Multiple Saves for the Same Effect

[KarinsDad]

The one you saved against. In this case its clear there are two separate condition sources, so I have less of a problem with two separate saves.

Why would you have a problem with two separate saves if it was just ongoing 5 necrotic and ongoing 10 necrotic?

The thing I don't understand is how the opposing POV gets to its interpretation at all. How exactly are you interpreting the word "effects" to mean "effect" in the rules?

Where is the rule that states that ongoing of the same damage halts the other similar effect instead of just the greater damage applies?

That's my confusion. I cannot interpret those word in that way, so I fail to see exactly how the opposing POV is interpreting them. Could someone explain it using the words as written?

 

[Infiniti2000]

I think ongoing damage is a key element to this discussion. I think the rules have an interesting tidbit there: "If effects deal ongoing damage od different types, you take damage from each effect every round. You make a separate saving throw against each damage type." pg. 278 PHB

Does the italicized portion mean anything special? From many people posting here, it seems too obvious to mention, unless maybe it says that you get ONE saving throw per type? That is easily extrapolated to one saving throw per effect.

I mean, if you have ongoing 5 acid from one effect and ongoing 5 poison from another, isn't it obvious they're separate effects and get separate saving throws? But, now assume you also have ongoing 5 acid from a third effect and reread the quote above. Two saves, one per damage type?

 

[MMDuran]

My interpretation is to go ahead and separate "effects" from Effects. So, if say there are two prismatic shards that have a Dazed (save ends) power and they both hit you with their daze beams, then you only have one Dazed (save ends) effect on you and are only making one Save to remove it rather than two (as those two beams don't Daze you via different Effects; they are both bright flashy lights from the same type of monster). This keeps things from getting -too- tiresome if you're, say, fighting a horde of scorpions with poison -- if you're suffering a scorpion venom Effect, you'll only ever suffer -one- scorpion venom Effect (unless you come across Momma Scorpion who has some sort of giant deadly variation on the stuff).

If a warlock then hits with a Dazed + ongoing 5 radiant damage (save ends both) power, clearly a different effect requiring a second Save, so, yes, you have to Save twice to get rid of the Dazed condition. If you then get hit by a Titan's flashlight so that you're taking ongoing 10 radiant (save ends), you're only taking 10 radiant (instead of 5, due to the stacking rules for ongoing damage), but you know that you now have 3 saves to make.

The big kicker, obviously, comes when you've got a second identical Daze or ongoing damage effect that comes from a separate Effect -- say a Yochlol Tempter shows up to give you that Dazed (save ends) or something else applies ongoing 10 radiant (save ends) other than that titanic flashlight. My gut instinct (and that's really ALL it is as the rules are, in my opinion, silent after perusing Google, the books, the updates, the official WotC and this thread) is that you judge the Effect separate from the effect/condition which means that if you're ganged up on by the shard and the yochlol and each dazes you in its own special way, you roll once for each Daze save at the end of your turn and hope to God your buddies either get them to unfocus their fire or kill them off one by one.

 

[Bayuer]

If you were hitted five times by effect 5 ongoing poison damge (save ends) you need only one save to dismiss effect.

If you have effect 5 poison damage + slowe (save end both) and 10 poison damage you need to make two save to clear effects and until then you are slowed and take 10 poison damage. If you made save only against 10 poison damage, you heve on you still effect of 5 poison damage + slow.

If you have effects a)5 poison damage until start of your next turn, b)5 poison damage (save ends), c)5 poison damage (save ends), d) 5 poison damage (until escape) the only effect that you need to read of in this example is to escape a grapple. All other effects don't stack.

If you use option make save for every hit that makes inbalance, becouse monsters strength grow. PCs don't have many powers with effects tha can be used many times in the same encounter.

 

[fnwc]

By chance has anyone posed this to customer support?

Yes:

Hello. All effects that are exactly the same are all ended by the same save, and you only take effect from the highest valued one. Any effects that are different are a totally different effect and require a separate save. So for example, if you had 3 instances of dazed on you, then one single save takes all of the stacked effects off of you. If you had dazed, then another guy gave you dazed and 5 ongoing poison damage, then you would have to make 2 separate saves; one for dazed, (and you would still be dazed at this point,) and a second for dazed + ongoing 5 poison. I hope this clears things up!

