In D&D 5e, it is stated that they do not, but I do not know of such a rule in Pathfinder 2e. Can temporary hit points restore consciousness to a creature with 0 regular hit points?
Maybe not as explicitly, but it does look that way.
The rules for Knocked out and Dying specify that if you are at 0 HP then you are unconscious and dying.
The rules for Temporary HP don't change that. They only specify that if you have temp HP that you lose those first when taking any damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't believe temporary hit points do anything at all for you save keep your actual hit points from being lowered for a time.
As such, I'd say no, they wouldn't revive you.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't believe temporary hit points do anything at all for you save keep your actual hit points from being lowered for a time.
As such, I'd say no, they wouldn't revive you.
Probably the right call. Otherwise gaining and losing temporary hitpoints on zero real hitpoints will keep bumping your wounded condition.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What they can do at 0 HP is preventing your increasing your Dying, as long as the amount is at least as high as the damage taken; might come in handy for low persistent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a 10th level spell called Revival.
A burst of healing energy soothes living creatures and temporarily rouses those recently slain. All living targets regain 10d8+40 Hit Points. In addition, you return any number of dead targets to life temporarily, with the same effects and limitations as raise dead. The raised creatures have a number of temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points you gave living creatures, but no normal Hit Points. The raised creatures can't regain Hit Points or gain temporary Hit Points in other ways, and once revival's duration ends, they lose all temporary Hit Points and die. Revival can't resurrect creatures killed by disintegrate or a death effect. It has no effect on undead.
It seems to me that the resurrective properties of this spell would be completely useless if the 0-HP creatures weren't restored to consciousness by the temporary Hit Points, seeing as they are never getting any normal Hit Points.
I don't believe temporary hit points do anything at all for you save keep your actual hit points from being lowered for a time.
As such, I'd say no, they wouldn't revive you.
Let's read the entry again:
Some spells or abilities give you temporary Hit Points. Track these separately from your current and maximum Hit Points; when you take damage, reduce your temporary Hit Points first. Most temporary Hit Points last for a limited duration. You can’t regain lost temporary Hit Points through healing, but you can gain more via other abilities. You can have temporary Hit Points from only one source at a time. If you gain temporary Hit Points when you already have some, choose whether to keep the amount you already have and their corresponding duration or to gain the new temporary Hit Points and their duration.
So, the rules state that when you acquire Temporary HP, they are a pool separate from your current and maximum HP value. They also state that if you were to take HP damage, the value is deducted from the Temporary HP pool first. So, in a sense, they actually do keep your actual HP from being lowered, so long as that value equals or exceeds the damage taken. (It actually doesn't say this expressly, but it's highly implied that they otherwise function normally like hit points.)
As it stands, this falls under the concept of "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a 10th level spell called Revival.
It seems to me that the resurrective properties of this spell would be completely useless if the 0-HP creatures weren't restored to consciousness by the temporary Hit Points, seeing as they are never getting any normal Hit Points.
Sure. But that spell specifically says that it will "return dead targets to life temporarily". Endure says no such thing.
So this is a case of a specific spell rule making an exception.
There's a 10th level spell called Revival.
It seems to me that the resurrective properties of this spell would be completely useless if the 0-HP creatures weren't restored to consciousness by the temporary Hit Points, seeing as they are never getting any normal Hit Points.
Sure. But that spell specifically says that it will "return dead targets to life temporarily". Endure says no such thing.
So this is a case of a specific spell rule making an exception.
Also, it's a 10th level spell, maybe it should be able to do things that aren't normally allowed
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a 10th level spell called Revival.
It seems to me that the resurrective properties of this spell would be completely useless if the 0-HP creatures weren't restored to consciousness by the temporary Hit Points, seeing as they are never getting any normal Hit Points.
Sure. But that spell specifically says that it will "return dead targets to life temporarily". Endure says no such thing.
So this is a case of a specific spell rule making an exception.
But it's not making an exception at all. Nothing in the spell states that it restores consciousness, so if the temporary Hit Points aren't doing that, then all the revived creatures are still unconscious. And then they just go right back to being dead? What's the point of that?
