Does a Death Ward Protect against Phantasmal Killer?

[Xylix]

Wow this is a friendly little thread. [Checks PHB...] No "death" in brackets next to the school for Phantasmal Killer.

Logical Fallicies are a pet peave. Addressing the first part of the sentance, when I brought up the second is evading the question, a logical fallicy.

He should have stated his second post in the first place.

If a monster has a special ability that says, "this works just like x" then the ability has the descriptors of x.

Correct, Something I agree with, I brought up the earlier to check the premises mister "I make a statment it is true because I said so" will accept.

He accepts apparently that if it describes itself as death, then it is death. Thus Bodak's gaze is a death effect.

Thus I can argue if its description describes a death effect, it is a death effect. This is very important for several issues, including said items like 'Vorpal, Nine Lives Stealer'

Which would also mean symbol is a death effect. Which is also quite obvious.

Death ward doesn't block fear effects, disintigration, poison that deals lethal con damage, petrification, or whatever.

Where is your line that states it does not block disintigration? Heck where is your line that says it only blocks effects that snuff out your life force.

Afterall snuffing out your life force isn't a death effect, it is snuffing out your lifeforce effect.

Death is merely a side effect.

However, I do belive everyone in here considers that a death effect.

Phantamal killer is simply using an illusion to convince someone that their life has been snuffed out. If you are immune to your life being snuffed out then you would obviously automatically disbelieve the illusion. Just like if you have an illusion of a fireball, and you are immune to fire, you obviously would not bother with a save, afterall you would have no reason to believe there would be harm.

"Reading the rules is FAIRLY simple (at least in this case )".

There is no rule stating the need for a death descriptor.

The second sentance indicates that the first sentance would have applied to those things given exception, otherwise there is no need for them to give an exception.

Conclusion there is no stated need for a death descriptor. Otherwise there would have been no need to state the exceptions that would never have applied.

As such a death effect can be construed to be a death effect that does not seem to follow the series of events labled. Those labled are 'non-direct' death effects. Effects that cause death as a secondary ruling from the spells effect after the primary effects are inacted.

Phantasmal killer does not state you go to deadly panic state of fear. It states you die from fear. It has no intermediate step.

It acts in all ways like a death effect (after you pass the illusion part that is). There for it is a death effect.

As the spell is describing death effect.

Disintegrate is not a death spell. This is perhaps the canonical counterexample to the assertion that all instakill effects are death effects.

You are not an athority on the subject. If you state "The sage states Disintegrate is not a death effect," then you are set.

I suggest you cease making statments without backing them up. In this case I would have suggested that nowhere in Disintegrate does it say 'die' is says transmutes to dust.

What is more Fort saves are accepted for transumation saves. As such we can declare it is not death merely a transmutation to dust.

Of course then, if it is merely a transmutation I will reply by healing it with a Polymorph Other. After all the player never died, he just turned to dust.


However you have not done so. I happen to disagree with this premise, Disitegrate is in every sense a death effect, except for the tags.

Tags are not clearly stated as needed, no one has given evidence that the tags are needed. I have given 'accepted' as not rejected evidence that the tags are not needed.

As such one must conclude tags are not needed.

Thus if tags are not needed then disintegrate is a death effect, and is negated by death ward.

If you have a counter example based on the sage that is a good place for you to start YOUR counter argument.

I do not accept baseless statements.

If that is all you have I suggest you reconsider you blind supportless position. If you have more you should offer it instead of just statments. The people here are not so idiotic to belive statements with no given backing.

Phantasmal Kills causes death through fear, so a Paladin is immune.

I would agree, just because I consider Phantasmal Killer a death effect does not mean it ceases to be a mindeffecting fear effect as well. Nor does it cease to be an illusion.

Assuming so would be a false presumption.

Also the protection against fear spells would give bonuses against this save. Though one could presume the will save is the save against fear, and thus only give the bonus to that.

It is up to interpetation.

 

[Xylix]

And honestly, before you convince your DM that every lethal spell is a "magical death effect" keep this in mind:

....

Ah, finally a decent point! However, I am a GM. So why would I care what happens to those poor little characters?


In any case I suggest you look at why I state that Deathward implies more than just the 'this is a death effect' powers.

Does this have a list of exceptions on damage dealing powers? Nope.

The english language is amazingly versitle. The same sentance can have a differing meaning dependent on the context it is placed on. I am quite sure that you however, are aware of this.

As such I can if I wish conclude that they mean the 'big death spells' when they say that. Now if it also had a list of exceptions this would be a PERFECT counter example. As it is it ain't quite solid.

Besides, perhaps those are not healable from raise dead

An interesting question.

It is nice to see your position actually throwing out amunition though!

The "magical death effect" referes to non-spell death effects.

I do believe that I have already tossed this out. Magical is a discriptor that most obviously applies to supernatural effects, spell-like abilities, and spells. That is why it is called magic.

You don't seriously think I would change my mind because you baselessly stated it as well?

 

[IceBear]

So getting hit for 50 points of damage by a fireball when you only have 10 hp is a death effect? The spell's effect was that it killed me, so it must be a death effect.

Yeah, I know, it's not - it just caused damage. I don't really have an issue with anything causing instant death to be blocked by this spell, but I don't think Phantasmal Killer is one of them. It wasn't magic that killed you, it was your own fear.

IceBear

 

[Berk]

I think the main cause of confusion for deathward is the whole effect part. People too often get it confused with affect. I can go into tons of detail here but just look up the definitions for each and it will probably shed some light on the situation. It's what cleared the whole deathward thing up for me. Anyways, bottom line, disint is a death affect, not a death effect. Using disint as an argument that it is a death effect isn't viable since it isn't a death effect, but a death affect. Just looking up the definitions of those 2 words will clear a lot up. It did for me anyway.

 

[jasper]

Since fear and death are two different descriptors I would say
Death Ward does not block the P. Killer.

Ward ...The subject is immune to all death spells and magical death effects. The spell does not protect against other sorts of attacks, such as hit point loss, poison, petrifaction, or other effects even if they might be lethal....
So it not a death spell, and the magical death effects would be like Miss Medusa show off and giving Peeping Tom Peter Paladin an eye full.

Also I would Peter was not affected by P. Killer.

has any one check with Sage or FAQ????

 

[Xylix]

I think the main cause of confusion for deathward is the whole effect part.

The main problem with death ward is it's poor description. If the spell even had a paragraph of filler text it would be easy through in or out spell effects as they apply.

as for definitions:


www.dictionary.com

effect
1. Something brought about by a cause or agent; a result.


a death effect is thus, death brought about by an agent or cause. This is exactly how they used it, and is why they needed to exclude damageing effects, and presumably those like damaging effects.

Pretty clear. Unless they are using their own internal definition, which is the argument others are presenting (though not in argument form, merely through statements). However the exclusion sentance following implies the standard definition.

 

[Caliban]

I love it when pseudo-intellectuals try to use "logic" to rewrite the core rules.

 

[Berk]

I love it when pseudo-intellectuals try to use "logic" to rewrite the core rules.

Who is using logic? I actually don't see any being used.

 

[Caliban]

Who is using logic? I actually don't see any being used.

I said he was using "logic" not logic.

 

[AGGEMAM]

... has any one check with Sage or FAQ????

Why not the SRD

DEATH ATTACKS

In most cases, death attacks allow the victim to make a Fortitude save to avoid the affect, but if the save fails the character dies instantly.

This strongly implies that anything that flatly says 'save or die' is a death effect, otherwise an assasins death attack is not actually a death effect since it does not say that it is.