean that Breath of Life is a bit more effective than people initially gave it credit for?
If they were killed 'directly' by a death effect, rather than through being reduced 'naturally' to -CON? Yeah, that's exactly how I see it working.
Breath of Life would be highly effective on a target droppped by an insta-kill non-"death attack" effect that didn't actually deal hit point damage, because you'd only have to heal their -CON in damage.
So if a first level human wizard receives a massive smackdown from a flumph barbarian, he goes from his 6 hp to -153 and dies. A moment later, since he's dead, he only has -10, his negative Con, which means he was just healed of 143 hp through being killed. Correct?
So if a first level human wizard receives a massive smackdown from a flumph barbarian, he goes from his 4 hp to -153 and dies. A moment later, since he's dead, he only has -10, his negative Con, which means he was just healed of 143 hp. Correct?
No, he's at -143 HP.
Now, if the flumph Barbarian had some sort of class ability that rendered the Wizard dead but without dealing HP damage? Then he's at -10 HP.
Scenario 1: The Wizard is at 10 HP and has 10 CON. The Barbarian deals 40 damage. The Wizard is at -30 HP. He's dead because his HP is less than his CON score. He remains at -30 HP because he actually died from the damage itself.
Scenario 2: Wizard is at 10 HP and has 10 CON. The Barbarian uses UberMasterKillPowerX; the power automatically kills a character who fails the Fort save, but otherwise deals no damage. The Wizard fails the Fort save. He immediately gains the dead condition. He took no damage, but because the dead condition requires that you be at -CON or lower, the Wizard automatically drops to exactly -10 HP.
So if a first level human wizard receives a massive smackdown from a flumph barbarian, he goes from his 6 hp to -153 and dies. A moment later, since he's dead, he only has -10, his negative Con, which means he was just healed of 143 hp through being killed. Correct?
Is -153 equal to or less than -CON? If so, no change in status is needed.
If you're hit with a CdG and fail the Fort save, you might still have apparent positive HP, if it wasn't enough to kill you. However, with this rule, you would drop to -CON, since your current HP were not equal to or less than that already.
So if a first level human wizard receives a massive smackdown from a flumph barbarian, he goes from his 6 hp to -153 and dies. A moment later, since he's dead, he only has -10, his negative Con, which means he was just healed of 143 hp through being killed. Correct?
"equal to or less than". Not "equal to".
Fixed...
So if a flumph barbarian receives a coup-de-grace from a first level human wizard (after he uses a scroll of deep slumber) for 2 hp of damage, and fails his Fort save, he goes from his Full hp to Full-2. Since he's dead, he shifts down to his negative Con.