Mettle + dead familiar

[Yogibear41]

If a character with Mettle has a familiar that dies, does a successful fortitude save allow him or her to completely negate the XP loss for the slain or dismissed familiar?

[nyjastul69]

No. Mettle protects against attacks. The loss of a familiar is not an attack.


attack
Any of numerous actions intended to harm, disable, or neutralize an opponent. The outcome of an attack is determined by an attack roll.

Source: PHB

In addition, there is a stickied thread at the top of this forum for this type of rules question.

[Telok]

If a character with Mettle has a familiar that dies, does a successful fortitude save allow him or her to completely negate the XP loss for the slain or dismissed familiar?

I may depend on your source of Mettle. The Crusader Mettle ability would work, it references any Fort or Will save that has a lesser effect on a successful saving throw. Hexblade Mettle says 'attack' and Pious Templar is spells only.

[nyjastul69]

I may depend on your source of Mettle. The Crusader Mettle ability would work, it references any Fort or Will save that has a lesser effect on a successful saving throw. Hexblade Mettle says 'attack' and Pious Templar is spells only.

That's a good point. I was working off the Hexblade definition.

[Yogibear41]

Could be possible to argue that since an "attack" killed the familiar that the fort save was also apart or a result of the "attack"


You could also potentially argue that since Tome of Battle came after Complete warrior that the Crusaders "mettle" is the updated form of the ability.

[nyjastul69]

Could be possible to argue that since an "attack" killed the familiar that the fort save was also apart or a result of the "attack"


You could also potentially argue that since Tome of Battle came after Complete warrior that the Crusaders "mettle" is the updated form of the ability.

Those things could be argued. Nothing says that those arguments​ are strong though.

[KillianHawkeye]

You could also potentially argue that since Tome of Battle came after Complete warrior that the Crusaders "mettle" is the updated form of the ability.

Not really. It wouldn't be the first time that a class feature worked differently for different classes. Hide In Plain Sight comes to mind.

[Jowgen]

I may depend on your source of Mettle. The Crusader Mettle ability would work, it references any Fort or Will save that has a lesser effect on a successful saving throw. Hexblade Mettle says 'attack' and Pious Templar is spells only.

This only applies if you disregard the Rules Compendium, which updates/uniformly defines Mettle.


Mettle is an ability that allows a creature to shrug off magical effects that are reduced in efficacy when the subject makes a successful Will or Fortitude saving throw, such as any spell with a saving throw entry of Will partial or Fortitude half. By making a successful saving throw, a creature that has mettle instead negates such an effect. An unconscious or sleeping creature doesn’t gain the benefit of mettle.

If you count the RC, then the question comes down to whether the Exp loss is a "Magical Effect"

[Telok]

And of course whether you consider the RC to be the general Mettle rule which is superceded by specific class versions (which are almost all slightly different) or if it's a specific replacement for all Mettle abilities.

[Jowgen]

And of course whether you consider the RC to be the general Mettle rule which is superceded by specific class versions (which are almost all slightly different) or if it's a specific replacement for all Mettle abilities.

Good point. Mettle was never otherwise formally defined to my knowledge. With RC it became a formally defined ability, like Evasion; and while it doesn't outright state that this definition superceeds all prior printings, it is the latest printing of a as-of-now defined ability.

So the question is, do you give priority to the General-vs-Specific rule or the later-superceeds-earlier rule. I personally lean towards the latter.

[Telok]

Good point. Mettle was never otherwise formally defined to my knowledge. With RC it became a formally defined ability, like Evasion; and while it doesn't outright state that this definition superceeds all prior printings, it is the latest printing of a as-of-now defined ability.

So the question is, do you give priority to the General-vs-Specific rule or the later-superceeds-earlier rule. I personally lean towards the latter.

Browser ate long replies twice. Yuck.
Correction: I was wrong about crusader, it specifies an attack.

General-vs-Specific: If RC redefined HIPS then that has implications for Shadowdancer PrC.

Some mettle abilities work against attacks, some against spells, some against spells and magical effects, some don't work while asleep and some do. A Fort:Half breath weapon is an attack but not a spell, there can be instances when a spell isn't an attack but you want to save any ways, and magic or non-magic environmental effects. Redefining Mettle makes real changes in classes abilities in some cases.