If you're stable you do not make death saving throws. We agree yes?
Where in the rules, what section of the rules, says "If you take any damage while you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death saving throw failure."
Chapter 9 of the PHB and Basic Rules, under Damage and Healing, subheading "Damage at 0 hitpoints"
Damage at 0 Hit Points. 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.
You'll note, that section of the rules is "Death Saving Throws". The thing we are specifically not doing. There is zero reason to consult that damage while at 0 rule because at the point were we are stable we do NOT reference that section of the rules.
You really need to learn the difference between content and formatting. Headers and titles are formatting; they aren't rules in and of themselves. the reason that the rule is under that header is because that header also contains the first description of death saving throw failures. Its organizational only.
Also, all rules apply unless an exception or a contradiction (specific v general) arises...in this case there is no exception or contradiction between the two rules in question, so both can (and do) apply.
Rules are only relevant when they're being called on. What you got here is a case of applying a snippet of a rule to the situation where it is not applicable. We are not referencing the section "Death Saving throws" until the rules tell us to. And they have, since we are stabilized, specifically told us NOT to reference them.
"A stable creature doesn’t make death saving throws"
a stable creature is not "making" saving throws when they take damage..."making" a saving throw involves rolling dice, as described in the rules, Chapter 7
To make a saving throw, roll a d20 and add the appropriate ability modifier. For example, you use your Dexterity modifier for a Dexterity saving throw.
Per the two rules then, a stable creature at 0 hitpoints can suffer the failures from taking damage because at no point does that rule require you to "make" a saving throw at all.
If you're not making death saving throws you don't reference that rule. Because it the Death Saving Throws rule. Which you don't make.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
If you're not making death saving throws you don't reference that rule. Because it the Death Saving Throws rule. Which you don't make.
Wrong, you reference any rule that has bearing on the situation at hand. Headings, Subheadings, and titles aren't rules. They are nothing more than text organizers so that we can easily find a reference. Otherwise the books would be a big block of text.
Also, regarding the above, this has been a standard organizational writing practice for centuries, and has been applied to even older texts. Did you know the Bible wasn't originally written in verses? the texts were reorgainized into chapters and verses long after they were written. That, and all of the formatting in the rules for D&D, is Paratext, not main text.
If you're not making death saving throws you don't reference that rule. Because it the Death Saving Throws rule. Which you don't make.
Wrong, you reference any rule that has bearing on the situation at hand. Headings, Subheadings, and titles aren't rules. They are nothing more than text organizers so that we can easily find a reference. Otherwise the books would be a big block of text.
Also, regarding the above, this has been a standard organizational writing practice for centuries, and has been applied to even older texts. Did you know the Bible wasn't originally written in verses? the texts were reorgainized into chapters and verses long after they were written. That, and all of the formatting in the rules for D&D, is Paratext, not main text.
Well I would argue that in rules and instructions, paratext is important. For example in a recipe book, you wouldn't follow instructions for cookies when baking a cake, in d&d you don't follow combat rules in social RP.
I can see both sides of the argument. I think it comes down to whether "the creature stops being stable, and must start making death saving throws, if it takes any damage," means to refer to death save rules for that damage or to take the damage then refer to death save rules only after. This is the part that isn't clear.
If you're not making death saving throws you don't reference that rule. Because it the Death Saving Throws rule. Which you don't make.
So you agree that by the same logic, one cannot perform the Somatic components for a spell using a focus if the spell does not require Material components? I mean, since the rule saying you can falls under the section for spells with M components, which you’re not using. Right?
Either your argument here is flawed or your argument there was since you’re arguing both sides of the same semantic. Either formally retract your arguments in this thread, or in that other thread because you cannot have it both ways. Either way, you gotta choose which one to be wrong about. So which is it, this point or that one? Otherwise you’re not arguing in good faith.
If you're not making death saving throws you don't reference that rule. Because it the Death Saving Throws rule. Which you don't make.
Wrong, you reference any rule that has bearing on the situation at hand. Headings, Subheadings, and titles aren't rules. They are nothing more than text organizers so that we can easily find a reference. Otherwise the books would be a big block of text.
Also, regarding the above, this has been a standard organizational writing practice for centuries, and has been applied to even older texts. Did you know the Bible wasn't originally written in verses? the texts were reorgainized into chapters and verses long after they were written. That, and all of the formatting in the rules for D&D, is Paratext, not main text.
Well I would argue that in rules and instructions, paratext is important. For example in a recipe book, you wouldn't follow instructions for cookies when baking a cake, in d&d you don't follow combat rules in social RP.
I never said it wasn't important. I said it wasn't rules. using your recipe reference, yes, I would look at cake rules for baking a cake, but I would also know that the heading "cake" is not an ingredient I would have to add to make my cake. you use the paratext to help organize and reference or understand the main text better, not to dictate what the text says. Regardless, recipes and a rule book are different, in that a book of recipes is a set of unrelated sections, but the rules of d&d are all related.
I can see both sides of the argument. I think it comes down to whether "the creature stops being stable, and must start making death saving throws, if it takes any damage," means to refer to death save rules for that damage or to take the damage then refer to death save rules only after. This is the part that isn't clear.
I don't see why it isn't clear, as there is no overlap between the rules. The Death Saves rule says 4 things happen when/after you drop to 0 hitpoints:
You start making death saves at the start of your turn
You track successes and failures, with death or stabilization being the end result if 3 of either are reached
Special instances occur on a roll of 1 or 20 while making a death save
You get one or two failures automatically if you take damage
The stabilization rules say several things as well:
A creature can be stabilized by a successful medicine check
A stable creature doesn't make death saving throws
It remains unconscious while stable
Taking damage removes the "stable" status and restarts death saves
A stable creature regains 1 HP after a certain amount of time
I have bolded the only two textual rules that cancel out. Notice that nothing in the stabilization rules overwrite the rule about taking damage, and nothing in the taking damage rule overwrites the rule about stable creatures not making death saves.
