Pacification damage type + Pacifist Healer

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
My idea of having a pacification damage type needs refined I do like the pacifist healer feat... but the pacifist healer could perhaps too easily do an end run around.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan...eep-petrification-transformation-attacks.html

Other Ideas for making pacification damage interesting
Temporary hit point gain might heal pacification damage. This leads to the difficulty of separately tracking pacification damage arghhhhhhh!!!

Temporary hitpoints might reduce damage from pacification attacks on a 2 for one basis.. you only loose 3 thp from an attack doing 6 pacification damage.
Perhaps I should expand the pacifist healers guilt complex so they take a hit if a target of there pacification damage is killed or similar?

Any ideas what might be balanced so the pac healer doesnt get a free ride?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm currently running a pseudo-pacifist cleric in 4e.

We aren't using any house rules, his attacks simply default to nonlethal. The reason for this is that my character is a sun priest (really more akin to a druid) and believes in fighting as his god does (battering his foes down with exhaustion). The mechanical disadvantage is that he never makes opportunity attacks, since he refuses to attack using anything but his divine magics. Because I didn't want to aggravate my party, I decided that as a nature priest he has no objections to others killing (cycle of life and death), although he will not take a life himself.

I guess what I'm getting at is that I don't see why you need special rules for a pacifist cleric (it's easy to reskin his attacks as whatever kind of pacifying "damage" you prefer). Also, being a pacifist isn't ever a "free ride" in D&D (you're someone who likely doesn't condone killing, with friends who are bloodthirsty adventurers, and enemies who are untrustworthy murderers).

YMMV
 

The pacificist healer feat from the new Divine Power allows you to get a benefit ie improved healing ... but if you do "damage" to a bloodied target your guilt complex causes you to take damage.... I am a real big fan of skinning various powers as you pointed out that laser hit could be a heat wave... that fatigues the enemy eventually knocking them out.... the new feat is rather problematic for the house rule I had (for basically sleep magic) and doesnt really care how we skin it.

So I kind of think I need to change that feat... so the guilt hit relates to the final stroke instead of when bloodied.
 

technically a true druid considers life and death quite natural and normal you shouldn't wastefully kill and he would like to join your hunting trip.
 

Note the idea for a pacification damage type is just like the other keywords...I dont want to separately track like temp hit points and it would basically be something other feats could gear off... and more fair sleep spells or waves of peace etc can be built based on. Sleep as it stands is legacy save or die.
 

The pacificist healer feat from the new Divine Power allows you to get a benefit ie improved healing ... but if you do "damage" to a bloodied target your guilt complex causes you to take damage.... I am a real big fan of skinning various powers as you pointed out that laser hit could be a heat wave... that fatigues the enemy eventually knocking them out.... the new feat is rather problematic for the house rule I had (for basically sleep magic) and doesnt really care how we skin it.

So I kind of think I need to change that feat... so the guilt hit relates to the final stroke instead of when bloodied.

Note the idea for a pacification damage type is just like the other keywords...I dont want to separately track like temp hit points and it would basically be something other feats could gear off... and more fair sleep spells or waves of peace etc can be built based on. Sleep as it stands is legacy save or die.

Okay, I didn't completely grok what you were getting at initially.

It seems weird that a pacifist would feel guilt over putting someone to sleep (especially if the alternative was death), but not really any weirder than when someone is "bloodied" by a sleep spell.

The pacifist healer feat doesn't seem like it meshes perfectly with the idea of pacification damage. The simplest approach is probably just to ban the feat in any game where you want to use pacification damage if you can't reconcile the concepts, though they work just fine on the mechanical level. I wouldn't reduce the stun to only when enemies are downed, because that significantly reduces the penalty. Pacifist healer makes the second half of any fight hell for the pacifist (once all enemies are bloodied, any attack the pacifist lands will stun him) whereas stunned by the finishing blow is much less painful (since it will usually occur less than once per enemy per fight).

I like your idea of modeling sleep, petrification, etc. effects as damage.

On the other hand, I'm not keen on pacification damage as it's own damage type. My approach would be to use existing damage types for pacifying attacks, with the keyword indicating that such attacks are always nonlethal in nature (you could even add that targets knocked out by the pacification keyword have to make a saving throw even after they are healed before they wake up, though I'd be careful using this against PCs as it's a lot more effective against them than monsters). A poison could easily be classified as pacifying (knock-out gas) and it isn't hard to imagine a heatstroke spell that is classified as fire damage (and thus ineffective against red dragons). I think this approach would require less general rework.

technically a true druid considers life and death quite natural and normal you shouldn't wastefully kill and he would like to join your hunting trip.

