If I am hit after I am reduced to 0 HP, do I take 1 or 2 death save failures?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
20
down vote

favorite












We're playing Hoard of the Dragon Queen, and during the brutal first episode, there is a duel that can take place (spoilers in the link).



When the player loses the duel, the other participant...




strikes one more time [and] inflicts one death roll failure on a character.




When this happened - the player marked off two death failures on their sheet. I asked them why. Here are the relevant parts of the PHB.



The section titled "Dropping to 0 Hit Points" states:




If damage reduces you to 0 hit points and fails to kill you, you fall
unconscious. This unconsciousness ends if you regain any hit points.




And later:




If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death
saving throw failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer
two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds your hit point
maximum, you suffer instant death.




Lastly, the Unconscious condition description says:




Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.




In conclusion, any melee attack made within 5 feet of me is an automatic crit. So does that mean if a bandit is being rude, and stabs me again with his puny dagger - I have a 50% chance of dying come my turn (save for help)?



Am I right in assuming that this is hand-waved in this adventure as it specifically states "one death roll failure"?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.























    up vote
    20
    down vote

    favorite












    We're playing Hoard of the Dragon Queen, and during the brutal first episode, there is a duel that can take place (spoilers in the link).



    When the player loses the duel, the other participant...




    strikes one more time [and] inflicts one death roll failure on a character.




    When this happened - the player marked off two death failures on their sheet. I asked them why. Here are the relevant parts of the PHB.



    The section titled "Dropping to 0 Hit Points" states:




    If damage reduces you to 0 hit points and fails to kill you, you fall
    unconscious. This unconsciousness ends if you regain any hit points.




    And later:




    If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death
    saving throw failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer
    two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds your hit point
    maximum, you suffer instant death.




    Lastly, the Unconscious condition description says:




    Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.




    In conclusion, any melee attack made within 5 feet of me is an automatic crit. So does that mean if a bandit is being rude, and stabs me again with his puny dagger - I have a 50% chance of dying come my turn (save for help)?



    Am I right in assuming that this is hand-waved in this adventure as it specifically states "one death roll failure"?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.





















      up vote
      20
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      20
      down vote

      favorite











      We're playing Hoard of the Dragon Queen, and during the brutal first episode, there is a duel that can take place (spoilers in the link).



      When the player loses the duel, the other participant...




      strikes one more time [and] inflicts one death roll failure on a character.




      When this happened - the player marked off two death failures on their sheet. I asked them why. Here are the relevant parts of the PHB.



      The section titled "Dropping to 0 Hit Points" states:




      If damage reduces you to 0 hit points and fails to kill you, you fall
      unconscious. This unconsciousness ends if you regain any hit points.




      And later:




      If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death
      saving throw failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer
      two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds your hit point
      maximum, you suffer instant death.




      Lastly, the Unconscious condition description says:




      Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.




      In conclusion, any melee attack made within 5 feet of me is an automatic crit. So does that mean if a bandit is being rude, and stabs me again with his puny dagger - I have a 50% chance of dying come my turn (save for help)?



      Am I right in assuming that this is hand-waved in this adventure as it specifically states "one death roll failure"?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      We're playing Hoard of the Dragon Queen, and during the brutal first episode, there is a duel that can take place (spoilers in the link).



      When the player loses the duel, the other participant...




      strikes one more time [and] inflicts one death roll failure on a character.




      When this happened - the player marked off two death failures on their sheet. I asked them why. Here are the relevant parts of the PHB.



      The section titled "Dropping to 0 Hit Points" states:




      If damage reduces you to 0 hit points and fails to kill you, you fall
      unconscious. This unconsciousness ends if you regain any hit points.




      And later:




      If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death
      saving throw failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer
      two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds your hit point
      maximum, you suffer instant death.




      Lastly, the Unconscious condition description says:




      Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.




      In conclusion, any melee attack made within 5 feet of me is an automatic crit. So does that mean if a bandit is being rude, and stabs me again with his puny dagger - I have a 50% chance of dying come my turn (save for help)?



