Another Death ward question...

[drnuncheon]

Directly, only the Bodaks Death Gaze and Arrow of Slaying, IIRC.

There's also the catoblepas with its 'death ray' (MM2).

J

 

[ruleslawyer]

First off, Annihilating Strike neither uses the [Death] designator nor calls itself either a "death effect" or a "death attack." Second, it is an SDA. Don't know about you guys, but I'd tend to rule that even Hand of Death and Life and Death, which clearly suggest that they are "death effects" of some sort, cannot be blocked by death ward, because they are so incredibly powerful as to ignore this spell's puny mortal protection. Play it as you will, though...

 

[gfunk]

First off, Annihilating Strike neither uses the [Death] designator nor calls itself either a "death effect" or a "death attack." Second, it is an SDA. Don't know about you guys, but I'd tend to rule that even Hand of Death and Life and Death, which clearly suggest that they are "death effects" of some sort, cannot be blocked by death ward, because they are so incredibly powerful as to ignore this spell's puny mortal protection. Play it as you will, though...

I think this is very justified. Consider Mind Blank, which can trump even Wish, Miracle, or Discern Location. However divine intervention can bypass the ward, according to the spell description. Now, if an 8th level Abjuration can't stop a deity, I don't see how a 4th level one could.

 

[Bryan898]

I can see the points about this spell "trumping" a diety. However, I have a small disagreement. The spell affects the PC, not the diety. It in now way has to rival the dieties power or such, and effects the PC much in the way a mage armor spell would be cast. You don't take away mage armor on a PC just because he's fighting a balor or something do you, just because it's significantly stronger than that specific spell. The point is to stop the character from instant death effects, not stop the dieties spells / effects. As for a measly 4th level spell... fireballs a measly 3rd level spell, unless cast by a 20th level caster. I think the strength of the spell reflects the caster, hence why areas, damage, and dispelling are based on caster level. So this measly 4th level spell isn't so measly when cast by a 50th level caster. Next point against saying they're dieties and all powerful... As I'm watching D&D become more powerful ( with the epic level books and such) PC's are able to reach this level to compete with such beings. If it weren't so the Deities and Demigods book wouldnt have had so many statstics and fighting capabilities of dietes. Let's face it, it happens, just look at the fantasy novels you read, the games you play, etc. Many of them come to a point where the hero defeats a god or near god-like creature. My job is to provide my PC's with a fun time, and I know that some of them are at the point where they want to challenge such a creature, and if Wizards didn't think this was going to happen they would have done the same as Planescape 2nd ed... I believe the line was "The dieties are unreachable. A diety could turn you inside out and drop you on the last layer of hell with the movemnt of a finger." The next thing is that I'm not looking for literal translations such as its not a death effect because it doesn't say so. "Everyone knows the #1 cause of death is dying" (GTA3: Vice City). Personally I don't think D&D should be translated literally, things are put there for reasons, it usually makes more sense to follow the reasoning behind the spell or rule than the literal translation. Paying attention to the literal translation only would be much the same as the way the laws are literally translated. Then we have rules lawyers much the same to real life lawyers (another rant for another time.) However, what I do want is your opinion on whether or not it Annihilating Strike should be considered a magical death effect. This is based on the description of the ability and what you think it doesn, not on the presumption that if something doesnt state "death effect" in it that it isn't something that causes death. After all, by english defiinition thats what a death effect attack would be. Thanks for any opinions.

 

[Stalker0]

If all the deity has is a death spell up his sleeve, then he's got more problems then the pcs.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If all the deity has is a death spell up his sleeve, then he's got more problems then the pcs.

Heh.

You bask in its black glow for a moment.

-- More --

"I believe it not!

-Hyp.

 

[0-hr]

Directly, only the Bodaks Death Gaze and Arrow of Slaying, IIRC.

Neither of those are listed as "Death Attacks". An Arrow of Slaying is a "Death Effect" and the Bodak ability just says:

"Death Gaze (Su): Death, range 30 feet..."

The Bodak entry is ambiguous but look alot like an ability with the "[Death]" descriptor to me (as opposed to an assassin's death attack).

So is there really only one "Death Attack" in the core rules? If so, and if that death attack is the assassin ability, then I'd be fairly convinced that "Death Wards works vs death attacks" is an error.

 

[AGGEMAM]

Neither of those are listed as "Death Attacks".

I beg to differ, if only because the DMG specifically states that they are death attacks.

Arrow of Death (arcane archer) is/should also be a death attack.

 

[0-hr]

Man I hate beggars. But anyway, do you think that a Death Ward protects against an assassin's death attack?

 

[AGGEMAM]

But anyway, do you think that a Death Ward protects against an assassin's death attack?

Yes. Have you looked it up in the DMG yet ? (It is still on page 74).