Yeah, this character is essentially a deluded priest whose beliefs are somewhat contradictory in nature. (The campaign setting has no established deities, so clerics are people who have, for various reasons, been inspired to believe/worship something greater than themselves). Excessive exposure to the sun can of course kill but because his view of the sun is as an impartial life giver, he ignores those facts that might inconvenience his personal truth. ;)
 
Last edited:

Okay, I didn't completely grok what you were getting at initially.

It seems weird that a pacifist would feel guilt over putting someone to sleep (especially if the alternative was death), but not really any weirder than when someone is "bloodied" by a sleep spell.
I have several other words I use stressed / frazzled / exhausted as well as bloodied is the mechanical term.. the description usually depends on the character (lucky heros and tough heros and skilled heros) get to skin there own defenses...
The pacifist healer feat doesn't seem like it meshes perfectly with the idea of pacification damage. The simplest approach is probably just to ban the feat in any game where you want to use pacification damage if you can't reconcile the concepts, though they work just fine on the mechanical level.
The feat sure does need something to work in my context... sleep is deaths little brother and gets under estimated too much.
I like your idea of modeling sleep, petrification, etc. effects as damage.

In some ways its just me disliking dicey randomness heros and significant villains arent supposed to be taken out by the whims of chance they have a buffer against that.... chance smacking somebody down... well that is what minions are for (I use them rather liberally).

On the other hand, I'm not keen on pacification damage as it's own damage type. My approach would be to use existing damage types for pacifying attacks, with the keyword indicating that such attacks are always nonlethal in nature (you could even add that targets knocked out by the pacification keyword have to make a saving throw even after they are healed before they wake up, though I'd be careful using this against PCs as it's a lot more effective against them than monsters). A poison could easily be classified as pacifying (knock-out gas) and it isn't hard to imagine a heatstroke spell that is classified as fire damage (and thus ineffective against red dragons). I think this approach would require less general rework.

Ahhhhh that is pretty elegant a sleep spell is now psychic and pacifying.

And the knockout gass is poison and pacifying...

I do think it might be nice to have temporary hitpoints be given special privilages against effects with pacification keyword.
 
Last edited:

I have several other words I use stressed / frazzled / exhausted as well as bloodied is the mechanical term.. the description usually depends on the character (lucky heros and tough heros and skilled heros) get to skin there own defenses...

I suppose it makes a kind of sense if you skin it as stress, though I had to chuckle a bit at the thought of a pacifist paralyzed by guilt because he caused a bloodthirsty orc undue stress. ;)

The feat sure does need something to work in my context... sleep is deaths little brother and gets under estimated too much.

I just mean that if you have sleep act as damage, the pacifist healer feat works fine. Every time you hit an enemy who is bloodied with your sleep spell you are stunned. It's a bit weird but mechanically it works, since the healing bonus from that feat is crazy good (and thus requires a significant drawback, which it provides). If you reduce the penalty for attacks with the pacification keyword (like only triggering it on the final blow) you significantly downplay the penalty, making that feat a no-brainer for any pacifist.

Alternately, reduce the bonus healing from pacifist healer and reduce the penalty as well. Off the top of my head, I'd say that if you want to reduce the penalty to "stunned on a finishing blow", reduce the healing to just Charisma modifier (lose the d6s).

In some ways its just me disliking dicey randomness heros and significant villains arent supposed to be taken out by the whims of chance they have a buffer against that.... chance smacking somebody down... well that is what minions are for (I use them rather liberally).

I understand where you're coming from. Even in 3.x and 2nd ed my group and I did our best to steer clear of save-or-die/save-or-suck effects by silent and unanimous agreement. We always felt they were very boring when they worked, and a waste of a resources when they didn't. I haven't had to deal with the save-or-X effects in 4e yet, since it seems my players still tend to avoid them like the plague.
 

Since attacks can be skinned as non-lethal pretty much at player will and I took some of the effects and pulled them in as always non-lethal-- oops I just thought of something ... I guess I might as well let my sleep spell kill .... if it does the final state isnt sleep its a coma.

I understand where you're coming from. Even in 3.x and 2nd ed my group and I did our best to steer clear of save-or-die/save-or-suck effects by silent and unanimous agreement. We always felt they were very boring when they worked, and a waste of a resources when they didn't. I haven't had to deal with the save-or-X effects in 4e yet, since it seems my players still tend to avoid them like the plague.

Well using a sleep spell and skinning it as binding ribbons... is kind of fun actually. Another spell doing damage and inducing slowness might do the trick though. (cold spells... with the cold keyword changed to force).
 

I think I am convinced then the only real use for the pacification key word is for it to key off of other feats and to imply that the normal use for the spell is non lethal.. I could suffocate you with that ribbon spell just by pushing a little harder... I could drive you into a deep unrecoverable coma with a poison based pacification spell... and put you in a glass cage with low level preservation magic with a trigger to make it permanent ;-) and call myself a wicked witch.

I think that temporary hitpoints almost feel like special resistance to pacification..
 
Last edited:

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top