      Am I right in assuming that this is hand-waved in this adventure as it specifically states "one death roll failure"?







      dnd-5e published-adventures character-death unconscious hoard-of-the-dragon-queen






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 28 mins ago









      V2Blast

      17.5k246110




      17.5k246110






      New contributor




      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 12 hours ago









      Shadow

      20518




      20518




      New contributor




      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Shadow is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          28
          down vote



          accepted










          This is an exception to the general rule, the PC takes one death save failure.



          You've accurately quoted the relevant general rules.



          RAW two death save failures would normally be taken by a PC from an attacker within 5 feet while that PC is unconscious (as correctly reasoned in the question).



          So, if no one successfully intervenes before the PC's next turn (initiative order / luck may not be your friend), there is a reasonable chance for that PC to die. However, it's a 45% chance of death, rather than 50% (1-9 = failure, 10-20 = success).



          In this instance:



          The attacker is capable of dealing both melee and ranged damage. So a successful strike to an unconscious PC would normally deal either 1 or 2 death saving throw failures, depending on the attackers distance from their unconscious victim. However here it explicitly states that he 'he inflicts one death roll failure'.



          This is a direct contradiction of the normal rule. In D&D 5e contradictions are reconciled via the rationale of 'specific beats general'. Clearly this is an extremely specific instance - it's one NPC, in one situation in one particular module who does something that appears contradictory to the general rule.



          So, follow the specific direction given here, and not the general rule.




          But why break the general rule?



          The question answer is above, the following is speculation:



          My hunch is that this exception was made so as not to force a certain playstyle on tables.



          Whether character death is something to be encouraged or actively avoided is very table dependant. Many tables may even operate on the unspoken understanding that unconcious PCs are not attacked.



          Forcing two death saving throw failures on a PC at one of these tables could be hugely controversial (due to the relatively high chance of subsequent death that you've pointed out).



          Dictating that only one death saving throw failure occurs is a kind of workaround for this. It still let's the DM build up the picture of a particularly deadly / nasty NPC who will hit someone that's already down, but vastly reduces the likelihood of a PC actually dying (now at 5% on the first roll - the chance of rolling a natural 1 and taking two failures).



          As suggested by Miniman, this exception could also just be an error - HotDQ was written and edited while the rules were still being developed.



          Either way, if it's appropriate at your table, as a DM, you can choose to overrule this specific direction and hand out two death saves, as per the general rules.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 3




            I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
            – SeriousBri
            11 hours ago







          • 1




            My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
            – Dale M
            2 hours ago










          • @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
            – Tiggerous
            2 hours ago










          Your Answer




          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "122"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: false,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          Shadow is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f134517%2fif-i-am-hit-after-i-am-reduced-to-0-hp-do-i-take-1-or-2-death-save-failures%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          28
          down vote



          accepted










          This is an exception to the general rule, the PC takes one death save failure.



          You've accurately quoted the relevant general rules.



          RAW two death save failures would normally be taken by a PC from an attacker within 5 feet while that PC is unconscious (as correctly reasoned in the question).



          So, if no one successfully intervenes before the PC's next turn (initiative order / luck may not be your friend), there is a reasonable chance for that PC to die. However, it's a 45% chance of death, rather than 50% (1-9 = failure, 10-20 = success).



          In this instance:



          The attacker is capable of dealing both melee and ranged damage. So a successful strike to an unconscious PC would normally deal either 1 or 2 death saving throw failures, depending on the attackers distance from their unconscious victim. However here it explicitly states that he 'he inflicts one death roll failure'.



          This is a direct contradiction of the normal rule. In D&D 5e contradictions are reconciled via the rationale of 'specific beats general'. Clearly this is an extremely specific instance - it's one NPC, in one situation in one particular module who does something that appears contradictory to the general rule.



          So, follow the specific direction given here, and not the general rule.




          But why break the general rule?



          The question answer is above, the following is speculation:



          My hunch is that this exception was made so as not to force a certain playstyle on tables.



          Whether character death is something to be encouraged or actively avoided is very table dependant. Many tables may even operate on the unspoken understanding that unconcious PCs are not attacked.



          Forcing two death saving throw failures on a PC at one of these tables could be hugely controversial (due to the relatively high chance of subsequent death that you've pointed out).



          Dictating that only one death saving throw failure occurs is a kind of workaround for this. It still let's the DM build up the picture of a particularly deadly / nasty NPC who will hit someone that's already down, but vastly reduces the likelihood of a PC actually dying (now at 5% on the first roll - the chance of rolling a natural 1 and taking two failures).



