Epic Fight turns into Epic Farce

[wally]

I'm not sure how often people are going to have to explain this but in 4e

you..are...not...safe

we clear on that, just because one dice roll doesn't mean my whole character has just gone down the drain doesn't mean its safe, just because my character can now heal to full health for the majority of time after a fight doesn't mean its safe.
Does it mean 4e is safer than 3e? not in my experience (but then DMs tended not to use save or die effects ever).

You can still die 3 bad saving throws before a heal you're dead, -50% of you're hits past 0 your dead.

If you want more challenging fights in 4e throw a level 5 encounter at the 1st level party each time and you get a good chance of them dying, but a good fight and the party will win.

Well, I am not really clear on that. It sounds like you are saying that where in previous editions, a failed save could kill you, now if you fail multiple saves before you heal yourself, then you are dead. It also sounds like one half the hits you receive after reaching 0 hit points could kill you. Is that true?

First off, save or die is dangerous. Failing 3 saves in a row before you heal yourself isn't so dangerous. It is a case of 'ooohh, I don't really want you to die, roll that again and we'll see if you save this time.' In game I can't really explain it except to say something to the effect of 'great and powerful magic isn't really great or powerful.'

If you don't heal yourself when you can and then take more damage to a point where you die, it isn't dangerous, it is dumb.

Taking damage after reaching 0 hit points should kill you. If someone is damaging your body after you have already been knocked unconcious, then you are dead. Nothing in any edition, at least as far as I remember, tried to alleviate this.

Also, it appears that you said to make fights more challenging to up the enemies power level to four greater than the party. Doesn't that pretty much say that if you continue to give the equivalent level of encounters to the party that there isn't a challenge?

Huh? what? so if a villain didn't have those properties he couldn't kill you, that seems to be what you're saying, surely thats a flaw with the system you are playing, where only save or die can kill you.

Not what I said at all. What I was getting at was if you are facing someone who could kill you with a word, and you succeed, it is much more brag-worthy than running up against anyone who spends minutes or hours whittling you down with little bits of damage over and over again. Okay, maybe that isn't exactly what I said, but it is close to what I mean.

Fair enough I like the idea of getting magical protection but this could very well equate to in 4e a normal challenging wizard but with several higher level spells, the sucessful protection negates him using that and maybe stops him recharging other powers, powers which otherwise would have decimated your party making survival hmm 5-15% likely. Getting magical protection from Miracle Max at the local city would not entertain me, unless it was a sub quest of some importence, just buying it would be utterly pointless.

Wait, you are saying that it would be normal for a DM to create a wizard with a level of power similar to the party, but giving him spells that are way more powerful than the party could get? Is that what you said? The reason I ask is that I saw another thread where someone was mentioning that it shouldn't be a problem giving a low level creature/enemy high level powers if it was just for the encounter or moment.

-wally

 

[Ginnel]

Well, I am not really clear on that. It sounds like you are saying that where in previous editions, a failed save could kill you, now if you fail multiple saves before you heal yourself, then you are dead. It also sounds like one half the hits you receive after reaching 0 hit points could kill you. Is that true?

First off, save or die is dangerous. Failing 3 saves in a row before you heal yourself isn't so dangerous. It is a case of 'ooohh, I don't really want you to die, roll that again and we'll see if you save this time.' In game I can't really explain it except to say something to the effect of 'great and powerful magic isn't really great or powerful.'

no save or die != not dangerous, and its not a case of ooh this or ooh that thank you very much.

The 3 saving throw thing is in terms of dying after you get knocked to minus hit points you start rolling a D20 each round get 9 or less 3 rounds in an encounter and your dead.

Magic is great and powerful, is it Greater and more Powerful than everything else? Nope not at all and Good riddence to that.

If you don't heal yourself when you can and then take more damage to a point where you die, it isn't dangerous, it is dumb.

You can heal yourself once in combat with a Second Wind, a cleric can heal their party twice per encounter, later on there are powers he can select to get more healing one every 5 levels or so. Potions can also heal you but they scale in cost to efficiency. All these (except the laterly aquired cleric powers) require healing surges to use which you have a limited amount of

Taking damage after reaching 0 hit points should kill you. If someone is damaging your body after you have already been knocked unconcious, then you are dead. Nothing in any edition, at least as far as I remember, tried to alleviate this.

