Juggernaut..resurrected?

[Egres]

This is the exact copy of a thread of mine on the WotC boards,but i decided to post it here too cause i've found that there are many good rule-lawyers here(not to mention Hypersmurf,that here is even a moderator!).

However...

Well,perhaps i've found a way to support my thoughts about Juggernaut Resurrection.(thanks to cwslyclgh)

An object doesn't have any class-feature (unless you are polimorphed in an object,of course), isn't it?

Ok,the Immunity to Healing sub-school of the Juggernaut is a class feature.

Then,from the 3.5 FAQ:

If you’re dead, you become an object.

And from the PHB glossary:

Creature: A living or otherwise active being, not an object.


Then,this means that you can now Cast Raise Dead or Resurrection and so on on your Juggernaut,cause objects don't have class features.!

Is this my dream become true ,or did i miss something?

 

[Staffan]

By that reading, you wouldn't qualify as a target for raise dead, because raise dead targets "a dead creature."

 

[Egres]

By that reading, you wouldn't qualify as a target for raise dead, because raise dead targets "a dead creature."

Dead creatures are objects,just particular ones.

In fact,apples are fruits,but fruits aren't only apples.

You can't cast Raise dead on all objects( fruits),but you can cast it on dead creatures(apples).

 

[Alzrius]

These aren't class features, they're type features (unless I recall wrongly). That is, they're defining characteristics of what it means to be that type of creature. Hence why you can't use raise dead on an Outsider, even after it's dead.

 

[DreamChaser]

i've been following this thread since early on over at the Eberron boards. Here's a link.

http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=4290556#post4290556

Its an interesting, if slightly absurd, exercise in trying to exploit that fact that not every little detail of everything is equated into a rule. Like the lack of any clear description of the "dead" condition (it doesn't say otherwise so why can't you still fight?).

I'm very much enjoying the debate.

DC

 

[Hypersmurf]

Like the lack of any clear description of the "dead" condition (it doesn't say otherwise so why can't you still fight?).

In 3E, you couldn't.

-Hyp.

 

[Methos of Aundair]

Originally posted by Egres

This is the exact copy of a thread of mine on the WotC boards,but i decided to post it here too cause i've found that there are many good rule-lawyers here

Also point out, the posters on Enworld tend to be more respectful and mature than that of WizCo, at least in my opinion.

I also am enjoying the debate and am curious how it plays out here.

 

[DreamChaser]

Also point out, the posters on Enworld tend to be more respectful and mature than that of WizCo, at least in my opinion.

I also am enjoying the debate and am curious how it plays out here.

The mod's here are much faster to smack down any infantile behavior; a trait I very much respect. Here's to more verbal sparing.

DC

 

[Egres]

OMG...i find you here too!

Ok then..probably i can sum up my position in this way:

From the PHB glossary:

Class feature: Any special characteristic derived from a Character class.

Character[...]The words "character" and "creature" are often used synonimously within these rules,since almost any creature could be a character within the game, and every character is a creature(as opposed to an object).

Character Class: One of the eleven player character types(list of core classes).[...]
Character class may also refer to a non-player character class or a Prestige class

Creature: A living or otherwise active being, not an object.

Well,please help me understand:

1)To have Class features you must have a Character Class.

2)Every Character is a Creature.

3)Creature can be only living or otherwise active being.

How can we say then that a dead creature (then a not-living,not active being thing) can have class features?

 

[DreamChaser]

Nowhere does it say the souls don't have class features nor does it say what class features are.

Now, here is a thought. A Dragon Disciple. This is a class through which a sorcerer (or bard) underegoes a metamorphosis. Each level, they gain some change that ends in an apotheosis (total change of being). As he advances he gains class features that are also traits of a template (Half-Dragon). Eventually, he becomes a half dragon; in fact, in Savage Species terms, this is not unlike a half-dragon racial class.

Both of these things throw you're concept that Class Features and Traits are mutually exclusive into some doubt. An Ogre Mage taking Ogre-Mage levels has what you call Traits as Class Features. A Dragon Disciple is gaining half-dragon abilitis as class features.

Thus, while I can no more prove what a class feature is or isn't than you can, there is a strong implication that they are not mutually exclusive from traits and thus cannot be so easily lost when dead, as you had argued.

When dealing with the idea of magic jar and mind switch, there is a difference, as you have pointed out: the body is not dead so the soul cannot take the whole being with it. The being is, in essence, divided (something special presumably that only a spell can accomplish). Death is not a spell effect (although some spells do mimic it). There is no indication that death can divide a person's essence.

And to go a step simpler:
If a body cannot have any feature's or traits because it is an object but when a body is reanimated by its spirit (using the proper magic) all class abilities and traits, save those lost do to level loss, are regained there are only two core explanations:

1) all features accompany the spirit/soul/life force and return with it.
2) a portion of them cease to exist for a time and then return when the reanimation is complete.

You are arguing that #2 is the case, despite a major logical counter points: Occam's Razor (the simplest explanation is probably the most correct).

None of the raise/res spells speak of a loss and regain of abilities/features (other than the level/constitution loss which is specifically quanitified and difficult to misconstrue). Because no such mention is made, it is fallacious to assume that such a process exists. The simplest explanation is that all class features remain wholy with the spirit/soul/life force because no other placement is given as an option.

DC