I agree. Normally when the game sets as exception it makes it clear putting it into the description.
Example:
You transform into a ferocious Large dragon, gaining the effects of 6th-level dragon form except that you use your own AC and attack modifier, you apply your extra damage from Rage, and the Breath Weapon uses your class DC. The action to Dismiss the transformation gains the rage trait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, it's a 10th level spell, maybe it should be able to do things that aren't normally allowedThere's a 10th level spell called Revival.
It seems to me that the resurrective properties of this spell would be completely useless if the 0-HP creatures weren't restored to consciousness by the temporary Hit Points, seeing as they are never getting any normal Hit Points.
Sure. But that spell specifically says that it will "return dead targets to life temporarily". Endure says no such thing.
So this is a case of a specific spell rule making an exception.
"It's a max level spell, so it should be powerful enough to do that" is not a valid rules defense to make.
The spell does not give any exception to the rule, therefore it still follows the rule, which means it does nothing to those that are dead or unconscious with temporary HP. The point of the spell reference is to point out that with that interpretation, the spell is processed stupidly, which means that interpretation of Temporary HP is wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously, what makes Temporary HP so different from normal HP that it instantly means you can't have consciousness? Because it's temporary? Just because it's temporary doesn't mean it ceases to effectively be HP, because it's a value that's reduced by damage, just like normal HP is. Because it's tracked separately and lost first? Gee, that's basically how HP works regardless, since the reason it's tracked separately is because it's not a permanent resource, and if you are given multiple forms of temporary HP, you need to know how much is adjusted from your previous value (if any), and how long those temporary HP last before they are gone.
I agree. Normally when the game sets as exception it makes it clear putting it into the description.
Ideally exceptions to a general rule are mentioned explicitly. That isn't always the case.
Example: Glean Contents. It isn't explicitly overriding any general rule.
------
Also, the general rule is stated clearly that you are Dying and Unconscious at 0 Hit Points.
Not that you are Dying and Unconscious at both 0 HP and 0 Temp HP.
The general rule is that you lose the Dying condition and wake up if you have 1 HP or more.
Not that you wake up if you have 1 HP or 1 Temp HP.
So you could argue that Revival is ambiguous in that it gives a character only Temp HP and expects that to remove the Unconscious and Can't Act conditions. The Ambiguous Rules rule would come in and say that it is too bad to be true that a 10th level spell doesn't do half of what it says that it can do and that the dead characters now have Temp HP and are alive temporarily, but are still Unconscious and Can't Act.
But the Ambiguous Rules rule doesn't trigger for Endure. Nothing in Endure even remotely implies that it does anything for a character that is Dead or Dying.
Ideally exceptions to a general rule are mentioned explicitly. That isn't always the case.
Example: Glean Contents. It isn't explicitly overriding any general rule.
What is the exception in question that we are meant to infer from Glean Contents? I'm not too familiar with this feat.
Also, the general rule is stated clearly that you are Dying and Unconscious at 0 Hit Points.
Not that you are Dying and Unconscious at both 0 HP and 0 Temp HP.
The general rule is that you lose the Dying condition and wake up if you have 1 HP or more.
Not that you wake up if you have 1 HP or 1 Temp HP.
I don't see anything in this general rule that would prevent temporary Hit Points from counting as Hit Points to grant consciousness. The Temporary Hit Points rule would have to say that temporary Hit Points are not real Hit Points, not just that they are tracked separately from current Hit Points and maximum Hit Points.
So you could argue that Revival is ambiguous in that it gives a character only Temp HP and expects that to remove the Unconscious and Can't Act conditions. The Ambiguous Rules rule would come in and say that it is too bad to be true that a 10th level spell doesn't do half of what it says that it can do and that the dead characters now have Temp HP and are alive temporarily, but are still Unconscious and Can't Act.
But the Ambiguous Rules rule doesn't trigger for Endure. Nothing in Endure even remotely implies that it does anything for a character that is Dead or Dying.
