House Rule for Stunning

[FireLance]

Also, with that rule, is the damage taken regardless of resistances? I guess it would be safe to assume so, but figured I'd ask.

Yes, definitely. It's more like "spend hp to take an action" rather than "take damage". I probably should add the following, along the lines of some player powers: "This damage cannot be avoided or reduced in any way."

 

[SlyFlourish]

I have a house rule called the Brutal Shakeoff. Any character or creature can shake off a status effect and take their level in damage. It speeds up combat and gives some hard choices to players.

 

[knightofround]

You know, Stalker0 brought up an interesting idea in another thread about ongoing damage. Just make all the saves in the round the damage was taken and apply it immediately.

What if we applied this idea to monsters?

Shake off
Free Basic Epic Action
Personal
At-will
You take X damage in order to roll a saving throw vs an effect that contains one of the following conditions: Stun, Daze, or Immobilized, even if the effect does not normally allow a save. This damage cannot be reduced in any way. You can only use this power during your turn before you have taken any standard, movement, or attack actions. You can use this power Y times per round. This action does not count toward your limit of free actions per round.

This way, (save ends) effects are more deadly than "until end of PC's next round" effects. And it's not a "pay X to get out of jail" fee...otherwise you might as well replace dazed/stunned/immobilized conditions in powers with extra flat damage instead.

 

[ArcaneSpringboard]

I'm starting to like the idea of turning Stunned into something like:

Stunned: You are Dazed.
You have a -4 to all defenses.

Possibly also You are Slowed.

Possibly also You are critically hit on a 18-20.

Possilby also You have a -2 to attack rolls.


This has the advantage of

1. It's not annoying. The PC and monster still get to do SOMETHING on their turn.
2. It helps speed up combat. Monsters that are stunned will get damaged more easily and the PCs can use tactics to set up a Stunned-Daily combo. PCs that are stunned could still get an attack.
3. It scares the PCs. When they're stunned, they're in imminent danger of getting KILLED as opposed to just losing their offensive abilities.

 

[eamon]

I think the real problem with stun is when it is used on a solo or, to a lesser extent, on an elite. After all, stunning one standard monster out of five still leaves the other four able to act. Hence, I'm considering taking the following approach for stun, which gives the stunned creature the option to do nothing (which is the same as current), or to pay a price in order to do something:

A stunned creature is dazed. In addition, if it takes any action, it takes damage equal to 10 + twice its level.​

Since solos and elites have more hit points, it is proportionately less painful for them to act while stunned. However, if they choose to do so, the PCs still get an advantage (more damage) for having stunned the monster.

This is a reasonable idea. However, you should take into account the fact that comparable monsters (elite's) have about three as many hitpoints as (N)PC's do. To be reasonable, an (N)PC should not need to take such a large hit nor elites such a small hit; to be conservative and be easy to compute, how 'bout following the suggestion in another thread and using a surges worth of hitpoints instead? That's bad enough so people won't be taking actions lightly - but will if it's critical. You may want a special exceptional rule for some solos (namely those that don't already have a stun-defense).

As an aside, I really wish PC's and monsters wouldn't have such pointlessly different mechanics; it screws up things like this, but also falling, dominate, NPC's in general, and ally-unfriendly area effects (which thus have been replaces with the generally more boring enemy-only effects).

 

[ZephyrTR]

Something should also be added in there that if you are Sustaining a spell or effect, it needs to end. I like Sustains to be interrupted by Daze as well.

 

[ArcaneSpringboard]

I was thinking about this last night, and I agree. Stunning is normally the only way to get rid of a sustained ability.

 

[FireLance]

This is a reasonable idea. However, you should take into account the fact that comparable monsters (elite's) have about three as many hitpoints as (N)PC's do. To be reasonable, an (N)PC should not need to take such a large hit nor elites such a small hit; to be conservative and be easy to compute, how 'bout following the suggestion in another thread and using a surges worth of hitpoints instead? That's bad enough so people won't be taking actions lightly - but will if it's critical. You may want a special exceptional rule for some solos (namely those that don't already have a stun-defense).

Actually, since an elite is supposed to take the place of two standard monsters, it should either be harder to stun them, or they should shake off the effect of the stun more easily. Losing a fixed number of hit points regardless of whether the creature is a PC, a standard monster, an elite, or a solo, achieves the latter.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Actually, since an elite is supposed to take the place of two standard monsters, it should either be harder to stun them, or they should shake off the effect of the stun more easily. Losing a fixed number of hit points regardless of whether the creature is a PC, a standard monster, an elite, or a solo, achieves the latter.

Alternately, you could use the equivalent of a standard monster's healing surge regardless of whether the creature is standard, elite or solo. In other words, 1/8 total hp for an elite, and 1/16 total hp for a solo.

 

[keterys]

If you make it something like 6 + level or 5 + 1.5*level, it'll mostly work for everyone.

Or just change it by tier. 5 - 10 per tier, done.