Blasphemy..!

[Thanee]

I highly doubt that in a single round, a group of rogues each getting one attack could kill an entire party.

Well, the cleric could be a bit smarter and do the spell after the rogues moved into position.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

It's not so much the rogues sneak attacking the party as the enemy wizard hitting them with a horrid wiltings and a quickened fireball while they're dazed and then the enemy barbarian charging one of the softened characters, power attacking, and cleaving into another softened character. Or something like that.

Blasphemy actually isn't nearly as bad as a spell as it is as a spell like ability. Half-fiends regularly get blasphemy at the party's level +11 to +5 if the template is applied to an advanced creature. Now that's really bad.

 

[Stalker0]

I'd say anything that primarily causes death is saved by death ward.

A fireball doesn't cause death, it causes hp damage. Hp damage can cause death.

Finger of death causes death.

I'd say the dead part of the spell would be saved by death ward.

 

[Celtavian]

re

This is a dead horse really. Been discussed time and time again.

Silence spell blocks all the effects of Blasphemy except banishment. If you are facing an evil cleric or creature with Blasphemy make sure to slot a few Silence spells or create a magic item that grants individual silence.

Death Ward does not work against all spells that kill, Implosion being the one that stands out foremost in my mind. Implosion is an evocation and is not a death effect. When it comes to spells, Death Ward works against spells with the death descriptor. They did alot of work making sure that every spell they wanted to be a death spell had the death descriptor. Another example where Death Ward doesn't help is the Green Prismatic Spray ray. On a failed save, it kills because of poison, Death Ward does not help.

A death spell for purposes of D&D terminology is a spell with the death descriptor. A magical death effect is usually a supernatural ability that causes death and is listed as a death effect in the description.

D&D uses a certain terminology for a reason. The terminology helps define and differentiate the rules. If a spell does not have the death descriptor or the ability of a creature is not listed as a death effect, then you should not assume Death Ward works against it.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I'd say anything that primarily causes death is saved by death ward.

A fireball doesn't cause death, it causes hp damage. Hp damage can cause death.

Finger of death causes death.

I'd say the dead part of the spell would be saved by death ward.

A lot of people like to think of it this way, but Thanee covered it pretty thoughrally. Death ward is pretty specific in the 4 types of things it prevents. As she said, a good spell is a spell with the [good] descriptor, an evil spell is a spell with the [evil] descriptor, and a death spell is a spell with the [death] descriptor.

The idea is that certain spells call upon the primal forces of pure, incarnate DEATH itself. This power is distinct. Death Ward is designed specifically to thwart it. Other spells, like Blasphemy, do indeed kill the subject, but they do it via a different mechanism. Perhaps in this case it is by uttering words so foul that only evil creatures can bear to hear them, and weak enough other creatures simply die from cardiac arrest, unable to get the unholy message out of their minds.

Your interpretation also makes Death Ward work against disintigration. No biggie, you think. Also, realize that your description might also allow Death Ward to render Undead immune to a good cleric (of twice their HD) attempting to destroy them.

Remember that the spell only causes death for creatures significantly below the level of the casting cleric. Creatures of this level have no business trying to kill a high-level cleric, and if Blasphemy doesn't kill them, some other spell surely will.

Perhaps you're right in so much as this spell deserves the [death] descriptor, but as written it doesn't have it. If you want to go strictly by the rules, well, I'm sorry, but no level of "I think it should work" will change the way it actually does work.

I suggest you speak with the other members of your group about this and see if they agree with you about the way it should work (perhaps you can vote to add the [death] descriptor to all insta-kill spells). If so, you can kiss all of our interpretations goodbye. Your group decides how they want to play the game, and if they're fine with an expanded-use Death Ward, who are we to argue?

For the record, I think Death Ward is a bit weak, since there are so few spells with the [Death] descriptor. Hell, I'm not sure it would be overpowerd for a creature under Death Ward to be unkillable (only reducable to -10 hp, stabalization automatic). I also think the Daze effect with no saving throw is over-the-top.

But this IS the rules forum, and the rules seem to be more in our favor than in yours. I agree that they could have been written a bit more explicitly in this area, but I think it's pretty obvious what they intended.

 

[MerakSpielman]

Also, as Celtavian says, it's not like there aren't defenses against this spell.

Silence is great.

Not having your whole freakin' party in a 40' space is another.

Counterspell/Dispel Magic.

Hit him with enough damage to ruin his concentration.

Have him target the wrong area with illusions.

Cast whatever the Good equivelent of Blasphemy is (I forget the name) on the opposing cleric.

If you're going up against an evil spellcaster, though, it boggles the mind that you wouldn't have Silence prepared, as a matter of course. It's really the simplest solution to the problem.

 

[Thanee]

The big problem I have with this spell is, that all those defenses won't help, if you suddenly bump into someone who has the spell prepared a couple times (or even worse has the ability to use it at will).

Unless the DM seriously pulls punches in this situation --> auto TPK

That's just silly.

I think I'll house rule the daze effect to deaf, like all the other versions of that spell!

Bye
Thanee

 

[S'mon]

I think I'll house rule the daze effect to deaf, like all the other versions of that spell!

Me too - I'd been worried about Balor blasphemy, my PCs will soon be reaching Balor-fighting levels, this seems like ideal solution.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I never, ever used Hezrou in 3.0E simply because they had Blasphemy at will. When using a creature to its fullest ability meant a guaranteed TPK, it's just not that fun to use it.

As written in the 3E Core Rules, a Hezrou's Blasphemy only had the dazing effect on non-evil creatures native to its plane.

The FAQ said otherwise, but it's clearly stated in the spell description.

Silence spell blocks all the effects of Blasphemy except banishment.

Silence will stop the banishment as well - Silence provides a defence against Sonic attacks, and Blasphemy has the Sonic descriptor.

The non-banishment effects of Holy Word and Word of Chaos only affect creatures who hear the Word - so if you're deaf, you'll only be affected by the Banishment. (In 3.5 as written, Blasphemy and Dictum do not require you to hear the word to have all their effects.)

But Silence provides a defence against all the effects of all four, since they're Sonic attacks.

-Hyp.

 

[Celtavian]

Silence will stop the banishment as well - Silence provides a defence against Sonic attacks, and Blasphemy has the Sonic descriptor.

You changed your stance since last this was discussed. I was using the info you gave me. Apparently in the spell description it said the banishment affect worked even if the person did not hear the word. Though it is true that Silence protects against all spells with the sonic descriptor, I thought you had assumed that the spell explanation suerceded the descriptor in this case.

I just looked it up, it does say the banishment works "even if the characters do not hear the Blasphemy." Are you no longer assuming that the sonic descriptor is superceded by the text in the spell?