Endure would indeed not imply that it helps dying characters, but only if we assume that temporary Hit Points are incapable of saving dying characters. And the only reason I see to assume they cannot is the possibility that allowing it is broken. And I'm sure if temporary Hit Points could do that in 5e D&D, it would be broken, but this game has the nasty wounded condition for players who keep dropping to 0 Hit Points, so it doesn't seem too crazy an idea for temporary Hit Points to function as a temporary life-saver.
What is the exception in question that we are meant to infer from Glean Contents?
Exactly.
The general rule is buried in the Decipher Writing Exploration activity. Glean Contents is most definitely an override of that general rule, but doesn't call out which rules in Decipher Writing it is overriding or even that it is an override.
I don't see anything in this general rule that would prevent temporary Hit Points from counting as Hit Points to grant consciousness. The Temporary Hit Points rule would have to say that temporary Hit Points are not real Hit Points, not just that they are tracked separately from current Hit Points and maximum Hit Points.
So even though Temporary Hit Points are called out as being different and separate from actual Hit Points, and can't be healed like regular Hit Points, they should be treated as though they are the same?
That is a bridge too far for me. How would the rules writers have to state things in order to make Temp HP actually be different from HP in your mind?
And Endure is certainly intended to be a lifesaver of a spell. But it has to be used before the target drops. It won't bring people back to a standing position afterwards.
Example: Glean Contents. It isn't explicitly overriding any general rule.
Glean Contents is pretty explicit about what it lets you do. So not really a good example here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Temporary hit points are temporary. I guess if one were to gain consciousness from 0hp by getting 1thp, that character would be conscious until the “temporary” ran out.
Glean Contents is pretty explicit about what it lets you do. So not really a good example here.
Example: Glean Contents. It isn't explicitly overriding any general rule.
My point is that it doesn't use the word 'except' or similar wording like YuriP was stating. That is not a hard and fast rules writing convention that is always followed.
My point is that it doesn't use the word 'except' or similar wording like YuriP was stating. That is not a hard and fast rules writing convention that is always followed.Glean Contents is pretty explicit about what it lets you do. So not really a good example here.
Example: Glean Contents. It isn't explicitly overriding any general rule.
But it does clearly define the ways in which it allows you to do a new thing, which is what makes it distinct from what it's being compared to.
The example here is closer to the old back and forth on critical persistent damage, where there's text that seems to assume you already know how a mechanic works, even though that rule interaction is not explicitly stated anywhere else (though also similarly, the distinction behind the confusion isn't entirely explicit either).
Then it was whether or not persistent damage is damage, now it's whether or not temporary hit points are hit points. The talking points are actually really striking in how much they parallel that debate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So even though Temporary Hit Points are called out as being different and separate from actual Hit Points, and can't be healed like regular Hit Points, they should be treated as though they are the same?
That is a bridge too far for me. How would the rules writers have to state things in order to make Temp HP actually be different from HP in your mind?
For the rules to convince me that temporary Hit Points are not real Hit Points, they need only say so. Pathfinder 2e does not seem to say this, and I don't really see what would break if temporary Hit Points are real Hit Points.
I can't find any rule or precedent that suggests they don't behave exactly like "real" HPs while they last.
You can't heal them.
I agree. Normally when the game sets as exception it makes it clear putting it into the description.Ideally exceptions to a general rule are mentioned explicitly. That isn't always the case.
Example: Glean Contents. It isn't explicitly overriding any general rule.
------
Also, the general rule is stated clearly that you are Dying and Unconscious at 0 Hit Points.
Not that you are Dying and Unconscious at both 0 HP and 0 Temp HP.
The general rule is that you lose the Dying condition and wake up if you have 1 HP or more.
Not that you wake up if you have 1 HP or 1 Temp HP.
So you could argue that Revival is ambiguous in that it gives a character only Temp HP and expects that to remove the Unconscious and Can't Act conditions. The Ambiguous Rules rule would come in and say that it is too bad to be true that a 10th level spell doesn't do half of what it says that it can do and that the dead characters now have Temp HP and are alive temporarily, but are still Unconscious and Can't Act.
