Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm going to be running a campaign with a Dhampir player. They have:

Negative Energy Affinity: Though a living creature, a dhampir reacts to positive and negative energy as if it were undead—positive energy harms it, while negative energy heals it.

Additionally, the type of the Dhampir race is explicitly not undead, but humanoid(dhampir). Thus, I would describe them as "living, but heals like undead".

This brings me to the core question: Does the Stabilize spell work like the Bleed spell on such a creature, and vice versa? Or do the spells work as normal?

My thoughts: If the spells use positive/negative energy, their effects are reversed for living creatures with NEA. However, the spells make no mention of positive/negative energy. My gut says that's simply an omission, as they seem like the spiritual replacements of 3.5's (Cure/Inflict) Minor Wounds, which definitely channel positive energy.

Any opposing thoughts, "Words of God", or compelling arguments?

share|improve this question
up vote 5 down vote accepted

By RAW, the spells Stabilize and Bleed don't specify that they channel energy, so they don't. It can be thought of as magically stitching closed, or ripping open, a wound; something to stop the excessive bleeding. Also consider that Stabilize is only on the Cleric/Druid spell list, while Bleed is on both the Cleric/Druid and Wizard/Sorcerer spell lists. If you flipped the effects, Wizards and Sorcerers could stabilize your Dhampir as well as Clerics, and only Clerics or Druids could magically bleed him. You could house-rule this easily if you prefer this flavour.

In terms of creatures other than your Dhampir, creatures with the Undead subtype don't have a Constitution score, so die immediately at 0hp. Bleed and Stabilize, therefore, would never normally be a consideration for actual Undead.

share|improve this answer
How would you say this relates to the idea of Stabilize stopping bleed effects? I found the idea here:… That is, if these spells directly interact with wounds to altar their rate of further injury in the case of being unconscious, should they also stop explicit forms of bleeding? – EnvisionAndDevelop May 9 '14 at 16:48
@EnvisionAndDevelop In the CR it says "If the character has become stable because of aid from another character (such as a Heal check or magical healing), then the character no longer loses hit points. In this case, positive energy no longer 'heals' and instead 'hurts' and negative energy no longer 'hurts' it instead 'heals'. I think spells that specifically cause Stabilization or Un-Stabilization would still continue to have the same effects / intentions. (the spell specifically says "you target a living creature") – DanceSC May 9 '14 at 22:59
@EnvisionAndDevelop Stabilize, mechanically, has no interaction with Bleed effects. The example I gave was just one way to fluff stabilizing a dying creature. Stabilize can be fluffed as anything that would, well, stabilize a body and prevent it from sliding towards death. Bleed effects end, though, as soon as the creature is magically healed (read: has HP magically restored). – Jason_c_o May 11 '14 at 17:36
@Jason_c_o I see what you're saying, I was just hoping for an in-game explanation that matched the apparent RAW. It's hard for me to imagine an effect of some kind that stops all bleeding and internal worsening of state except wounds that came from certain special attacks. – EnvisionAndDevelop May 12 '14 at 12:45

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.