Misuse of the save mechanics in the MM to reintroduce save or die effects

[AntiStateQuixote]

It is almost as if the aim is to create a sensation of threat ("Oh no, I'm slowed, I might get turned to stone") without much danger of the threat actually appearing and taking a PC out of the game.

Sounds like you are exactly describing the "slow burn" effect that mearls talks about here.

The threat of being turned to stone is effective, exciting and fun. The reality of a PC being turned to stone and the "unfun" of dealing with that aftermath takes away from a particular (preferred my many?) style of play.

 

[chaotix42]

Ironic, that a certain monster's most feared/iconic ability also turns out to be the part which you need dread the least, because of the fairly low probability that said event (petrification) will actually occur...

Therefore, I conclude that what we need are fights consisting of 5 medusae spamming their gaze ability. Use high rates of occurrence to compensate for low odds...

This! Have the PCs fight several such creatures and benefit from redundancy. Tougher to do with elite/solo monsters though.

I like the mechanic though, and if I really wanted to be evil I'd just fit in a save penalty and level the monster up a bit.

 

[GorTeX]

Altough as we all know, most of the save or die effect have been removed, there are a few which survived the purge and made it as monsters abilities. In particular, some form of petrification can be seen in the basilisk, medusa and beholder I believe.

If I remember correctly, it was a goal to remove the '1 failed save kills/incapacitates you', not all killing/incapacitating powers.

For the medusa, it takes 3 failed saves (not 1) to become petrified. It it not a misuse of the save mechanic, as it represents the PC slowly turning to stone over 3 turns...or not if they shake off the effect. Since saving throws are now used as a timing mechanism, this fits perfectly and is not a misuse.

A medusa doesn't have to hit you multiple times to petrify you..just once but it takes a few seconds (18 to be exact) to turn a living being into stone apparently.

 

[ravenheart]

Petrification Saving Throw, bare with me!

How about treating it a bit like Death Saving Throws:

At the end of each round you make a "Petrification Saving Throw" after saving vs. slow, immobilized or any other detrimental condition. A failure automatically makes you slowed (if you weren't already), two consecutive failed saving throws makes you immobilized and a third failed save in a row makes you petrified. A success could perhaps alleviate the current condition (immobilized>slowed>normal), and 20+ would counter it completely.

I'm not sure if a (normal) successful save would alleviate the condition temporarily (meaning you'd either need a 20 or some other way of completely cancelling out conditions) or fight it off completely, thoughts?

Oh, by the way, this is my first post at ENWorld.org, been lurking around for some time now.

 

[chaotix42]

@ GorTex - I think it's only two failed saves: [attack hits] slowed [failed save] -> immobilized [failed save] -> petrified.

Not that it matters much to the discussion.

 

[Piratecat]

It would almost be a miracle for anyone to get turned to stone during a fight with a medusa!

Cheers

Heh. We lost two PCs and a NPC when we fought one.

Stupid medusa.

 

[Dracorat]

just once but it takes a few seconds (18 to be exact) to turn a living being into stone apparently.

Did you watch the nVidia medusa demo?

It took her like a whole minute...

 

[Taralan]

In addition, powers that grant saves to the affected party members trigger the progressive mechanic as well. If the cleric tries to help an immobilized fighter out, he may end up killing them because he fails a save.

I think they really need to look at other ways to design this mechanic, as it really doesn't make sense for an action that aids a character to push them closer to death's door.

This is a good point I had not considered and show why the save mechanism, altough it looks elegant at first is not appropriate to model such effects (like my Unfailing Ressources example).

Contrary to what some have stated the goal is not to make the gaze necessarily more deadly, but it should be scary, especially to much lower level PC. Surely as mentioned by Runestar we could just handwaive it for a village of peasants (altough this might stretch the credulity of some of the PC who have fought Medusa before and realise they can only very rarely turn someone to stone) but what about a fight with lower level PC ? If for some reason a group of First level PC decide to hunt a medusa, they SHOULD be turned to stone. With the current mechanic, they will be killed certainly, but very likely not affected by the monsters iconic ability.

I believe these effects are caused by a holdover reflex of the designer. A save used to represent a resistance, and the mechanic would have been perfectly fine as is in all previous editions (in fact it would work great as a patch for save or die effects lethality for Pathfinder if they want to steal that machanics) but it does not work for 4e because of the flat 55% chance of success. This is why a secondary attack is needed because the old saves have not been replaced by the new save (hence the name creates confusion) but by the new defenses (fortitude reflex and will).

Petrefaction gaze: if you hit the target it is slowed and takes ongoing 10 petrification damage (save ends). Aftereffect slowed and ongoing 5 petrifaction damage (save ends). If you are bloodied while suffering ongoing petrification damage you become immobilised. If you reach 0 hp you are turned to stone.

I like this suggestion by plane sailing altough it agains plays on the hit point ablation which is not my preference.

At the end of each round you make a "Petrification Saving Throw" after saving vs. slow, immobilized or any other detrimental condition. A failure automatically makes you slowed (if you weren't already), two consecutive failed saving throws makes you immobilized and a third failed save in a row makes you petrified. A success could perhaps alleviate the current condition (immobilized>slowed>normal), and 20+ would counter it completely.

I'm not sure if a (normal) successful save would alleviate the condition temporarily (meaning you'd either need a 20 or some other way of completely cancelling out conditions) or fight it off completely, thoughts?

I am not sure I understand your suggestion here Ravenheart. Is the target first petrified and slowly brought back to life with succesfull saves ??

 

[Dracorat]

The other option would be to have it operate on a round by round basis as it does now, with saves allowed to end the effect if the player spends their standard action making an attempt to stave off the effect or if a person makes a successful heal check on them (then allowing another save attempt).

If nothing is done about it, petrification is inevitable.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I am not sure I understand your suggestion here Ravenheart. Is the target first petrified and slowly brought back to life with succesfull saves ??

The basic idea is that it works the same as death saves - a succesful indicates doesn't imply you recover, it just means it is not getting worse. So you still start off at slowed, and get worse - you just can't shrug the effect off.