Inured to Undeath; what happened when my DM let me maximise it's interactions [Archive]

TheUser

2019-04-09, 11:33 PM

So we went for a level 17 two shot adventure and I showed up with a 376 hp necromancer and his beefy simulacrum also with 376 hp. (There were also a few other surprises I had kept in store for later but they are not the point of this discussion).

So first came the obvious question from my DM:

"How did you do this?"

After explaining how shapechange kept my class skills and personality and one of those features says my max HP can't be reduced.... when my form reverts from a Dragon Turtle 🐢 and my HP is reduced back to it's caster form it actually doesn't because my max HP can't be reduced. Thematically the necromancer grasps on to life force and doesn't let go. And I really like the imagery of a death wizard that takes horrendous amounts of punishment with bones as hard as concrete, unphased by the little things like having all the skin on his face burnt off.

Max HP 341.

Part 2. Wish to cast level 8 Aid. When the effect ends...oh wait. Max HP can't be reduced. 376. Same thematics. Can't stack the same effect twice so it can't be cast over and over.

Part 3. Simulacrum time.
So it's a perfect copy of whatever creature you cast the spell on except with half it's maximum HP. Which is all well and good but it's a copy of someone who can't have their max HP reduced....well this is probably the most ambiguous one but my DM seemed a ok with it.

When I asked why he was a-ok with all of this he spelled it out pretty simply for me.

1) "At high levels, the challenge is no longer about survival; death is merely a setback for high level heroes. Failure has far greater consequences for the world(s) at large. You gave me a nice thematical image of a death resistant necromancer and I liked it."

I have to somewhat agree here. Wizards especially, have the clone spell, and with wish at 17 can cast clone on off days here and there to just have a slew of back-ups for when they might die. Wizards were already functionally immortal 2 levels ago.

2) "Damage is just a means to an end. I wouldn't be a very good DM if all I could do to incapacitate you was damage."

After seeing our local power-mongering Sorlock get shafted with a feeblemind a session ago I couldn't help but agree. The DM has a huge array of tools to challenge PC's. Damage is just one of them. This just ups one set of resillience my PC would have.

3) "This is not a very powerful feature compared to other wizard features. There's literally a wizard feature that lets you consistently counterspell and dispel magic 9th level spells using 3rd level slots (+11 means a 65% chance to counter/dispel). Malleable Illusions with Mirage Arcana can end armies...this is nothing."

He has DM'd lots of tier 4 stuff for Adventure League which apparently has a very "go with the flow" attitude baked into the modules and "let the PC's use their abilities to bypass challenges" mindset according to him. I suppose that's what players derive their satisfaction from in that tier. If you're playing in tier 4 you're meant to be overpowered.

Anyways, thought I'd share. Turns out letting players maximise feature interactions in tier 4 isn't much of an issue. The session was super fun and still very tense. Dominate person is a -very- scary spell with level 17 characters and high level monster DC's and having an arcane trickster with expertise in arcana to identify and call out incoming spells felt the most useful of all.

Rukelnikov

2019-04-09, 11:53 PM

Aid is not reducing your hp when it ends, its just not increasing it anymore. If you rule it works, then after it ends you can cast it again, and it would stack, since you are not under the effects of it anymore, and thus you wouldn't be stacking its effect.

Your DM sounds like a good one btw.

Jerrykhor

2019-04-10, 04:27 AM

TheUser

2019-04-10, 05:36 AM

As much as i like your DM's attitude, I wouldn't agree with your argument, especially the Shapechange one. 'Your max HP can't be reduced' argument only works if your Max HP was increased in the first place, but its not. It was clearly replaced by another number that happen to be bigger than your original HP.

For Aid, seems you have a point there. I can't find any reason to not allow that.

At first glance I shared this sentiment.

But the fact that your class features, mental stats and personality remain is very indicative that a part of your character's essence is affecting the transformation, much in the same way Druids aren't perfect replicas of the beasts they wildshape into (the Dragon talk on wildshape was a really big eye opener on the "spirit of permissiveness").

This is not to say that shapechange and wildshape are 100% the same, but a lot of identical verbiage is used with regards to what is and isn't affected.

