What's your opinion on "Save or Die" effects?

Generally, I tend to dislike all-or-nothing effects, unless they are so common that they average out (i.e. attack rolls)

I prefer spells and effects that affect you a little if you make your save, or more if you fail. Thrown in some resistance, immunity and vulnerabilities in there to shake things up in specific situations. In other words, I wish that poison, mental domination/charm, death etc were some kind of a mental fireball; it hits you bad or it hits you a little, but is unlikely to take you out of action in one roll.

I think, ultimately, they were a bad implementation of a good idea.

The idea is that if you're going to play the hero of some fantasy story, you're going to need the same perplexing 'plot armor' those heroes always seem to have.

Hit points were a better implementation of the same idea. Your hero doesn't just get stabbed and die like normal people do, he somehow escapes the deadly thrust each time (until his luck runs out). They're something you can manage as part of play, from both the player & DM perspectives. They still distort things if you take them too literally, rather than as plot armor, but whatever, I've yet to see an alternative work a lot better.

The idea of saves is that they can, well, save your character when he 'should have been killed' (or something equally final), so poison, magically turned to stone, that sort of thing, were given "saves." And beloved, long-time, high level characters had /much/ better saves.

The problem is that it was wrong-headed to make the distinction in the first place. Poison kills you, gorgons turn you to stone, etc - but a knife in the heart kills you just as certainly. Why does the dagger do 1-4/1-3, and the poison save-or-die?
Because Gygax goofed.
The poison should just do poison damage.
Because hps, for all their issues, are a better system for modeling plot armor.

JMHO

We are talking about attacks that instantly kill a character, right?

My rule is usually to be harsh but not unfair. All PCs can die, but they will only die if they mess up.

So I would probably telegraph a high risk of death ahead of time so they have a chance to react to it.

Additionally, I usually offer ways of resurrection, but it depends on how my players react to death. One of my players might say after failing a saving throw "Oh well, wanted to try a new class anyway" or I already know he is unhappy with his class choice. Then I just let him die in a climatic scene that gives a nice closure. Another player might say "Oh no, I really liked my character, I don't want him to die". In that cause, I react different. The enemies might actually stabilize him and take him prisoner, giving the other a chance to save him. Or he might die, but I also provide ways to revive him. In AL for example if you are below level 5, your faction would actually offer free resurrection if I recall correctly. After that it might still offer paid services. Or the party hears about a powerful cleric in the area and seeks him out. There might also be a potion nearby that can save the PC.

If I went for a petrification themed dungeons, before the party even goes there, I'd probably already hint on the existence of a potion that can heal petrification.

Fauchard1520 said:

Banshees are a good example. I made a "wail of the banshee" trap at the end of a Tomb of Horrors style crawl.

Click to expand...

I read that as "Wall of the Banshees", and had a terrifying mental image for a minute.