Does a Death Ward Protect against Phantasmal Killer?

[gfunk]

I still say it's the mixing up of the words affect and effect.

Death is the affect of a disintigration effect.

Since the effect was not death, it obviously isn't a death effect.

Oh . . .
Er . . .
Umm . . .
Hmmm . . .

But if you are affected by a Disintegrate spell aren't you effectively dead?

 

[Berk]

But if you are affected by a Disintegrate spell aren't you effectively dead?

different words and different meanings, but same words with the same meanings. You just rearranged the words a bit is all. It all means the same thing. Changing a verb or noun into an adverb gives it a completely different use of the context. My last point still stands. The quote above doesn't do anything to change that point since in it we aren't talking about affect and effect but completely different words that aren't actually all that different. Confusing? Not at all. They are the same, but just different.

 

[Xylix]

But if you are affected by a Disintegrate spell aren't you effectively dead?

LOL

There are a number of spells that can kill instantly. Does Death Ward protect against them all?

Does Death Ward protect against Flesh to Stone, Disintegrate, and Holy Word? I don't think so.

Flesh to Stone is already addressed. And flesh to stone does not kill, it just turns you to stone

It says so in the book. Not a death spell.

Holy word banishes. It doesn't kill, how can it be a death spell....

Disitegrate I have approached about 5x now, quote what I said, tear it apart and we will talk again.

The following is a list of spells with the [Death] descriptor in the PHB:

Circle of Death (Necromancy) Fort negates
Death Knell (Necromancy) Will negates
Destruction (Necromancy) Fort partial
Finger of Death (Necromancy) Fort partial
Power Word, Kill (Conjuration) No save
Slay Living (Necromancy) Fort partial
Wail of the Banshee (Necromancy) Fort negates

Yep, looked it up myself.

Death Ward specifies what it does not work against:
1) Death by hit point loss
2) Death by poison
3) Death by petrification
4) "other effects even though they might be lethal"

Also completely agreed

Let's say that magical death effects are a big circle. Inside this circle are smaller circles representing supernatural things (Bodak's gaze), spells (magical effects with the [Death] descriptor, and other non-classified magical effects (Arrow of Slaying).

You Forgot

d) Death Spells without the death descriptor

Which would be Phantasmal killer

which would be in the circle of 'magical death effects'

However, since it is a spell it would be superfluous and illogical to place in the other magical effect category. If you were to do this, why even bother with the [Death] descriptor.

Convience, makes looking around easier. Same reason for sticking 'illusion' or etc... on. Perhaps to make some death spells more visible....

Label those 'death spells' which you cannot recover with slay living (which ironically would only be Phantasmal killer even if you DID include disintegrate )

Plenty of reasons. Same reason I do similar things when I design my own systems.

MY POINT

From a purely pragmatic point of view, it is easy to see how Phantasmal Killer can be interpreted as a death effect subject to Death Ward.

However, from a game mechanics view, this argument does not hold water.

*Chuckle* that depends on how you interpert a particular sentance. If you interpert it my way YOUR argument does not hold water. What is really funny is only
Caliban has bothered to show YOUR point of view holds water.

To convince me it doesn't hold water show that my interpetation of this does not hold water.

I labeled my premesies now go attack them. Just like I did Caliban's premises.

 

[hong]

different words and different meanings, but same words with the same meanings. You just rearranged the words a bit is all. It all means the same thing. Changing a verb or noun into an adverb gives it a completely different use of the context. My last point still stands. The quote above doesn't do anything to change that point since in it we aren't talking about affect and effect but completely different words that aren't actually all that different. Confusing? Not at all. They are the same, but just different.

Oh dear.

 

[hong]

d) Death Spells without the death descriptor

Which don't exist.

(much sophistry snipped)

To convince me it doesn't hold water show that my interpetation of this does not hold water.

It would appear that the solar radiation in Xylix's world is shifting wavelengths as well.


Hong "not enough ALL CAPS... or EXCLAMATION MARKS!!!!!!" Ooi

 

[Xylix]

Which don't exist.

Oh does it not now. I suppose that means you can start by elimating a very earlier argument showing it did?

I suppose your lack of attempt means you cannot, or consider yourself above logic. You are of course the absolute never wrong authority on everything right?

You have read my oppinion on argument from authority surely by now. So you should have expected this response.

Go show me that this catagory does not exists. Cease in merely saying "IT DOES NOT"

Unless that is all you can say. In that case go join Auraseer and have your own little discussion. Since you both like thinking no further than your own unbacked claims.

When you are ready to join the 'discussion' instead of adding commentary, go dig up some of premises and destroy them.

 

[IceBear]

Phantasmal Killer is not a death spell. It is a fear spell. It kills you because you believe your worse fear is about to get you and you simply die of fright (heart attack). Are you saying a death ward stops heart attacks too? There's a freaking limit to what the spell does.

IceBear

 

[Xylix]

Icebear I already answered that question.

Go attack my answer, or provide something new. Until them go away.

 

[hong]

Oh does it not now. I suppose that means you can start by elimating a very earlier argument showing it did?

I suppose your lack of attempt means you cannot, or consider yourself above logic. You are of course the absolute never wrong authority on everything right?

You have read my oppinion on argument from authority surely by now. So you should have expected this response.

Go show me that this catagory does not exists. Cease in merely saying "IT DOES NOT"

Unless that is all you can say. In that case go join Auraseer and have your own little discussion. Since you both like thinking no further than your own unbacked claims.

When you are ready to join the 'discussion' instead of adding commentary, go dig up some of premises and destroy them.

You're not very good at this, you realise.


Hong "for example, you have yet to refer to yourself in Capital Letters" Ooi

 

[gfunk]

Go show me that this catagory does not exists. Cease in merely saying "IT DOES NOT"

The burden of proof is on you, I'm afraid.

No one can prove that Santa Claus does not exist. Just like no one can prove that your phantom Death spell but not [Death] spell category does not exist.

You must convince us that it does exist and you are not doing a very good job.

You seem to be a dictionary-phile, how about this one:

IMBECLIE
Main Entry: im·be·cile
Pronunciation: 'im-b&-s&l, -"sil
Function: noun
Etymology: French imbécile, n., from adjective, weak, weak-minded, from Latin imbecillus
Date: 1802
1 : a mentally deficient person; especially : a feebleminded person having a mental age of three to seven years and requiring supervision in the performance of routine daily tasks of self-care
2 : FOOL, IDIOT
- imbecile or im·be·cil·ic /"im-b&-'si-lik/ adjective