Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 3877855" data-attributes="member: 2268">So we're actually talking about 5 Bodaks getting the jump on 4 20th level characters, and each character meeting the gaze of 5 Bodaks at the same time, or am I misunderstanding you again? <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid    :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" /> Because as far as I understood the Death Gaze of the Bodak, it only works when the character meets the Bodak's gaze directly. Also, the simplest solution written down in the MM is  Averting your gaze, meaning you look elsewhere on the bodak, gaining a 50% chance to not have to make a save at all without incurring the penalty for blind fighting.I'm sorry Hussar, but while your example isn't as overinflated as others that argued about save or die being broken with examples of hundreds of 9th level clerics running around the setting when the characters hit high levels, it's still very much in the realm of the academical, in my opinion, to be really convincing. Especially such things as gaze attacks have very specific parameters before they work, in contrast to area attacks such as breath weapons, and there are workaround for such attacks before you even have to make a save.Spells with death effects are a different pair of shoes though. And if you can point me at a monster with a save or die breath weapon (Hmmmm, undead dragon breathing Cloudkill? Ideas...), we can easily discuss that.But claiming that a 4 man group of whatever level has to make 5 saves per character per round when meeting 5 Bodaks is a bit unbelievable, especially when there is a 50% chance for each to not even having to make one save. Remember what I said in the other thread, about not believing number-niggling is any solution to this discussion? Same goes for this thread, since there is no good hold on the real numbers, and any percentage we come up with on the fly is flawed from the beginning, because it is far too generalized to be of any use, and because we can throw numbers at each other's feet as long as they suit us and still say nothing much. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification