Is 4th edition getting soft? - edited for friendly content :)

[DM-Rocco]

I thought you were going to say that 4e would have mixed ethnicity chaotic good paladins wearing rainbow armor and marrying gay druids who are hugging trees. So compared to that, no, I don't think it's becoming too liberal.

I don't like the 'fear of death' in an adventure game by default. You shouldn't motivate PCs with the threat that they might die. You motivate them with the threat that the villain will do something fiendish and hurt a lot of innocent people. The hero can assume he's nigh invincible, but he has to be smarter and tougher than the villain to succeed.

And if you want to inject fear of death into your game, don't rely on 'save or die' spells. That's too trite. Who would be afraid of having your life's candle quickly snuffed when there are warlocks who can bind your will, send you to kill those you love, and then extract your heart with their bare hands, sacrificing your soul to Tharizdun so you will have no afterlife? That's what heroes should be afraid of.

Finger of death? *laugh*

LMAO, yes, that might be

Anyway, I agree that a villian should me killing the family members and such to be evil and chaotic but then what becomes of the necromancer? I cast my 7th level finger of death spell and if the villian fails his saving throw he gets sickened for d4 rounds. Ooo, watch out.

 

[DM-Rocco]

This.

Nothing is so anti-climactic as just pointing at someone and saying "Dead". Just having someone drop dead, PC or NPC, is a Disappointment.

And I can't recall the last book or movie I saw where the badguy just makes one of the heroes drop dead.

Now, I will take the time to differentiate this from a "Save or Get Buggered" spell like Hold Person/Sleep/Charm. Those can at least be Dispelled, and mix up combat a little ("Quick, the Fighter's held; everybody protect him!"). I'd much rather see a change in the situation that makes it Fun, that immediately makes players have to alter their tactics.

Recently the group I was in attacked a priest who saw us coming, so she cast Silence on the door to where she was. It completely borked the entire party, because our mage was too chicken to come in the room, and couldn't cast anything inside. This inevitably resulted in two PC deaths (almost three).

Save or Dies just feel... like the DM just announcing, "Okay, everyone, flip a coin. Heads, you die. Tails you live." What fun.

You know that not only can the bad guys use save or die effects but the good guys can too.

What do you propose to do with Power Word Kill? Should everyone start with over 100 hit points so they wont die from a 9th level spell?

 

[Henry]

There's one thing you're forgetting.

Energy resistance.

Why would it matter, firstly, if we're talking about a massive damage effect that would do the same thing as a save or die? Secondly, there are lots of excessive damaging spells (Horrid Wilting is one) that are unaffected by energy resistance. Third, If you're assuming energy resistance, there also exist spells such as Spell Immunity, Superior Resistance, etc. that would take the counterpart to Energy Resistance where save-or-die spells are concerned, which IMO means that neither would apply to the discussion. (That Banshee-Wailin' Lich above would be put paid to with a single Superior Resistance spell, granting a +6 save bonus for the Wizard in question. You could get into anti-magics, dispells, etc. But it muddies the waters of "save-or-die vs. lotsa damage" duscussions.)

 

[DM-Rocco]

First, because it pushes too many buttons on first glance, I altered the thread title.

Second, I wasn't too thrilled with the connotations the thread started out with, but Hobo convinced me with his post to let this stay open. I'll be brief; anyone who attempts to push this back into politics or makes snide political comments will get me swinging the banhammer post-haste.

My bad on the liberal thing. I posted it early morning and thought about it while I was working but I got so swamped at work that didn't even get a chance to read feed back or even think about this post until this morning.

I changed the title myself too. I wasn't trying to get political or take a stance on gay paladins or anything, that was implied by others.

Apologizes to the few who posted and thought I was doing so.

Back on focus now and thanks for not shutting down the thread. It was meant to be a serious topic, not a political bash.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

So, facing down a lich wielding save-or-die spells you know could snuff your life out at any moment is not heroic? To me, forging on when the risk is great is the essence of heroic.

I do agree such things are best left for crucial encounters. What this says to me is that bodaks and catoblepas suck, not "save or die" sucks.

Again, its a matter of scale. At one point from level 1 to 30, the bodak IS a climactic BBEG monster. At some point, the level 9 cleric lich armed with Slay Living IS a mook that you'll fight 5 of at a time.

Particularly since they want monsters to remain some staying power over various levels, any save or die effect on a critter is likely to stick around for a wider range, going from boss monster to eventual fodder guy. Given the emphasis on larger battles in 4th edtiion, thats potentially forcing a lot more saves. Throw in the fact that people dont roll saves, and a lucky bodak who chunks down a 20 on his gaze attack just killed the entire party.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

However, what's more unfair: An effect that gives you a 50/50 percentage chance of survival, or massive damage that gives you NO chance of survival, because it can't be reduced?

True, but if things are balanced correctly, there shouldn't be an attack that does so much damage that you die with no chance of survival. I think that is just as big a problem as save or die effects.

Battles that are more fun last multiple rounds and each round the tension and, perhaps, the difficulty goes up as your hitpoints and resources get closer and closer to the end point where you might not be able to survive next round unless luck is on your side.

It's that building tension that creates the most fun in battles, IMHO. Some battles end before the tension builds too much. The tension may only be "Are these monsters too powerful for us? Guess we'll find out." only to be followed by defeating them easily in a round or two.

Save or dies (and creatures with an attack capable of killing someone in one hit) create a different type of tension. It isn't a building slowly tension that starts off small and goes up. It starts high and stays high. Each round you know that if luck isn't with you, that's the end for you. It feels less "in your control".

In a multiple round, building battle, you know that you have multiple actions in which to do something to prevent your demise. You may die in 3 rounds of attacks by the enemies, but that gives you 3 rounds to use an ability to heal yourself or another party member to assist you. You may also defeat the enemy before those 3 rounds are up if you just use the right ability. Maybe you can paralyze it or give it enough penalties to its attack to miss and therefore buy yourself an extra round or two.

It's a process of making decisions that may save you. Rarely are there any decisions that save you from a save or die, which is why people don't like them.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

That's a problem with the Fighter, though. If it were an 8th-level Warblade, they'd be Emerald Razor-ing the party's Fighter with a touch attack + Power Attack and Weapon Specialization, hitting for a not-insignificant bit of damage. Not too bad for a mook, but not very impressive compared to what the party's higher-level warriors should be able to do in return.

He's still going to be less of a threat than the bodak though.

And at upper levels you've got to be running around with Death Ward, Contingency, or some means of scouting that doesn't put you in immediate danger. Else you're insufficiently prepared for the kind of dangers a great hero has to overcome. If 20th-level play is just a scaled-up version of 1st-level play, there's something seriously wrong.

So the answer is to load up with buffs to counter the threat? Meaning its handily boiled down to standard operating procedure? Then the threat is gone anyways. Why not cut out the middleman, and remove the threat and need to manage buff timers and other jackenapery?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

So the two remaining party members do their thing, and the next round the lich proclaims loudly, "WAIL OF THE BANSHEE I MEMORIZED IT TWICE SUCKAS!"

Rick James is a lich?

 

[DM-Rocco]

Switch and Apoc are not main characters - they're Cohorts.

You'd have a point had he unplugged Morpheous.

Other than Mel in Braveheart, (save versus your inerds or die) you are not going to find a main character who dies. By their death they become cohorts.

I really feel that is a bad example on your part.

 

[Baby Samurai]

Rick James is a lich?

Yep, the kind you don't bring home to mother!