Defense against implosion

[Cronos988]

It works on any and all creatures that it can effect at all , which is any creature that is not gaseous or incorporeal. The spells text allows for no targets that survive the effect on a failed save. (Some creatures specific text counters this, the Tarrasque for example, has specific text on the issue. The undead and construct types have specific text on fortitude saves, the spell itself has no clause.). Save, or Die. There is *no* Save, or usually die.

That seems a lot like arguing semantics. Do you have any example of a creature or state of a creature to which implosion, by way of its mechanic (crushing) should not apply, but does?

That's the whole text as it appears in the PHB. There again is not a most, or usually in the text. its simply "A spell or special ability that instantly slays the target". Nothing in the entry states that the [Death] tag is the sole factor in determining this trait.

If you read the thread referenced above, you will note that "death effects" are NOT spells with the [death] tag. That would be redundant. Death effects are supernatural effects that, according to their description, are death effects.

Uhm... no? Power Word Kill is an enchantment, mind effecting compulsion with the death tag. Crisis of Life is a telepathy power with mind-affecting and death as tags. Clairsentience is also a power with the death tag. Note none of these have any ties to necromancy or negative energy, so that also counts pretty heavy against the Death Ward only protects against negative/necromancy effects.

And how does Power Word: Kill kill you? It is quite apparent that it attacks your life force. And it is a great example of why Death Ward has nothing to do with "save or die", because Power Word Kill is blocked and is not a SoD.

See thats the thing though, most of those do infact cause other effects *with mechanics* that *then* determine if they kill you. Vorpal severs the head, and then, as stated in the text, kills creatures that would be killed by decapitation. Phantasmal killer creates an illusion, that then, if your subject to fear may scare you to death. Cloud Kill conjures up a cloud of poison, that then might kill you if your not immune to poisons.

Can you live without a head? Great! But you head is still chopped off.
Are you immune to poisons? Great! There is still a cloud of poison.
Immune to fear effects? Great! That big scary illusion still appeared.

Implosion does not crush you and *then* check if thats fatal. It kills, or does nothing. That's why it is different.

I am sorry but this is nothing but semantics. All of the spells you listed do theoretically infinite damage if the target can be affected by their mechanic. Implosion is no different. You can either ignore the effect description altogether, or take it into account. You cannot ignore 90% of the effect description and rely solely on the last 2 words. That is not how you interpret a text, as I am sure any lawyer will attest to.

In fact, I coul make the same argument for say cloudkill, as cloudkill states "These vapors automatically kill any living creature with 3 or fewer HD". The immunities are in a different sentence, just as they are in the Implosion description. By that logic, cloudkill is a death effect.

Does anything in the rules draw any connection at all between the [death] descriptor and "death effects"?

No, but the term "death effect" is specifically spelled out in several abilities that attack your life force. This is presumably the case to make clear which abilities allow raising and which do not.