I opted to view it in reverse; If a spell transformed me into a weak and sickly version of myself with a crippled body that kept all my class skills and personality would it be permissable to have it reduce my max HP? I opted for "no" as my answer.

The word "replace" is not a magical bypass of "reduce." Saying that you "replaced" this higher number with a lower one is no different from reducing it. If it were a polymorph spell it would be different because polymorph gets rid of your ability to be immune to having your max hp reduced. Shapechange does not.

That having been said I would still respect a DM who does not share this interpretation.

JackPhoenix

2019-04-10, 08:06 AM

Unless something explicitly says it reduces your max hp, it doesn't.

Most shapechanging effects simply replace your form (and HP) with another. Your HP isn't reduced, because you don't have your HP value anymore.. Simulacrum doesn't have "reduced HP", it gets half your max HP, and that number can't get reduced further.

Chronos

2019-04-10, 09:37 AM

Bjarkmundur

2019-04-10, 04:01 PM

Thank you for your story. Getting a small insight into tier 4 play is always fun :)

TheUser

2019-04-11, 04:54 AM

Yeah, if you have 800 HP and cast Simulacrum, it's not that the Simulacrum starts off with your HP, and then cuts it in half. It starts off with 400, and that's all it ever have (until it takes damage, at least).

It is probably the most slippery of slopes with regards to the "specific beats general" clause. I honestly was thinking this would be the least likely circumstance my DM would accept.

You shape an illusory duplicate of one beast or humanoid that is within range for the entire casting time of the spell. The duplicate is a creature, partially real and formed from ice or snow, and it can take actions and otherwise be affected as a normal creature. It appears to be the same as the original, but it has half the creature’s hit point maximum and is formed without any equipment.

Technically, it starts with half max HP as a baseline. But because of the wording of the spell with implicit adoption of all abilities it becomes a catch 22 of sorts.

I went back and probed the DM a bit more on this one and he gave me a surprising response.

"If it's an ambiguous RAW case that could really go either way, unless it breaks the game, just side with the player. The system is heavily bogged down with enough restrictions adding more does not really seem to be the design intent of tier 4. Just up the challenge and let the player take on more."

I'm loving his hot takes on tier 4. However! He has also said that had I not approached him beforehand it would've been less likely to go my way because "no DM wants to be blindsided either"

StoicLeaf

2019-04-11, 05:33 AM

PhantomSoul

2019-04-11, 05:48 AM

It is probably the most slippery of slopes with regards to the "specific beats general" clause. I honestly was thinking this would be the least likely circumstance my DM would accept.

It's not really a specific-beats-general case; it's a house rule because the text doesn't support it in the specific or the general (it's not a case where a ruling fills the gap; you're setting the HP to a value, not reducing the HP; it's the same with polymorph giving you a new HP value altogether instead of reducing/increasing your HP, and Aid similarly is phrased in a way more consistent with the Max HP being reset (loss of a change) not reduced).

A more ambiguous case with the un-errataed rules would be having a negative Constitution score and rolling a 1 on your HP upon level-up; from the phrasing though (PHB15) that's not really a reduction either. It's less clear, though, since they essentially don't handle the case directly at all.

This is a downside of using pseudo-plain-English; the technical terms are normal words, and the text doesn't highlight that a technical meaning applies. (Compare decreases with is reduced here; in the level-up case, your hit point maximum decreases but isn't really reduced (it's simply set to a lower value on level-up), but here again the simulacrum wouldn't see that benefit because it's set-as-lower but neither decreased nor reduced.)

It's rules-as-fun, which is great, and for a one- or two-shot where "breaking" things or house-ruling new interactions isn't a concern, it's fine to have fun with it, especially if other players are aware they'll have a lot of leeway for adding in interactions. For the general policy, though, agreed at all levels (though then that's a ruling the monsters might apply too, of course).

TheUser

2019-04-11, 06:49 AM

Like others have said, it's nice that he let you do that but RAW doesn't really fly.

If you read over what Inured to Undeath does you'll conclude that polymorphing into a giant, armored animal isn't the same as not being impressed by some undead thug trying to suck out your life essence.

polymorph and shapechanging are -very- different from both a lore and mechanics perspective. I am going to assume shapechanging is what you meant and not go through the semantics I have already thoroughly detailed in the thread and initial post.

