Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3864957" data-attributes="member: 18280">Sure.  Perhaps I should have gone back and quoted myself in entire earlier.If the chance that Monster X surprises you, hits you, and kills you in that hit works out to 5%, then it is no different than any other effect that has a 5% chance of killing you before you can react.The only important things are:(1)  What is the chance of dying? and (2)  Do I get to act in order to mitigate that chance?You would need to remove a lot more than SoD effects to remove the chance of dying before you can react.  Perhaps, for example, monsters should never do enough damage to kill a PC in one blow?  Or, perhaps such damage dealing monsters should never surprise...or win initiative?You may also say, for example, "More rolls means more chances to fudge a roll", and this is true.  However, the game shouldn't be designed (IMHO) on the basis of fudging rolls you don't like (as player or DM).  Action Points, which will apparently be core in 4e, offer a better solution to this problem IMHO.  As a player, I'd rather die from a SoD effect than discover the DM fudging to save me, though.  I very much doubt that I am alone in this.Moreover, if you are going to fudge the roll, why not simply fudge the first roll?  Does an outcome based on DM Fiat need multiple chances to invoke that Fiat?  If so, why?RC</blockquote>