Massive Damage, DR, Temporary Hit Points and Return to the Tomb of Horrors

[Herremann the Wise]

Hi Everyone,

Our group has just started Return to the Tomb of Horrors in fine style. Unfortunately, our DM has gotten a little upset that he was railroaded into a decision he did not want to make because the players insisted a grey area existed. As such, because the rules were made to appear inconclusive, the DM gave the benefit of the doubt to the player.

The situation revolved around a boulder that did 73hp's of damage. The DM ruled that everyone who took the full brunt (three characters) had to make massive damage saves (DC 15) or die. Everyone did this making the save except the party sorcerer. This is when the arguments started.

The Character in question had DR 10/magic at the time as well as 25 odd temporary hit points from a Heroes Feast cast earlier by the party cleric as well as his own false life spell. The player argued that because the temporary hit points were taken off first and that he got DR 10 (reducing the damage to 63 anyway), that he should not have to roll for massive damage. He argued that the temporary hit points were not really his and were more a damage buffer. Quoting the false life spell description, "You harness the power of unlife to grant yourself a limited ability to avoid death." The difference between temporary hit points coming off first and lets say a bear's endurance constitution increase was argued as a point of difference.

Personally, I think hit points are hit points and if you lose 50 or more of them then you have to roll a massive damage save or die. So, has the DM been hoodwinked or was the character correctly saved from death?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Crothian]

Hit points are hit points, so he would have to make the save. Now if the DR made the damage he took under 50 then he would have had a point.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Personally, I think hit points are hit points and if you lose 50 or more of them then you have to roll a massive damage save or die.

It's interesting, thinking about it.

By the rules, I agree with Crothian.

By the flavour... I think the sorcerer has a point.

For example, if he had fifty temp hit points, and an attack dealt exactly fifty damage... the sorcerer is left at his normal max hit points. Even a Cure Minor Wounds spell will have no effect on him - he has no wounds to cure. Should he risk Massive Damage... from taking no injury?

And on the DR front... DR is described as being instant healing in some cases, and the ability to ignore damage in others. If someone with DR 10/X is hit with an attack for 55 damage... if their DR ignores damage, they take 45 damage. If their DR is instant healing, they take 55 damage, and then heal 10 immediately. Shouldn't that latter case require a Massive Damage check?

-Hyp.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

It's interesting, thinking about it.

By the rules, I agree with Crothian.

By the flavour... I think the sorcerer has a point.

-Hyp.

I suppose this evolves into the argument of "what are hit points": actual damage, the ability or skill to avoid threatening damage or a mixture of the two? In which case then, what are temporary hit points?

Far easier to just follow the rules I suppose. At least our DM - a fellow kiwi - won't beat himself up too much that there is at least some justification for his "incorrect" decision.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[dcollins]

The situation revolved around a boulder that did 73hp's of damage. The DM ruled that everyone who took the full brunt (three characters) had to make massive damage saves (DC 15) or die. Everyone did this making the save except the party sorcerer. This is when the arguments started.

The DM was correct here. The sorcerer did take more than 50 points damage, and by the core rules that requires a massive damage save.

I've always thought that the "massive damage" save is a very unsightly hack on the core mechanic of hit points (dating from 2nd Edition). In my group's games, we don't use it -- and a surprisingly high percentage of players instinctively think that it must be an optional variant rule.

 

[Victim]

I've always thought that the "massive damage" save is a very unsightly hack on the core mechanic of hit points (dating from 2nd Edition). In my group's games, we don't use it -- and a surprisingly high percentage of players instinctively think that it must be an optional variant rule.

I agree. Especially, since after a certain point, 50 point attacks are more routine than massive. Nothing like a 5% chance to die each time you get hit.

 

[HeavyG]

as well as 25 odd temporary hit points from a Heroes Feast cast earlier by the party cleric as well as his own false life spell.

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I seem to remember a thread not too long ago where people were saying that temporary hp from multiple sources weren't cumulative.

I agree. Especially, since after a certain point, 50 point attacks are more routine than massive. Nothing like a 5% chance to die each time you get hit.

Yeah. We've realized this lately, as we run our first high level game. That 50 hp limit is purely arbitrary and we ended up nixing that rule.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I wouldn't bet my life on it, but I seem to remember a thread not too long ago where people were saying that temporary hp from multiple sources weren't cumulative.

Didn't notice that before.

Yeah, one of the only sources that discusses temporary hit points is the 3E Main FAQ... and it says "Temporary hit points from multiple sources don't stack".

-Hyp.

 

[Rystil Arden]

I agree. Especially, since after a certain point, 50 point attacks are more routine than massive. Nothing like a 5% chance to die each time you get hit.

I agree, and so I eliminated death by massive damage as well. Of course half of the problem for the 5% death chance is with the "1 automatically fails" rule, and so I also use the variant rule that a 1 means roll again and add the result to -20 to determine your effective roll (conversely, 20 means roll again and add the result to the 20). This tends to keep crazy things from happening (like bumbling kobolds nonproficiently wearing half plate and tower shield for a total attack bonus of -23 to hit from hitting the AC 50 fighter 5% of the time, or high level fighters with +26 to Fortitude saves from instantly dying 5% of the time from every hit if massive damage is used).

 

[Stalker0]

The epic handbook takes a lot of this into account.

It strongly suggests removing the autohit/autofail and adding in the +20/-20 rule. I believe it also raises the amount of damage needed to trigger massive damage rules.