Fair warning??

[ARandomGod]

I happen to agree with the "expert"... I wouldn't use a death effect (i.e. save or die) unless I knew the players understood it to be a possibility. At least my group is not too crazy about raising the dead, and I'm not too crazy about them rolling up new characters for every session.

Plus, I would avoid killing them except near the end of a session... which further limits when I'd use a death effect.

Unfortunately, one of the main GM's I play under considers "fair warning" to be "your character just got ress'd from last time, he should know to expect it now."

 

[Emiricol]

My DM's version of 'fair warning'?

"Hey, good thing you killed that guy before he got his spell off, because it was going to be a save-or-die spell."

John, is that you?





(kidding)

 

[lonesoldier]

I consider the fact that the spells are in the PHB, and the players have a copy of said book, to constitute 'fair warning'.

Quoted for Truth,

Half the fun of RPGs is not knowing what the Abyss you are getting into.

 

[D-rock]

Half the fun of RPGs is not knowing what the Abyss you are getting into.

Well I think its about 55% , but your right on.

 

[rbingham2000]

Maybe the PCs meet a grumpy NPC who vehemently hates magic (cannot stand to be in the room with a magic-user, refuses to let them into his establishment, that kind of thing). When they grill him on why the hell he's so intolerant of magic, he can tell them about how this evil bastard sorcerer (the necromancer) took one of the only loved ones he had away from him with that aforementioned insta-death spell.

That would be the cue for them to head to the local cleric to have death wards placed on them.