Save or Die: Yea or Nay?

[Kingreaper]

Actually all of my players like the fact that save or dies exist, though they might dislike losing a character to one.

Then why would they prefer to have it removed from a system than have it added to a system?

No.

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

When I play FPS games, I don't like getting hit.
I like the possibility of being hit (otherwise I'd find a god-mode cheat).

When I play D&D I don't like dying.
I like the possibility of dying (otherwise I'd play a game without it)

When I play FPS games, I don't like the controls to suddenly reverse
I don't like the possibility of the controls suddenly reversing.
So, I don't play games where that is a possibility.

When I play D&D, I don't like save or die spells being used.
I don't like the possibility of save or die spells being used.
So I don't play games where they are a possibility.


Do you understand the difference between wanting something to happen in the moment, and wanting it to be possible?

 

[Henry]

For me, I've never seen save-or-die as suspenseful - it's more like crap-shooting to me. At least with SS-or-D or SSS-or-D it's like making someone watch as you feed them through the meatgrinder - more of a sense of dread as you're failing two or three rolls in a row to get screwed.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Dying to a SoD nine times out of ten was something you couldn't have avoided, regardless of what many people here claim. Or shall I again quote 3.5 which explicitly states that you cannot identify a medusa until it's making you roll saving throws?

Character death isn't the problem. When a character dies in an exciting, dramatic manner (and this is the most important part) that they in part choose, be it willingly or unwillingly, character death is a good thing.

"The wizard casts finger of death. Welp, you died."

Not a good thing.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

"The wizard casts finger of death. Welp, you died."

Not a good thing.

Someone didn't do their research to discover what spells were in that enemy wizard's spellbook? Bah! They had it coming.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Or shall I again quote 3.5 which explicitly states that you cannot identify a medusa until it's making you roll saving throws?

Only if you also explicitly quote the bits about how it conceals its face and uses seduction or deception to draw a PC to within range before whipping off her mask and saying "gotcha!" No way do I want my bard, Wannabe Casanova, to get off easy with lots of saves because he failed to recognize the danger when the DM gave him the chance.

Seriously, SoD encounters are absolutely not certain death encounters if played interestingly-- at least that's how I'm accustomed to thinking about it. Almost never have I as a player just unexpectedly stumbled into an SoD, and I don't think I've just sprung one on a player since I was a 12 year old. Certainly not "nine times out of ten".

 

[BryonD]

Save or die is where I have the problem. If I look at a medusa, and the medusa is meant to be full on greek-myth medusa: I die. I don't "Save or die" I die.

I'd really prefer a Will Save to control the urge to glance.

But, regardless, in situations of this type I always describe a "save" as having avoided ever meeting the gaze. If you see Medusa in my game, you turn to stone.

 

[BryonD]

Dying to a SoD nine times out of ten was something you couldn't have avoided, regardless of what many people here claim. Or shall I again quote 3.5 which explicitly states that you cannot identify a medusa until it's making you roll saving throws?

If you are identifying a medusa by inspection, you have already screwed up.

Funny thing is, in the original tellings of the story, way back in the day, it was even more scary. There was only one Medusa. And, anyone who had ever seen her was stone. So NO ONE knew what she looked like. You did not know that there was a snake-haired woman over there to avoid. You just knew SOMETHING over there would turn you to stone with a glance.

If a medusa is the random monster in room 14d on level 6 of the Black Dungeon of Dave, then yeah, that is anticlimatic and no fun. But, as far as I see it, that isn't a story or even hardly a narrative.

Character death isn't the problem. When a character dies in an exciting, dramatic manner (and this is the most important part) that they in part choose, be it willingly or unwillingly, character death is a good thing.

"The wizard casts finger of death. Welp, you died."

Not a good thing.

Again, if you pull it completely out of any remote context, then you have removed every reason for playing in the first place, as far as I am concerned.

I've never played in a *good* game in which there were wizards throwing semi-random finger of death spells at PCs around every corner.

In my games, if you go after a wizard with the potential to cast finger of death, then you better be ready to deal with whatever it is he may be casting. It may be FoD. It may be something completely different and just as bad.

