|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, so this has bothered me for a long time. Paizo, sit down, we need to have a talk.
Listen Paizo . . . you're doing great. I like a lot of the stuff you do. I'm really excited about starfinder second edition, I'm happy to see Pathfinder 2e out there, I'm a fan of most of the stuff you've been doing. Sure, there's a few things that are rough around the edges. . . aiding another need a bit of fixing . . . I personally think the incapacitate trait is harsh and needs a reworking, but mostly we are okay.
But we gotta talk about you throwing the death effect out there all the time. I don't think you guys realize what throwing the death tag on something means. Y'see, undead and constructs have pretty much blanket immunity to 'death effects' which means, as far as I can tell, anything with the death trait. Now, that works great for things like finger of death. Undead are already dead, finger of death shouldn't work on them. Scare to Death, undead don't have a heartbeat, they can's be scared to death, got it.
But let's look over here at the Assassin's 'Angel of Mercy' Feat. Gives all of your attacks the death trait against the target of your Assassin's Mark. So, if I'm reading the rules right, if your assassin targets an undead for assassination to get that juicy backstabber and deadly trait on their attacks . . . the undead becomes immune to all their weapons trikes. All of them. Look it up, you CAN'T elect to turn angel of death off, so you level up, and suddenly become worse.
But the big problem here, the one I called you in for, is the Kineticist feat "All shall end in flames." Now I get it . . . it can kill people, including the kineticist, and reincarnate them . . . sounds like a death effect. But remember, that now means that it can't hurt undead or constructs now. All shall end in flames? Hardly, apparently if you are undead you can walk through them just fine.
So, listen, I understand that some things feel like they should have the death effect, but remember what that means. If you want undead to be immune to the 'complete and utter destruction' thing, add a rider to spells saying 'while undead are immune to the complete destruction portion of this spell, they can still be damaged by it, and destroyed normally as if the impulse did not have the death trait' or something like that.
I love your games man, but please remember to double=check the implication of a trait when you add it to an ability.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know that I entirely agree with the read on "Immune: death effects," if only because it falls under the "too bad to be true." I think my Strikes gaining the death trait would still harm undead targets, but they would be immune to the actual "death effect". Like, it isn't going to be slain.
I mean, even if it is intended to work this way, it definitely falls under 99% of GMs aren't going to run it this way.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know that I entirely agree with the read on "Immune: death effects," if only because it falls under the "too bad to be true."
It should be noted that the game never mentions too bad to be true only "If one version is too good to be true, it probably is." For the bad you have to rule it has "problematic repercussions or doesn’t work as intended". In this situation it's likely the same conclusion but this way someone looking up the quoted line will find them.
General Rules
Source Core Rulebook pg. 443 [Ambiguous Rules]
"Sometimes a rule could be interpreted multiple ways. If one version is too good to be true, it probably is. If a rule seems to have wording with problematic repercussions or doesn’t work as intended, work with your group to find a good solution, rather than just playing with the rule as printed."
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I still maintain that just because a creature has immunity to one of the traits, that doesn't mean that they get blanket immunity to everything that the effect or ability does.
some complex effects might have parts that affect you even if you're immune to one of the effect's traits
The example given is different damage types.
But that one example is not exhaustive.
Edit: Previous thread here.
I'm wondering if the Death trait only applies to application of Death, Dying, Wounded, Doomed. (List being pulled as condition/levels that directly involved in determining one's becoming dead) HP may not be directly related to DEATH, as it primarily simply triggers dying once reaching 0. That is partially not true, however, as I believe it is also listed somewhere that any hit doing more than 2x max hit points damage also triggers death.
It might be nice to have a rider on the Death trait saying immunity to this trait only stops the application of rendering Death, and potentially increasing listed conditions, such as dying, doomed, etc. depending on what the developers intentions were for it. It does seem like it would/could come up frequently enough to have it generally stated, so each death effect spell/ability doesn't have to restate it. (and any exceptions could be stated in particular death effects, such as any ability they don't want doing HP damage to those immune to death effects)
Thanks for the reference about complex effects it reinforces that the probably intent for most such immunities from death effects is probably intended to stop the death effect, but not necessarily other aspects. I can imagine running into conditions where I'd imagine HP damage might have been intended to have been folded in too. Certainly something adding the death trait, probably immunity from the trait would simply be removal of the trait, not removing the effects of the ability before the trait was applied. (if that makes sense)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's funny, the Death trait almost seems to be (at least) two seemingly mutually exclusive traits in a trench coat.
1. A creature takes no damage but dies instantly, presumably through some sort of system shock or having ones soul removed suddenly.
2. A creature takes damage as normal but if they fall to 0 hit points they die without further ceremony.
Since most undead do 2 on their own normally (ignoring for now that most other NPCs do by default, too), it hardly makes sense for them to be immune to it. Meanwhile some effects might have both as different results ie save and take damage with a chance to die instantly, or fail and take no damage but still die instantly, which only naturally creates a further conundrum in that death immune creatures take more damage for making the save if the damage is treated as ignoring their immunity, while ruling in favour of total immunity runs the question of why this particular fear or fire effect is specifically deathly and therefore can't touch an undead, where another could.
I kind of feel like the death trait should only apply to things that kill you instantly with no damage, and the "die at 0" should either be a different trait or not a trait at all (premaster Disintegrate reduced bodies to ash without any special trait, doesn't seem like it's really that necessary)
|
I feel the Death trait is too much of a 0-100% thing.
If you are living and it kills you, you die. No Heroic recovery for you.
If you are undead, it does nothing.
As a clear PC-killer, it should be used extremely sparingly and not on staple damaging spells such as Vampiric Touch or Phantasmal Killer that are already potent spells without even taking into account the Death trait.
One more small clarification to hope for in the remaster, I suppose. Would make sense for all shall end in flames to have it if there is a slight change to the rules, since it's a post ogl book technically.
One more small clarification to hope for in the remaster, I suppose. Would make sense for all shall end in flames to have it if there is a slight change to the rules, since it's a post ogl book technically.
What actual rules change needs made?
The 'Complex Effects' clause of the Immunity rules already exists. At most, the rule needs more examples so that people don't assume that "multiple damage types" is the only thing that qualifies as a complex effect.
I mean personally another line along the lines of "a creature immune to death effects is only immune to being killed immediately if brought to 0 HP by the effect, not to effects such as damage.". I'm not a writer and I'm sure there are loopholes in what I wrote but something to that effect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agree with gaulin. The problem with the complex immunity rule is that while some effects are very obvious, it's extremely vague for a number of other abilities, to the point where people can't even agree if the rule should be applied at all, much less how to divide up effects.
Plus the problem here is as much about blanket immunity as it is about complex effects. Ruling Angel of Death as to only apply the death trait to its own effect makes sense, but All Shall End In Flames only does the one thing, and letting it bypass bonuses to saves against death effects feels just as wrong as undead being immune to it.
I really wish that traits on spells/feats/abilities generally were connected to the specific thing they are connected to, and not just the spell/ability as a whole. Honestly, I think there should only be 3 types of damage (physical, Energy, and spirit) and every other aspect of damage should be a trait that is specifically connected to the damage instance, but that feels like much more of a 3rd edition thing than a remastery thing. Fire being a trait and a damage type is another example of this unnecessary confusion.
Like vampiric touch could just do energy (void) damage, and the death trait would only be about being reduced to 0 HP and it feels like that would be much clearer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All Shall End In Flames only does the one thing, and letting it bypass bonuses to saves against death effects feels just as wrong as undead being immune to it.
Strong disagree.
Let's count:
1) This deals 13d6 fire damage with a basic Reflex save against your class DC.
2) Any creature dropped to 0 HP by this fire dies, reduced to a pile of ash.
3) If you die to this impulse, you return to life at the start of your next turn in the same space. When you return, you have Hit Points equal to double your level.
First, I see three different things that it does.
Second, only one of those makes sense to have the Death trait on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) This deals 13d6 fire damage with a basic Reflex save against your class DC.2) Any creature dropped to 0 HP by this fire dies, reduced to a pile of ash.
Are you really making the argument these are completely distinct effects? You can't even reach one without the other. It's completely part of the damage dealing effect.
Second, only one of those makes sense to have the Death trait on.
So if I have an effect that gives me a bonus to saves against death effects, this particular death effect should just... get to bypass that? Since you're arguing the rest of the spell should lose the trait.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes.
Does bonuses vs death effects normally protect you from fire damage?
Are you arguing that your bonus to saves against death effects is going to do anything if you get hit by Fireball?
The Death effect part of All Shall End In Flames doesn't have a save to get a bonus against.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well it's confusing because then what would something like death wards bonus vs death effects ever protect you from? What's the difference between finger of deaths save and all shall end in flames save? One is negative damage and one is fire, but you should get the extra bonus from death wards against finger of death because of the theme of it?
Are you arguing that your bonus to saves against death effects is going to do anything if you get hit by Fireball?
If Fireball had the death trait, yeah.
The saves vs the death effects of Phantasmal Killer and Scare to Death. Probably some other things that I didn't find instantly too.
Are all undead immune to Lethal Finisher too? Can't even do regular damage against them?
Well it's confusing because then what would something like death wards bonus vs death effects ever protect you from? What's the difference between finger of deaths save and all shall end in flames save? One is negative damage and one is fire, but you should get the extra bonus from death wards against finger of death because of the theme of it?
Also, curious how you feel about Death Ward's lack of adding a bonus to saves against Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill.
And to be clear, my point in bringing all of this up is that dealing with complex effects and immunities is complicated.
It probably needs cleaned up in the general rules for immunity and resistances. And could certainly use more examples given in the rules.
The saves vs the death effects of Phantasmal Killer and Scare to Death. Probably some other things that I didn't find instantly too.
Both interesting examples because Scare does specify that only one part of the effect has the death trait (although it still runs into issues because of it).
Phantasmal Killer has the opposite thing going on though. The instant death mechanic gains the incapacitation trait, but the death trait is on the spell itself, which makes the claim the death mechanic should only apply to the latter effect feel odd, since whoever wrote it clearly knew spelling that out was an option.
Well it's confusing because then what would something like death wards bonus vs death effects ever protect you from? What's the difference between finger of deaths save and all shall end in flames save? One is negative damage and one is fire, but you should get the extra bonus from death wards against finger of death because of the theme of it?Also, curious how you feel about Death Ward's lack of adding a bonus to saves against Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill.
I don't understand what you mean? Those things don't have saves?
I don't understand what you mean? Those things don't have saves?Well it's confusing because then what would something like death wards bonus vs death effects ever protect you from? What's the difference between finger of deaths save and all shall end in flames save? One is negative damage and one is fire, but you should get the extra bonus from death wards against finger of death because of the theme of it?Also, curious how you feel about Death Ward's lack of adding a bonus to saves against Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill.
That's what I'm pointing out.
You were mentioning that Death's Ward should work for the save against the fire damage in All Shall End in Flames because Death's Ward is supposed to provide some sort of protection against all Death effects.
But I am not following the logic. The Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill also don't allow saves. So the bonus to saves provided by Death's Ward doesn't do anything there either. And that's not a problem because...?
The only thing I can think of is because Death's Ward also gives void damage resistance. So it will help against Power Word Kill by giving damage resistance.
But it also does that against Finger of Death.
And Death's Ward isn't supposed to give Fire resistance. So why is it a problem that it doesn't do anything to All Shall End in Flames?
The Death trait is a feature that applies an effect, not directly related with the damage type, that would be the one thing applied if damages undead or not, instead the Death trait.
What undead is immune to is the effect of the Death trait.
The Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill also don't allow saves. So the bonus to saves provided by Death's Ward doesn't do anything there either. And that's not a problem because...?
Because neither of those things offer saving throws. They're interacting with save based mechanics exactly as expected (not at all).
It's a complete non sequitur, though presumably that's on purpose. This is some particularly silly trolling even for you though, and doesn't really do anything to advance the argument you want to make.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dunno if someone already posted this, but the Inmunity entry states that "You can still be targeted by an ability that includes an effect or condition you are immune to; you just don't apply that particular effect or condition."
From this I gather that let's say fear component of Unspeakable Shadow, which has the death trait, still affects you even if you are inmune to death effects, you just cannot die to the crit failure.
Edit: In this case, the Death effect should be only on the secondary save, as the interaction with Death Guard makes you receive a bonus to saves against the fear component but it can be argued that you don't receive either immunity or a bonus against the secondary save cause it only has incapacitation. As much as this needs to be errated, the point still stands, though. Same argument can be said about Wail of the Banshee and its damage and drain, for example.
I was just trying to say that if the actual damage part of a death effect (fire damage from all shall end in flames) and the actual dieing part of a death effect (being reduced to ashes) really are totally seperate, then things like bonuses to saves vs death effects makes things murkier. Looking through the list of things with the death trait on AoN, almost all of them deal damage and the damage dealt needs a save. The actual dieing part just happens because you reach 0 HP. So either death wards saves to death effects do almost nothing because it applies to almost nothing(which would be a bummer since it's been very useful in my game for not insta dieing to a few things) or death trait and the damage dealt by effects with the death trait are linked.
That's the sort of thing that makes the death trait on all shall end in flames fiddly on things that are immune to death effects. I could see a gm ruling either way, and I do recognize it as a bummer similar to the OP.
I was just trying to say that if the actual damage part of a death effect (fire damage from all shall end in flames) and the actual dieing part of a death effect (being reduced to ashes) really are totally seperate, then things like bonuses to saves vs death effects makes things murkier. Looking through the list of things with the death trait on AoN, almost all of them deal damage and the damage dealt needs a save. The actual dieing part just happens because you reach 0 HP. So either death wards saves to death effects do almost nothing because it applies to almost nothing(which would be a bummer since it's been very useful in my game for not insta dieing to a few things) or death trait and the damage dealt by effects with the death trait are linked.
That's the sort of thing that makes the death trait on all shall end in flames fiddly on things that are immune to death effects. I could see a gm ruling either way, and I do recognize it as a bummer similar to the OP.
I don't think it is that murky. A bonus to saves applies cause it makes you less likely to die to the death effect. An inmunity only applies IF you would die to the death effect.
Remember that
The subordinate action doesn’t gain any of the traits of the larger action unless specified.
So any strike from a action with the death trait do not gain the death trait
I would just have the creatures be immune to the death trait. Not everything with the death trait, boom, problem solved :p
The Reaper's Spellgun and Power Word Kill also don't allow saves. So the bonus to saves provided by Death's Ward doesn't do anything there either. And that's not a problem because...?Because neither of those things offer saving throws. They're interacting with save based mechanics exactly as expected (not at all).
It's a complete non sequitur, though presumably that's on purpose. This is some particularly silly trolling even for you though, and doesn't really do anything to advance the argument you want to make.
The debate topic I am speaking against is the idea that it is a wrong ruling to say that Death's Ward doesn't do anything against All Shall End in Flames.
Your idea is that the bonus to saves should instead be applied to the save against the fire damage since the actual death effect doesn't allow a save.
I'm saying that that idea is a bit off because there are plenty of death effects that don't allow a save. All Shall End in Flames is just another one of those - like Power Word Kill. So All Shall End in Flames also interacts with the death effect save exactly as intended - which is not at all since the death effect doesn't allow a save.
There is no reason to misapply the bonus to saves against death effects to a fire effect because that is the only part of the complex effect that allows a save.
Tbh, I think it works as written (but I agree it could've been written better). Undead are immune to death effects associated with the death trait, but they're not immune to weapons. I mean, imagine I enchanted one of those huge boulders from Wile E. Coyote Looney Tunes cartoons with a death trait, and then catapulted it at a ghoul. Does the boulder just bounce off the ghoul for 0 dmg? I certainly hope not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm saying that that idea is a bit off because there are plenty of death effects that don't allow a save. All Shall End in Flames is just another one of those
Except, again, that's objectively untrue. It is literally a spell with the death trait that forces a save.
I'm saying that that idea is a bit off because there are plenty of death effects that don't allow a save. All Shall End in Flames is just another one of thoseExcept, again, that's objectively untrue. It is literally a spell with the death trait that forces a save.
And you say that as though the Complex Effects rule doesn't exist.
Sure. if you decide that All Shall End in Flames is a simple effect and everything that it lists in one thing that it does, then the death trait applies to everything.
But if I look at it and see a complex effect where one is a fire effect that has damage with a save, then there is a death effect, and finally there is a resurrection effect - there is no good RAW reason why the bonus to saves or immunity to Death effects should apply to the fire effect.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
one is a fire effect that has damage with a save, then there is a death effect
How do you trigger the death effect? Your previous examples of complex effects have all referred to entirely different components, like a spell that deals multiple types of damage, or another spell that deals damage and creates a hazard.
... Since this is an entirely separate effect, there has to be some way to trigger it on its own, right?
... Since this is an entirely separate effect, there has to be some way to trigger it on its own, right?
Why is that the requirement?
I have also used the example of Inkshot and Briny Bolt.
If a target is immune to Poison, should they avoid the Dazzled effect of Inkshot? The toxic ink will feel like water at that point right?
