D&D 4E 4e and save or dies.

[hong]

Oh, I agree. I have no real stance on this issue at all, other than that 4E does have save-or-die. I don't really care whether monsters or players have access to them.

4E does not have save or die.

 

[TheLordWinter]

It pisses me off to read sidebars about rituals to call demons and raise undead but be unable because of the great god of Absolute Game Balance.

So why can't you use these? I know for a fact some of these are rituals from the Monster Manual, so why not use them?

I still haven't played 4e yet. I play Saturday, and I fear I nerfed my character by trying to get to 2 classes (primarily wizard and warlock training) with a drow. Unfortuatly, dark, intelligent wizard with staff doesn't seem to be covered.

With this combination you should have plenty of options - all the cantrips the Wizard has, your at-will Wizard powers, an encounter power, a racial encounter power of your choosing between two options (better than most races, since they get one fixed one), a choice of three Warlock at-will powers to use as an Encounter power and two daily powers to choose from (as a Wizard).

While none of these powers will instantaneously kill your targets, is that really such a bad thing? Consider for a moment the fighter or the rogue - they have been hitting the dragon steadily for five or ten rounds and have finally gotten it to Bloodied. You have been hurling save or die spells on the other hand (under the presumption you had them). The dragon finally rolls a 1 on its save and dies. Effectively, everything that the Fighter and Rogue accomplished means nothing.

Tactically the entire fight was somewhat moot, don't you think? It didn't matter what plans or strategies were used or what any other characters did so much as it mattered on whether you could force the monster to keep rolling dice until the statistical probability that it rolled poorly would kill it and you'd win.

Just my two cents, but I've seen my own groups from 3.X deal with Save or Die mechanics less than favorably. I like seeing that the heavy-hitting characters are participating in the fight in a more meaningful way than lowering a monster's save or boosting your DC checks.

 

[Grazzt]

4E does not have save or die.

Exactly. It has 'save or possibly die'. Like several peeps have mentioned, you have to fail a series of saves before death.

 

[Shazman]

Oh, forgive me for DARING to compare the current edition of D&D to the previous one. How could I do such a stupid thing? Never mind that they have "Dungeons and Dragons" plastered all over their covers and are made by WoTC. Never mind that some of the iconic conventions are still visible. Nope. Can't compare the two. Please forgive my abject stupidity.

Honestly, if they are going to change the game to be unrecognizable, they really should call it something else.

I agree. They could say its a game based on or inspired by D&D, but calling it D&D seems to be fallacious at best. Call it 4E or World of Dungeoncraft, and it would be more acceptable.

 

[Crosswind]

The answer as to why monsters get Save or Die and PCs don't seems fairly straightforward:

PC Groups are expected to have a leader of some form. All PC leaders have abilities that can allow them to help a PC make another save, often at a bonus. This dramatically reduces the chances of dying.

Monster leaders rarely have these abilities. Therefore, using a save or die on a monster would be too good.

-Cross

 

[MadMaligor]

I agree. They could say its a game based on or inspired by D&D, but calling it D&D seems to be fallacious at best. Call it 4E or World of Dungeoncraft, and it would be more acceptable.

I cant wait for the 6th edition people to keep arguing with the 7th edition people about how its not D&D anymore, and all the "Old school" 4th edition people talk about playing with the guys who came back to 4th Ed D&D from the days of playing Basic/Expert D&D. Then we can read all the nostalgia posts and how Vivendi ruined D&D when they purchased Hasbro and turned it into World of Dungeoncraft and Dragonslaying.

People, listen. Gygax, Kuntz, and Arneson screwed you all when they released Greyhawk and Blackmoore on what amounts to Day 2 of the birth of D&D. Game over, end of story. We can talk about jumping the shark all day, and how Unearthed Arcana became the blasphemy of D&D, 2nd edition handbooks created the bastard children of all races and classes, and 3.5 is a simulation not a roleplaying game...blah blah blah blah blah.

Until you start rolling percentile dice to hit, and HP charts are based on appendages, and halflings cant wear shoes, and every class gets the ability to shoot some elemental based laser out their eyeballs, we are still playing D&D.

We need to move past this. Its getting old....and Shazam, I mean that very respectfully. This is not aimed at just you. I have no ill will tword ya at all.

 

[Starfox]

Honestly, if they are going to change the game to be unrecognizable, they really should call it something else.

While I'm not a 4E hater, I think you have a point here. When they first started talking of 4E, they said it was an evolutionary change, a smaller step than 2E -> 3E. Ha! Flat out lies there, which makes me very skeptical of anything WotC has to say from then on.

But I still like 4E, even if its a different game.

 

[WarlockLord]

While none of these powers will instantaneously kill your targets, is that really such a bad thing? Consider for a moment the fighter or the rogue - they have been hitting the dragon steadily for five or ten rounds and have finally gotten it to Bloodied. You have been hurling save or die spells on the other hand (under the presumption you had them). The dragon finally rolls a 1 on its save and dies. Effectively, everything that the Fighter and Rogue accomplished means nothing.

Not really. The fighter and the rogue kept the dragon from running the spellcaster over.

Also, I really don't see why it should just be spellcasters that get death effects. Why couldn't a fighter decapitate or a rogue go for the jugular?

 

[cferejohn]

I agree. They could say its a game based on or inspired by D&D, but calling it D&D seems to be fallacious at best. Call it 4E or World of Dungeoncraft, and it would be more acceptable.

Yes by all means they should toss their brand equity out the window. Wizards, and then Hasbro spent money for the right to call their product Dungeons and Dragons. If you don't like what they've done in 4e, there is enough published 3/3.5 stuff (plus more coming in Pathfinder) to keep you happily gaming for a long long time, but to suggest that Hasbro, out of the goodness of their own hearts, simply throw away the Dungeons and Dragons brand equity is frankly silly.

Oh wait, we were talking about save-or-die.

4E does not have save or die.

 

[Imperialus]

If you're fighting Orcus you can afford raise dead.

And our savant friends the Wizards Char-Op boards have come up with a few character builds that can oneshot BBEG's almost as well as a save or die.