I digress,

Beginning at 10th level, you have resistance to necrotic
damage, and your hit point maximum can't be reduced.
You have spent so much time dealing with undead and
the forces that animate them that you have become
inured to some of their worst effects.

Remember that more than just undead suck out max hp (clay golems for example); we'll contrive max hp as "life essence" for now and that the feature Inured to Undeath, while rooted in the idea of constant necrotic energy exposure deals far more with the idea not letting go of life essence once you have it. This is why it doesn't explicitly say "cannot have max hp reduced by necrotic damage" which would be far more specific to undead creatures, but rather just broadly applies to anything that reduces your max hp. It is derived out of necessity from constantly dealing with undead, but applies to far more. I can understand how people might not share this interpretation, but it fits far better with how even the core mechanics of the feature are presented.

MaxWilson

2019-04-11, 08:36 AM

I went back and probed the DM a bit more on this one and he gave me a surprising response.

"If it's an ambiguous RAW case that could really go either way, unless it breaks the game, just side with the player. The system is heavily bogged down with enough restrictions adding more does not really seem to be the design intent of tier 4. Just up the challenge and let the player take on more."

I'm loving his hot takes on tier 4. However! He has also said that had I not approached him beforehand it would've been less likely to go my way because "no DM wants to be blindsided either"

Translation: "That's an interesting interpretation and I don't care enough to argue with you about it." I can respect that attitude, and especially for a one-shot I'd like to think I'd adopt a similar attitude... but it's still a questionable interpretation from both a rules perspective and (especially) a game-logic perspective. There's absolutely nothing about simulacrum creation/shapechange/an Aid spell ending which suggests that "undeath" is involved or that inurement to negative energy would be helpful.

So, good for him, but I would feel wrong about trying to take advantage of this interpretation myself, even at the table of a DM who tolerated it.

Remember that more than just undead suck out max hp (clay golems for example); we'll contrive max hp as "life essence" for now and that the feature Inured to Undeath, while rooted in the idea of constant necrotic energy exposure deals far more with the idea not letting go of life essence once you have it. This is why it doesn't explicitly say "cannot have max hp reduced by necrotic damage" which would be far more specific to undead creatures, but rather just broadly applies to anything that reduces your max hp. It is derived out of necessity from constantly dealing with undead, but applies to far more. I can understand how people might not share this interpretation, but it fits far better with how even the core mechanics of the feature are presented.

Nobody disputes that clay golems reduce your max HP. What is under dispute is that Simulacrums have their max HP "reduced" or dispelling Aid or Shapechange reduces your max HP (vs. ceasing to increase it).

An old-school munchkin would push your interpretation even further and claim that a high-level Necromancer can be raised from the dead by a simple Healing Word spell or healing kit usage, because he "never lets go of life essence" and that the rule about not being able to be healed while dead is "less specific" than Inured To Undeath. That munchkin would be wrong, and I'm sure you would agree, but his interpretation is broadly consistent with the narrative you're advancing to support your desired rules interpretation. In fact his exploit is more thematically consistent with evil necromancy than yours is--a necromancer who refuses to die is way more of a popular trope than a necromancer who somehow is still a dinosaur inside (in "life essence") even when he is no longer a dinosaur on the outside.

================================================== ===========

As an aside: "specific beats general" is fine as an implicit disclaimer for keeping rule text short, but when two specific rules come into conflict, appeals to "specific beats general" always turn into arguments about which rule is actually more specific, and it's a mess. "Specific beats general" in practice means "use your judgment/ask your DM what is the least surprising interpretation".

I doubt anyone, including TheUser, really thinks that accumulating infinite HP through repeated applications of the Aid spell is really the least surprising interpretation of Inured To Undeath. Even TheUser didn't adopt this interpretation until a month or so ago, and they sounded surprised and excited when they first posted about it.

TheUser

2019-04-11, 10:08 AM

================================================== ===========

As an aside: "specific beats general" is fine as an implicit disclaimer for keeping rule text short, but when two specific rules come into conflict, appeals to "specific beats general" always turn into arguments about which rule is actually more specific, and it's a mess. "Specific beats general" in practice means "use your judgment/ask your DM what is the least surprising interpretation".

