What Has To Be Save-Or-Die?

[Ahnehnois]

Dunno, if you made a short list of the most iconic D&D wizard spells, I'm pretty sure magic missile, fireball, meteor swarm would be right up there... and that's all hp damage. Prior to 3e, we never really took SoDs because frankly they didn't have enough of a chance of success, whereas the damage from spells was _fantastic_ compared to other options.

Ah yes, the pre-3e days. Your point is well taken. As casters do often make attack and damage rolls, maybe there is conversely a potential for nonmagic SoD outside of CdG. Not sure what it would look like though.

I wouldn't count the spells no one took because saves were automatic as an example of good game balance though. Those were a problem that 3e (sort of) fixed by creating DCs determined by the caster.

 

[keterys]

I'd argue that 3e broke SoDs (and save or sucks) by fixing save DCs. I remember one of the early 3e games I played in (rather than DMed) and an NPC caster threw out a death spell of some sort (I want to say Circle of Death from a necromancer)... and I needed a 20 to make the save (I think, might have been 19 would have - I _didn't_ make it, and I rolled decently, I know that). I had a decent Con, a reasonable save bonus item, but the DM made the NPC logically and took spell focus and a fairly necromantic PrC that added to save DCs and... poof, dead.

In previous editions, folks still would have died, but at least we'd look at the 2 we rolled and go "Damnit, bad luck" instead of the 15 and gone "Yeah, that's BS"

It's one reason I'd rather see graded effects (like failed saves resulting in badness) - even if it's:
Circle of Death
X necrotic damage.
Save for half damage.
Roll a 1: Die

Though I still think hp as plot protection works as a concept.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Though I still think hp as plot protection works as a concept.

One thing to consider is that if hp are used as plot protection against all attack forms, then high hit point classes like fighters will have the best protection against all attack forms - including mind-based attack forms. Low hit point classes like wizards will have the worst protection, even against mind-based attack forms.

 

[keterys]

Yes and no - the fighter would be hit and fail saves more easily against mind attacks.

Edit: For example, let's say a monster has an attack that deals X psychic damage and dazes the target normally, but dominates if the target has 2X hp.

If the fighter has 4X hp and is hit/fails save 50% of the time, while the wizard has 3X hp and is hit/fails save 30% of the time, then the wizard takes more hits/fails to drop than the fighter.

 

[Pour]

How about JUST the Sphere of Annihilation? That'd make it pretty infamous and piss-your-pants scary.

More realistically, as mentioned above, Epic tier should have plenty of save or die instances, because, as mentioned above, the PCs of that tier can handle it to a much better degree.

 

[mmadsen]

So many different issues come together here.

When we ask, what has to be save-or-die, I think most of us are thinking of what kind of threats either work or not. The petrifying gaze of Medusa fits that description. It doesn't fit the concept for someone to get kind of petrified.

When we look at how the mechanics actually work though, save-or-die is an excellent fit for realistically modeling most mundane attacks. Real people don't have hit points; one hit can kill them, or a dozen hits might not kill them.

If we look closely, hit points really serve as plot-protection points, but strangely deficient ones that only protect against "hits" from threats that do "damage" -- whatever that means -- and not against certain spells, poisons, etc.

If we implement all threats as a sequence of saves (or rolls against defenses), then anyone can (realistically) survive or die from just about anything, but no one has any plot protection. If we reimagine hit points as a pool to boost missed saves, then save-or-die effects are still serious threats, but they never take out important characters through one bad roll.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I'd argue that 3e broke SoDs (and save or sucks) by fixing save DCs.

I agree. I had a wizard player who buffed his int stat into the stratosphere, took all the spell focus feats, etc and used nothing but SoD or status effect spells. He was near unstoppable. I don't blame SoD spells, I blame the scaling of dcs.

 

[mmadsen]

One thing to consider is that if hp are used as plot protection against all attack forms, then high hit point classes like fighters will have the best protection against all attack forms - including mind-based attack forms. Low hit point classes like wizards will have the worst protection, even against mind-based attack forms.

If hit points are the only defense, and classes continue to receive hit points as if they represent physical toughness, then, yes, a Fighter or Barbarian ends up with more plot protection than a Wizard. But that's not the only way to do things.

If plot-protection points are completely divorced from toughness, but Fort saves aren't, then a no-name grizzled veteran might have a high Fort save and a good chance to shrug off physical threats, but if he failed a save, he'd be done for. And he'd have no special defense against illusions, etc.

On the other hand, an unassuming little Hobbit burglar who's destined to great things might have a tremendous number of plot-protection points -- or plenty of opportunities to replenish them -- but not have especially impressive stats. He would just keep getting "lucky" until he fulfilled his destiny.

 

[Greg K]

If we're using mechanics to represent the traditional tropes of fantasy narratives, then nothing is save or die. 'Hit Points' represent your plot immunity, and so an attack like a medusa's gaze would deal damage and blind you (representing you closing your eyes at the last minute). If it runs you out of hit points, instead you're petrified.

Honestly, when it comes to hit points, I, definitely, don't want them being used for things like Medusa's gaze.

I would prefer to see plot immunity come from a separate mechanic in the form of hero points
- receive a bonus to you d20 roll (must be declared before you roll)receive a bonus to you d20 roll (must be declared before you roll)
- re-roll a save (including a dying save) and take the better (maybe, with a hefty +10 bonus if you a roll a 10 or less on the reroll similar to True20 Conviction/M&M Hero Points). This would have to be announced after your roll, but before knowing if you succeeded or failed.
- automatically, shake off a status: dazed, fatigue, etc.
- automatically, stabilize from dying
- trigger a second wind
which would be in addition to other functions (e.g., take an additional action)


Finger of death, disintegration, word of death stuff, I have no problem with them doing hit point damage or having a two save process- an initial save to avoid and then go into death and dying save upon failure.

Poisons, I, definitely, have no problems doing hit points (as well as secondary effects). I would like to see them have an onset time and be continuous. I would, definitely, be looking at Poisoncraft (Blue Devil Games) and Sean Reynolds variant rule: continuing damage for poison).

Then again, I would like to see hit points less abstract and something that does not scale or does so minimally. Though, I do like how characters start with more hit points in 4e.)

 

[Zaukrie]

You know, I suppose if there was 1 medusa on the planet, I'd be ok with instant death from THE Medusa.

But if Medusa are a race, then I don't see the compelling argument to rely on the mythology of our world.