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

[Reynard]

I want a sidebar in the DMG RIGHT NOW that will allow me to continue using THAC0 and Vancian Magic in Fourth Edition. Keep them cows holy.

THAC0 is a function of the core die rolling mechanics, so it doesn't make any sense to keep it in there. And, yes, there *should* be a method for Vancian magic in 4E.

 

[Remathilis]

THAC0 is a function of the core die rolling mechanics, so it doesn't make any sense to keep it in there. And, yes, there *should* be a method for Vancian magic in 4E.

Fine. Then I want all five original save categories back. (Even *Gasp* Save vs. Death Magic!) Legacy is Legacy, after all.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I get the impression that some people have a very different concept of "Options, not Restrictions" than I have.

For me, it means that when I have a general idea about a character (player perspective) or a adventure (DM perspective), I can whip out the rulebooks and find something that does what I want.

If my next character concept happens to be "I want to play someone that can kill people with a wink of his finger", the rulebook should give me an option to do this. But I wouldn't expect it to be a spell like Finger of Death, it might just be Scorching Ray or a Warlocks Eldritch Blast, possibly with the serial numbers (read: flavour description) filed off. I'd be perfectly happy with it.
Few people will whip out the rulebook and wonder if there is Save-Or-Die Mechanic. That's usually not how you approach creating a character or an adventure.

If I look for a particulary frightening NPC, I look for an ability that looks nasty. FInger of Death certainly is. But an ability that steals a character's soul, or causing his body to slowly rot away is pretty nasty, too. As is a extremely competent sword master.

Massive amounts of damage can replicate Save or Die, too (even if it is a "be hit and die"). Though I'd prefer if this wouldn't happen, and I hope that even with spell criticals in 4th edition, this will rarely happen.

A nice side effect of losing save or die effects will also probably be that Raise Dead will become less important to the game. And that's also a good thing for me, and I think it's probably also nice for those that preferred the Save or Die spells.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm almost positive that there'll be a finger of death. It'll just be made a bit less arbitrary... like take 4d6 con damage, 2d6 if you save. Still lethal, but far less likely to leave the player warping the table with a death grip and mentally deciding how big a chair he's going to shove down your throat.

I would much rather have that than the binary save: Dead|Fine that Finger of Death is now. Heck, 2d6 con damage (assuming 3e's ability chart) is a loss of 1-6 hp per HD, so even if you save, its still potentially lethal. However, now that spell needs to pass my fort defense, total con score, and possibly my total hp (if the con damage doesn't kill me). That sounds like an appropriate Paragon-level spell, right there.

 

[Psion]

If the trade off is between a game with death being more difficult but more meaningful and running the Tomb of Horrors as written, I'll gladly take the latter.

There's a long ways between having perhaps a occasional villain have a save or death effect and Tomb of Horrors (which has death-no-save effects).

Again, false dichotomies.

 

[Psion]

THAC0 is a function of the core die rolling mechanics, so it doesn't make any sense to keep it in there. And, yes, there *should* be a method for Vancian magic in 4E.

Vancian magic: agreed.

But after a fashion, "save or die" is a dice mechanic thing that is being changed. The change that saves become defenses.

Bowbe was almost totally ignored in the past few pages, but I think he may be right. There may be no save-or-die because there are no saves. But is that to say there is no "death attack"? That remains to be seen. Even now, HP can be ploughed through by a lucky crit by a big creatures.

 

[hazel monday]

I don't have a problem with my PC dying in a fight. I just want that death to be from being whittled down and over powered -

Does your DM always allow you to choose the method of your death? I hate it when a player dies in a game that I'm running. It doesn't happen all that often. But when it does happen, the player never chooses how or when he dies. It happens unexpectedly as a result of gameplay. If a player ever told me how his character could or couldn't die, it'd seem pretty wierd to me.

 

[hazel monday]

I'm resisting the urge to scream and rant right now. Mostly because I am absolutely amazed there are DMs (and to a less extent, Players) who cannot fathom a D&D game without finger of death.

I can't speak for everyone who wants to keep save or die in the game. But as for me, I've only used save or die effects twice in 15 years of DMing. I don't enjoy using save or die effects against my players. But I enjoy watching my players reactions when the possibility of fighting a wizard that's powerful enough to use those spells against the players.
Save or Die is just another tool in the DMs bag of tricks. Overusing it is a pretty lousy trick to pull on your players, I must admit. But I like having the threat of it hanging there.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Fine. Then I want all five original save categories back. (Even *Gasp* Save vs. Death Magic!) Legacy is Legacy, after all.

Question: What save do you use when you're hit with a Flesh to Stone spell cast from a staff?

Answer: Your lowest.

 

[MerricB]

I don't view my team hosing the BBEG in round 1 a "letdown" to begin with. Why not call it "an amazing victory"? .

The trouble isn't when it happens once. It's when it happens all the time - which is pretty much what D&D combat allows.

Every combat becomes "Save or die" wars.

Cheers!