I doubt anyone, including TheUser, really thinks that accumulating infinite HP through repeated applications of the Aid spell is really the least surprising interpretation of Inured To Undeath. Even TheUser didn't adopt this interpretation until a month or so ago, and they sounded surprised and excited when they first posted about it.

Except that the effect of the aid spell (increasing max hp) is still being applied despite the spell being over, which means the "Combining Magical Effects" rule comes into play. Just like you can't stack aid spells normally you still can't even when the spell is over if the effect is still being applied. The stacking of HP stops after the highest level of aid. Even though the spell has ended the effect has not.

StoicLeaf

2019-04-11, 12:24 PM

Remember that more than just undead suck out max hp (clay golems for example); we'll contrive max hp as "life essence" for now and that the feature Inured to Undeath, while rooted in the idea of constant necrotic energy exposure deals far more with the idea not letting go of life essence once you have it. This is why it doesn't explicitly say "cannot have max hp reduced by necrotic damage" which would be far more specific to undead creatures, but rather just broadly applies to anything that reduces your max hp. It is derived out of necessity from constantly dealing with undead, but applies to far more. I can understand how people might not share this interpretation, but it fits far better with how even the core mechanics of the feature are presented.

No, we won't.
The ability feature is rather clear. You're a master at necromancy. Undeath and necromatic affects that would wither your flesh simply don't work against you anymore. Expanding that via clever wording to EVERYTHING else is ridiculous. WotC allowing for immunity against HP drains from non-undead creatures is a nice bonus, nothing more.

What you're doing is basically:
"I'm immune to radiation, time to go sit on some rattlesnakes. After all, they can't hurt me now".

TheUser

2019-04-11, 02:43 PM

No, we won't.
The ability feature is rather clear. You're a master at necromancy. Undeath and necromatic affects that would wither your flesh simply don't work against you anymore. Expanding that via clever wording to EVERYTHING else is ridiculous. WotC allowing for immunity against HP drains from non-undead creatures is a nice bonus, nothing more.

What you're doing is basically:
"I'm immune to radiation, time to go sit on some rattlesnakes. After all, they can't hurt me now".

Ease up on the forum rage please. It's D&D, nothing serious. If I offended your sensibilities then I apologise, but seriously get a grip.

That's a terrible analogy btw. If you're going to straw man me would you at least be more subtle about it? I would say this is the opposite but equivalent of magic resistance confering advantage on a monk's stunning strike after WotC details an entire paragraph on "The magic of Ki." It clearly isn't the intent of the game designers but the core rules would seem to suggest that Ki being magic in nature means magic resistance affects Ki manipulation, or that an Anti-magic field would strip a monk of their ki powers. It's right there in the rules as written, but is clearly not the intent of the game's designers.

MaxWilson

2019-04-11, 07:39 PM

Except that the effect of the aid spell (increasing max hp) is still being applied despite the spell being over, which means the "Combining Magical Effects" rule comes into play. Just like you can't stack aid spells normally you still can't even when the spell is over if the effect is still being applied. The stacking of HP stops after the highest level of aid. Even though the spell has ended the effect has not.

Okay, your perspective is noted. I do not agree that ending the increase effect constitutes decreasing your max HP in a way that Inured to Undeath would protect you from, but at least we agree that infinite increases are out of bounds.

Good gaming to you.

MagneticKitty

2019-04-11, 07:52 PM

Just because you /can/ coffeelocke, doesn't mean you/should/.
Same logic here.
Wouldn't fly at my table. But you do you.

Rukelnikov

2019-04-11, 07:54 PM

Just because you /can/ coffeelocke, doesn't mean you/should/.
Same logic here.
Wouldn't fly at my table. But you do you.

Difference is, Coffeelock works RAW (as wish+simulacrum, that doesn't mean they are a cool thing to actually do in a game)

Kane0

2019-04-11, 08:10 PM

If you're going for the 'grasp onto extra lifeforce' angle i'd just say you get an upcast False Life as extra HP rather than temps.

Vorpalchicken

2019-04-11, 08:51 PM

The ability is called "inured to undeath." How is ignoring the natural limit of Shapechange making you inured to undeath?

