1) After damage is applied bringing you to 0 hit points, but before you become unconscious.
So you would end up with whatever health was provided by the Heal spell, conscious, and without gaining any Wounded condition (because you never went Unconscious/Dying).
2) The spell still has all of its traits, so it still provokes. The timing is very tricky, however:
In my opinion, because you're casting the spell at 0 HP but not Unconscious, being hit and damaged again, whether normally or with a crit, will bring you to 0 and knock you Unconscious, foiling the spell. The only difference will be whether you start at Dying 1 (from a hit) or 2 (from a Crit).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion, because you're casting the spell at 0 HP but not Unconscious, being hit and damaged again, whether normally or with a crit, will bring you to 0 and knock you Unconscious, foiling the spell.
I can certainly see where that is coming from, but I don't think any further hits will "bring you to 0" as you already were at 0 and it's impossible to reduce hp any further. So if the hit is not disrupting the spell as normal, e.g. critical hit Reactive Strike, then the spell is not disrupted.
In my opinion, because you're casting the spell at 0 HP but not Unconscious, being hit and damaged again, whether normally or with a crit, will bring you to 0 and knock you Unconscious, foiling the spell.I can certainly see where that is coming from, but I don't think any further hits will "bring you to 0" as you already were at 0 and it's impossible to reduce hp any further. So if the hit is not disrupting the spell as normal, e.g. critical hit Reactive Strike, then the spell is not disrupted.
This is a very old question which relates to when Reactions occur and how they resolve, and I don't really wish to rehash that old argument.
It'll up to Momar and/or their GM to rule on whether a creature brought to 0 hit points by a Reaction gets to complete the action or activity that triggered the Reaction if said Reaction didn't Disrupt it outright.
The question about the meaning of "if you would be reduced to 0 HP" is kind of moot. No matter how you decide that, the timing of casting the spell is pretty clear.
you can cast the spell as a free action before you become unconscious.
What is a bit strange here is that this is still listed as a free action rather than a free action with a trigger. So by strict RAW trolling you couldn't cast the spell as a free action unless it is during your turn that you are getting reduced to 0 HP.
But assuming that the GM isn't trolling you by telling you that you can't use that ability 99% of the time, it would be treated like a free action triggered by falling unconscious and would resolve right before that step. Which is definitely after taking the damage and being at 0 HP.
This is a very old question which relates to when Reactions occur and how they resolve, and I don't really wish to rehash that old argument.
link to most recent thread hashing this out for any newcomers to the forum.
What is a bit strange here is that this is still listed as a free action rather than a free action with a trigger. So by strict RAW trolling you couldn't cast the spell as a free action unless it is during your turn that you are getting reduced to 0 HP.
Yeah, I think they didn't format it like other Free Actions with triggers due to space, similar to Battle Cry. But they are both clearly still free actions with triggers. Those being "You would be reduced to 0 hit points but not immediately killed" for Mortal Herald and "You roll initiative" for Battle Cry.
The alternative, as you say, is to assume they just almost never work, which doesn't seem intended at all.