          As suggested by Miniman, this exception could also just be an error - HotDQ was written and edited while the rules were still being developed.



          Either way, if it's appropriate at your table, as a DM, you can choose to overrule this specific direction and hand out two death saves, as per the general rules.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 3




            I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
            – SeriousBri
            11 hours ago







          • 1




            My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
            – Dale M
            2 hours ago










          • @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
            – Tiggerous
            2 hours ago














          up vote
          28
          down vote



          accepted










          This is an exception to the general rule, the PC takes one death save failure.



          You've accurately quoted the relevant general rules.



          RAW two death save failures would normally be taken by a PC from an attacker within 5 feet while that PC is unconscious (as correctly reasoned in the question).



          So, if no one successfully intervenes before the PC's next turn (initiative order / luck may not be your friend), there is a reasonable chance for that PC to die. However, it's a 45% chance of death, rather than 50% (1-9 = failure, 10-20 = success).



          In this instance:



          The attacker is capable of dealing both melee and ranged damage. So a successful strike to an unconscious PC would normally deal either 1 or 2 death saving throw failures, depending on the attackers distance from their unconscious victim. However here it explicitly states that he 'he inflicts one death roll failure'.



          This is a direct contradiction of the normal rule. In D&D 5e contradictions are reconciled via the rationale of 'specific beats general'. Clearly this is an extremely specific instance - it's one NPC, in one situation in one particular module who does something that appears contradictory to the general rule.



          So, follow the specific direction given here, and not the general rule.




          But why break the general rule?



          The question answer is above, the following is speculation:



          My hunch is that this exception was made so as not to force a certain playstyle on tables.



          Whether character death is something to be encouraged or actively avoided is very table dependant. Many tables may even operate on the unspoken understanding that unconcious PCs are not attacked.



          Forcing two death saving throw failures on a PC at one of these tables could be hugely controversial (due to the relatively high chance of subsequent death that you've pointed out).



          Dictating that only one death saving throw failure occurs is a kind of workaround for this. It still let's the DM build up the picture of a particularly deadly / nasty NPC who will hit someone that's already down, but vastly reduces the likelihood of a PC actually dying (now at 5% on the first roll - the chance of rolling a natural 1 and taking two failures).



          As suggested by Miniman, this exception could also just be an error - HotDQ was written and edited while the rules were still being developed.



          Either way, if it's appropriate at your table, as a DM, you can choose to overrule this specific direction and hand out two death saves, as per the general rules.






          share|improve this answer


















          • 3




            I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
            – SeriousBri
            11 hours ago







          • 1




            My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
            – Dale M
            2 hours ago










          • @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
            – Tiggerous
            2 hours ago












          up vote
          28
          down vote



          accepted







          up vote
          28
          down vote



          accepted






          This is an exception to the general rule, the PC takes one death save failure.



          You've accurately quoted the relevant general rules.



          RAW two death save failures would normally be taken by a PC from an attacker within 5 feet while that PC is unconscious (as correctly reasoned in the question).



          So, if no one successfully intervenes before the PC's next turn (initiative order / luck may not be your friend), there is a reasonable chance for that PC to die. However, it's a 45% chance of death, rather than 50% (1-9 = failure, 10-20 = success).



          In this instance:



          The attacker is capable of dealing both melee and ranged damage. So a successful strike to an unconscious PC would normally deal either 1 or 2 death saving throw failures, depending on the attackers distance from their unconscious victim. However here it explicitly states that he 'he inflicts one death roll failure'.



          This is a direct contradiction of the normal rule. In D&D 5e contradictions are reconciled via the rationale of 'specific beats general'. Clearly this is an extremely specific instance - it's one NPC, in one situation in one particular module who does something that appears contradictory to the general rule.



          So, follow the specific direction given here, and not the general rule.




          But why break the general rule?



          The question answer is above, the following is speculation:



          My hunch is that this exception was made so as not to force a certain playstyle on tables.



          Whether character death is something to be encouraged or actively avoided is very table dependant. Many tables may even operate on the unspoken understanding that unconcious PCs are not attacked.