But the Ambiguous Rules rule doesn't trigger for Endure. Nothing in Endure even remotely implies that it does anything for a character that is Dead or Dying.
I mean, the Revival spell gives the perfect intention behind Temporary HP if the idea is that it's supposed to work:
A burst of healing energy soothes living creatures and temporarily rouses those recently slain. All living targets regain 10d8+40 Hit Points. In addition, you return any number of dead targets to life temporarily, with the same effects and limitations as raise dead. The raised creatures have a number of temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points you gave living creatures, but no normal Hit Points. The raised creatures can't regain Hit Points or gain temporary Hit Points in other ways, and once revival's duration ends, they lose all temporary Hit Points and die.
If the idea is that the Temporary HP counts as being enough to break Unconsciousness and regain the ability to act again, despite not having HP to begin with, then the intention seems quite clear that Temporary HP are just like normal HP in that respect as well. If it's not, then I don't see anything else spelled out in the spell that breaks this, because again, if the idea is that this is supposed to be an exception, then the spell needs to point this out, and it simply doesn't.
All we get is "Your dead targets come back to life temporarily, get Temp HP, can't heal HP, and can't regain or swap Temp HP they acquire later." At best, we can argue that it's because they're "brought back to life" that they get to act again, but this doesn't mean anything mechanically besides removing the Dead condition. And again, if that's removed, then they're still Unconscious because they're otherwise at 0 HP, and if we subscribe to the idea that Temporary HP isn't enough to restore consciousness, then the spell does nothing to fix this, as being "brought back to life" doesn't mean you ignore HP rules.
And no, Too Bad to Be True doesn't work here because it's quite clear that, with the "Temporary HP isn't HP rule", this is what happens. There's no other interpretation to provide. It's not ambiguous at all. It's just...bad. And dumb. And nonsensical. The first two I can accept, because a lot of 10th level spells are traps (Miracle, Wish, et. al., I'm looking at you), and honestly a 10th level spell not working right doesn't break the game that much. The last one I don't because it interacts with a far more core mechanics in the game, there are far more situations for this to come up in actual gameplay, and honestly, the interpretation of "It's HP, but it's not really HP, so it's not HP for things that rely on HP to work" just doesn't make sense given how it's otherwise ran in every other aspect of the game.
I can't find any rule or precedent that suggests they don't behave exactly like "real" HPs while they last.You can't heal them.
The rules already spell this out as an exception. They still otherwise function just like Hit Points besides what's spelled out.
-We know they're tracked as a separate pool from your Maximum and Current HP (for mechanics that rely on them).
-We know they're lost first as opposed to your standard HP.
-We know you can't have multiple sources of Temporary HP, and that you have to choose which ones you have if you apply multiple sources at once.
That's pretty much it. It's not like it's something that absorbs hits and then the rest of the damage just "poofs" away from your current HP; the rules don't outright spell this, but by RAW, this could be an interpretation by that rule since again, Temporary HP isn't HP. It's damaged first, but nothing in the rules says normal HP is damaged second, so...
I can't find any rule or precedent that suggests they don't behave exactly like "real" HPs while they last.You can't heal them.The rules already spell this out as an exception. They still otherwise function just like Hit Points besides what's spelled out.
-We know they're tracked as a separate pool from your Maximum and Current HP (for mechanics that rely on them).
-We know they're lost first as opposed to your standard HP.
-We know you can't have multiple sources of Temporary HP, and that you have to choose which ones you have if you apply multiple sources at once.That's pretty much it. It's not like it's something that absorbs hits and then the rest of the damage just "poofs" away from your current HP; the rules don't outright spell this, but by RAW, this could be an interpretation by that rule since again, Temporary HP isn't HP. It's damaged first, but nothing in the rules says normal HP is damaged second, so...
"I didn't ask how much damage the tarrasque does; I said I cast Endure!"
Yes, ASIDE from thatI can't find any rule or precedent that suggests they don't behave exactly like "real" HPs while they last.You can't heal them.
You can have more temporary hit points than your maximum hit points.
Hit Points are a core statistic of your character, while temporary hit points are an effect caused by a spell or ability.