But water by itself can still cause the Dazzled condition as seen in Briny Bolt.
And in both cases, you can't inflict the Dazzled condition on its own right? But being immune to Dazzled shouldn't make you immune to the damage that the spell may cause.
... Since this is an entirely separate effect, there has to be some way to trigger it on its own, right?Why is that the requirement?
I have also used the example of Inkshot and Briny Bolt.
If a target is immune to Poison, should they avoid the Dazzled effect? The toxic ink will feel like water at that point right?
But water by itself can still cause the Dazzled condition as seen in Briny Bolt.
Not water but salt water. Second, it's magic so it kind of makes it moot as you can magic water to do something it can't normally do: you can't claim water can deal good damage because holy water deals it. Nothing in inkshot indicates its effect aren't from poison [in fact, it mentions "stinging ink" and doesn't say anything about interact action to end the effect because it's poison vs plain old water]
on the greater point, when you have multiple effects attached to the same roll, they become entwined essentially: without doing so, you have weird results with various bonuses and effects. For instance, does a bonus to death magic only apply AFTER you die from All Shall End in Flames [ie, when the death effect kicks in]? How about having a bonus to fire but a minus to death effects [you can't know if you get a minus until you've already failed and died]?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If bonuses or immunity would work on finger of death, they should apply the same way to all shall end in flames. They function identically (damage resulting in 0 HP = death) except for the damage type.
It might look strange narratively, but there is no mechanics reason why Finger of Death couldn't also be a complex effect with both a Negative damage effect and a Death effect.
Certainly if a target is immune to Death effects that doesn't automatically expand to include all negative energy effects. Eclipse Burst would still do full damage to someone who had a spell effect that gives bonuses or immunity to Death effects.
Undead happen to have immunity to both, but that isn't required.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Welp I definitely disagree. There's a ton of spells and such that deal damage and have the death trait and only a single save for both. As I said earlier death ward has been huge for my character against some threats with crazy breath weapons that turn characters to ashes and such. If you're telling me death ward only applies to saves that literally only kill character or not (no damage involved), then I'll just have to agree to disagree. It really sounds to me like you're cherry picking what you want to happen. I think that RAI all shall end in flames is probably meant to damage undead. But saying that even RAW it does is a little fishy.
If anything all this discourse also proves that the death trait should be further clarified, or as op wants, less things should have the death effect. Even if you are right, breithauptclan, it's not clear that your view is what's intended.
on the greater point, when you have multiple effects attached to the same roll, they become entwined essentially: without doing so, you have weird results with various bonuses and effects. For instance, does a bonus to death magic only apply AFTER you die from All Shall End in Flames [ie, when the death effect kicks in]? How about having a bonus to fire but a minus to death effects [you can't know if you get a minus until you've already failed and died]?
Which makes it clearer that All Shall End in Flames is two separate effects.
The Fire effect has the saving throw roll.
The death effect has no roll. It is triggered solely by ending up at 0 HP when the fire effect is finished.
Welp I definitely disagree. There's a ton of spells and such that deal damage and have the death trait and only a single save for both. As I said earlier death ward has been huge for my character against some threats with crazy breath weapons that turn characters to ashes and such. If you're telling me death ward only applies to saves that literally only kill character or not (no damage involved), then I'll just have to agree to disagree. It really sounds to me like you're cherry picking what you want to happen. I think that RAI all shall end in flames is probably meant to damage undead. But saying that even RAW it does is a little fishy.
I think that is mostly due to what Sibelius Eos Owm mentioned at the start of this thread. That the Death trait is actually two different traits wrapped up together.
One being 'can cause you to die without touching your HP'.
The other being 'when you drop to 0 HP you die without using the Death and Dying rules'.
If anything all this discourse also proves that the death trait should be further clarified,
Ultimately that is all I am going for any time that I dig in my heels on some topic or another in one of these threads. Is it possible for one side to prove their case conclusively, or does this actually need clarifications in the rules?
Which makes it clearer that All Shall End in Flames is two separate effects.
Two separate effects that cannot exist independently other, reference traits applied to the whole spell (as opposed to being attached to specific components) and are entirely interdependent in their functionality.
So in other words, not separate at all.
Or if they are...
The Fire effect has the saving throw roll.
Are you sure the fire trait, the damage, and the reflex saving throw aren't all separate from each other too?