Creamsteak
Explorer
Con check, DC 10 + |Negative Damage|
Rather than the PHB Flat 15 DC.
Rather than the PHB Flat 15 DC.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
My houserule for stabilizing.
- Thread starter Creamsteak
- Start date
candidus_cogitens
Explorer
Are you suggesting this as a replacement for a heal check?? Or were you speaking of the rules for stabilizing on your own, without the help of a healer?
Performing a heal check should not be connected to the Constitution of the dying player.
In my opinion, stabilizing on your own should not be connected to CON either. The advantage of having a high CON is already reflected in the fact that you were able to take more of a beating before falling unconscious in the first place. But if you really don't like the idea of a flat 10% chance of stabilizing on your own, it might be worth considering using a fortitude save somehow. But the problem with that would be that it would be too easy for high-level characters to stabilize and too hard for low level characters.
If it ain't broke ...
Performing a heal check should not be connected to the Constitution of the dying player.
In my opinion, stabilizing on your own should not be connected to CON either. The advantage of having a high CON is already reflected in the fact that you were able to take more of a beating before falling unconscious in the first place. But if you really don't like the idea of a flat 10% chance of stabilizing on your own, it might be worth considering using a fortitude save somehow. But the problem with that would be that it would be too easy for high-level characters to stabilize and too hard for low level characters.
If it ain't broke ...
candidus_cogitens
Explorer
Jeph said:
What CON check? I still can't figure out what you guys are referring to.
Creamsteak
Explorer
Page 129, start at Dying (-1 to -9 Hit points). I'm refering to this line:
I replaced the 10% roll with a Con check. I also modified the Heal check to stabalize another character. Normally the check is always DC 15, but instead I have the check DC 10 + |Negative Damage|.
It breaks the game down to saying that saving someone's life when they are 10 seconds away from dead is harder than saving someone's life when they have A minute and a half.
It's not that big of a change, just thought I'd post it in house rules as one "other" way to handle things.
I replaced the 10% roll with a Con check. I also modified the Heal check to stabalize another character. Normally the check is always DC 15, but instead I have the check DC 10 + |Negative Damage|.
It breaks the game down to saying that saving someone's life when they are 10 seconds away from dead is harder than saving someone's life when they have A minute and a half.
It's not that big of a change, just thought I'd post it in house rules as one "other" way to handle things.
candidus_cogitens
Explorer
Thanks for clarifying.
I don't like the CON check idea, because your CON bonus is already reflected in the additional hit points you get from it.
BUT, I like the idea of the variable DC for first aid Heal checks. That makes a lot of sense. It would make it more urgent to get to a dying character, rather than letting him bleed for a few rounds while you finish off the foes before you administer first aid. I don't think it would create any major balance problems since the average DC (ranging from 11 to 19) would be 15. It might make dying slightly more frequent though. Here's why:
Let's say your buddy is down at -1. He is unlikely to end up dead. (DC 11 is easier than DC 15). On the other hand, even using the standard DC 15 the PC would be unlikely to die because if you fail at your first attempt, you could always try again. You would have several rounds to re-try before he actually dies. So, really, your modification does not make it that much less likely that a character would die.
Now let's take a different for-instance. Let's say your buddy went from 5 HP to -9 HP from a single hit. You have to heal him in one round or he'll be dead. There is no opportunity to re-try. So, in this instance, the character is much more likely to end up dead if you're using the variant rule that you propose.
You'll end up with more dead characters.
I don't like the CON check idea, because your CON bonus is already reflected in the additional hit points you get from it.
BUT, I like the idea of the variable DC for first aid Heal checks. That makes a lot of sense. It would make it more urgent to get to a dying character, rather than letting him bleed for a few rounds while you finish off the foes before you administer first aid. I don't think it would create any major balance problems since the average DC (ranging from 11 to 19) would be 15. It might make dying slightly more frequent though. Here's why:
Let's say your buddy is down at -1. He is unlikely to end up dead. (DC 11 is easier than DC 15). On the other hand, even using the standard DC 15 the PC would be unlikely to die because if you fail at your first attempt, you could always try again. You would have several rounds to re-try before he actually dies. So, really, your modification does not make it that much less likely that a character would die.
Now let's take a different for-instance. Let's say your buddy went from 5 HP to -9 HP from a single hit. You have to heal him in one round or he'll be dead. There is no opportunity to re-try. So, in this instance, the character is much more likely to end up dead if you're using the variant rule that you propose.
You'll end up with more dead characters.
Similar Threads
