Players, DMs and Save or Die

[Celebrim]

So in other words, there is absolutely nothing in the rules that says that "save-or-die effects are a DM tool to be used to make certain encounters and NPCs have a very special significance." Thank you for admitting that, even if it was in a very roundabout way.

If you think DMs need a rule to establish an enjoyable gaming session, then I don't think there is much use in having this conversation.

More to the point, its pretty irrelevant. You've morphed the discussion from the question of save or die to the question of save or die as it is implemented in a particular edition of the game. You are arguing a completely different topic than the people you are talking to, and celebrating the fact that you are making points completely unrelated to anything that they care about.

given the fact that as PCs rise in level, the level-appropriate NPCs and monsters they encounter will have access to these abilities more and more often, we can conclude that barring either house rules or the DM intentionally restricting his or her use of certain enemies, the PCs will face an increasing chance of random and arbitrary death based on a single roll of the d20 as the game progresses to higher and higher levels.

It's worth noting that in 1st edition, the opposite was largely true. Because the DC's of saving throws largely didn't scale, the higher level you reached the less threat any particular 'save or die' situation represented and the more secure you could be. Since even ordinary poison was a 'save or die' situation in 1st edition, the number of save or die situations didn't really increase over time either. Or in other words, one can believe that 'save or die' is a problem in the current edition, without believing that the problem is 'save or die' itself.

You may think that's a good thing. I don't.

Whatever.

 

[Grog]

Okay, I've seen two votes from pro-SoD people for "The PCs should never have to save or die unless they want to." Basically, they think that save-or-die should only be for big challenges that the PCs can face if they want to, but don't have to face.

I see a few problems with this.

1. As a DM, if I want to put an optional challenge in the game that has a good chance of killing some PCs, I don't need an extremely flawed mechanic to do it. There are many different ways I can build a challenging and fun encounter without using abilities that make a PCs life or death come down to a single roll of the d20. Save-or-die is not a necessary component of a "great risk for great reward" scenario, and I don't think that the potential for its use in such a scenario is worth all the problems it causes in other areas of the game.

2. The idea that SoD should be for optional challenges only means that I can never use high-level wizards or clerics (along with several monsters, such as the iconic beholder) as villains who the PCs must face. Or, alternatively, I have to metagame and have the wizards and clerics choose less than optimal spells to use against the PCs. Neither of those options is particularly appealing to me. If I want a high-level wizard as the BBEG in my campaign, I should be able to have a high-level wizard as the BBEG in my campaign.

3. This does nothing to address the issue of the players using save-or-die spells against enemies, which in my experience can also be a problem. It can turn an important encounter into an anticlimax (and while encounters are a dime a dozen in D&D, important encounters aren't), and it contributes to the problem of casters dominating the game at high levels ("Gee, the wizard one-shotted the enemy in the first round. Again.")

 

[Grog]

If you think DMs need a rule to establish an enjoyable gaming session, then I don't think there is much use in having this conversation.

*sigh*

I am perfectly aware of the fact that each individual DM is free to run his or her game the way he or she sees fit. What I'm saying is that the rules as written should facilitate enjoyable games as best they can. And also refuting the notion that there's some kind of special rules governing the use of save-or-die effects in the RAW.

And I also know that save-or-die worked differently in 1E, thanks.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Okay, I've seen two votes from pro-SoD people for "The PCs should never have to save or die unless they want to." Basically, they think that save-or-die should only be for big challenges that the PCs can face if they want to, but don't have to face.

Of course, "the PCs should never have to face an encounter unless they want to" is my stance on a nest of goblins as well. Players choose what they do isn't just for "big challenges".

Obviously, we shouldn't have goblins in the game.

RC

 

[Remathilis]

I hope you realize that "I give you 1d20, I'll roll 3d20 and take the highest number. Highest roll wins." is not the same % chance of result.

Sure it is. All those dice still are numbered 1-20. The odds of beating any one of the individual dice rolls is exactly the same. However, your odds of beating all three is slim. That's the beauty of it, its not a 50/50 chance of death. Its not pass:die. You have multiple hurdles to jump. So you can outright win and swindle me out of my $100 (lets say you roll a 20, I don't roll higher than an 18 on any die) but the odds over the long run are in my favor.

That's all I want out of my PC's death chance. Sure, luck can have me low on hp, failing a save, and taking X points of damage (where X = more hp than I currently have) but that's at least another two buffers before death. SoD is that one d20 roll to get that $100, you might get lucky and win, but you can't do that 2, 3, or 4 times in a row. You're luck will run out.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I hope you realize that "I give you 1d20, I'll roll 3d20 and take the highest number. Highest roll wins." is not the same % chance of result.

Sure it is.

All those dice still are numbered 1-20. The odds of beating any one of the individual dice rolls is exactly the same. However, your odds of beating all three is slim. That's the beauty of it, its not a 50/50 chance of death. Its not pass:die.

Okay, then.

Imagine you roll 1d10. The odds of rolling 10 are 1 in 10.

Imagine you roll 2d10. The odds of rolling 20 are (1 in 10 on the first die, 1 in 10 on the second die) 1 in 100. This is why we use 2d10 to roll percentiles.

A creature with a 50% chance to win initiative and a 50% chance to hit the average character (say) has a 25% chance to hit the average character before that character can do anything about it. If the creature also has a 50% chance of killing someone with that blow, it has a 12.5% chance of killing a character before that character can do anything about it.

In this hypothetical encounter, 3 dice are rolled, resulting in a 12.5% chance of death before a character can react. This is, in fact, a bit safer than a save in which a 3 is successful (rolling a 1 or 2, and thus failing, is a 10% chance).

