New Article: Death and Dying

[JohnSnow]

I just assume that happens off-camera, like going to the toilet it's one of life's necessities better not dwelled on. When I had basic (British) army training, a lot of it focused on how to safely finish off enemy wounded/incapacitated/bodies, with various drills depending on the position of the body etc.

I submit that any DM who objects to the "just dead" rule wants to dwell on it. He's salivating as he waits for the one time the players forget to say "we slit the throats of our downed enemies."

If it happens "off camera" as you say, what's the problem with saying the enemies "just die?" Do you think "heroes" should have to go about the grisly task of finishing off all their downed adversaries? Do you want to force that flavor decision on everyone's game? Besides, in the real world, sometimes people are just dead, no dying, no saving throw, no slowly bleeding out. They're just dead. Heroes, and sometimes villains, are different. It's a narrative device, nothing more. Orc #3 bleeds out before he recovers because he's not important to the narrative, so what happens to him can be glossed over. By contrast, Bob's PC Fighter IS important, and so the rules offer him some extra "padding." That might hold true for Baron McEvil too, or even his top henchmen, but it doesn't have to hold true for every single minion.

Moreover, what happens if the PCs "don't have time" to complete the grisly task of finishing off all their downed adversaries (putting aside for the moment whether that's a problematic act for "good" characters)?

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

An even simpler option:
Zero equals unconcious for players, NPCs and monsters.

Roll a d20 every round with the roll modified by Constitution bonus + 1/2 level. If you don't beat a DC 20 you die. You lay unconcious a number of hours equal to the amount of damage you took.

For lower level characters, it means zero is no longer regarded as (I think I can hold out for another X rounds, since I bleed until -10). It brings the danger of combat back into the metagamer's mind.

 

[Dragonblade]

Another good house rule would be to simply ignore negative damage altogether. At 0 hitpoints you are considered dying and follow the rules as written in the article. Make your save every round. Therefore, if you get healed you start at 0 hp per the article.

Just once you are dying you basically cease taking damage and thus don't even bother tracking negative hp. Essentially you would only die as a result of a coup de grace, or by failing your three saves without being stabilized.

I guess the drawback is if your body is at fireball ground zero, some people may not find it "realistic" that your body isn't further damaged. Hence the desire to actually track negative hp. But for a little less bookkeeping you get essentially the same system.

 

[Darkwolf71]

I submit that any DM who objects to the "just dead" rule wants to dwell on it. He's salivating as he waits for the one time the players forget to say "we slit the throats of our downed enemies."

If it happens "off camera" as you say, what's the problem with saying the enemies "just die?" <snip>

As much as I disagree with pretty much everything JS has said in this thread, here he is absolutly right.

0 = dead. 'Unless the PCs have reason to interact with a fallen foe.'

Is exactly the same as:
It is assumed the PCs slit the throats of the fallen. 'Unless they have reason to interact with a fallen foe.'

 

[Grog]

If it truly was the goal of the 4.0 team to simplify the rules to make them easier to run, then the first thing you is build an elegant and simple ruleset that all players adhere to; this rule regarding death and dying does neither, as it makes PCs into sanctioned cheaters through having separate standards from NPCs

Which many if not most gamers already did anyway. Did you seriously keep track of the negative hit points for every single orc the PCs dropped in a big fight, and make stabilization rolls for each of them every round? If so, I think you're in a pretty small minority.

and it does so through a far more complicated Death's Door rule than all previous editions.

How is rolling a d20 every round more complicated than rolling a d10 every round?

 

[Grog]

I don't know where you guys got these rules. In 1e, 0 hp meant dead.

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure it was in 1E. I think it was in the DMG somewhere, though it might have been an optional rule.

Regardless, it was a holdover from either 1E or 2E.

 

[kennew142]

I never roll for NPCs to stablize unless it is necessary. I've always given them -1 hp per round unless the party (or someone on their side) heals them. It is simulationist enough for my purposes, without a lot of extra die rolling. I imagine that I will do the same in 4e (i.e. assuming that they fail their stabilization rolls every round).

On the subject of NPC clerics/warlords healing their fellow party members, I can't see why it wouldn't work the same way it does for PCs. If they get healed, they're hp total equals the amount of healing done. I wouldn't let NPCs roll for the heroic autostable + heal unless they were dramatically important to warrant it. In this case, I would probably assume they make it (especially if it happens when no one is looking and it give them a chance to get away).

Since all GMs are free to treat their NPCs just like PCs, I fail to see why other posters are so upset. Keep doing what you are doing. You don't have to houserule anything. That method is supported by the rules now - it's just not the default.

I personally like to make a qualitative difference between PCs and NPCs. I've been doing so for years. IMC the PCs are like the main characters of a book or movie. They can die, whether it be heroic or by mishap or a lucky shot. I like to emphasize the former and limit the frequency of the latter. I'm happy the 4e rules appear to support this style without a lot of house ruling.

 

[Lizard]

Um, I hate to be the one pointing out the obvious, but if you're so worried about taking prisoners why not just strike for non-lethal damage, grapple them or subdue them with a spell. Hacking them down like a tree with a great axe, you get what you get - firewood.

Uhm...yeah.

Not to risk being thrown out of the He-Man 4e Haters Club, but this set of rules does fix issues with 3x while not introducing any grevious new flaws that I can see. In my games, if the PCs want to take prisoners, they use non-lethal damage, because one cgood whack can take the orc from 1 hp to -11...

 

[kennew142]

Are you sure? I'm pretty sure it was in 1E. I think it was in the DMG somewhere, though it might have been an optional rule.

Regardless, it was a holdover from either 1E or 2E.

It was not in 1e in any of the rule books. I don't think it was in 2e either. It sounds very much like a house rule.

 

[JohnSnow]

I don't know where you guys got these rules. In 1e, 0 hp meant dead.

Sorry, but that's just not true. I was looking through the 1e DMG a couple weeks back, and characters in 1e were unconscious when they hit 0 hp and dying when their total went negative. They died when they reached -10 hp.

On the other hand, you are correct that in OD&D and early editions of Basic/Expert D&D, you were dead at 0 hp. And of course, since we lived without a DMG for 2 years when First Edition AD&D came out, many people just used the previous rules. But they were changed when the DMG came out.

However, like many things in the 1st Edition Dungeon Master's Guide, the rule was so hard to find that not many people noticed it.