Night Hag-- Save or die?

[Felon]

Unconsicous = Dead = Petrified for all the player cares. If you never wake up, you are effectively "dead."

The results of the power do not magically go away after the encounter ends, even if the power itself does. You do not heal damage. You do not remove conditions that aren't explicitly removed. You do not revive dead enemies or team members. You do not wake up if unconscious with no save.

Darn, if only there was someone whose job it was to sit at the game table and make judgment calls on things like when an unconscious character wakes up. I thinks it's to say, the intent of "no save" was to mean the character doesn't wake until after the encounter's over.

Here's yet another "fix" that I will likely toss aside. When I was first looking through the DMG for some monster that could render someone unconscious for more than a round or two, so a character could actually get abducted once in a while without having to go through a whole beatdown.

They really need some mechanic other than "save ends", for effects that just aren't meant to be a one-round affair. In this case, I'd probably allow a save if a fellow party member makes a Heal check on them.

 

[Nytmare]

I can't help but think that some people missed the part where this was a typo.

The intent of "no save" was that they screwed up and meant to put "save ends."

Even "unconscious to the end of the encounter" doesn't fit because it's still Hit > Fail save > player stops playing D&D.

 

[Felon]

I can't help but think that some people missed the part where this was a typo.

The intent of "no save" was that they screwed up and meant to put "save ends."

How do you know this was a typo? I'm looking at the MM update right night now. They don't explain what's a typo and what's a takeback.

How do you mistype "save ends" and wind up with "no save"?

 

[Kordeth]

How do you know this was a typo? I'm looking at the MM update right night now. They don't explain what's a typo and what's a takeback.

How do you mistype "save ends" and wind up with "no save"?

It's probably not a typo per se, but given that the only purpose of saving throws is to define a duration in 4E and the term "no save" isn't defined anywhere in 4E, it's safe to assume that it's a relic from an earlier draft of the rules when saves worked a bit more like they do in previous editions.

In any case, it doesn't matter why it was wrong, it was just plain wrong, and I believe the point Nytmare was making is that it's kind of pointless to discuss rulings and ramifications of a rule that doesn't actually exist.

 

[Nytmare]

It has been errated. Rules as originally intended mean absolutely nothing because the power was wrong. It is not "no save," or "till the end of the encounter," the power is "save ends." There is no spoon.

 

[Felon]

It's probably not a typo per se, but given that the only purpose of saving throws is to define a duration in 4E and the term "no save" isn't defined anywhere in 4E, it's safe to assume that it's a relic from an earlier draft of the rules when saves worked a bit more like they do in previous editions.

In any case, it doesn't matter why it was wrong, it was just plain wrong, and I believe the point Nytmare was making is that it's kind of pointless to discuss rulings and ramifications of a rule that doesn't actually exist.

The point Nytmare was making was that it was a typo. Now, apparently, we have an "update" on his previous comment and it turns out he actually meant something else altogether.

The rule exists. It's in the book, and that's what the majority of players will refer to. It's a select minority who actually memorize or even bother to look up the copious amounts of errata/takebacks/updates that are online.

Having said that, if the OP is part that minority, then his question has indeed been answered.

 

[Nytmare]

The point Nytmare was making was that it was a typo. Now, apparently, we have an "update" on his previous comment and it turns out he actually meant something else altogether.

The rule exists. It's in the book, and that's what the majority of players will refer to. It's a select minority who actually memorize or even bother to look up the copious amounts of errata/takebacks/updates that are online.

You are correct, I concede. The majority of the players who are out there who only have access to the book they purchased, and who don't have access to the errata or this forum in which rules questions are asked and aswered should use the incorrect rulings posited by the people in said forum who choose to ignore the errata and make up their own house rules.

 

[Vegepygmy]

You are correct, I concede. The majority of the players who are out there who only have access to the book they purchased, and who don't have access to the errata or this forum in which rules questions are asked and aswered should use the incorrect rulings posited by the people in said forum who choose to ignore the errata and make up their own house rules.

+1 XP for you!

 

[deleteme123456]

There's always Remove Affliction if you want to go back to no save, and no waking up at the end of the encounter.

 

[Starfox]

The way I see it, even powers that do not allow a save under certain conditions cans till be saved against - someone just has to give you a save. There are many powers that do this, as does a DC 15 Heal check.

This solves many of these issues.