Finger of Death should be "Finger of Uncsonsciousness"

[Dalebert]

It lacks the crucial phrase "If this dmg reduces a creatures hit points to zero, it dies." On an NPC it would do that but on a PC, they're just going to fall unconscious unless it does massive dmg (current total + max hp). You think that was an oversight? Was it intended to be this whimpy? It's a very scary-sounding single-target 7th level spell that you'd expect liches to use on the PCs, but that's unlikely to kill most characters of tier 2 which are also the lowest levels characters will likely encounter a spellcaster of that ability.

[Scyrner]

When I used it, as a DM (on a VG Warlock of the Fiend) I just house ruled it so that it did what I wanted it to, because you're correct, it should kill you when you hit 0 hp.

[Unoriginal]

It lacks the crucial phrase "If this dmg reduces a creatures hit points to zero, it dies." On an NPC it would do that but on a PC, they're just going to fall unconscious unless it does massive dmg (current total + max hp). You think that was an oversight? Was it intended to be this whimpy? It's a very scary-sounding single-target 7th level spell that you'd expect liches to use on the PCs, but that's unlikely to kill most characters of tier 2 which are also the lowest levels characters will likely encounter a spellcaster of that ability.

One, it's not whimpy, two, it's called "Finger of Death" because it raises zombies when it kills.

[Dalebert]

One, it's not whimpy, two, it's called "Finger of Death" because it raises zombies when it kills.

Well, then that would be Finger of Undeath but whatever. Getting a free zombie in tier 3 is kinda meh but I do understand that it's a no-maintenance zombie. Still, that's a new perk of the spell in this edition as I recall and the point of the spell by all common sense reasoning should be to inst-kill someone. This is obviously as complaint as a DM; not a player. As a player, it will usually kill something as NPCs don't typically get death saves. It's hard enough to challenge smartly-build PCs as it is without out our super-villain scary things being bubble-wrapped for safety.

[ZorroGames]

It was named that (and acted radically differently than 5e) back in OD&D IIRC. A favorite reason High Level Clerics (who had it) were feared as much if not more than high level Wizards.

Failure in saving was not considered a viable option.

[KorvinStarmast]

It was named that (and acted radically differently than 5e) back in OD&D IIRC. A favorite reason High Level Clerics (who had it) were feared as much if not more than high level Wizards.

Failure in saving was not considered a viable option. It was a reverse of the raise dead spell.

Note: There are Anti-Clerics (listed below) who have similar powers to Clerics. Those Clerical spells underlined on the table for Cleric Spells have a reverse effect, all others functioning as noted. The chief exception is the Raise Dead spell which becomes:

The Finger of Death: Instead of raising the dead, this spell creates a "death ray" which will kill any creature unless a saving throw is made (where applicable). Range: 12". (A Cleric-type may use this spell in a life-or-death situation, but misuse will immediately turn him into an Anti-Cleric.) Anti-Clerics: Evil Acolyte, Evil Adept, Shaman, Evil Priest, Evil Curate, Evil Bishop, Evil Lama, Evil High Priest.M&M page 34

I note this for a couple of reasons, one of which was that in Men and Magic, alignment was Law/Neutral/Chaos and clerics were subject to a particular rule ...
Note that Clerics of 7th level and greater are either "Law" or "Chaos", and there is a sharp distinction between them. If a Patriarch receiving the above benefits changes sides, all the benefits will immediately be removed! M&M page 34 But a cleric who did not declare for law (perhaps this was meant for NPC's) were by definition labeled as evil.

[ZorroGames]

It was a reverse of the raise dead spell.


I note this for a couple of reasons, one of which was that in Men and Magic, alignment was Law/Neutral/Chaos and clerics were subject to a particular rule ... But a cleric who did not declare for law (perhaps this was meant for NPC's) were by definition labeled as evil.

Yes! I was too lazy... I mean busy talking with my wife... to go to the basement and look it up.

Thanks !

Edit: people in Sacramento where I first played OD&D always called it the Finger of Death so it has been imprinted as that from the beginning. And yes, the silly ones always pointed with the middle finger when an NPC cast it. :smallconfused:

[Dalebert]

Okay, I FoD-ed this thread to raise one more question.

