Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3851443" data-attributes="member: 4937">I find it really hard to fit myself into the confines of that poll.I'm nominally 'pro save or die', but really by that I mean that I am 'pro save or face condition', and 'dead' is a condition and hense a potentially valid possibility IMO.&nbsp; It also fits the source material.&nbsp; There are times when you want 'Lord Voldemort' to throw out the killing curse.&nbsp; Save or die is a valid literary effect, because die is a valid literary effect.&nbsp; The saving throw just makes it more gamable.But at the same time I'm not a fan of saving throws, because they make for two many unexpected stupid deaths.&nbsp; This includes not just 'save or die', but things like 'save or be turned to stone' or 'save or by turned into a rabbit' or even 'save or lose a level' when the players don't have the resources to deal with those problems yet.&nbsp; It also includes things like 'save or be paralyzed' when said character is likely to immediately by coup de graced if he fails.&nbsp; It also often includes things like, 'Save or take 2d12 Con damage'.&nbsp; So, while I'm 'pro save or die' just like I'm pro energy drain and I'm pro ability damage and even in limited cases pro maiming and all sorts of other nastiness, that doesn't mean that I don't think that the exisiting rules don't need some work.So what I really am is 'pro hypothetical save or die' but not 'pro current save or die'.&nbsp; I'm sympathetic to the character that says, &quot;I hate save or die.&quot;, because I've been there.&nbsp; In fact as a player, I'm infamous as the guy who never ever ever passes a saving throw.&nbsp; I'm sure I've done it on occasion, but it doesn't really stand out for all the 'save or go permenantly insane' (failed), 'save or lose CON permanently' (failed), 'save or be blasted by the fireball' (failed), 'save or be fried by the blue dragon' (failed), that I've gone through as a player, all of which under the circumstances amounted to 'save or die'.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3851443, member: 4937"] I find it really hard to fit myself into the confines of that poll. I'm nominally 'pro save or die', but really by that I mean that I am 'pro save or face condition', and 'dead' is a condition and hense a potentially valid possibility IMO. It also fits the source material. There are times when you want 'Lord Voldemort' to throw out the killing curse. Save or die is a valid literary effect, because die is a valid literary effect. The saving throw just makes it more gamable. But at the same time I'm not a fan of saving throws, because they make for two many unexpected stupid deaths. This includes not just 'save or die', but things like 'save or be turned to stone' or 'save or by turned into a rabbit' or even 'save or lose a level' when the players don't have the resources to deal with those problems yet. It also includes things like 'save or be paralyzed' when said character is likely to immediately by coup de graced if he fails. It also often includes things like, 'Save or take 2d12 Con damage'. So, while I'm 'pro save or die' just like I'm pro energy drain and I'm pro ability damage and even in limited cases pro maiming and all sorts of other nastiness, that doesn't mean that I don't think that the exisiting rules don't need some work. So what I really am is 'pro hypothetical save or die' but not 'pro current save or die'. I'm sympathetic to the character that says, "I hate save or die.", because I've been there. In fact as a player, I'm infamous as the guy who never ever ever passes a saving throw. I'm sure I've done it on occasion, but it doesn't really stand out for all the 'save or go permenantly insane' (failed), 'save or lose CON permanently' (failed), 'save or be blasted by the fireball' (failed), 'save or be fried by the blue dragon' (failed), that I've gone through as a player, all of which under the circumstances amounted to 'save or die'. [/QUOTE]

Verification