A burst of healing energy soothes living creatures and temporarily rouses those recently slain. All living targets regain 10d8+40 Hit Points. In addition, you return any number of dead targets to life temporarily, with the same effects and limitations as raise dead. The raised creatures have a number of temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points you gave living creatures, but no normal Hit Points. The raised creatures can't regain Hit Points or gain temporary Hit Points in other ways, and once revival's duration ends, they lose all temporary Hit Points and die.If the idea is that the Temporary HP counts as being enough to break Unconsciousness and regain the ability to act again, despite not having HP to begin with, then the intention seems quite clear that Temporary HP are just like normal HP in that respect as well.
No, the idea is that 'you return ... to life temporarily' is removing the Dead condition - which is what is applying the Unconscious and Can't Act conditions. That is what causes the target to get up and start fighting again.
Not the gaining of temporary HP.
Also, this is one spell. One high level spell. If this spell needs to be reworded to make it work right, then this spell needs to be reworded. This spell isn't what should determine the rules for all things that cause Temporary Hit Point gain.
Yes, ASIDE from thatI can't find any rule or precedent that suggests they don't behave exactly like "real" HPs while they last.You can't heal them.You can have more temporary hit points than your maximum hit points.
Hit Points are a core statistic of your character, while temporary hit points are an effect caused by a spell or ability.
Not realistically possible, since you can't stack Temporary HP, and there's no level-relevant effect that can do this.
That's a semantics difference, this is like saying a Status Bonus to hit is different than a Proficiency Bonus to hit; the point being is that they are still both bonuses to hit, which is what matters in regards to altering how much of a bonus to hit you have for a given Strike. Same concept here: Temporary HP are still HP, because you still lose them from damage the same way normal HP is lost, and it's relevant for determining how much damage you need to take before you reach 0 HP.
A burst of healing energy soothes living creatures and temporarily rouses those recently slain. All living targets regain 10d8+40 Hit Points. In addition, you return any number of dead targets to life temporarily, with the same effects and limitations as raise dead. The raised creatures have a number of temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points you gave living creatures, but no normal Hit Points. The raised creatures can't regain Hit Points or gain temporary Hit Points in other ways, and once revival's duration ends, they lose all temporary Hit Points and die.If the idea is that the Temporary HP counts as being enough to break Unconsciousness and regain the ability to act again, despite not having HP to begin with, then the intention seems quite clear that Temporary HP are just like normal HP in that respect as well.No, the idea is that 'you return ... to life temporarily' is removing the Dead condition - which is what is applying the Unconscious and Can't Act conditions. That is what causes the target to get up and start fighting again.
Not the gaining of temporary HP.
Also, this is one spell. One high level spell. If this spell needs to be reworded to make it work right, then this spell needs to be reworded. This spell isn't what should determine the rules for all things that cause Temporary Hit Point gain.
That's not how that works according to your initial post:
The rules for Knocked out and Dying specify that if you are at 0 HP then you are unconscious and dying.
The rules for Temporary HP don't change that. They only specify that if you have temp HP that you lose those first when taking any damage.
And the spell says:
The raised creatures have a number of temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points you gave living creatures, but no normal Hit Points.
So, let's say you remove the Dead condition with this spell. Okay. Well, the spell then says they don't have normal HP, which can effectively be translated to mean 0 HP. The spell gives no extra exceptions beyond removing the Dead condition (which is by your own admission, since you believe that's the sole reason you need to be able to act, even with mere Temporary HP), but they still have 0 normal HP, and you admitted yourself that having Temporary HP doesn't change that, and the spell says they only have Temporary HP, and no other form of HP.
Now, if the argument is only normal HP works for consciousness (because Temporary HP, another form of HP, doesn't count), then simply "not having" normal HP means you don't fulfill the criteria for having more than 0 normal HP, and consciousness requires that you at least have a positive value of normal HP. Lacking a value fails to fulfill that criteria, which means dead people still be unconscious upon being raised from the dead for a minute.
