House Rule: Subdual
- Thread starter TerraDave
- Start date
Dr_Ruminahui
First Post
Except for one encounter where I had a 3 way battle (and where the PCs attempts to capture the enemy 1 just made it easier for enemy 2 to coup de gras the potential captives), I'm quite happy with how the subdual rules have played out.
For my own group, the biggest limitation to taking prisonners is the player's own disbelief at a certain attack being used nonlethally - for example, Flaming Sphere is difficult for them to conceptualise as being non lethal. If they don't think it can, and I can see how it might I will suggest as much (I the above 3 way I suggested that Stinking Cloud could be used to create a tear gas like effect), and if the party/player agrees, it will be non lethal, if not, then its still lethal. Of course, this approach isn't really a limitation if your players are more focussed on the mechanical effects of the rules than the fluff ones. If you do have such mechanically inclined players, you could get a similar effect by declaring by DM fiat whether a power can be used non-lethally or not.
The second biggest limitation is that I require the player to declare whether they want it to be nonlethal when they use the power, and said effect lasts for the entirety of the power's duration. This has two results. First, it prevents players from tossing a Fireball into a room and doing lethal damage to everyone but the hostage. Second, it means for persistent effects (like Stinking Cloud), that the player needs to say its non lethal when it is first cast - if its been out there for several rounds, when you finally drop a baddie its too late to suddenly say "Oh, it only knocks him out". Last session, this rule bit the players in the butt a bit, as it meant that the assassin with the most information was incinerated rather than interogated.
Either/both of these changes may better lead to the results you want with only some very minimal changes to the rules - IMHO, they also have the benefit of being simple to apply, simple to remember, and fair to both the DM and the players - though in those regards, YMMV.
For my own group, the biggest limitation to taking prisonners is the player's own disbelief at a certain attack being used nonlethally - for example, Flaming Sphere is difficult for them to conceptualise as being non lethal. If they don't think it can, and I can see how it might I will suggest as much (I the above 3 way I suggested that Stinking Cloud could be used to create a tear gas like effect), and if the party/player agrees, it will be non lethal, if not, then its still lethal. Of course, this approach isn't really a limitation if your players are more focussed on the mechanical effects of the rules than the fluff ones. If you do have such mechanically inclined players, you could get a similar effect by declaring by DM fiat whether a power can be used non-lethally or not.
The second biggest limitation is that I require the player to declare whether they want it to be nonlethal when they use the power, and said effect lasts for the entirety of the power's duration. This has two results. First, it prevents players from tossing a Fireball into a room and doing lethal damage to everyone but the hostage. Second, it means for persistent effects (like Stinking Cloud), that the player needs to say its non lethal when it is first cast - if its been out there for several rounds, when you finally drop a baddie its too late to suddenly say "Oh, it only knocks him out". Last session, this rule bit the players in the butt a bit, as it meant that the assassin with the most information was incinerated rather than interogated.
Either/both of these changes may better lead to the results you want with only some very minimal changes to the rules - IMHO, they also have the benefit of being simple to apply, simple to remember, and fair to both the DM and the players - though in those regards, YMMV.
Last edited:
TerraDave
5ever, or until 2024
No, there is a very good reason to "shoehorn" the mechanic, as I have noted.
But I in turn remain a little baffled. I am saying:
The rule as written breaks the whole genre , and undermines an ancient principle that (still underlies) use of lethal force.
So, why would I use that rule. I can't think of one reason to, other then its there.
But I in turn remain a little baffled. I am saying:
The rule as written breaks the whole genre , and undermines an ancient principle that (still underlies) use of lethal force.
So, why would I use that rule. I can't think of one reason to, other then its there.
I think I follow now.
What you're saying is that in the real world, and in the majority of historical/fantasy fiction, it's harder to incapacitate / take someone alive when using weapons when using weapons designed to deal lethal damage than it is to simply kill them with those weapons.
And because that's the type of game you want to play, you want the rules to reflect this facet of realism.
So, if I'm now following you correctly that will a) make it harder to subdue rather than kill; and b) leave some chance of accidently killing the target even when you've taken the mechanical penalty for attempting to subdue.
Right?
What you're saying is that in the real world, and in the majority of historical/fantasy fiction, it's harder to incapacitate / take someone alive when using weapons when using weapons designed to deal lethal damage than it is to simply kill them with those weapons.
And because that's the type of game you want to play, you want the rules to reflect this facet of realism.
So, if I'm now following you correctly that will a) make it harder to subdue rather than kill; and b) leave some chance of accidently killing the target even when you've taken the mechanical penalty for attempting to subdue.
Right?
Great! Now that we know what you're after, we can help. 
It looks like you're trying to use an additional save. I think we can get to what you want by making the Death Save more fluid.
Right now, every time you roll a Death Save:
1-9: Mark off a checkbox. Three and you die.
10-19: Nothing happens.
20: Spend a healing surge.
