From the Glossary under Death Attacks: Death attacks slay instantly. A victim cannot be made stable and thereby kept alive.
There are many death spells and effects in the game which deal hit point damage. What happens when the target gets into the negatives? Do they simply die outright?
The above text makes little sense to me in the context of the game since very few death effects outright kill the target anymore.
From the Glossary under Death Attacks: Death attacks slay instantly. A victim cannot be made stable and thereby kept alive.
There are many death spells and effects in the game which deal hit point damage. What happens when the target gets into the negatives? Do they simply die outright?
The above text makes little sense to me in the context of the game since very few death effects outright kill the target anymore.
You think it is strange that they have written something that only applies to a few selected spells and effects? - Honestly I can't see the problem in that.
Pathfinder choose to remove most death effects from the game so that the few that are left will be more epic and unique. Death effects are very powerfull, not only do they kill the person outright, but they also make it nearly impossible to ressurect the person.
From the Glossary under Death Attacks: Death attacks slay instantly. A victim cannot be made stable and thereby kept alive.
There are many death spells and effects in the game which deal hit point damage. What happens when the target gets into the negatives? Do they simply die outright?
The above text makes little sense to me in the context of the game since very few death effects outright kill the target anymore.
You think it is strange that they have written something that only applies to a few selected spells and effects? - Honestly I can't see the problem in that.
Pathfinder choose to remove most death effects from the game so that the few that are left will be more epic and unique. Death effects are very powerfull, not only do they kill the person outright, but they also make it nearly impossible to ressurect the person.
Except most DON'T kill a person outright. They made what appears to be a blanket rule meant to apply to ALL death attacks when it can't possibly apply to even a majority (since most don't simply kill, but rather deal damage).
Wouldn't dealing damage potentially leave someone at negative hit points and dying--exactly opposite of what the text says?
Yeah I see what you are getting at.
The question would be: Does a death effect that deals hp damage enough to take the target to 0 or negative hps kill the creature outright?
Clearly failing the save against say a Finger of Death spell, taking the damage, and still have positive hps wouldn't kill the target. And clearly making the save and taking enough to drop it below its negative con score would kill it outright.
So you have situations where a target fails its save and ends up with say -2 hps. Should that kill the creature outright? What about making the save and still taking enough damage to go to -2?
I don't think theres any clear answers here.
I'm inclined to treat Death effect spells the same as the Disintegrate spell, which says "Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated." This applies both to failed saves and successful saves. Applying this to Death spells certainly makes them more dangerous, but shouldn't spells described as [death] be pretty badass? It also makes them more useful against heavily damaged targets, when a succesful save could still pose a significant risk of outright death even against high con score targets. This treatment would also be consistent with the text under Death effects in the conditions section of the CRB.
Yeah I see what you are getting at.
The question would be: Does a death effect that deals hp damage enough to take the target to 0 or negative hps kill the creature outright?
Clearly failing the save against say a Finger of Death spell, taking the damage, and still have positive hps wouldn't kill the target. And clearly making the save and taking enough to drop it below its negative con score would kill it outright.
So you have situations where a target fails its save and ends up with say -2 hps. Should that kill the creature outright? What about making the save and still taking enough damage to go to -2?
I don't think theres any clear answers here.
I'm inclined to treat Death effect spells the same as the Disintegrate spell, which says "Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated." This applies both to failed saves and successful saves. Applying this to Death spells certainly makes them more dangerous, but shouldn't spells described as [death] be pretty badass? It also makes them more useful against heavily damaged targets, when a succesful save could still pose a significant risk of outright death even against high con score targets. This treatment would also be consistent with the text under Death effects in the conditions section of the CRB.
I guess it could also mean that, once you are put into negatives, you cannot stabilize under any circumstances and are pretty much guaranteed to bleed out.
I think it's a rather important distinction actually. It means you can't use breath of life to bring them back.
I'm inclined to treat Death effect spells the same as the Disintegrate spell, which says "Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated." This applies both to failed saves and successful saves. Applying this to Death spells certainly makes them more dangerous, but shouldn't spells described as [death] be pretty badass? It also makes them more useful against heavily damaged targets, when a succesful save could still pose a significant risk of outright death even against high con score targets. This treatment would also be consistent with the text under Death effects in the conditions section of the CRB.
I think this is the way to go. Let's remember that before 3.5, a failure on a save vs. disintegrate meant....disintegration. They changed it to damage, but put the 0 hp bit in there to keep it dangerous and scary.
Then Paizo comes along and decides to do the same for all save of die spells, but they left something hanging. If I were to say, "I like the new disintegrate rules, let's apply that principle to all save or die effects", I would transfer the language from disintegrate to all the other spells and set the damage however I judged best.
I do believe the death attack is in reference to the assassin death attack ability...not so much [death] spells.
The Death Attack entry in Appendix 1: Special Abilities, is verbatim from the SRD except they changed 'dead equals -10hp' to 'hit points equal to or less than his negative Constitution score'.
(Incidentally, that one change is in error; it was obviously copy/pasted from the section dealing with hit points and death. The whole purpose of the entry it replaces was to establish that dead is dead and it means -10. They should have left off the 'or less than' part.)
This entry most definitely applies to all Death Attacks including spells. It still makes reference to Death Ward protecting from these attacks. Death Ward states "The subject gains a +4 morale bonus on saves against all death spells and magical death effects." And that stipulation has been in the spell since 3.0.
However, the entry isn't "wrong", it is incomplete. There are still death spells and magical death effects that work as described; they just need to add to the entry to clarify the effects that have been changed.