A question for DMs. Say you're running a published adventure, and it contains a situation something like this: the PCs are crossing a precarious rope bridge across a chasm, and something or other shakes it, trying to make them fall off. The adventure text says that each PC has to make a DC 10 dexterity save or fall off the bridge into the chasm. Some of your PCs make the save, and some don't.
"Bob," you say, "you fall off the rope bridge and plunge into the chasm."
One of the other players then says, "My character was right next to Bob on the bridge. I reach out and try to grab him."
If this happened at your table, would you allow the additional save [made by the second player], and either way, what would be your reasoning?
If you did allow the additional save, what difficulty would you set it at?
This actually came up in a game I ran tonight. I allowed the second save and set the DC at 17, but I'm still not sure about the whole thing. I could see an argument that PCs would want to do everything in their power to save their buddies, and also that I shouldn't be shutting down player solutions to problems presented by the story. (The latter was the main reason I went ahead and allowed it.} But I could also see an argument that the PCs are supposed to be too busy keeping their own balance to help anyone else. Or, from a mechanical standpoint, that it tilts the danger factor too far in the PCs' favor--as written, there was supposed to be only one failed save between a PC and falling damage, and now suddenly there are two.
"Bob," you say, "you fall off the rope bridge and plunge into the chasm."
One of the other players then says, "My character was right next to Bob on the bridge. I reach out and try to grab him."
If this happened at your table, would you allow the additional save [made by the second player], and either way, what would be your reasoning?
If you did allow the additional save, what difficulty would you set it at?
This actually came up in a game I ran tonight. I allowed the second save and set the DC at 17, but I'm still not sure about the whole thing. I could see an argument that PCs would want to do everything in their power to save their buddies, and also that I shouldn't be shutting down player solutions to problems presented by the story. (The latter was the main reason I went ahead and allowed it.} But I could also see an argument that the PCs are supposed to be too busy keeping their own balance to help anyone else. Or, from a mechanical standpoint, that it tilts the danger factor too far in the PCs' favor--as written, there was supposed to be only one failed save between a PC and falling damage, and now suddenly there are two.
Last edited: