D&D 3E/3.5 D&D 3.5: SoD vs. Regeneration?

[Karei]

My DM is saying that SoD (Save or Die) spells, (Phasmasmal Killer being the spell in question.) still deal "damage," just doing enough damage to reduce hit points to -10, and are thus turned into non-lethal damage by regenerators (trolls being the example encountered.) So unless an SoD can be shown to deal CON damage instead of HP damage, it won't kill a troll.

How can I refute him? Or is he right?

 

[frankthedm]

It's possible the GM is mistaking the specific rules for a certain creature's regeneration, for they way regeneration NORMALLY works.

If _____________ fails its save against a spell or effect that would kill it instantly (such as those mentioned above), the spell or effect instead deals nonlethal damage equal to the creature’s full normal hit points +10 (or 868 hp).

This is a unique case, normally Regeneration works as described below.

Special Abilities :: d20srd.org
Regeneration

Creatures with this extraordinary ability recover from wounds quickly and can even regrow or reattach severed body parts. Damage dealt to the creature is treated as nonlethal damage, and the creature automatically cures itself of nonlethal damage at a fixed rate per round, as given in the creature’s entry.

Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, deal damage to the creature normally; that sort of damage doesn’t convert to nonlethal damage and so doesn’t go away. The creature’s description includes the details. A regenerating creature that has been rendered unconscious through nonlethal damage can be killed with a coup de grace. The attack cannot be of a type that automatically converts to nonlethal damage.

Creatures with regeneration can regrow lost portions of their bodies and can reattach severed limbs or body parts. Severed parts die if they are not reattached.

Regeneration does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation.

Attack forms that don’t deal hit point damage ignore regeneration.

An attack that can cause instant death only threatens the creature with death if it is delivered by weapons that deal it lethal damage.

A creature must have a Constitution score to have the regeneration ability.

 

[Karei]

Rather I think it's that he's choosing to emphasize the literal interpretation of "dead" and giving it more weight than the spell effect description.

Essentially he's reading into it where nothing's actually written and saying that, since "dead" is either -10 HP or 0 CON, the spell must therefore deal "damage," to cause one of those states. Since on a successful Fort. save, the creature takes hit point damage, the death effect on a failed save must therefore deal "hit point damage."

 

[Karei]

Never mind, I've found Word of God on this issue in the 3e monsters faq:

Can you kill a troll with phantasmal killer spell?
Yes. Regeneration does not provide protection against death effects or against other special effects that cause death, such as massive damage, drowning, starvation, or having one's Constitution score lessened to 0. If the troll fails both saves against a phantasmal killer spell, it dies and its regeneration power will not bring it back.

On that note, would all of this apply in 3.5? Some of it? Seems like massive damage shouldn't work.

 

[Dandu]

Things that kill you dead without dealing HP damage cannot be avoided with Regeneration.

 

[Karei]

I know that. The trouble is convincing my DM that phantasmal killer doesn't deal hp damage unless the fort save is successful. He often tends to read into things where nothing is written. Says certain things are confusing and that the writers were unclear, even though the answer is perfectly clear if you just focus on the actual phrasing. That if it doesn't say something specifically, it can be implied to mean that you can assume it means something that it doesn't say.

 

[Pergentile]

If a Troll can be turned face down in a puddle and can drown and not be saved from Regeneration, then how could one justify any other effect that causes "Death" other then damage, being negated by Regeneration? Even before rules are checked, one should make sure one KNOWS things like Regeneration, etc, and could simply apply logic to them and would normally solve their own problem.

Edit: He is the DM, he should simply decide how HE wants to rule it, instead of trying to justify his opinion with RAW. If he decides that in this one specific instance, it is different then the written rules, and it isn't an arbitrary decision that upsets his player, you should just accept it, instead of making a thread like this. :/

 

[Dandu]

I know that. The trouble is convincing my DM that phantasmal killer doesn't deal hp damage unless the fort save is successful. He often tends to read into things where nothing is written. Says certain things are confusing and that the writers were unclear, even though the answer is perfectly clear if you just focus on the actual phrasing. That if it doesn't say something specifically, it can be implied to mean that you can assume it means something that it doesn't say.

Oh, god, I would love to play under your DM.

 

[irdeggman]

If a Troll can be turned face down in a puddle and can drown and not be saved from Regeneration, then how could one justify any other effect that causes "Death" other then damage, being negated by Regeneration? Even before rules are checked, one should make sure one KNOWS things like Regeneration, etc, and could simply apply logic to them and would normally solve their own problem.

Edit: He is the DM, he should simply decide how HE wants to rule it, instead of trying to justify his opinion with RAW. If he decides that in this one specific instance, it is different then the written rules, and it isn't an arbitrary decision that upsets his player, you should just accept it, instead of making a thread like this. :/

How many hit points of damage does the effect deal?

All hit point damage spells specify how many they deal or something that is measured in hit points - like -"reduced to -10 hit points, or -1 hit points".

Things that say save or die - do not list hit point damage being dealt. It is s specific effect.

 

[Empirate]

Try this one with your DM:

By his understanding of the rules, A Finger of Death spell deals just enough lethal damage to render the target dead.

So a Sleep spell obviously deals just enough nonlethal damage to render the target(s) unconscious. Because everything must be measured in damage. Right?

So let's expand the applications of this way of thinking:

By the same reasoning, an effect that Sickens the target obviously deals 4 points of damage to all ability scores (since it applies a -2 penalty to all ability checks). With me so far?

Now play a focused Conjurer, take the Cloudy Conjuration feat and go to town with your no-save 4 damage to all abilities on every Conjuration spell you cast!