Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Interested2" data-source="post: 1668451" data-attributes="member: 20930">I've been playing a while now, and am on the verge of starting my own campaign.&nbsp; One thing thats been bugging me (pardon the pun) for some time now is the very low DC's of poisons in the game, especially plant poisons and insect poisons.&nbsp; Plants have poisons mainly to protect them from pests and animals that eat them.&nbsp; Such a poison isn't very evolutionarily sound if it does absolutly nothing to half the animals that eat it.&nbsp; On the other hand, if it causes death in anything that eats it around 75%-95% of the time, then it is very evolutionarily sound and probably won't have much eating it after a few generations.&nbsp; Thus it makes sense for plants to evolve poisons that work.&nbsp; Lets look at a typical poison in D&amp;D (and in the real world).&nbsp; Arsenic, Ingested DC 13, 1 Con, 1d8 ConI'll quote from the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.&nbsp; Based on this, I would say that arsenic should be Inhaled DC 18, 1 Con primary, 1 Con secondary.&nbsp; It should also be Ingested DC 24, 1d6 Str primary, 2d6 Con secondary, failure by 5 more more causing death.&nbsp; Poisons in D&amp;D are far too weak.&nbsp; One dose ingame has to be enough to cause death a fair amount of the time, otherwise it would not be considered a dose.&nbsp; A A 5th level fighter will save against arsenic if he rolls a 9 or higher as it currently is, and arsenic is a nasty substance.&nbsp; In addition, this is assuming that the fighter has nothing boosting his Fort save.&nbsp; A 9th level unaugmented fighter has a fort save of +6.&nbsp; My 9th level Wizard, with various enhancements (and no spells running) has a fort save of +13.&nbsp; He will always save against arsenic.&nbsp; That doesn't seem right to me.&nbsp; In a world where the animals are more dangerous, where dragons roam the lands, and where parties of adventurers hack their way through jungles in search of treasure, the evolutionary pressure is on for plants and animals to survive.&nbsp; They must develop more toxic poisons in response to a hostile environment.&nbsp; Those that do not will die out, eaten or crushed to death.&nbsp; The ready availibility of the neutralize poison spell and extraordinary poison immunity makes poison even less effective, prompting even deadlier poisons.&nbsp; A brush against a poisonous plant in the jungle going to a temple shouldn't be a matter of an easy to make fort save.&nbsp; It should be a stop-and-heal game event, where the party&nbsp; must tend to their comrade or he may die.&nbsp; Poisons are nasty in the real world, but in D&amp;D, they're just another easy to make roll.&nbsp; Even if someone doesn't make the roll, neutralize poison, or items such as 'Peripat of Proof against Poison' make 'normal' poisons generally ineffective.&nbsp; In my campaign, there is no neutralize poison spell.&nbsp; The DC's of all poisons are raised by 5.&nbsp; And being poisoned is a major, life threatening event, not a simple thing to brush off.&nbsp; Any else here agree with me about poisons in D&amp;D?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Interested2, post: 1668451, member: 20930"] I've been playing a while now, and am on the verge of starting my own campaign. One thing thats been bugging me (pardon the pun) for some time now is the very low DC's of poisons in the game, especially plant poisons and insect poisons. Plants have poisons mainly to protect them from pests and animals that eat them. Such a poison isn't very evolutionarily sound if it does absolutly nothing to half the animals that eat it. On the other hand, if it causes death in anything that eats it around 75%-95% of the time, then it is very evolutionarily sound and probably won't have much eating it after a few generations. Thus it makes sense for plants to evolve poisons that [B]work[/B]. Lets look at a typical poison in D&D (and in the real world). Arsenic, Ingested DC 13, 1 Con, 1d8 Con I'll quote from the Agency of Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Based on this, I would say that arsenic should be Inhaled DC 18, 1 Con primary, 1 Con secondary. It should also be Ingested DC 24, 1d6 Str primary, 2d6 Con secondary, failure by 5 more more causing death. Poisons in D&D are far too weak. One dose ingame has to be enough to cause death a fair amount of the time, otherwise it would not be considered a dose. A A 5th level fighter will save against arsenic if he rolls a 9 or higher as it currently is, and arsenic is a nasty substance. In addition, this is assuming that the fighter has nothing boosting his Fort save. A 9th level unaugmented fighter has a fort save of +6. My 9th level Wizard, with various enhancements (and no spells running) has a fort save of +13. He will [B]always[/B] save against arsenic. That doesn't seem right to me. In a world where the animals are more dangerous, where dragons roam the lands, and where parties of adventurers hack their way through jungles in search of treasure, the evolutionary pressure is on for plants and animals to survive. They must develop more toxic poisons in response to a hostile environment. Those that do not will die out, eaten or crushed to death. The ready availibility of the [I]neutralize poison[/I] spell and extraordinary poison immunity makes poison even less effective, prompting even deadlier poisons. A brush against a poisonous plant in the jungle going to a temple shouldn't be a matter of an easy to make fort save. It should be a stop-and-heal game event, where the party [B]must[/B] tend to their comrade or he may die. Poisons are nasty in the real world, but in D&D, they're just another easy to make roll. Even if someone doesn't make the roll, neutralize poison, or items such as 'Peripat of Proof against Poison' make 'normal' poisons generally ineffective. In my campaign, there is no neutralize poison spell. The DC's of all poisons are raised by 5. And being poisoned is a major, life threatening event, not a simple thing to brush off. Any else here agree with me about poisons in D&D? [/QUOTE]

Verification