I assume you don't die after getting hit on 0 hit points so Area effects don't wipe you out, 3rd edition you weren't on 0 as much as this new edition and yes you do die on -50% hits or on 3 failed death roles.

Also, it appears that you said to make fights more challenging to up the enemies power level to four greater than the party. Doesn't that pretty much say that if you continue to give the equivalent level of encounters to the party that there isn't a challenge?

An equal level combat will not challenge/kill the party, a higher level encounter is common in the adventures written in this new edition.

Not what I said at all. What I was getting at was if you are facing someone who could kill you with a word, and you succeed, it is much more brag-worthy than running up against anyone who spends minutes or hours whittling you down with little bits of damage over and over again. Okay, maybe that isn't exactly what I said, but it is close to what I mean.

Ah but its not minutes or hours its a climatic battle of probably 1minute to 2 as opposed to the battles of 12-24 seconds.

Wait, you are saying that it would be normal for a DM to create a wizard with a level of power similar to the party, but giving him spells that are way more powerful than the party could get? Is that what you said? The reason I ask is that I saw another thread where someone was mentioning that it shouldn't be a problem giving a low level creature/enemy high level powers if it was just for the encounter or moment.

-wally

I don't see why not levels, builds, templates say goodbye to them, I just do what I did with third looked at the characters and made up the saves hp and attacks depending on what I wanted, except this new edition the book tells me the rough figures to use in a nice little table

 

[wally]

no save or die != not dangerous, and its not a case of ooh this or ooh that thank you very much.

The 3 saving throw thing is in terms of dying after you get knocked to minus hit points you start rolling a D20 each round get 9 or less 3 rounds in an encounter and your dead.

Magic is great and powerful, is it Greater and more Powerful than everything else? Nope not at all and Good riddence to that.

Sorry, I thought you were saying that there were effects that make you roll three saves, and if you fail all then you die. Misunderstood.

If you are knocked to minus hit points, then there should be more of a danger, as you are at 'death's door.' I was refering more to how long and how difficult it is now to get you to 'death's door.'

You can heal yourself once in combat with a Second Wind, a cleric can heal their party twice per encounter, later on there are powers he can select to get more healing one every 5 levels or so. Potions can also heal you but they scale in cost to efficiency. All these (except the laterly aquired cleric powers) require healing surges to use which you have a limited amount of

To me this sounds like there is more opportunity to keeping yourself on your feet and healed than in previous editions. Some mention the overabundance of healing available in previous editions, and that 4ed limits that by limiting each individual to a certain number of healing surges, but I think that is all dependent upon your own view.

I assume you don't die after getting hit on 0 hit points so Area effects don't wipe you out, 3rd edition you weren't on 0 as much as this new edition and yes you do die on -50% hits or on 3 failed death roles.

So, from your point of view, you have seen characters reach 0 hit points more often in 4ed? I can see how this could alter your perception, but from what I have seen and heard, the experiences are opposite, especially with characters in 4ed starting with and gaining more hit points per level than I witnessed previously.

An equal level combat will not challenge/kill the party, a higher level encounter is common in the adventures written in this new edition.

Which is why I think people are feeling that 4ed is safer than previous editions. Sure the argument can come up that mentions that the books tried to tell you that an equivalent leveled encounter should take up to 25% of the parties resources, but that could be one character if the combat went that way. It doesn't seem to go that way in 4ed.

Ah but its not minutes or hours its a climatic battle of probably 1minute to 2 as opposed to the battles of 12-24 seconds.

I don't see why not levels, builds, templates say goodbye to them, I just do what I did with third looked at the characters and made up the saves hp and attacks depending on what I wanted, except this new edition the book tells me the rough figures to use in a nice little table

Well, a fight that takes a couple of swings to kill, or a spell or two to kill isn't necessarily too bad, in my opinion. It is when it takes round after round of, 'well I did another 15 points of damage. Where's he at?' 'Another 10% gone.' That can take a long time in our time, and the perception is that it would be a long time in game time.