It doesn't matter how many dice are rolled. It matters what odds those rolls represent.

RC

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Uhm..RC...not that I disagree about your last line...if the final probability of death is the same, the actual number of events that lead there are in so far irrelevant as long as the character doesn't get the chance to act as well...you'll be hard-pressed to find a monster that has a 50% chance to kill an "average" character (which I'll simply understand as a CR-equivalent monster in a one-against-one situation) in the monster manuals I got, at least with simple hit point damage, or even damage dealing spells. Also, at levels around something like the Bodak turns into a "balanced" (note the quotation marks) encounter, a 3 usually won't cut it to survive the death gaze of that beast.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Uhm..RC...not that I disagree about your last line...if the final probability of death is the same, the actual number of events that lead there are in so far irrelevant as long as the character doesn't get the chance to act as well...you'll be hard-pressed to find a monster that has a 50% chance to kill an "average" character (which I'll simply understand as a CR-equivalent monster in a one-against-one situation) in the monster manuals I got, at least with simple hit point damage, or even damage dealing spells. Also, at levels around something like the Bodak turns into a "balanced" (note the quotation marks) encounter, a 3 usually won't cut it to survive the death gaze of that beast.

Not to be negative, but if you examine the encounter guidelines in the DMG, you will see that an "appropriate" encounter can be of a CR quite a bit higher than APL. So that 12.5% chance of death, by playing the monster straight (no special rules saying not to, remember) is actually quite low, IMHO, compared to what following the guidelines can dish out.

Also, I was attempting to discuss what odds mean, using a hypothetical, not trying to come up with actual encounter numbers. Of course, we could determine the odds of an insta-kill if we had specifics, such as specific characters vs. specific monsters. OTOH, I am not sure that we could determine what the "average" Init bonus is of characters at any given level (is Improved Initiative a common feat across the board? How common? How uncommon? Etc.), and so on.

We could take some characters from the back of a module, and see how easy it would be to kill them with various "appropriate" monsters before they had a chance to do anything about it. I'm betting that, effectively, a comparable % chance of dying exists without SoD at low levels, similar to that of SoD at high levels, simply by using the suggested guidelines.

Effectively, IMHO, certain threats have to be treated as special by the DM, or the players should invest in body bags, or the DM has to veer from the suggested guidelines. SoD effects are unique in this.

RC

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Not to be negative, but if you examine the encounter guidelines in the DMG, you will see that an "appropriate" encounter can be of a CR quite a bit higher than APL. So that 12.5% chance of death, by playing the monster straight (no special rules saying not to, remember) is actually quite low, IMHO, compared to what following the guidelines can dish out.

Also, I was attempting to discuss what odds mean, using a hypothetical, not trying to come up with actual encounter numbers. Of course, we could determine the odds of an insta-kill if we had specifics, such as specific characters vs. specific monsters. OTOH, I am not sure that we could determine what the "average" Init bonus is of characters at any given level (is Improved Initiative a common feat across the board? How common? How uncommon? Etc.), and so on.

We could take some characters from the back of a module, and see how easy it would be to kill them with various "appropriate" monsters before they had a chance to do anything about it. I'm betting that, effectively, a comparable % chance of dying exists without SoD at low levels, similar to that of SoD at high levels, simply by using the suggested guidelines.

Effectively, IMHO, certain threats have to be treated as special by the DM, or the players should invest in body bags, or the DM has to veer from the suggested guidelines. SoD effects are unique in this.

RC

Heh, I know what you were trying to do, and that your numbers are just an example for what you mean with "equal probabilities" of deaths from damage vs. death effect..and I agree, as I said. Same goes for special treatment of certain monsters and effects. My post came out of my own experiences trying to do number comparisons (and I did try to work with some more specified numbers), and people were still jumping up and down over them, and they were plenty lower than those percentages you used. Things in this thread tend to get blown out of context easily is all I wanted to say, so don't be surprised if somebody takes those numbers and does exactly that while ignoring the fact that you simply used them for illustration purposes.

 

[Nifft]

Found the post...work like Destiny Points in SW Saga? And how do they work? I'm curious, because I've been trying to find a good way to introduce Luck and Fate points into my games without making them overpowering everything else.

Wow, lots of traffic in this thread.

Here's how they work. Note that this is specific to my group and not a generally balanced mechanism.

Getting Fate Points: Do something out of game that helps the game. Artwork of your character doing something, a journal entry / story hour entry, maps, whatever. Make it available to the group. Earn from one to three Fate Points.

Fate Points attach to the player, not the character. You may use Fate Points for your cohort. You may keep Fate Points if your character dies and you make a new one.

Using Fate Points:

• Use #1: "Use the Force, Luke!" -- add dice to a roll... nearly any roll (except HP), depending on your character level (ECL, not just HD). You must decide to use your Fate Point before rolling. Extra dice as follows:
  - 1-4: +1d6
  - 5-8: +1d8
  - 9-12: +2d6
  - 13-16: +2d8
  - 17-20: +3d6
  
• Use #2: "Hold my beer. Watch this!" Pull off a daring stunt by "taking 20" on a single skill check. You spend the point and don't have to roll.
  
• Use #3: "I'm not dead yet!" -- avoid going into negative hp, instead you have exactly 0 hp.
  
• Use #4: "Judo-chop!" -- automatically confirm a single critical hit.
  
• Use #5: "Let me check my notes..." -- You gain an immediate clue to your current situation. This may be anything from "think word puzzle" to "they're immune to /mind-affecting/ effects".

Uses #1 and #3 have seen the most action.

Cheers, -- N