Players, DMs and Save or Die

[KingCrab]

Its very annoying when a high CR monster designed to be the setpiece of an important battle dies in the second round because he failed his save vs. the fourth save-or-die effect in the combat.

In my old 2ed campaign many years ago, there was a long term BBEG spellcaster that was the plotwise center of my game for many adventures. After travelling into his "lair" over several sessions, when they finally did meet him they got in a feeblemind spell in the first round of combat. He rolled low and failed his save. It was frustrating. However, I still supported and support the save or die spells. The caster got to a decent enough level and focused his efforts on that form of magic so he deserves to occasionally get something good out of it.

Why do I support save or die effects? I like the mood the different afflictions bring to a battle. These guys are stunned, these guys are stupid, these guys are chamed, and you don't want to know what caused the splatter that that guy used to be. That's just fun and crazy. Slowly dwindling hit points aren't as interesting.

Added: Just realize this post doesn't make sense unless you're using my definition of save or die which includes all the nasty effects that bypass hit points. If one was to suggest leaving in the save or be held and then effectively killed, save or become an idiot and then again get killed, save or something else that can easily get you killed type spells but want to get rid of save or die, they'd have a better chance of talking me into it.

 

[blargney the second]

Heads I win, tails you lose.

(Fortunately, the doubled-up option is the one I voted anyways.)
-blarg

 

[Arkhandus]

D'oh, I voted wrong. Y'know you got two copies of the same line in the poll, right? I'm a player and a DM, and I prefer save or die effects being in the game, but there's no option for that in the poll; just two options for disliking SoD.

 

[Nifft]

Dave or Die?

C'mon, Dave isn't all that bad.

- - -

2/3 of the "mostly DM"s so far do not like SoD. I'm among them.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Aloïsius]

My option does not exist. So I voted "DM and support".

 

[Baby Samurai]

As a DM of 20 years, even though they haven't actually come up, I hate the concept of save or die.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I'm more a DM, though I play enough. I think save or die is really important. The idea of slaying someone with a gaze (or petrifying, etc.) is a fantasy staple. Save or die effects should be high level and difficult to create (perhaps with a cost that prevents you from throwing one off every round like 3e finger of death). They shouldn't be ubiquitous, but they should exist.

 

[Baby Samurai]

They shouldn't be ubiquitous, but they should exist.

Why?

 

[theredrobedwizard]

DM for 16 years, hater of SoD spells for 15.9 years. They seemed awesome until the first time I used one against a PC. Total funkiller.

-TRRW

 

[sidonunspa]

Err, I am a player and a DM and I support save or die... but when I clicked where I *thought* it would be supporting that argument I find two options, both the same, not in favor of it.

It sucks as a player...

Example 1: here we are, playing some Dungeon Craw a few years back (3.0 days) and we clear the dungeon, save the girl, and stop the cult of the dragon from creating a new dracolich.

As we walk out of the complex a curse set upon us when we disturbed some skulls kicks into effect...

I roll a 1 and die.

A worthless death and made me (and everyone else at the table) feel cheated.

Example 2: Phase Spider pops out and attacks my caster in the surprise round, I end up dead from constitution loss so quick that I can't do anything about it. Oh ya, that was fun.


Any good story telling GM will find that save or die effects not only takes away from the story, but takes away from the fun of the game