Players, DMs and Save or Die

[RFisher]

I guess part of it for me is that "save or die" is one simple way to bypass hit points. I played for years where I was careful to always "honor hit points". I like the game better now that I don't play it that way. I find "save or die" a simple & way to handle jumping off a 200 foot cliff, the guy with a dagger to someone's throat deciding to cut, poison, &c. I like it better for these things than hit points. (Hit point damage for falling has never really felt right to me.)

These situations aren't so hard to avoid. Don't jump off the cliff. Keep the dagger guy talking until he lets his guard down or give him enough to make him let the hostage go. Poison can be a bit trickier but manageable. None of them require neon signs.

Since I like how it handles these mundane situations, I can be fine with it in magical situations as well.

As an interesting tidbit, to see how another version of D20 Fantasy handles something like the Bodak's Death Gaze, I just checked Castles & Crusades (and please NO C&C edition war now, okay?).

A victim meeting the Bodak's gaze must make a successful Constitution save against 21/27 (Prime/Secondary attribute), or die in 1d4 rounds. The process can be stopped by casting Cure Disease, Heal or Cure Critical Wounds on the character before he dies. If the saving throw was successful, the character becomes immune to the effect of that specific Bodak's Gaze attack.

I can live with that. Could the rest here too?

If every "save or die" in the game gets replaced with something this complex, then it's going to start becoming less fun for me rather than more fun. There's a limit to the amount of complexity I want in a face-to-face game.

Even more importantly, there are people I want to game with whose complexity limit is much lower than mine.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Perception vs. Reality

Take a look at the quote at the begining of this post: http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3881703&postcount=139

In the WLD, Hussar killed 27 player characters. "About half were traps or save or die, the other half were straight up damage." So, in 80 sessions, SoD and traps accounted for about 14 deaths. There are a lot of traps in the WLD, but if we are generous (without checking Hussar's transcripts), we might assume 7 SoD deaths.

Is that any worse than "the ogre with a greataxe critting you for 50 points of damage when you only have 30"?

RC

 

[Hussar]

Take a look at the quote at the begining of this post: http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=3881703&postcount=139

In the WLD, Hussar killed 27 player characters. "About half were traps or save or die, the other half were straight up damage." So, in 80 sessions, SoD and traps accounted for about 14 deaths. There are a lot of traps in the WLD, but if we are generous (without checking Hussar's transcripts), we might assume 7 SoD deaths.

Is that any worse than "the ogre with a greataxe critting you for 50 points of damage when you only have 30"?

RC

Umm, what makes you think the traps were not save or die? Jeez, RC, could we please stick a fork in this convo? FFS, if you're going to start being THAT pedantic about every post, just put me back on ignore.

 

[Hussar]

However, in the interests of accuracy - well, as accurate as my faulty memory can recall- deaths by SoD:

• 2x cockatrice
• 2xBasilisk
• 3-4xSoD traps (funnily enough, the same player for 3 of them all within a space of a few weeks )
• 1x SoD spell

Does ghoul paralysis combined with coup de gras count? If so, chalk one up to that.

In any case, we've got about a quarter of the deaths specifically from SoD effects. That's pretty high when you think about it. Save or Suck, or Save or Die Later would result in a lot less lethality here.

Then again, I wouldn't mind if they scaled back on the lethality of combat as well. I know that I've added in a few things like Action Points into my next campaign specifically because I found 3e so incredibly lethal.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Well, one thing is for sure...looking at the topic, it's pretty ironic how die-hard this thread is.

 

[Remathilis]

I guess part of it for me is that "save or die" is one simple way to bypass hit points.

...and thats why I DON'T like them.

Good gaming.

 

[WarlockLord]

...and thats why I DON'T like them.

Good gaming.

And THAT'S why I do.

The hit point system...what the heck is it supposed to represent anyway? Yes, I know, it's some bizarre combination of turning a hit into a minor wound via skill and luck, and physical endurance. Looking at this interpretation, one wonders if one should not add dex to hp instead of, or in addition to con, as saga tells us a strong individual can only take 15 hp of physical punishment. Also, what skill or luck applies when you're in the center of a 20 ft radius fireball and your reflex save fails? I can see this system for weapons, but...

 

[Remathilis]

And THAT'S why I do.

The hit point system...what the heck is it supposed to represent anyway? Yes, I know, it's some bizarre combination of turning a hit into a minor wound via skill and luck, and physical endurance. Looking at this interpretation, one wonders if one should not add dex to hp instead of, or in addition to con, as saga tells us a strong individual can only take 15 hp of physical punishment. Also, what skill or luck applies when you're in the center of a 20 ft radius fireball and your reflex save fails? I can see this system for weapons, but...

Sigh...

Because a system that involved specific damage to specific body organs based on the type of attack (weapon or spell) would be unwieldy, cumbersome, and not very fun. I'd rather have one "life pool" that attacks, spells, and effects take from than one system for fire damage, one for bludegoning weapons, one for poison, etc.

I've also found the "what hp represents" arguments end up more pointless than any other D&D argument other than alignment. HP, like AC, level, Reflex Saves, or skill ranks is a mechanical numeric representation that on its own means little, but allows the game to create a cohesive narrative that in turn creates an enjoyable experience. Each one of those mechanics breaks down against logic (how do you not die from a 200' fall? How does armor make you harder to hit? How does improving your mastery of the arcane arts involve killing goblins? How do you even DODGE a 20' radius fireball and remain in the same 5' square?) so I found most rules like that are best left alone and unexplained, less you be driven mad and have to play some more realistic/simulationist game like GURPS.

 

[Hussar]

Remathilis says it very well. HP are abstract. Always have been. And have always been described as abstract. If the system is abstract, why do people keep trying to tie it to concrete circumstances?

It doesn't work any more than trying to physically construct an M C Escher painting would work. You can't because... it's abstract.

Thus, you don't actually dodge the 20 foot radius fireball. That would be one possible interpretation, but, that's not what HP's actually say. They say, for whatever reason, that fireball didn't hurt you as much as it hurt the next guy. However, because HP's are abstract, they don't provide any actual reason for WHY that happened.

 

[Geron Raveneye]

Remathilis says it very well. HP are abstract. Always have been. And have always been described as abstract. If the system is abstract, why do people keep trying to tie it to concrete circumstances?

It doesn't work any more than trying to physically construct an M C Escher painting would work. You can't because... it's abstract.

Thus, you don't actually dodge the 20 foot radius fireball. That would be one possible interpretation, but, that's not what HP's actually say. They say, for whatever reason, that fireball didn't hurt you as much as it hurt the next guy. However, because HP's are abstract, they don't provide any actual reason for WHY that happened.

Not that I disagree on the general abstract nature of hit points, mind you.