All we're saying is that the interpretation presented makes this spell nonfunctional for the intended purpose of reviving recently deceased creatures to fight. If the intent is that it's supposed to do that, then either A. the interpretation is bad, or B. the spell is poorly worded and needs to be adjusted to accommodate it. Problem is, Paizo usually isn't this sloppy for that sort of thing, and probably wouldn't write a spell of this power to be completely useless (though I tend to disagree, since max level spells broke the game in 1E, so having powerful max level spells in 2E seems counterproductive, but that's personal bias at work), so I'd rather err on the side of "Paizo knew this consequence was going to happen, so they assumed temporary HP is still a form of HP and counts for consciousness," and not "Paizo can't write spell functions consistently, so just assume this spell should work."
Not realistically possible, since you can't stack Temporary HP, and there's no level-relevant effect that can do this.
First, that isn't a reasonable counterpoint. Just because it isn't something that is "on-level" to do doesn't mean that it isn't possible.
And second, that isn't quite what I was meaning anyway. The point is that if temp HP and regular HP are in fact the same thing, then the combination of the two would still be capped by your Max HP value. So if you are at full HP from just regular HP, then you couldn't be affected by a spell that gives you temp HP because that would put you above your maximum.
That's a semantics difference, this is like saying a Status Bonus to hit is different than a Proficiency Bonus to hit; the point being is that they are still both bonuses to hit, which is what matters in regards to altering how much of a bonus to hit you have for a given Strike. Same concept here: Temporary HP are still HP, because you still lose them from damage the same way normal HP is lost, and it's relevant for determining how much damage you need to take before you reach 0 HP.
A status bonus is different than a proficiency bonus.
A focus spell is different than a spell slot spell. And both are different than an innate spell.
-----
But on the subject of using spells to determine general rules, have any of you in the camp of 'temp HP are equal in all cases to regular HP' looked at Spirit Link?
Why does it specify a difference between the two?
And what exactly happens if you have 15 temp HP but no regular HP?
if you're ever at 0 Hit Points, spirit link ends automatically.
Is it meaning any HP? Or only regular HP?
Not realistically possible, since you can't stack Temporary HP, and there's no level-relevant effect that can do this.First, that isn't a reasonable counterpoint. Just because it isn't something that is "on-level" to do doesn't mean that it isn't possible.
And second, that isn't quite what I was meaning anyway. The point is that if temp HP and regular HP are in fact the same thing, then the combination of the two would still be capped by your Max HP value. So if you are at full HP from just regular HP, then you couldn't be affected by a spell that gives you temp HP because that would put you above your maximum.
That's a semantics difference, this is like saying a Status Bonus to hit is different than a Proficiency Bonus to hit; the point being is that they are still both bonuses to hit, which is what matters in regards to altering how much of a bonus to hit you have for a given Strike. Same concept here: Temporary HP are still HP, because you still lose them from damage the same way normal HP is lost, and it's relevant for determining how much damage you need to take before you reach 0 HP.A status bonus is different than a proficiency bonus.
A focus spell is different than a spell slot spell. And both are different than an innate spell.
-----
But on the subject of using spells to determine general rules, have any of you in the camp of 'temp HP are equal in all cases to regular HP' looked at Spirit Link?
Why does it specify a difference between the two?
And what exactly happens if you have 15 temp HP but no regular HP?
if you're ever at 0 Hit Points, spirit link ends automatically.Is it meaning any HP? Or only regular HP?
At best, you might come across a 10th level Endure spell on a Level 1 creature, which will only last a round. The point being is that it's so contrived that using it as a counterpoint means we're basically not even playing the same game with the same standards. If we're regularly throwing 10th level Endure spells at Level 1 characters/NPCs, we might as well just throw Tarrasques at Level 1 characters/NPCs too, because that's about the same power scale we're working with here.
Temporary HP expressly says that it's a pool tracked separately from your current and max HP, so the idea that it affects your max HP cap is debunked. It's still called a form of HP, and it's still damaged normally like HP is.
