L&L 3/05 - Save or Die!

[Lanefan]

Some of you might be mis-reading something: the article does not refer to having a percentage of your h.p. remaining before something bad happens, but a flat number.

Which means - as was pointed out above - low h.p. classes e.g. Wizards, Thieves, etc. are kinda screwed over on this one. Now this might be good or bad or neither depending on your point of view, but it has to be noted.

As for another suggestion that has cropped up several times here, that the SoD kicks in when you are bloodied: that makes the huge (and quite possibly wrong) assumption that the "bloodied" mechanic will be in 5e at all.

Personally, I don't mind save-or-die in moderation: iconic monsters, some spells, occasional poisons, and I likes me some Grimtooth now and then. Where 1e missed the boat was in making pretty much all poisons flat-out deadly instead of giving them a whole range of effects; later editions have largely fixed this, but 1e played by RAW was very nasty this way.

Lanefan

 

[jedavis]

Besides the old Power Word spells, I seem to recall the 3e Death domain having a similar power. Let's see:

You may use a death touch once per day. Your death touch is a supernatural ability that produces a death effect. You must succeed on a melee touch attack against a living creature (using the rules for touch spells). When you touch, roll 1d6 per cleric level you possess. If the total at least equals the creature’s current hit points, it dies (no save).

​

So it's not unprecedented for such a power to be in the hands of PCs. I think the rule as presented is simple and works pretty well. If we're talking about a PC's one-shot spell, I would hope that there is some kind of compensatory effect if the target isn't below the HP threshold.

For example, flesh to stone spell: If the target is below the HP threshold, it must save or turn to stone. If above the HP threshold or the save is successful, it is slowed (turning to stone) and can attempt to save each round on its turn to shake off the effect. If the target drops below the HP threshold while under this effect, it must immediately save or turn to stone. A paralysis, sleep, or death effect could use the exact same rules (perhaps with a different save type being required) except you could sub out different effects: sleep would weaken instead of slow, death effects could stun, paralysis effects could daze, and so on.

Disintegrate: If the target is below the HP threshold, it must save or be immediately disintegrated. If above the HP threshold or it successfully saves, it takes 10d6 damage (or whatever is appropriate).

Death poison: If the target is below the HP threshold, it must save or die. If above the HP threshold or it successfully saves, each round on its turn it takes poison damage and can attempt a save to shake off the effect. If the target drops below the HP threshold while still poisoned, it must immediately save or die.

I think this could work well for a number of types of effect. It combines a little bit of 4e's multiple-save concept but still allows for instant effects if the target is vulnerable.

Yeah, I was strongly reminded of Death domain too. Random death threshold would make things a lot more interesting - rather than 25 HP or die, try 8d6, with (in the 3.x idiom, at least) a save to half that.

 

[RangerWickett]

Well, for one, avoiding a medusa's gaze shouldn't be a Fort save. It should be a Reflex save, or maybe a Perception check, to represent you reacting to the approach of the medusa and averting your eyes before you see her.

Let's ponder the different styles of SoDs.

Gaze Attack. At some point you're unable to avert your gaze, and you die.

Poison. The substance does horrible things to you, either killing you or crippling you.

Death Spell. The spell kills you if you fail the save, or injures you if you succeed.

Paralysis/Hold Spell. The spell leaves you vulnerable to a coup de grace, but when it wears off you're fine.

Mind Control. The spell makes you unable to aid your allies, and instead turns you into an enemy, but when it wears off you're fine.

Several of those options above aren't really that different, from a mechanical perspective, from "you take a lot of damage, and it might kill you." A 'death spell' ends up with one of two options - you're alive or you're dead. In the rules of D&D, that's not TOO terribly different from a fireball. Afterward, you're alive or you're dead. If you just modeled the death spell as a) doing a LOT of damage, and b) having some debilitating effect even if the target survives the damage, it ends up with the same game-play result, and with a good narrative feel.

Poison is pretty similar. Just pick an appropriate condition to apply.

Paralysis and Hold Spells? I'd like to see these work as, "The target is slowed and weakened (save ends). If the target is bloodied or becomes bloodied (feel free to substitute "below HP threshold of X") before he succeeds his save, he is paralyzed for Y amount of time."

(Preferably there would also be low-level spells to break these effects. Maybe if you just cast cure spells and get the person's HP back above bloodied, he gets a save to break out.)

Mind control? Something similar. The target is dominated (save ends). If he ends up bloodied before he makes his save, he's instead dominated for X time.



So, finally, the medusa's gaze. How to do it? Well, it's basically another "you're alive or you're dead" options. But it doesn't feel right for the medusa's gaze to do damage.

I'd run it this way. First, tweak HP a bit so when you're at 0 or below, you're helpless, but not unconscious. That way, if the medusa shoots you with an arrow and you're cowering on the ground at negative HP, she can slide by and stone your ass.

Second, make it totally a player's choice how much risk he's willing to take. Closing your eyes negates the gaze attack, and assuming the PC knows there's a medusa around, he can do that on his turn and be immune until his next turn. But if he chooses to have his eyes open on his turn, he remains vulnerable until the start of his next turn. He can target the medusa more easily, but he has to make Reflex saves to avert his gaze quickly enough before she can glare at him.

 

[Dausuul]

I think after reading enough of comments like this, 5e is dead already. Those that are playing earlier editions are not open to anything except a reprint of their own edition.