First, rule that every strike for Subdual damage* grants you a cumulative +1 on Death Saves until the end of the encounter or until you spend a healing surge.
Then, we just need to determine how hard subdual attacks need to be.
-1Hit/-1Damage is a pretty minor penalty, even when you assume that you're going to need to hit someone with several subdual attacks to give you a good chance of taking them alive. I'd probably go with -2/-2, or if I was feeling really cranky and wanted to make it hard, -2/HalfDamage.
*It's an interesting idea that by default Psychic damage is subdual. Maces & other blunt weapons still do plenty of damage though. I'd rule that anyone making a Weapon keyword attack needs to make a special effort to hit less lethally.
It looks like you're trying to use an additional save. I think we can get to what you want by making the Death Save more fluid.
Right now, every time you roll a Death Save:
1-9: Mark off a checkbox. Three and you die.
10-19: Nothing happens.
20: Spend a healing surge.
First, rule that every strike for Subdual damage* grants you a cumulative +1 on Death Saves until the end of the encounter or until you spend a healing surge.
Then, we just need to determine how hard subdual attacks need to be.
-1Hit/-1Damage is a pretty minor penalty, even when you assume that you're going to need to hit someone with several subdual attacks to give you a good chance of taking them alive. I'd probably go with -2/-2, or if I was feeling really cranky and wanted to make it hard, -2/HalfDamage.
*It's an interesting idea that by default Psychic damage is subdual. Maces & other blunt weapons still do plenty of damage though. I'd rule that anyone making a Weapon keyword attack needs to make a special effort to hit less lethally.
john112364
Explorer
I personally dislike the 4e subdual rules. Basically it's like "What? That attack took him below zero? Oh, well in that case I'm going to knock him out." Say what? The first time one of my players ran that one by me I was a little taken aback by it. It's just very nonsensical to me. So let's give this a whirl, shall we?
House Rule: Subdual
House Rule: Subdual
- All subdual attacks must be declared before a power (regardless of the power source) is used. Once a power is declared subdual or lethal, it remains so for the entire duration and for all targets of the attack.
- Subdual attack take a -2 penalty to attack and damage rolls due to the difficulty of doing nonlethal damage with an attack that is primarily lethal.
- When a creature is taken down to 0 hit points or lower due to subdual damage it makes a Death Save as normal but with a +2 bonus to save. If all damage taken is subdual damage the save is at +5.
- If the Death Save is failed then the creature is dying as normal. Continue making Death Saves as appropriate.
- If the Death Save is successful then the creature is knocked out. Until it regains hit points, the creature is unconscious but not dying. Any healing makes the creature conscious. If the creature doesn’t receive any healing, it is restored to 1 hit point and becomes conscious after a short rest.
- Psychic attacks do not take a -2 to damage, but still take a -2 to hit due to the need for a precision attack.
- Special weapons such as padded clubs would not receive the -2 to hit because you don't need to pull the blow. Such weapons would still take a -2 to damge due to the padding.
- Someone who has been subdued would be more succeptable to intimidate skill checks made against them (immediately following the attack of course), possibly granting a +5 bonus to the skill user for the duration of the skill encounter. (And possibly longer at DM's disgression)
Garthanos
Arcadian Knight
I calll it a finishing stroke free action.
One way to look at it is there is a free action at the point of npc going under zero hit points... this free action is usually but not always an extension of the action which drives them unconcious. If the power was an ice attack the free action can freeze the enemy solid or just leave there blood very cold.
If the power was a sword attack the free action might be a punch in the nose knocking them out or it might be a there can be only one - the ultimate finishing stroke free action.
In the wheel of time novels the Aes Sedai would do something called tying off a spell.
I have a druids sleep (called Sleeping beauty) that drains energy when it takes the target below zero I decide whether to tie it off or not before that point I cant even tie it off. Tied off its permanent coma (fix with a remove affliction ritual or similar by someone of noble birth - basically raise dead
) ... untied off its a sleep very like traumatic unconciousness hard but not impossible to awaken from.
TerraDave
5ever, or until 2024
On the death save, I was focused on NPCs (normally dying at 0). For PCs, I guess the original idea would be that they get that save, make it and just knocked out, fail then dying...
Garthanos: again, my problem with that is you are putting the PCs in the position of making a lot of intential killing strokes (vs. being "forced" to kill their oponents). Of course, this was discussed quite a bit upthread.
Garthanos: again, my problem with that is you are putting the PCs in the position of making a lot of intential killing strokes (vs. being "forced" to kill their oponents). Of course, this was discussed quite a bit upthread.
Similar Threads
D&D General
Self-Defeating Rules in D&D
Recent & Upcoming Releases
-
June 16 2026 -
June 16 2026 -
September 16 2026 
Arcana Unleashed(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.
Replies (181) -
September 16 2026 -
October 1 2026 -
October 6 2026 -
January 1 2027