          Forcing two death saving throw failures on a PC at one of these tables could be hugely controversial (due to the relatively high chance of subsequent death that you've pointed out).



          Dictating that only one death saving throw failure occurs is a kind of workaround for this. It still let's the DM build up the picture of a particularly deadly / nasty NPC who will hit someone that's already down, but vastly reduces the likelihood of a PC actually dying (now at 5% on the first roll - the chance of rolling a natural 1 and taking two failures).



          As suggested by Miniman, this exception could also just be an error - HotDQ was written and edited while the rules were still being developed.



          Either way, if it's appropriate at your table, as a DM, you can choose to overrule this specific direction and hand out two death saves, as per the general rules.






          share|improve this answer














          This is an exception to the general rule, the PC takes one death save failure.



          You've accurately quoted the relevant general rules.



          RAW two death save failures would normally be taken by a PC from an attacker within 5 feet while that PC is unconscious (as correctly reasoned in the question).



          So, if no one successfully intervenes before the PC's next turn (initiative order / luck may not be your friend), there is a reasonable chance for that PC to die. However, it's a 45% chance of death, rather than 50% (1-9 = failure, 10-20 = success).



          In this instance:



          The attacker is capable of dealing both melee and ranged damage. So a successful strike to an unconscious PC would normally deal either 1 or 2 death saving throw failures, depending on the attackers distance from their unconscious victim. However here it explicitly states that he 'he inflicts one death roll failure'.



          This is a direct contradiction of the normal rule. In D&D 5e contradictions are reconciled via the rationale of 'specific beats general'. Clearly this is an extremely specific instance - it's one NPC, in one situation in one particular module who does something that appears contradictory to the general rule.



          So, follow the specific direction given here, and not the general rule.




          But why break the general rule?



          The question answer is above, the following is speculation:



          My hunch is that this exception was made so as not to force a certain playstyle on tables.



          Whether character death is something to be encouraged or actively avoided is very table dependant. Many tables may even operate on the unspoken understanding that unconcious PCs are not attacked.



          Forcing two death saving throw failures on a PC at one of these tables could be hugely controversial (due to the relatively high chance of subsequent death that you've pointed out).



          Dictating that only one death saving throw failure occurs is a kind of workaround for this. It still let's the DM build up the picture of a particularly deadly / nasty NPC who will hit someone that's already down, but vastly reduces the likelihood of a PC actually dying (now at 5% on the first roll - the chance of rolling a natural 1 and taking two failures).



          As suggested by Miniman, this exception could also just be an error - HotDQ was written and edited while the rules were still being developed.



          Either way, if it's appropriate at your table, as a DM, you can choose to overrule this specific direction and hand out two death saves, as per the general rules.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 29 mins ago









          V2Blast

          17.5k246110




          17.5k246110










          answered 11 hours ago









          Tiggerous

          6,84443165




          6,84443165







          • 3




            I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
            – SeriousBri
            11 hours ago







          • 1




            My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
            – Dale M
            2 hours ago










          • @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
            – Tiggerous
            2 hours ago












          • 3




            I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
            – SeriousBri
            11 hours ago







          • 1




            My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
            – Dale M
            2 hours ago










          • @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
            – Tiggerous
            2 hours ago







          3




          3




          I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
          – SeriousBri
          11 hours ago





          I agree with your logic. I have played this module and it was told as he tried to leave a lasting mark rather than a killing blow, where as usually the attack is an attempt to kill.
          – SeriousBri
          11 hours ago





          1




          1




          My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
          – Dale M
          2 hours ago




          My guess as to why the general rule is broken is that the adventure was written before the rules were finalised and the automatic critical happened afterwards.
          – Dale M
          2 hours ago












          @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
          – Tiggerous
          2 hours ago




          @DaleM Thanks for the insight, Miniman said the same - I've incorporated that possibility into my answer (penultimate paragraph).
          – Tiggerous
          2 hours ago










          Shadow is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          Shadow is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Shadow is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          Shadow is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f134517%2fif-i-am-hit-after-i-am-reduced-to-0-hp-do-i-take-1-or-2-death-save-failures%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest













































































          Comments

          Popular posts from this blog

          Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being “babysat” by supervisor

          What does second last employer means? [closed]

          One-line joke