JNAProductions

2019-04-11, 08:53 PM

Yeah, some iffy RAW here. As-in, does not work.

But I'm glad you enjoyed a good game!

krugaan

2019-04-11, 09:04 PM

LudicSavant

2019-04-11, 09:09 PM

Some relevant sources:
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/04/18/does-the-inured-to-undead-feat-for-necromancy-wizards-stop-the-level-4-exhaustion/
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/113638

TheUser

2019-04-11, 09:18 PM

The ability is called "inured to undeath." How is ignoring the natural limit of Shapechange making you inured to undeath?

Is this the part where I bring up the cantrip "Chill Touch?" Which doesn't chill with any cold damage and doesn't have a range of touch....

Or that Globe of Invulnerability doesn't actually make you invulnerable....

Galithar

2019-04-11, 09:21 PM

Is this the part where I bring up the cantrip "Chill Touch?" Which doesn't chill with any cold damage and doesn't have a range of touch....

Or that Globe of Invulnerability doesn't actually make you invulnerable....

Act like this is written in blue because I'm on my phone and don't know the tag :P

Of course they do! Just ignore what the book says it's all right there in the name!! That's all you really need. Firebolt actually requires a crossbow bolt to use because all you really do is catch it on fire and throw it!

Rukelnikov

2019-04-11, 09:34 PM

Some relevant sources:
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/04/18/does-the-inured-to-undead-feat-for-necromancy-wizards-stop-the-level-4-exhaustion/
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/113638

Assuming the effect of Aid is still up while the spell itself has ran its course (which I disagree with, because losing a buff is not the same as getting nerfed), what would happen if said Necro enters adead magic area or antimagic field?

AMF suppresses spells and magical effects but that would "reduce" the Necro's max HP

Consider that a similar reading would mean Freedom of Movement makes Haste last for 1 hour, since under FoM "[...]spells and other magical effects can neither reduce the target's speed nor [...]", haste doubles your speed, but since under FoM your speed cannot be reduced, haste MUST last for the whole duration of FoM.

Now that I think more about it... maybe yeah, that should be the RAW meaning of "can't be reduced" (I would finally dare to cast Haste without fearing a barrage of dispels coming my way :P Nope forget that, they would dispel my FoM and with it Haste too, i'm still not casting haste)

Jerrykhor

2019-04-11, 09:37 PM

The argument for HP stacking with Aid is quite simple. After doing some digging, there are some who say that since your HP cannot be reduced, Aid never wore off, and thus the same magical effect does not stack. I dont agree with that. Nothing prevents Aid from wearing off, and once it does, your HP is supposed to go back to normal. But because of Inured to Undeath, it cannot be reduced. So that increased HP is now your default HP.

And yes, un-adding your HP from HP buffs IS reducing your HP. There's an argument I saw that what Inured to Undeath actually means that it your HP cannot be reduced below its normal level. But I don't see those words there, because if it were, then the meaning would be different. Strict reading of 'your HP cannot be reduced' simply means just that - It cannot be reduced whatsoever, full stop. Any time your HP would go from a bigger number to a smaller number, THAT is a reduction.

Rukelnikov

2019-04-11, 09:39 PM

Vorpalchicken

2019-04-11, 09:42 PM

Is this the part where I bring up the cantrip "Chill Touch?" Which doesn't chill with any cold damage and doesn't have a range of touch....

Or that Globe of Invulnerability doesn't actually make you invulnerable....
Chill Touch is referring to the "chill touch of the grave."

Globe of Invulnerability makes everyone in the globe invulnerable to spells of lower level, so that's not bad.

PhantomSoul

2019-04-11, 10:46 PM

I agree that either it works indefinitely (stack as much HP as you want), or doesn't work at all, the only works once is what doesn't make sense.

That seems exactly right, yes!

TheUser

2019-04-12, 06:50 AM

Assuming the effect of Aid is still up while the spell itself has ran its course (which I disagree with, because losing a buff is not the same as getting nerfed), what would happen if said Necro enters adead magic area or antimagic field?

AMF suppresses spells and magical effects but that would "reduce" the Necro's max HP

Consider that a similar reading would mean Freedom of Movement makes Haste last for 1 hour, since under FoM "[...]spells and other magical effects can neither reduce the target's speed nor [...]", haste doubles your speed, but since under FoM your speed cannot be reduced, haste MUST last for the whole duration of FoM.

