Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DiceGolem" data-source="post: 3669444" data-attributes="member: 53922">Staying true to the original Diehard feat is probably for the best, changing it to allow stabalization after the first saving throw. And as far as Steadfast Determination goes, now it has a true death-defying purpose! I mean, as long as you took Endurance anyway, you might as well be gearing towards both feats. Why change Diehard to do both? Heck, if you think the bonus is too much, make Diehard a prerequisite for Steadfast Determination!I guess the 1/2 vs. full negative hit point DC argument is really up for each specific DM's death threshold. By taking half, there's a much larger amount of damage someone can unluckily take before really worrying about a good chance of death. Whereas, by taking full, even a blow to -10 becomes dire for a low level character, or even a low Fort character.[code][b]&nbsp;&nbsp; DC&nbsp; &nbsp; | Fort +0 | Fort +6 | Fort +12[/b]---------------------------------------------&nbsp; DC 1&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; &nbsp; 5%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 3&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 10%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 5&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 20%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 7&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 30%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 9&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 40%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 10%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 11&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 50%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 20%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 13&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 60%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 30%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 5%&nbsp; DC 15&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 70%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 40%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; 10%&nbsp; DC 17&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 80%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 50%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; 20%&nbsp; DC 19&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 90%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 60%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; 30%&nbsp; DC 20&nbsp; |&nbsp;&nbsp; 95%&nbsp;&nbsp; |&nbsp; 70%&nbsp; &nbsp; |&nbsp; 40%[/code]For new characters, and those with abysmally low Fortitude saves, the chance of death is almost certain at DC 15 and higher. Going with the Half rule, that's at -30 hit points. With the Full rule, that's only a -15. For much more normal characters, with around average Fortitude saves, the chance of death is only dire closer to DC's 19 and 20 (-40 HP / -20 HP). The chance of death is still a probability at DC's closer to 11 (-22 HP/ -11 HP).Looking at it from the perspective of whittling down PC's into the negatives, the Full DC option appears better, with a small margin between possibly dying and nearly dying favoring the same small margin of damage. However, with the consideration in mind for some monster landing a massive critical, the Half DC does better, allowing for a much larger margin of numbers to accomidate for such a massive amount of damage unloaded at once.I guess it really comes down to how often you honestly want your PC's do die. If you feel a huge amount of damage should completely obliterate a PC (or mob) then stick with the Full DC rule. But, if you feel that a PC shouldn't just fall down dead after some enemy caster gets lucky with an evocation spell, go with the Half.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DiceGolem, post: 3669444, member: 53922"] Staying true to the original Diehard feat is probably for the best, changing it to allow stabalization after the first saving throw. And as far as Steadfast Determination goes, now it has a true death-defying purpose! I mean, as long as you took Endurance anyway, you might as well be gearing towards both feats. Why change Diehard to do both? Heck, if you think the bonus is too much, make Diehard a prerequisite for Steadfast Determination! I guess the 1/2 vs. full negative hit point DC argument is really up for each specific DM's death threshold. By taking half, there's a much larger amount of damage someone can unluckily take before really worrying about a good chance of death. Whereas, by taking full, even a blow to -10 becomes dire for a low level character, or even a low Fort character. [code][b] DC | Fort +0 | Fort +6 | Fort +12[/b] --------------------------------------------- DC 1 | 5% | 5% | 5% DC 3 | 10% | 5% | 5% DC 5 | 20% | 5% | 5% DC 7 | 30% | 5% | 5% DC 9 | 40% | 10% | 5% DC 11 | 50% | 20% | 5% DC 13 | 60% | 30% | 5% DC 15 | 70% | 40% | 10% DC 17 | 80% | 50% | 20% DC 19 | 90% | 60% | 30% DC 20 | 95% | 70% | 40%[/code] For new characters, and those with abysmally low Fortitude saves, the chance of death is almost certain at DC 15 and higher. Going with the Half rule, that's at -30 hit points. With the Full rule, that's only a -15. For much more normal characters, with around average Fortitude saves, the chance of death is only dire closer to DC's 19 and 20 (-40 HP / -20 HP). The chance of death is still a probability at DC's closer to 11 (-22 HP/ -11 HP). Looking at it from the perspective of whittling down PC's into the negatives, the Full DC option appears better, with a small margin between possibly dying and nearly dying favoring the same small margin of damage. However, with the consideration in mind for some monster landing a massive critical, the Half DC does better, allowing for a much larger margin of numbers to accomidate for such a massive amount of damage unloaded at once. I guess it really comes down to how often you honestly want your PC's do die. If you feel a huge amount of damage should completely obliterate a PC (or mob) then stick with the Full DC rule. But, if you feel that a PC shouldn't just fall down dead after some enemy caster gets lucky with an evocation spell, go with the Half. [/QUOTE]

Verification