Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mesh Hong" data-source="post: 5001856" data-attributes="member: 73463">Personally I run it differently, if you are already subject to a status effect further similar effects have no effect.&nbsp;If you are already dazed, you cannot be more dazed. If you are already taking 10 ongoing fire damage and you are subject to another effect for 5 ongoing fire damage then it isn't applied as you are already taking a similar and more dangerous effect.&nbsp;Amazingly I do this for the same reason as you, it's simple and easy to remember.&nbsp;For the record, as DM I am responsible for tracking effects on the PCs, I have a dedicated pad that I write down each effect on (when acquired) and cross them off when they have saved.&nbsp;Of course like many of my rules of the game this is an approach that I have arrived at instinctively through play so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it isn't RAW.&nbsp;&nbsp;I can see what you are saying here, but I think you might have it the wrong way round. A similar effect is a similar effect, it isn't a nerf to only have to save against it once.&nbsp;In fact it might be overpowering an encounter if you are having to save against multiple instances of an effect. If you get hit by 4 attacks that also daze then if you have to make 4 saves to shake it off you are certainly going to be under the influence a lot longer, and probably be subject to further attacks that increase the total number of saves required.&nbsp;Don't get me wrong, I can see the logic in your approach, and if it works the same for PCs as Monsters then it is certainly balanced. But I think it might be a little excessive for my tastes, and possibly require a lot more dice rolling that can slow turns down.&nbsp;Also I have used monsters that confer stronger or longer lasting effects that require multiple saves; eg (2 saves ends).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mesh Hong, post: 5001856, member: 73463"] Personally I run it differently, if you are already subject to a status effect further similar effects have no effect. If you are already dazed, you cannot be more dazed. If you are already taking 10 ongoing fire damage and you are subject to another effect for 5 ongoing fire damage then it isn't applied as you are already taking a similar and more dangerous effect. Amazingly I do this for the same reason as you, [I]it's simple and easy to remember.[/I] For the record, as DM I am responsible for tracking effects on the PCs, I have a dedicated pad that I write down each effect on (when acquired) and cross them off when they have saved. Of course like many of my rules of the game this is an approach that I have arrived at instinctively through play so I wouldn't be at all surprised if it isn't RAW. I can see what you are saying here, but I think you might have it the wrong way round. A similar effect is a similar effect, it isn't a nerf to only have to save against it once. In fact it [I]might be[/I] overpowering an encounter if you are having to save against multiple instances of an effect. If you get hit by 4 attacks that also daze then if you have to make 4 saves to shake it off you are certainly going to be under the influence a lot longer, and probably be subject to further attacks that increase the total number of saves required. Don't get me wrong, I can see the logic in your approach, and if it works the same for PCs as Monsters then it is certainly balanced. But I think it might be a little excessive for my tastes, and possibly require a lot more dice rolling that can slow turns down. Also I have used monsters that confer stronger or longer lasting effects that require multiple saves; eg (2 saves ends). [/QUOTE]

Verification