Now that I think more about it... maybe yeah, that should be the RAW meaning of "can't be reduced" (I would finally dare to cast Haste without fearing a barrage of dispels coming my way :P Nope forget that, they would dispel my FoM and with it Haste too, i'm still not casting haste)

This is adorable; trying to be cheeky and coy and jenky all in the same little post. I feel compelled to respond to it all the same.

Freedom of Movement does not flat out say that "your speed cannot be reduced" but carries an important rider "spells and other magical effects can neither reduce your speed..."

Losing haste isn't having your speed reduced by a magical effect, it's having your speed reduced by the lack of a magical effect.

For the duration, the target’s movement is unaffected by difficult terrain, and spells and other magical effects can neither reduce the target’s speed nor cause the target to be paralyzed or restrained.

PhantomSoul

2019-04-12, 09:29 AM

Losing haste isn't having your speed reduced by a magical effect, it's having your speed reduced by the lack of a magical effect.

Rather, it's having your speed reverted (a net decrease) by lack of magical effect. No reduction was inflicted -- just like with Aid ending!

JNAProductions

2019-04-12, 09:34 AM

This is adorable; trying to be cheeky and coy and jenky all in the same little post. I feel compelled to respond to it all the same.

Freedom of Movement does not flat out say that "your speed cannot be reduced" but carries an important rider "spells and other magical effects can neither reduce your speed..."

Losing haste isn't having your speed reduced by a magical effect, it's having your speed reduced by the lack of a magical effect.

No need to be so rude. Besides which...

Rather, it's having your speed reverted (a net decrease) by lack of magical effect. No reduction was inflicted -- just like with Aid ending!

That. Haste ending reduces your move speed in the same way Aid ending reduces your max HP.

TheUser

2019-04-12, 03:32 PM

Rather, it's having your speed reverted (a net decrease) by lack of magical effect. No reduction was inflicted -- just like with Aid ending!

"Reverting" to a lower speed is still your speed being reduced. It's funny how the English language works that way;
Taking a higher number and making it a smaller one is a reduction. That's what reduced means. You can try and dance around the concept of base hp (a term I have never heard expressed in any 5e ruleset) but the term is never applied anywhere including Inured to Undeath.

It's important to understand that you are creating a false equivalency; one of these is a spell that has a very clear clause that the reduction can't be due to a spell or magical effect. The other does not. The magical effect is not what is reducing your speed, it's the lack of one, so freedom of movement doesn't apply when a target loses haste.

The developers made choices to employ very specific words. "Your maximum HP cannot be reduced." Not, "normal maximum" or "base maximum" (undefined terms coincidentally).

You may not like the rules as written, you're even free to disregard them for a more balanced version of the game, but unfortunately this is one of those unavoidable loopholes created by high level shenanigans in the RAW....

MaxWilson

2019-04-12, 03:55 PM

Freedom of Movement does not flat out say that "your speed cannot be reduced" but carries an important rider "spells and other magical effects can neither reduce your speed..."

Losing haste isn't having your speed reduced by a magical effect, it's having your speed reduced by the lack of a magical effect.

Dispel Magic is a spell, so ending Haste by Dispel Magic would definitely qualify for Freedom of Movement to override the speed reduction... except that losing a speed bonus isn't a speed reduction, so Freedom of Movement does nothing. This is exactly the same as losing the HP bonus from Aid.

TheUser

2019-04-12, 04:53 PM

Dispel Magic is a spell, so ending Haste by Dispel Magic would definitely qualify for Freedom of Movement to override the speed reduction... except that losing a speed bonus isn't a speed reduction, so Freedom of Movement does nothing. This is exactly the same as losing the HP bonus from Aid.
Same faulty logic. A magical effect isn't directly reducing your speed. A magical effect is removing a magical effect which increased your speed.

Once again, a "lack of magical effect" isn't fulfilling the caveats of Freedom of Movement. It doesn't flat out say "your speed cannot be reduced" so this is a false equivalency....

MaxWilson

2019-04-12, 08:24 PM

Same faulty logic. A magical effect isn't directly reducing your speed. A magical effect is removing a magical effect which increased your speed.