But they are both bonuses to hit. You are essentially saying Temporary HP isn't a form of HP. I.E. a Status Bonus to hit isn't a form of bonus to hit, that a focus spell isn't a spell, or that an innate spell isn't a spell. They might be different types of the same thing, but in the end, they are still the same thing: a spell, or a bonus to hit.
The rules don't say what type of HP you need (since there are multiple types of HP), and they don't say to discount temporary HP, which means any form of HP could, in fact, apply to stave away unconsciousness. Now, if the rules said "normal HP," you'd have a point. But they don't. Saying that's the intent means you'd need to pull more references to support it, and so far all the references seem to work against that thought intention, based on it making the Revival spell effectively not working, and making the Endure spell seem far, far weaker than it should.
Read the full description for Spirit Link, it tells you what happens with Temporary HP being involved:
You form a spiritual link with another creature, allowing you to take in its pain. When you Cast this Spell and at the start of each of your turns, if the target is below maximum Hit Points, it regains 2 Hit Points (or the difference between its current and maximum Hit Points, if that's lower). You lose as many Hit Points as the target regained.
This is a spiritual transfer, so no effects apply that would increase the Hit Points the target regains or decrease the Hit Points you lose. This transfer also ignores any temporary Hit Points you or the target have. Since this effect doesn't involve positive or negative energy, spirit link works even if you or the target is undead. While the duration persists, you gain no benefit from regeneration or fast healing. You can Dismiss this spell, and if you're ever at 0 Hit Points, spirit link ends automatically.
The spell doesn't care about whatever Temporary HP you or your target may have; it actually spells it out as an exception, because it means the developers actually knew it would come up in gameplay.
Even if it didn't, Temporary HP only calls out that it's a "separate pool" from your maximum or current, and that it's only reduced from damage first (or from accepting a different source of Temporary HP), not from any other method, meaning it wouldn't be affected by this spell anyway based on general rules. Paizo often likes to repeat rulings in its descriptions to reinforce obvious intentions, such as with Flurry of Blows and the Flourish trait.
Temp HPs are HPs and behave as such by every standard except the specific ways they are stated to differ in their description. "Not waking someone" isn't one of them
The Knocked Out and Dying rules do make the distinction.
Everywhere else in the rules that references Temporary Hit Points does so specifically.
Spells say that they grant Temporary Hit Points. Or heal actual Hit Points.
Abilities do the same.
The rules for Temp HP specifically mention that damage will reduce your Temp HP first before reducing HP. But it still makes the distinction between the two.
And the Knocked Out and Dying rules specifically call out that you begin dying at 0 HP.
If you're unconscious because you're dying, you can't wake up while you have 0 Hit Points. If you are restored to 1 Hit Point or more via healing, you lose the dying and unconscious conditions and can act normally on your next turn.
Now, the second sentence does imply the one thing having you lose Unconcious is Healing to at least 1 HP. Correct me, but gaining Temp HP is not Healing, is it?
If you're unconscious because you're dying, you can't wake up while you have 0 Hit Points. If you are restored to 1 Hit Point or more via healing, you lose the dying and unconscious conditions and can act normally on your next turn.Now, the second sentence does imply the one thing having you lose Unconcious is Healing to at least 1 HP. Correct me, but gaining Temp HP is not Healing, is it?
Sure, but what's stopping somebody from using Endure on a character that's Unconscious from dying, giving them Temporary HP, and then spending another action to rouse them from Unconsciousness to act? Sounds to me like it's a perk of Healing, and not an ironclad rule discounting Temporary HP to function as HP for the purposes of consciousness.
Just as well, this also works against the Revival spell working for dead creatures being brought back to life via Temporary HP, because it doesn't remove the dying or unconscious conditions. Because again, it's not healing past 0 HP.
Endure doesn't reference Dying at all. So even if you cast Endure on a creature at 0 HP and spend another action rousing them, they will still have the Dying condition.
Revival specifically overrides this by saying that the targets are temporarily brought back to life. No the wording is not ironclad. But that is clearly the intent - that Revival removes the Dead condition temporarily. In addition to providing temporary HP. Which wouldn't by themselves cause the target creatures to lose the Dying or Dead conditions.
