Players, DMs and Save or Die

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Why isn't it? The challenge was in determining that the bodak was there & what to do about it.

One thing I definitely get out of these discussions is a good view at where 3E design did some fairly obvious blunders. Bodaks as random encounter monsters, for example, instead of special effect monsters.

These got me thinking, especially when also remembering the idea of "Encounter Monsters" like a Sea Snake that attacks ships.

There are "regular monsters" that you can put in any situation and don't warrant special treatment besides some special effects.
There are "encounter monsters" that are in the gameworld a single monster, but are better replicated in game terms as a set of monsters/hazards/traps/enviromental effects.
And there are "adventure/quest monsters". You don't battle them like regular monsters. They are monsters that you beat by completing an adventure and getting the right tools to beat it. There might be a final fight, which might be exciting or a push-over.

Examples for these "Quest Monster"
"Epic" Scale:
The Evil Goddess Virdella Treshamn wants to destroy the world of the Diamond Throne to get enough power to conquer dozens of planes.
The PCs can't really beat her, she is a frigging goddess. But many many decades ago, the Dramojh developed a magical ritual that killed the Hanavare Trinity. If the PCs find the ingredients and descriptions for the ritual, they might be able to force Virdella into a mortal form, that, albeit powerful, can be beaten. She might not be dead forever, but she won't be able to come back for a millenia - and the ritual will work again!

Heroic Scale:
A cult in the city has overtaken parts of the city council, and opponents of their goals die mysteriously. Careful investigation will turn out that the effect that killed the opponents was a magical Death Effect, and following the trails of the cult finally reveals the Cult has created a Bodak. Once the PCs find this out, preparing Death Ward is relatively easy. But should they really attack the heavily defended hideout, unaware where the Bodak is kept. Or should they try to ambush them when they attack their next target? But who is the next target?

 

[Raven Crowking]

On a related note, I am begining to think that most swarms would work better as hazards than as monsters per-se.

Thoughts?

RC

 

[Baby Samurai]

On a related note, I am begining to think that most swarms would work better as hazards than as monsters per-se.

Thoughts?

Isn't that what they did with Green Slime and Ochre Jelly etc in 3.5?

 

[Raven Crowking]

Isn't that what they did with Green Slime and Ochre Jelly etc in 3.5?

Green slime became a hazard in 3.0, and it works fairly well that way.

I wasn't aware that the ochre jelly got turned into a hazard?

Some other things that used to be critters but that you don't generally melee with got the hazard treatment, like rot grubs and (in Tome of Horrors) ear seekers.

I could see some swarms still being combat encounters.....but a case like upsetting a wasp nest, or bees, or even spiders (as in Raiders of the Lost Ark) might be better as hazards, unless they are actually after you for some reason as a unified whole (like the CIFAL from the 1e Fiend Folio, for example).

RC

 

[Baby Samurai]

I could see some swarms still being combat encounters.....but a case like upsetting a wasp nest, or bees, or even spiders (as in Raiders of the Lost Ark) might be better as hazards, unless they are actually after you for some reason as a unified whole (like the CIFAL from the 1e Fiend Folio, for example).

Scarab beetle swarm?

 

[Hussar]

*snip*

Oh, and to answer one of Hussar's posts...why should I have a problem with an encounter that is guaranteed to kill one out of four characters? Isn't that what an appropriate challenge rating is supposed to do? Eliminate 25% of the group's resources? One out of four. Just because there are some monsters that don't spread that out over the whole group, but simply punch out one character completely instead? If I shied away from the potential of a dead character, I shouldn't use strong encounters.

And yep, I'm going to bow out of this cyclic discussion a well. All has been said, and I think I've got a pretty good picture of the different opinions now, so even if we didn't come to a consense in this discussion, I think it was way from wasted time.

Good gaming, and see you in another thread.

A guaranteed PC death is not an EL=par encounter.

Standard encounter is 4 rounds. That's 16 saving throws plus 4 extra for directed saves for a 4 member party. That's a guaranteed kill. That completely breaks the CR guidelines. A par encounter should not result in a PC death 100% of the time. But, that's what a Bodak, or a medusa does. It is not in line with a given CR.

I have zero problems killing PC's. Obviously. But, a creature that is written in such a way that you should statistically ALWAYS kill one PC is bad design.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

On a related note, I am begining to think that most swarms would work better as hazards than as monsters per-se.

Thoughts?

RC

Depends on the Swarm, but in many cases, this seems appropriate. They might be an enviromental effect (Dark Harbor, an Iron Heroes adventure, uses them as such), or a kind of trap.

Ear Seekers seem to be more traps then anything else.

I believe Age of Worms has a undead-creating worms, which also make a lot more sense as some kind of hazard/enviromental effect.

Side Note:
Even if D&D 4 is a total failure or WotC is destroyed by a meteroite, I think the many discussions we had about design, monsters, encounters, game balance alone was worth the whole think. Being forced to reevaluate old concepts is very inspiring.
I hope I have the time, energy and dedication to put all this inspiration in a few adventures.

 

[Raven Crowking]

A par encounter should not result in a PC death 100% of the time. But, that's what a Bodak, or a medusa does.

You need to go back and learn how to determine odds, my friend. So long as there is a chance to avoid death on each save, the chance of PC death is never 100%. In the case of, say, a medusa, you can also do things that lower the chance of death via the SoD effect....or even remove it altogether.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Side Note:
Even if D&D 4 is a total failure or WotC is destroyed by a meteroite, I think the many discussions we had about design, monsters, encounters, game balance alone was worth the whole think. Being forced to reevaluate old concepts is very inspiring.
I hope I have the time, energy and dedication to put all this inspiration in a few adventures.

Hell, yes!

 

[FireLance]

RC brought that up before as well about not all encounters are at par. That's true. However, those same rules he's pointing to say that I could drop 15 or so Bodak encounters on my 8th level party for every CR 13 challenge I toss their way. Yet, despite the fact that the 15 Bodak encounters should not result in a single PC fatality, they are almost guaranteed to whack as many or more PC's than the CR +5 encounter.

That's my point. SoD disproportionately kills PC's based on the challenge. A CR 8 encounter vs an 8th level party should NOT result in a fatality. It should be a fairly easy fight. Yet, because of SoD, I've got a reasonable chance of killing at least 1 PC. It's far and away too powerful.

I think that is more a problem of save or die monsters being under-CRed. In the specific case of the bodak, it's also pretty much useless without its save or die ability. As previously mentioned, I think a save or die monster ought to be a reasonably tough challenge even without its save or die ability, and more lethal (but still winnable) with it.