Exactly. That's not a reduction, from a game rule perspective. Ending the increase isn't what Freedom of Movement means when it refers to effects that reduce your speed.

Galithar

2019-04-12, 08:51 PM

Exactly. That's not a reduction, from a game rule perspective. Ending the increase isn't what Freedom of Movement means when it refers to effects that reduce your speed.

The difference in wording is this:

Haste: Doubles a creatures speed.
Freedom of movement: Prevents a MAGICAL EFFECT from reducing your speed.

The effect of Haste increases your speed. It's removal means your speed IS reduced, but it is NOT reduced by a magical effect. The magical effect was increasing it. The LACK of magical effect is decreasing it. Since Freedom of movement only protects from magical effects it cannot protect from the loss of an effect.

Aid: Increases a creatures Max HP
Inured to Undeath: Your max HP may not be reduced. Period. No rider, no qualifier. Cannot be reduced. Not cannot be reduced by a magical effect, not can't be reduced by necrotic powers or attacks. Simply cannot be reduced by anything ever.

MaxWilson

2019-04-12, 09:06 PM

The difference in wording is this:

Haste: Doubles a creatures speed.
Freedom of movement: Prevents a MAGICAL EFFECT from reducing your speed.

The effect of Haste increases your speed. It's removal means your speed IS reduced, but it is NOT reduced by a magical effect.

A magical effect is responsible. Dispel Magic is a magical effect. But I agree that a magical effect is not reducing your speed, because ending an increase is not a reduction, in the sense that Freedom of Movement is concerned with.

Galithar

2019-04-12, 09:17 PM

A magical effect is responsible. Dispel Magic is a magical effect. But I agree that a magical effect is not reducing your speed, because ending an increase is not a reduction, in the sense that Freedom of Movement is concerned with.

I agree with part of what you're saying. Ending an increase IS a reduction. Dispel magic on Haste doesn't decrease your speed. By that I mean that dispell magic only makes Haste go away. Haste going away is what causes the speed reduction. If the speed reduction was caused by dispell magic, and not but a side effect of it, then freedom of movement would prevent the reduction.

This is all really nit-picky pedantry that really boils down to 'ask your DM' but expect it not to work. Though I still stand by it working RAW.

StoicLeaf

2019-04-13, 12:07 AM

Aid: Increases a creatures Max HP
Inured to Undeath: Your max HP may not be reduced. Period. No rider, no qualifier. Cannot be reduced. Not cannot be reduced by a magical effect, not can't be reduced by necrotic powers or attacks. Simply cannot be reduced by anything ever.

Inured to Undeath

Beginning at 10th level, you have resistance to necrotic damage, and your hit point maximum can't be reduced. You have spent so much time dealing with undead and the forces that animate them that you have become inured to some of their worst effects.

Aid
2 Abjuration

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V S M (A tiny strip of white cloth)
Duration: 8 hours
Classes: Cleric, Paladin
Your spell bolsters your allies with toughness and resolve. Choose up to three creatures within range. Each target’s hit point maximum and current hit points increase by 5 for the duration.
At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, a target’s hit points increase by an additional 5 for each slot level above 2nd.

Seriously, it's like people don't want to account for the 2nd sentence.

MaxWilson

2019-04-13, 12:32 AM

Seriously, it's like people don't want to account for the 2nd sentence.

Well, to be fair, most people do. There's only, like, two people who don't.

Zalabim

2019-04-13, 03:24 AM

"Reverting" to a lower speed is still your speed being reduced. It's funny how the English language works that way;
Taking a higher number and making it a smaller one is a reduction. That's what reduced means. You can try and dance around the concept of base hp (a term I have never heard expressed in any 5e ruleset) but the term is never applied anywhere including Inured to Undeath.

It's important to understand that you are creating a false equivalency; one of these is a spell that has a very clear clause that the reduction can't be due to a spell or magical effect. The other does not. The magical effect is not what is reducing your speed, it's the lack of one, so freedom of movement doesn't apply when a target loses haste.

The developers made choices to employ very specific words. "Your maximum HP cannot be reduced." Not, "normal maximum" or "base maximum" (undefined terms coincidentally).

