L&L 3/05 - Save or Die!

I'm thinking of the Medusa, and here's how I'd want it to work:

* Low-level characters just get turned to stone instantly

* Higher-level characters turn to stone slowly, but can fight through the effect, and it dispels when the Medusa dies

(So the powerful warrior can stagger towards Medusa, slowly turning to stone, slowing down, stiffening up, and finally gets to melee range just as he's almost done, and swings, lopping her head off*.)
You know, a two-tier threshold might work for something like this.

Medusa's gaze:
25 hp or less: Instant petrification - make a saving throw or be petrified.
26 hp or more: Creeping petrification - make a saving throw or take 10 hp of damage; second failed save: you are also slowed; third failed save: you also take a -2 penalty to attack rolls; fourth failed save: you are immobilized instead of slowed; fifth failed save: you are petrified.

EDIT: This way, each failed save gets you closer to petrification, either by dropping your hp below the threshold, or by moving you along the creeping petrification track.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't. In fact, I think they should have the option. But it shouldn't be the default.
Since I have decided that I should consider distinctions such as "core" and "default" to be meaningless, you are welcome to lobby for your favored approach to be the default. I will be happy with my options.
 

[/zzz] Just a dumb, tired thought that's probably been discussed before: if the purpose of save or die is fear-inducing super-scary monsters that would (should?) be a higher level anyway, why not just make save or die effects apply if a monster is +x levels higher than you? And maybe you save or die monsters -x levels lower, for giggles. And maybe some magic weapons give you +x "effective" levels vs. certain monsters. [zzz]
 

I'm not a big fan of save or die, for players or monsters.

However, if such things are to exist, I find the proposed system unnecessarily clunky.

If you want SoD effects to interact with the HP system, don't go half-way, go all the way.

Instead of:
The medusa's gaze forces creatures currently at 25 or fewer hit points to make a save or be turned to stone.

why not
The medusa's gaze forces creatures to make a save or take 25 damage. If this attack reduces a creature to 0 or fewer HP, the creature is turned to stone.

For all characters at 25 or fewer hitpoints, this is functionally identical. For characters above 25 hitpoints, it's still a threat, unlike "I can't even look at you until you've been beat up enough".
 

why not
The medusa's gaze forces creatures to make a save or take 25 damage. If this attack reduces a creature to 0 or fewer HP, the creature is turned to stone.

The main problem I have with that is: Where does the 25 damage come from when you are not turned to stone?
 

Is it really necessary to imply that everyone who doesn't play like you do is therefore playing some other thing that RPGs can do OK, although other media (TV? movies? videogames? you might at least be specific in your casting of aspersions) do it better?
I didn't say anything about playing like me. But there are strengths and weakness which can be compared.

I've got no quibble with what is huge fun to any given individual. But I've been consistent on this point for years and the market results have matched my assessments. Variations in unique indiviual preferences are neither disputed nor accepted as evidence overriding the larger dominant trend.

4e-style SSSoD is not radically different, in it's play, from a system with SoD plus Fate Points - which is a pretty common RPG design.
I completely disgaree with you there. The incremental effects portion of SSSoD is a key feature in 4E and in the details of this conversation. A SoD system with all or nothing results but a AP system for allowing a player to either possibly or even automatically override a failed role is an entitrely different thing.

It has nothing at all to do with "story telling" vs "tactical games with marginal to meaningless narrative substance".
Taking alone and out of context I agree that there is no obligation that the two be connected. And I don't claim it is universal. but I do claim it is a common overlap and I'll also stick to that as a reasonable assessment in the more specific context of the conversation.
 
Last edited:

The medusa glances at you, hoping to subject you to her petrifying gaze!
If you had 25 hp or less, you stare the medusa full in the face. Make a saving throw or be turned to stone.
If you had 26 hp or more, you manage to avert your eyes at the last second. You are not petrified ... yet.
Anything that passes the "if you look at Medusa you turn to stone" test is good. And this covers that criteria.

However, once the narrative issues are covered it is still reasonable to select the best option for game play. IMO this still doesn't do a great job. A big part of the fun is knowing that death (or non-death petrification) can be a split second away.
 


The main problem I have with that is: Where does the 25 damage come from when you are not turned to stone?

This is the point where you see your veins turning black and your skin going grey but you haven't petrified yet.

Your body is still fighting off the 'poison' of petrification.
 

Instead of:
The medusa's gaze forces creatures currently at 25 or fewer hit points to make a save or be turned to stone.

why not
The medusa's gaze forces creatures to make a save or take 25 damage. If this attack reduces a creature to 0 or fewer HP, the creature is turned to stone.

For all characters at 25 or fewer hitpoints, this is functionally identical. For characters above 25 hitpoints, it's still a threat, unlike "I can't even look at you until you've been beat up enough".

I'd rather see:

The medusa's gaze forces people to make a constitution save. On a failed save they take 2d12+12 damage and are slowed.*
If this reduces them to 25 or less hitpoints they are instead turned to stone.
 

Remove ads

Top