But that is what heroes do.

Defeating the Finger of Death wizard is glorious.
Getting killed by the FoD wizard can also be glorious, and memorable and fun.
Defeating the Finger of Booboo wizard is lame. Getting defeated by the FoBB wizard is pathetic.

You can't overcome a challenge if you cower from the challenge.

But, tastes CLEARLY differ. If you want to fight marginally contextualized battles against a string of random baddies and be reasonably assured that pure statistics won't kill you, then SoD is a horrible element from a gamist point of view.

 

[Hussar]

Players don't want their characters to die either. Should that be removed? They don't particularly like getting hit, remove that as well?

True, no one wants their character to die. But, it's a far, far cry from "I don't want my character to die in a totally arbitrary way that I have no control over" and "I don't want my character to get smooshed by repeated hits from trolls."

Everyone keeps focusing on the medusa. but, in AD&D, there are a whole host of creatures that force save or die. Many of which are not things you can automatically prepare for. Snakes and spiders come to mind right away. It's not unreasonable for a PC to be surprised by either one - not all spiders spin webs and snakes are kinda known for that whole surprise ambush thing.

I lost far more PC's to snakes and spiders than combat damage in AD&D.

It's not about adventuring with rubber rooms. It's that it's entirely arbitrary. Either you have the counter, or someone dies. Listen at doors? Sure, I hear a woman talking. I should automatically assume medusa? Wow, metagame much? I see small birdlike tracks. I should automatically presume cockatrice? Depending on the track roll (and depending on the edition - after all, without a ranger, I cannot detect tracks AT ALL in AD&D) how do I tell the difference between cockatrice and kobold tracks?

Never minding why there are tracks being left on stone floors, but, hey, we'll ignore that for a minute.

Or a banshee? In Land Beyond the Magic Mirror, there is a banshee in one location. There are no clues that she is there. None. You walk in and whammo, instant death saves. In one of the Dragonlance modules (the exact number escapes me at the moment) banshees are a random encounter. An arbitrary roll of encounter distance + initiative roll can lead to the banshees getting the drop on me and having zero opportunity to prepare.

In A1, there is a basilisk as a random encounter - how do I prepare for that?

In the Savage Tide AP, 5 bodak assassins riding undead tyrannosaurs teleport out on top of the party at a random point - no warning.

And this is perfectly in keeping with D&D actually. Bodaks ARE demonic assassins. It's one of their reasons for being.

Retrievers also have SoD abilities. Their entire purpose is to go out and hunt specific people.


The idea that SoD creatures should only be used in very specific circumstances where the PC's have ample opportunity to prepare themselves isn't supported by the rules. Quite the opposite in fact. SoD creatures are meant to be used as Aha Gotcha monsters when the players are least prepared. Whether it's monsters like Rot Grubs and Green Slime or intelligent stuff, older versions of the game were chockablock with this sort of thing.

If that's the kind of game you enjoy, more power to you. I do not. I find them arbitrary, far, far too metagamey, and lead the players into a very antagonistic relationship with the DM.

 

[Sunseeker]

I've been rolling this over in my head for a few days, trying to come up with what I felt was the best answer.

I like SoD's in limited use, it's logical that some creatures, and some powers should present you with this situation. However, lets face it, even if *magical beast* can force you to make a SoD as a natural ability, it needs to have some sort of limitation. SoD's can be fun if there is a solid reason for them to happen, it keeps people on their toes, and is usually lore-correct.

That does not however prevent them from being overused by DMs who just want to cause trouble for a group.

 

[Hussar]

Funny thing is, in the original tellings of the story, way back in the day, it was even more scary. There was only one Medusa. And, anyone who had ever seen her was stone. So NO ONE knew what she looked like. You did not know that there was a snake-haired woman over there to avoid. You just knew SOMETHING over there would turn you to stone with a glance.

Weren't there three Gorgons? I've never heard the version where there was only one.

Learn something new every day.

As to the rest, well, I'll leave that to other people.