You may not like the rules as written, you're even free to disregard them for a more balanced version of the game, but unfortunately this is one of those unavoidable loopholes created by high level shenanigans in the RAW....
Reducing your maximum hp is a game term, not a broad fictional concept. Failing to understand that is like failing to understand what an attack is (say fireball is an attack, or magic missile surely is) and arguing that you can cast multiple spells with the Attack action because those spells are attacks. The only things that are reducing your maximum hp are those effects that use those words.

Galithar

2019-04-13, 03:32 AM

Seriously, it's like people don't want to account for the 2nd sentence.

Seriously, it's like people don't want to account for the Sage Advice where it is stated that yes it is intended to prevent reduction from any source. Including things like Exhaustion 4 which is clearly not related to the undead at all.

Some relevant sources:
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2017/04/18/does-the-inured-to-undead-feat-for-necromancy-wizards-stop-the-level-4-exhaustion/
https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/113638

Kalashak

2019-04-13, 04:18 AM

This thread is giving me severe third edition flashbacks

TheUser

2019-04-13, 07:10 AM

Reducing your maximum hp is a game term, not a broad fictional concept. Failing to understand that is like failing to understand what an attack is (say fireball is an attack, or magic missile surely is) and arguing that you can cast multiple spells with the Attack action because those spells are attacks. The only things that are reducing your maximum hp are those effects that use those words.

This is what we call a non
sequitur mixed with a straw-man. The straw man is easy to spot: Nobody with a Rules as Written conscientious approach that I and some others in this thread have adopted, would ever try and make the argument that Extra Attack allows for extra spells; the rules of the book don't support that claim even a little bit. When you try to compare a proposition to something completely ridiculous that lacks a strong parallel it doesn't actually make your opponent's position look worse or your position look better...it just makes it look like you weren't able to properly construct a proper comparison.

The non sequitur is there because the premise you set up is entirely disconnected from the conclusion of [the only interactions that should be included in Inured to Undeath's "your max hp can't be reduced" are specific effects which directly state they reduce your maximum hp and not incidentals]. For instance, if a DM does permanent constitution damage to a character (maybe as a price to recieve powers or a reward, maybe through a unique undead creature mechanic) and the level up process would actually reduce their max HP you would argue that Inured to Undeath would not kick in because the reduction to max hp was incidental and not from an effect with clear intent to reduce maximum hitpoints yes?

Maybe you should do more to actually develop that premise instead of that other thing you did in the beginning.... I understand you might be trying to make it funny and ridiculous (often the point of a non sequitur) but within the context of our discussion I do not think it will elicit the effect you want (then again maybe it did and I am unclear on your intentions).

The thematics presented at the beginning of this thread were to help back up the mechanics I had discovered, not the other way around. I didn't start with some contrived view of max hp and try to twist the rules to fit them, but rather, noticed the rules were painting a different picture of my previous vision and so I developed a new way of imagining it to fit the rules.

Zalabim

2019-04-13, 08:34 AM

TheUser

2019-04-13, 01:24 PM

An attack is a game term, not a broad fictional concept. Failing to understand that is like failing to understand what reduction to your maximum HP means and claiming that Inured to Undeath means the increase to maximum HP doesn't end when Aid ends. The only things that are attacks are those effects the game tells you are attacks in clear words.

Nobody in this thread has failed to understand that the word "attack" has a very well defined technical meaning in D&D 5e. There are more than 3 whole pages in the PHB devoted to understanding the strict applications in the ruleset that accompany the word "attack"; making an attack roll, ranged attacks etc. etc. The word "attack" in 5e has, literally, infinitely more definitive text written about it compared to "reducing maximum hit points" because 5e has zero rules descriptive text defining this new made up technical expression of yours.

While be both agree that "You cannot have your maximum hit points reduced" has a very strict definition, you've asserted that unless an interaction specifically invokes the "reduce maximum hit points" clause (maybe I missed the 3 pages of definition on this technical term like the word attack, could you point me to it in the PHB?) Inured to Undeath ceases to function. I, on the other hand, have opted to take the words by their literal meaning because unlike the word "attack" Fifth Edition hasn't devoted any space to defining "reducing maximum hit points" to your made up standards.