This is generally how I apply saves in my game. Recently in a 1 shot delve, the characters were against a pair of Umber Hulks. If I had stacked their at-will (minor! blast!) daze against them, they would have never, ever gotten out of the daze effect.

For my game, I use this system with the exception that effects that are statistically identical aren't considered the "same" if they're from completely different monster/sources:

"Black mold spores" cause an effect of:

• Ongoing necrotic 5
• Slowed

"Necromancer's curse" causes an effect of:

• Ongoing necrotic 5
• Slowed

In the example above, I treat these as different (and would as a result, stack with each other, but not themselves).

Whether or not you believe the CSR, I think this method makes some logical sense and helps reduce some of these problems.

 

[Flipguarder]

In the example above, I treat these as different (and would as a result, stack with each other, but not themselves).

There are a few reasonable interpretations of "stacked" in this scenario:

1. ongoing 10 damage, 2 saves required to get rid of it.
2. ongoing 10 damage, 1 save reduces to 5, 2nd gets rid of the rest.
3. ongoing 5 damage, 2 saves to get rid of it.

If option 1 or 2, what do you define as "double-slowed"?

 

[fnwc]

There are a few reasonable interpretations of "stacked" in this scenario:

1. ongoing 10 damage, 2 saves required to get rid of it.
2. ongoing 10 damage, 1 save reduces to 5, 2nd gets rid of the rest.
3. ongoing 5 damage, 2 saves to get rid of it.

If option 1 or 2, what do you define as "double-slowed"?

In my campaign:

These are all different "effects", which is a grouping of mechanical rules which affect a character (perhaps not the best word, not to be confused with a status effect such as slowed).

In your example, which are 3 different "effects" they all are different and would all stack with each other (but not themselves).

Let's look at an example using your effects described above, but with slight modification, to include status effects. In this example we're assuming untyped ongoing damage (otherwise only the highest ongoing damage per type applies, according to RAW).

1. ongoing 25 damage + slow, first save (remove slow and reduce ongoing damage to 15), second save (ends)
2. ongoing 10 damage + slow, first save (remove ongoing damage), second save (ends)

Monster A Turn 1: Monster applies effect #1 to Bob. Bob is slowed.

Bob Turn 1: Takes 25 damage from effect #1. Makes save against effect #1. After the save, Bob still has "slow and ongoing 15" from effect #1 on him since he made the first save.

Monster B1 Turn 1: Monster applies effect #2 to Bob (poor Bob). Bob is still slowed due to effect #1, but stacking "slow" from effect #2 does nothing.

Bob Turn 2: Takes 15 damage from effect #1. Bob takes 10 damage from effect #2. If the ongoing damage type from these effects were both the same (such as fire) then Bob would take 15 damage only (the larger of the two ongoing damage amounts). Bob makes save against effect #1, ending effect #1. Bob makes the save against effect #2. However, Bob is still slowed from #2.

Monster B2 Turn 1: Monster applies effect #2 to Bob, who is still under the secondary save effect from the same effect from Monster B1. Effect #2 that was applied to Bob (that he has just saved 1 out of 2 against) is wiped out, and replaced with a new instance of effect #2.

Bob Turn 3: Takes 10 damage from effect #2 from Monster B2. Bob saves against #2 (first time for this instance) and no longer will take ongoing damage, but is still slowed.

Bob Turn 4: Has no more ongoing damage stacked on him, however is slowed. Makes his second save against #2 from B2, and is cured of all save effects.

Hope this makes some sense. The easiest way to think about it is in groups. If they comparing the individual mechanics of each "effect" group is identical, then they do not stack. I also personally add the rule that identical effect groups can stack if they come from completely different "fluff" sources (see my necromancer vs mold example above).

 

[Flipguarder]

I was referring to the post 35 so the effects I listed were the "stacked" versions of what he was talking about.

But I got the gist of what you were trying to say