Temp HPs are HPs and behave as such by every standard except the specific ways they are stated to differ in their description. "Not waking someone" isn't one of themThe Knocked Out and Dying rules do make the distinction.
Everywhere else in the rules that references Temporary Hit Points does so specifically.
Spells say that they grant Temporary Hit Points. Or heal actual Hit Points.
Abilities do the same.
The rules for Temp HP specifically mention that damage will reduce your Temp HP first before reducing HP. But it still makes the distinction between the two.
And the Knocked Out and Dying rules specifically call out that you begin dying at 0 HP.
That rules entry doesn't make any such distinction. It doesn't reference Temporary HP anywhere, which means any form of HP might affect that value.
That rules entry doesn't make any such distinction. It doesn't reference Temporary HP anywhere, which means any form of HP might affect that value.
No. The Death and Dying rules indeed don't reference Temporary Hit Points. Which means that discussing temporary HP regarding Death and Dying conditions is somewhat irrelevant.
Your current HP value is a specific value. One that is not adjusted by temporary HP.
And the Death and Dying rules specifically reference your actual current HP value.
Temporary Hit Points do not change that value.
Anyway, I have made my closing arguments. I think we are just talking in circles here.
Revival is just badly phrased. The qualification „ but no normal Hit Points“ is but completely and utterly unneccesary, if not for tossing a Golden Apple to the mob.
Revival is just badly phrased. The qualification „ but no normal Hit Points“ is but completely and utterly unneccesary, if not for tossing a Golden Apple to the mob.
Doesn't matter, because they're still only given Temporary HP. If Temporary HP doesn't count, then the spell does nothing. It has to give a specific exception for it to work, and "temporarily bring them back to life" doesn't work, the same way Temporary HP doesn't work.
That rules entry doesn't make any such distinction. It doesn't reference Temporary HP anywhere, which means any form of HP might affect that value.No. The Death and Dying rules indeed don't reference Temporary Hit Points. Which means that discussing temporary HP regarding Death and Dying conditions is somewhat irrelevant.
Your current HP value is a specific value. One that is not adjusted by temporary HP.
And the Death and Dying rules specifically reference your actual current HP value.
Temporary Hit Points do not change that value.
The entries don't say "your current HP," they only say "your HP." This is like saying "the rules say your proficiency bonus, not your bonus," when there's nothing there to suggest that only the proficiency/current value is what matters.
And no, Temporary HP doesn't affect your current HP value, but it still affects your overall HP, which is what we believe is what the entries refer to.
I can agree that the arguments are circular, though. We've made our points, and I don't think we can convince one another of the other's perspective.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But, it does:Doesn't matter, because they're still only given Temporary HP. If Temporary HP doesn't count, then the spell does nothing. It has to give a specific exception for it to work, and "temporarily bring them back to life" doesn't work, the same way Temporary HP doesn't work.Revival is just badly phrased. The qualification „ but no normal Hit Points“ is but completely and utterly unneccesary, if not for tossing a Golden Apple to the mob.
If the spell is successful, the creature returns to life with 1 Hit Point.
The entries don't say "your current HP," they only say "your HP." This is like saying "the rules say your proficiency bonus, not your bonus," when there's nothing there to suggest that only the proficiency/current value is what matters.
I thought those were also different.
Calculating a skill DC is done with 10 + bonus.
Calculating the result of Assurance is done with 10 + proficiency bonus.
Cover, Greater Cover, Lesser Cover.
Terrain, Difficult Terrain, Hazardous Terrain.
No, it doesn't:But, it does:Doesn't matter, because they're still only given Temporary HP. If Temporary HP doesn't count, then the spell does nothing. It has to give a specific exception for it to work, and "temporarily bring them back to life" doesn't work, the same way Temporary HP doesn't work.Revival is just badly phrased. The qualification „ but no normal Hit Points“ is but completely and utterly unneccesary, if not for tossing a Golden Apple to the mob.
If the spell is successful, the creature returns to life with 1 Hit Point.
The raised creatures have a number of temporary Hit Points equal to the Hit Points you gave living creatures, but no normal Hit Points.