D&D General D&D without Death. Is it possible? (+)

[hawkeyefan]

I have no such goal. It is the way D&D was conceived by its creators as evidenced by the Example of play in the DMG.

My apologies, my post was meant to be a reply to @DND_Reborn but I must have hit reply to the wrong post. I’ll correct that now.

 

[Willie the Duck]

Our house-rules make combat already pretty deadly already, just because we prefer combat to be more realistic and injuries linger.

I think here is where there is going to be an insurmountable issue. Realistically, combat is deadly and death comes quick and unexpectedly. The only way to have a game that is simultaneously realistic and with low chance of death is a game where combat* isn't a main focus.
*warlike combat, I guess. a campaign about a wrestling or martial arts league would be interesting, although most gamers with that interest simply go do martial arts.

Games with low body counts tend to be things like four-color superhero games where the combat isn't really that realistic, and when you fall unconscious you wake up tied to train tracks or whatever. Or a game like Ghostbusters where death is off the table and if you fall off a building, you will naturally land on an awning or whatever and just have to climb back up all those stairs.

 

[éxypnos]

My apologies, my post was meant to be a reply to @DND_Reborn but I must have hit reply to the wrong post. I’ll correct that now.

no worries and no apology needed

 

[Lanefan]

UPDATE:

Here is my thoughts for the system at present:

1.Your HP at level one is your Death Threshold. For creatures, it will be their HD size at maximum plus CON mod (or best ability modifier, haven't decided).

Danger, Will Robinson.

Using HD size rather than some sort of metric that's more equal across all classes makes some classes far more likely to hit their death threshold than others. The squishies, in effect, get squishier; which becomes a very big deal once you add in...

There will be no raise dead or revivify due to the nature of the campaign/setting. Creatures that are killed (other than old age) rise as undead, including PCs.

...this.

At risk of setting off a war, I wonder...

What if the death threshold could instead be somehow species-based? To wit, some species (Dwarves, Hobbits) are just harder to kill than others (Elves) based on some combination of size and general toughness. To make it less predictable, the death threshold for each character could be set by the formula [species threshold + con modifier + d6] where "species threshold" is a flat number for each species - Humans might be 10, Dwarves 13, Elves 8, etc. down the line with the overall range being between about 5 (Leprechauns) and 15 (Goliaths or Ogres).

Obviously, these species thresholds are a dial you can tweak in order to increase/decrease overall lethality.

 

[Blue]

When I want to play a game like that, I don't use D&D as the system. It has built in assumption about combat being a common way of overcoming challenges and doesn't have robust rules for those to be non-lethal, nor mechanisms for handling the outcome. For example, an honor system that included giving parole and such. All of that can be handled - as in any system - freeform and narratively, but there's no mechanical support or guidance for it.

There are other game systems and genres I'd turn to first for a no-death game.

 

[jayoungr]

I'm playing in a game that includes a young and rather sensitive player. The DM is her father. When we defeat an enemy in that game, the DM just says, "He falls down," and we all know that particular creature won't be bothering us anymore.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Danger, Will Robinson.

Using HD size rather than some sort of metric that's more equal across all classes makes some classes far more likely to hit their death threshold than others. The squishies, in effect, get squishier; which becomes a very big deal once you add in...

I think you missed the first part. For PCs, it is equal to your hp at level 1. For creatures, it is based on HD size.

So, if your Fighter has 13 at level 1, that is your DT, whether you are small or medium size.

I'm discussing it with my group tomorrow and playtesting some, so everything could change. We'll see.

 

[Mistwell]

A bit of background first:

I am a pretty mellow person in general. I like spirited competition (sports, etc.) but abhor violence really. I've gotten to the point where I don't watch movies or play video games with violence just for the sake of violence and killing in general has bothered me for years to the point I often consider becoming a vegetarian but it would be extremely difficult given the people I live with.

On the drive home tonight, I was reflecting on D&D specifically. The rules of course are at 0 hit points a creature is dying, and most DMs just say it is dead, allowing (generally) only PCs to make death saves. I've posted before about alternatives for 0 hit points, how it could just mean "defeat" in most cases, whether that leads to surrender, fleeing, or whatever, just not death.

So, like always, I am curious: does anyone play D&D so that even the creatures your PCs encounter aren't actually killed, or at the very least only rarely when it is important to the story?

I did this with a kids game and it mostly worked fine.

 

[Lanefan]

I think you missed the first part. For PCs, it is equal to your hp at level 1. For creatures, it is based on HD size.

So, if your Fighter has 13 at level 1, that is your DT, whether you are small or medium size.

Indeed. My point is that Wizards, who are already squishy, are by default made even squishier as none can ever have a DT that high (unless you somehow have Wizards able to start with 13 h.p., which would be well into houserule territory).

To get around this, my suggestion is simply that one's DT potential should be based on something - size, species, whatever - other than one's class in order to make it more equal across the classes; and, as a side effect, to also provide an avenue to translate this mechanic across to non-classed individuals in the setting.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Indeed. My point is that Wizards, who are already squishy, are by default made even squishier as none can ever have a DT that high (unless you somehow have Wizards able to start with 13 h.p., which would be well into houserule territory).

To get around this, my suggestion is simply that one's DT potential should be based on something - size, species, whatever - other than one's class in order to make it more equal across the classes; and, as a side effect, to also provide an avenue to translate this mechanic across to non-classed individuals in the setting.

Oh, got it. I was reading your response differently. Thanks for the further explanation.

Well, I would be fine with going with size-based HD max as I plan to do with creatures. I don't think anyone in my group would mind, even if Gnomes and Halflings had d6 compared to other races' d8s.