I play 4E and have since it was released. Its superior balance, mechanical support for the DM, and expansion of options for non-casters are valuable enough to me that I put up with the things I don't like about it, including its treatment of hit points. For other people, however, that equation balances out differently.

Everything I've seen indicates that Pathfinder and 4E players can come together on the hit points issue, but only if each side acknowledges the validity of the other's concerns. For Pathfinder fans, that means acknowledging that 4E fans have a valid complaint about having to rely on divine magic/healsticks, and about the lack of a way to recover resources between fights. For 4E fans, that means acknowledging that Pathfinder fans also have a valid complaint about the narrative not matching the terms used ("attack," "hit," "damage," "heal," "bloodied," etc.) and about the lack of lasting consequences for serious injuries.

There are quite a number of ways a system could address all of these concerns and work for everybody. A wounds/vitality system is one approach that's seen a lot of interest on ENWorld, and has the benefit of being relatively easy to "modularize." I can think of others. But if each side sticks its fingers in its ears and insists that the solution is for the other side to just give in, yeah, you're not going to see an agreement there.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I don't like Mearls' suggestion.

I'd like to see save or die effects work in stages. Each stage of the progression leads to a flavorful and logical next step. The final stage is death/turned to stone/what-have-you.

Whether this is on failed saves or subsequent attacks doesn't matter as much to me.

In regards to these spells in the hands of PCs, I agree with Mearls that the spell shouldn't be used up with no effect. Make these type of spells (using 4E parlance) "Sustain: Standard" with subsequent rounds of sustainment moving the effect up a stage (probably with further attacks/saves).

 

[Libramarian]

This is a more general comment but I don't think it's a good idea to try to please risk-for-reward gamers and story gamers at the same time with particular mechanics.

We need a high level switch that changes the whole game over to a different mode.

Such as a "death flag" mechanic. Your character can't die until you've given your permission to the DM.

There you go. Now you don't have to water down classic game concepts halfway. Those who don't like unexpected character death can die exactly as often as they want.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

Behold the modularity inherent in the system! When presented with a dial, why not just be happy that you can set it to what you want instead of complaining that it can be adjusted to a setting you don't want?

Because only the dm can choose the setting. I like save or die and I won't play in a D&D game where disintegrate makes you go "ouchie, I got a booboo."

 

[Mark CMG]

On the other hand, the save or die mechanic can be incredibly boring. With a few dice rolls, the evening could screech to a halt as the vagaries of luck wipe out the party.

This stems from the basic assumption that pulling the lifeless body of a PC out of a fray, retreating to revive that PC (if possible), and then returning as a better equipped party to overcome that previous obstacle isn't an option that should be a natural part of the game. It assumes too much, IMO. It's not a "screeching halt," it's just one of many paths in which the game can head. For those who want the game to hinge on the above assumption, DMing advice can be included to avoid such situations.

 

[grimslade]

I think after reading enough of comments like this, 5e is dead already. Those that are playing earlier editions are not open to anything except a reprint of their own edition.
Your edition is great, for you. My edition is great for me. If we can't embrace that there's a chance that maybe our games can both benefit from some of the other editions qualities then WotC is publishing their last edition.

We are talking about an optional rule here. SoD is looking to be on the outs for base rules, but with an optional sidebar for inclusion. This is how older and more recent editions can move to the latest and greatest, through compromise. The hp debate is a bone of contention in all editions, not just 4E vs previous. Someone mentioned the EGG vs. White Dwarf argument in early 1E, so no sweat, hit points are left vague for that reason. Healing surges put stress on the compromise, but really I always thought of them as adrenaline surges anyway.

Back to Save or be wounded rapidly to stone....
I can see a range of optional systems. True save or die. Fail your save take a wound until you die. Save or suck. All sorts of stuff. Although, does anyone like save or suck in lieu of SoD?

 

[Sunseeker]

This stems from the basic assumption that pulling the lifeless body of a PC out of a fray, retreating to revive that PC (if possible), and then returning as a better equipped party to overcome that previous obstacle isn't an option that should be a natural part of the game. It assumes too much, IMO. It's not a screeching halt it's just one of many paths in which the game can head. For those who want the game to hinge on the above assumption, DMing advice can be included to avoid such situations.

If there's a monster with a save-or-die mechanic going on, I'm going to wager that "retreat and retry" isn't going to be much of an option anyway. Okay, it's easy to not look in the medusa's eyes when you've got your backs to her and running away. Additionally(working under the medusa issue here) dragging a stone statue that was once your friend is A: very difficult in the sense that it's going to weigh several hundred pounds, and B: runs a high risk of damaging the character while hauling them out.

Now, presumably the medusa is a sentient creature and it's possible it could be reasoned with. Perhaps some tribute(that's gonna be costly baby!) to appease it to let them go. Other creatures with lower intelligence levels, this probably isn't going to happen.

So realistically unless you have some sure-fire escape route or some guaranteed way to break combat for a while, escape isn't going to be possible. Beyond that, why were you fighting this thing to begin with? Certainly it possessed something you needed or impeded your path to the thing you needed. What's to say the "thing you needed" is still going to be there? The sheer arrogance of the creature guarding it/living where it's located?

Retreat is sometimes possible in certain combats. But I think that almost anything with a save-or-die effect is going to be very much a "win-or-die" fight.