I think that was my perception of the end of Star Wars Episode III when they were fighting their lightsabre duel for so long. It seemed ridiculous and boring after a bit, especially when one of them standing a little higher on the ground ended the combat immediately. That should've happened right at the beginning, and things would've been so much easier to watch.

-wally

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So if you have to get past a river of lava will it feel cheap to you that drinking it won't work?

Seriously, I think the presumption that absorb and counter the attack is the one alternative is terribly limited. (And very battle-gamey)

Maybe I should have mentioned that despite all other tricks (including full "Novaing" we couldn't beat that damn stupid little Dragon that was merely one or two steps above our PC, because no one of us was able to not get beat by him, and no one was able to survive more then one round within his reach? A Heal/Cure Ability Drain spell combination would have been all we have needed... (I suppose that's another type of swingy - if you happened to buy the right supplement, you can beat this foe at your level.)

So, yes, it was very silly to presume absorbing and then countering the attack would be the only alternative, but that was the only approach that was left for us to explore. (Aside maybe from deciding that maybe the world doesn't need _us_ saving it...)

Your analogy would appear closer to the example better if the aforementioned River of Lava was inside an Antimagic Field and melt any kind of construction we would want to build above it, leaving us only to swim through it.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Again, there seems to be two unrelated complaints. First is complaining about saving throws, which I'm arguing against, and the other is complaining about having to sit out, which is so breathtakingly stupid I can't complain about it.

Here's the thing - complaining about sitting out IS complaining about dying. You honestly cannot separate the two - that's what sitting out is caused by. And if you're complaining that characters die, please stop playing D&D.

 

[Branduil]

Asking someone to stop playing D&D is pretty rude, as is the rest of your post.

People are complaining because SoD and SoS spells make you sit out before you have a chance to do anything at all. Without save-or-die you usually only die when it's your own or your party's fault.

 

[cangrejoide]

Again, there seems to be two unrelated complaints. First is complaining about saving throws, which I'm arguing against, and the other is complaining about having to sit out, which is so breathtakingly stupid I can't complain about it.

Here's the thing - complaining about sitting out IS complaining about dying. You honestly cannot separate the two - that's what sitting out is caused by. And if you're complaining that characters die, please stop playing D&D.

Let me guess, you are the DM of your group?

Also thanks for telling us how stupid our worries and arguments are, I don't know what Enworld would do without your wonderful insight.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Ah, so that's two responses without any actual response.

Again, I can understand complaints over save-or-die. That's why I've been arguing about it - because there's something to argue about.

But again, if you never want anyone to sit out, then nobody can ever die. And yes, that is stupid.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Maybe I should have mentioned that despite all other tricks (including full "Novaing" we couldn't beat that damn stupid little Dragon that was merely one or two steps above our PC, because no one of us was able to not get beat by him, and no one was able to survive more then one round within his reach? A Heal/Cure Ability Drain spell combination would have been all we have needed... (I suppose that's another type of swingy - if you happened to buy the right supplement, you can beat this foe at your level.)

So, yes, it was very silly to presume absorbing and then countering the attack would be the only alternative, but that was the only approach that was left for us to explore.

I think you completely missed his point.

I played through AoW, too, and if the dragon you're talking about is the one I think you're talking about, you didn't actually have to fight the dragon (i.e., drink the river of lava). You could have just avoided it.

Your analogy would appear closer to the example better if the aforementioned River of Lava was inside an Antimagic Field and melt any kind of construction we would want to build above it, leaving us only to swim through it.

Or tunnel under it, or fly over it, or teleport past it, or...

 

[Dinkeldog]

Ah, so that's two responses without any actual response.

Again, I can understand complaints over save-or-die. That's why I've been arguing about it - because there's something to argue about.

But again, if you never want anyone to sit out, then nobody can ever die. And yes, that is stupid.

Here's an actual response. Sit out the rest of the thread.

While you're doing that, re-read the rules again so that in the future you can find a more civil and less abrasive method of interacting with your fellow posters.