Death and Dying: Annoying new subsystem reduces fun.

[psionotic]

I've always hated the revolving door of death in 3.x (and in some of the previous editions). The new system looks to be an enormous improvement.

If the trend continues that this new edition is inspired by Star Wars, mooks there die at 0hp just like monsters do, and I assume that's how they'll set the default. "Named" or other important NPCs that a DM thinks are important could then optionally be given this rule, or their survival or bleeding out could just be decided by DM fiat.

 

[psionotic]

So now PC's are not only nearly impossible to kill (-60 hp! Give me a break!), but they have a 5% chance of regenerating like a troll on steroids. The rest of it they can keep, but these two parts are cheesy and lame.

You don't need to drop to -60, you just have to be dropped to 0 and then roll under 10 three times before being healed. The average then, is six rounds of life before you die, regardless of negative total.

I like this because the negative HP number currently gives PCs a (metagame, but still) chance to decide who to heal first based on how many rounds someone will take to bleed out.

 

[Wolfspider]

PCs die at negative 1/2 total hit points, eh?

With all the healing and self-healing that can be done in the new system, that makes PCs pretty darn hard to kill.

EDIT: Which has already been pointed out.

 

[Archade]

Well, my two cents ...

I don't mind getting rid of the 0 hp condition - they're right there, it's a razor-edge condition that should go away.

However, I disagree with the negative-half-total-hit-point threshhold. If hit points represent luck and skill at high levels more than physical condition, an unconscious character shouldn't take 10 hacks of a greatsword to take out, no matter what level they are.

As for the dying roll of d20 potential three strikes and you're out, this shoud have been replaced with a saving throw (or hit roll vs your own Fortitude save, whatever 4e would do), rather than a sub-system. The mystery of dying is good, and I've done something similar in my 3e house rules.

Waking up with 1/4 of your hit points is excessive. This should have been done with Action Points, since they are becoming a core mechanic.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I actually like this rule quite a bit. As a DM, I often either fudged damage rolls, or I'd find some way or other for a character to narrowly avoid death, even if the method used wasn't exactly RAW. This system should not require me to do so, or at least not as often, and the system looks easy to implement. I'd call this excellent design work. If the rest of 4E that we haven't seen yet follows the same elegance and preserves verisimilitude, I'd say it will be a much needed improvement.

 

[Rechan]

Can we get a thread entitled "Death and Dying: Great new subsystem that makes dying fun"?

I mean, if we're going to put biased thread titles and make arguments, we might as well do both.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Well, my two cents ...

I don't mind getting rid of the 0 hp condition - they're right there, it's a razor-edge condition that should go away.

However, I disagree with the negative-half-total-hit-point threshhold. If hit points represent luck and skill at high levels more than physical condition, an unconscious character shouldn't take 10 hacks of a greatsword to take out, no matter what level they are.

I always looked at it this way. A monster/NPC who goes down is scratched off. The reason is that his com padres won't be around to heal them up when the PCs are done whacking on them. When the combat is over, any monsters that are still twitching are coup de gras'd. Likewise, if the whole party goes down into the negatives, one of two things happens. One: the monsters put the party to the death. Two: The party is captured.

Waking up with 1/4 of your hit points is excessive. This should have been done with Action Points, since they are becoming a core mechanic.

It doesn't say that you wake up with 1/4 your hit points. What it says is that the amount of healing applied brings you to a positive number equal to the number of points of healing you received. In other words, negative hit points are a measure of how close to death you are. Healing always returns you from any point near death and restores you to a somewhat healthy condition. I think this makes a lot of sense, personally.

 

[Rechan]

PCs die at negative 1/2 total hit points, eh?

With all the healing and self-healing that can be done in the new system, that makes PCs pretty darn hard to kill.

EDIT: Which has already been pointed out.

I seem to recall that one of the early designer blogs said that at one point in the playtest, PCs were hellishly difficult to kill.

So apparently this issue has come up, and been dealt with.

 

[Rechan]

It doesn't say that you wake up with 1/4 your hit points. What it says is that the amount of healing applied brings you to a positive number equal to the number of points of healing you received. In other words, negative hit points are a measure of how close to death you are. Healing always returns you from any point near death and restores you to a somewhat healthy condition. I think this makes a lot of sense, personally.

From the article:

3) If you’re dying at the end of your turn, roll 1d20.
Lower than 10: You get worse. If you get this result three times before you are healed or stabilized (as per the Heal skill), you die.
10-19: No change.
20: You get better! You wake up with hit points equal to one-quarter your full normal hit points.

 

[Nymrohd]

By going through this thread,
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=218169

even fast, it seems that playtester characters are dying with reasonable regularity. So I guess it is quite a lethal system.