The "Way of the Long Death" monk has a feature called "Touch of Death":
Touch of Death
Starting when you choose this tradition at 3rd level, your study of death allows you to extract vitality from another creature as it nears its demise. When you reduce a creature within 5 feet of you to 0 hit points, you gain temporary hit points equal to your Wisdom modifier + your monk level (minimum of 1 temporary hit point).
(Bold added for emphasis). How does this work when a WotLD Monk reduces a zombie to 0 hit points and the blow is shrugged off by undead fortitude?
If damage reduces the zombie to 0 hit points, it must make a Constitution saving throw with a DC of 5+the damage taken, unless the damage is radiant or from a critical hit. On a success, the zombie drops to 1 hit point instead.
I could see this working one of two ways:
A zombie takes a hit, and drops to 0 hit points. Then Undead Fortitude kicks in and on a success, the zombie comes back to 1 HP. The zombie had been reduced to 0 hp, so ToD activates.
A zombie takes a hit, and makes a roll to see whether it drops to 0 or 1 HP. On a success, it drops to 1 HP and had never dropped to 0, therefore ToD does not activate.
Is there any official ruling on this case? If not, what is a reasonable interpretation of these rules?
In one of the company’s im involved with there is a problem between one manager and a programmer. They are both very good at their jobs, but there is constant clashes. I would like to get some feedback to help me sort this out.
The programmer works in cycle’s of 2-5 days, mostly in 6 phrases.
- Create plan.
- Clean up the code.
The programmer complains about the manager stepping in when he is in the later stages of the cycle, and often later in the day and start to question the scope of the current cycle, or the larger strategic plan, that it should be changed and a lot more should be included. He says he is "rally mode", and totally focused on the current stage. He say he is more than willing to discuss this when he is rested and its in the beginning of a new cycle. But when he is in the middle of something he feels its very frustrating and unproductive to "step out of the car" and let go of the information currently uploaded in his short-term working memory and go up to the bridge and assume the "commander roll" and start think more long term strategic.
The manager sees it as he job to question the scope of the current cycle or the greater plan when ever see the need. He don’t see any valid reason for not doing this during the daily and scheduled contact.
I’m trying to ask as neutral as I can, so I don’t affect the answers with my own bias. But should i somehow retrain the programmer so he is better prepared to always be able to brainstorm about the larger picture? Should I try to convince the manager that he should hold of the strategic issues until the current cycle is finished and a new cycle is starting?