As per title. The temporary hit points description says:
Some spells and special abilities confer temporary hit points to a creature. Temporary hit points aren't actual hit points; they are a buffer against damage, a pool of hit points that protect you from injury.
And there are options in game that deal damage, which cannot be prevented in any way, like Life transference spell:
[...] You take 4d8 necrotic damage, which can't be reduced in any way, [..]
Or the Vital Sacrifice feat from Tal'Dorei campaign setting reborn, which sparked the debate at my table:
As a bonus action, you can choose to take 1d6 necrotic damage to gain a blood boon. [...] The damage you take to gain a blood boon can't be reduced in any way.
So, would temporary hit points block the damage to the real hit points from these options? My player goes on to provide as an example a RPG-bot ruling otherwise in their feat rating for the book, and Jeremy Crawford's tweet on similar matter with concentration:
When temporary hit points absorb damage for you, you're still taking damage, just not to your real hit points.
arguing that you do take damage, and temp hit points are not a reduction, so they work against the options presented above. For me it's... complicated, as I think it's counter intuitive, easily abusable and the temp hit points straight up say they are a buffer against damage, so that damage would go past them, and on the other hand is my player, and the rest of the group which stands by "it just works, it makes sense", which, of course they do, it's just beneficial to the player/party.