For the record, if we are talking about Paratext, note that the entire section is called "Dropping to 0 hitpoints". Is it correct to assume that because stabilization does not typically happen at the moment you drop to 0 hitpoints, that the stabilization rules therein only apply to instances where that occurs (knocking someone out)?
The bible. Baking cookies. And somatic components.
There is no beating this exact combo of arguements. I concede.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
It's quite spectacular how the Bible, cookies, and one's own argument can prove a point to someone after the same point was made 4 days ago. I would now officially like to request that everybody immediately stops posting on this thread, to let us all enjoy this small victory. Thank you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I know this is forever later, but for the benefit of people like me double checking rules and using this post for help before finding the appropriate section
“Roll a d20. If the roll is 10 or higher, you succeed. Otherwise, you fail. A success or failure has no effect by itself. On your third success, you become stable (see below). On your third failure, you die. The successes and failures don't need to be consecutive; keep track of both until you collect three of a kind.
The number of both is reset to zero when you regain any hit points or become stable.”
(PHB: Death Saving Throws section).
So, yeah. Just wanted to leave that there even if it doesn’t necessarily help the original question, it helped me.
Chapter 9 of the PHB and Basic Rules, under Damage and Healing, subheading "Damage at 0 hitpoints"
Damage at 0 Hit Points. 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.
You really need to learn the difference between content and formatting. Headers and titles are formatting; they aren't rules in and of themselves. the reason that the rule is under that header is because that header also contains the first description of death saving throw failures. Its organizational only.
Also, all rules apply unless an exception or a contradiction (specific v general) arises...in this case there is no exception or contradiction between the two rules in question, so both can (and do) apply.
a stable creature is not "making" saving throws when they take damage..."making" a saving throw involves rolling dice, as described in the rules, Chapter 7
To make a saving throw, roll a d20 and add the appropriate ability modifier. For example, you use your Dexterity modifier for a Dexterity saving throw.
Per the two rules then, a stable creature at 0 hitpoints can suffer the failures from taking damage because at no point does that rule require you to "make" a saving throw at all.
If you're not making death saving throws you don't reference that rule. Because it the Death Saving Throws rule. Which you don't make.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Wrong, you reference any rule that has bearing on the situation at hand. Headings, Subheadings, and titles aren't rules. They are nothing more than text organizers so that we can easily find a reference. Otherwise the books would be a big block of text.
Also, regarding the above, this has been a standard organizational writing practice for centuries, and has been applied to even older texts. Did you know the Bible wasn't originally written in verses? the texts were reorgainized into chapters and verses long after they were written. That, and all of the formatting in the rules for D&D, is Paratext, not main text.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paratext
Well I would argue that in rules and instructions, paratext is important. For example in a recipe book, you wouldn't follow instructions for cookies when baking a cake, in d&d you don't follow combat rules in social RP.
I can see both sides of the argument. I think it comes down to whether "the creature stops being stable, and must start making death saving throws, if it takes any damage," means to refer to death save rules for that damage or to take the damage then refer to death save rules only after. This is the part that isn't clear.
So you agree that by the same logic, one cannot perform the Somatic components for a spell using a focus if the spell does not require Material components? I mean, since the rule saying you can falls under the section for spells with M components, which you’re not using. Right?
Either your argument here is flawed or your argument there was since you’re arguing both sides of the same semantic. Either formally retract your arguments in this thread, or in that other thread because you cannot have it both ways. Either way, you gotta choose which one to be wrong about. So which is it, this point or that one? Otherwise you’re not arguing in good faith.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I never said it wasn't important. I said it wasn't rules. using your recipe reference, yes, I would look at cake rules for baking a cake, but I would also know that the heading "cake" is not an ingredient I would have to add to make my cake. you use the paratext to help organize and reference or understand the main text better, not to dictate what the text says. Regardless, recipes and a rule book are different, in that a book of recipes is a set of unrelated sections, but the rules of d&d are all related.
I don't see why it isn't clear, as there is no overlap between the rules. The Death Saves rule says 4 things happen when/after you drop to 0 hitpoints:
The stabilization rules say several things as well:
I have bolded the only two textual rules that cancel out. Notice that nothing in the stabilization rules overwrite the rule about taking damage, and nothing in the taking damage rule overwrites the rule about stable creatures not making death saves.
For the record, if we are talking about Paratext, note that the entire section is called "Dropping to 0 hitpoints". Is it correct to assume that because stabilization does not typically happen at the moment you drop to 0 hitpoints, that the stabilization rules therein only apply to instances where that occurs (knocking someone out)?
The bible. Baking cookies. And somatic components.
There is no beating this exact combo of arguements. I concede.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
It's quite spectacular how the Bible, cookies, and one's own argument can prove a point to someone after the same point was made 4 days ago. I would now officially like to request that everybody immediately stops posting on this thread, to let us all enjoy this small victory. Thank you.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I know this is forever later, but for the benefit of people like me double checking rules and using this post for help before finding the appropriate section
“Roll a d20. If the roll is 10 or higher, you succeed. Otherwise, you fail. A success or failure has no effect by itself. On your third success, you become stable (see below). On your third failure, you die. The successes and failures don't need to be consecutive; keep track of both until you collect three of a kind.
The number of both is reset to zero when you regain any hit points or become stable.”
(PHB: Death Saving Throws section).
So, yeah. Just wanted to leave that there even if it doesn’t necessarily help the original question, it helped me.