If you are dropped to zero by this spell and then fail three death saves, did the spell kill you? I say "yes" but some disagree. I think it's already nerfed to crap and that it's also common-sense interpretation of the language. Technically, failing death saves is almost always the cause of death but you would'nt answer "How did your character die?" with "I failed three death saves". You'd say "I was killed by a minotaur". The point is, the REASON you are making death saves is because the spell dropped you to zero. If you stabalize or get healed, you're good. If you fail, then the spell killed you; just not instantly.

I would of course make an exception if the death save fails were induced by additional dmg. Then something else than FoD killed you.

[MaxWilson]

Okay, I FoD-ed this thread to raise one more question.

If you are dropped to zero by this spell and then fail three death saves, did the spell kill you?

My ruling: yes, unless something else finished you off (i.e. did damage/caused a death failure after Finger of Death did). This leads to the interesting possibility (roleplaying dilemma) of having to cut your friend's throat (auto-crit) to try to save him from the zombification which is slowly overtaking his body. If you've already died from having your throat cut, you obviously can't ALSO die from necromantic energy. At least if you cut his throat you can maybe resurrect him later.

Note that assigning credit for kills is also important for the Necromancer's Grim Harvest feature, not just for Finger of Death.

[The_Jette]

Ask your players, "If you die, do you mind your character getting turned into a zombie?"

If no, finger of death causes death and the character rises as a zombie.
If yes, finger of death doesn't cause the death. The character is just dead.

Unless this is for an AL game. In that case, as the DM make a judgment call and move forward.

[DivisibleByZero]

Ask your players, "If you die, do you mind your character getting turned into a zombie?"

If no, finger of death causes death and the character rises as a zombie.
If yes, finger of death doesn't cause the death. The character is just dead.

Unless this is for an AL game. In that case, as the DM make a judgment call and move forward.

I would ask my players: "Do you want to play DnD?" and that would be the end of the questioning.
If they elect to play, then they play by the same rules as everyone else, including being killed and raised as a zombie if that's what the situation/spell calls for.
If they can do it to NPCs and mobs, then NPCs and mobs can do it to them. Deal with it.
I'm not coddling players just because they want special treatment.... and yes, that's exactly what you just described.

[The_Jette]

I would ask my players: "Do you want to play DnD?" and that would be the end of the questioning.
If they elect to play, then they play by the same rules as everyone else, including being killed and raised as a zombie if that's what the situation/spell calls for.
If they can do it to NPCs and mobs, then NPCs and mobs can do it to them. Deal with it.
I'm not coddling players just because they want special treatment.... and yes, that's exactly what you just described.

Okay, congratulations. You're not coddling your players. Since there isn't actual RAW for this extremely specific situation, I don't see it as coddling. But, whatever. You do you.

[QuickLyRaiNbow]

Okay, congratulations. You're not coddling your players. Since there isn't actual RAW for this extremely specific situation, I don't see it as coddling. But, whatever. You do you.

I really do not see the resistance to consulting players about this sort of stuff.

[Dalebert]

I'm already annoyed that this spell is severely nerfed from the DM-scary-high-level spell toolbox. It's hard enough to challenge players at the higher levels. I've learned that it doesn't turn you into a zombie at 0 and accepted it. Now folks are trying to bubble-wrap it for safety even more. Now they're saying it has to be massive dmg to work, and that's extremely unlikely at the levels when it would be a threat. Even accepting that 3 failed saves are required for it to turn you into a zombie, it's really unlikely to actually happen unless your party is just completely apathetic toward your dying body.

So no. I will not be asking players what they want. I have my interpretation of it. If you manage to fail three death saves with no help, i.e. no additional dmg after dropping to zero, then you zombify. Yes, someone finishing you off in desperation would actually save you and let you be raised in the standard fashion, but let's be real. Why not just use a healer's kit?

[alchahest]

as a DM you can just make the spell say "you die and rise as a zombie regardless of you current or total HP". If killing your players is what makes you happy, then you can even forgo allowing a save! after all, it was their fault for uh, being in your game?