Poll: Do you want Save-Or-Die in 4th Edition

[MisterWhodat]

That nicely sums up one of my biggest problem with 3E. Resurrection is a world-shaking event -- at least it should be.

Don't dish out death like a status. Don't negate it like a status. Treat it like death.

Sounds good. In my current campaign we have just reached 6th level and we have no clue of resurrection as characters. We did beg a high level druid to help when we lost a guy early and she reincarnated him, let me tell you none of us want that again.

It all depends on how your DM handles these things. I am all for save or die, or hell just dying. The fear of death, whether from an angry spellcaster or a crazy monster, keeps me on my toes. As characters you have access to the same spells the villains do so make them save or die first.

My point was I like that you can die, makes me want to do some cool stuff before my characters life gets snuffed out in an adventure. We have never played where characters not considered epic can afford to be brought back to life.

 

[FourthBear]

I don't really see this as a positive feature of the rules, though. I wouldn't mind "will points" in addition to "hit points". Or at least a "mental condition track" and a "physical condition track". Each failed will save brings you closer to your demise (which might be you going insane, being dominated or having your soul ripped from your body)...

That does remind me of the mention in one of the 4e articles on something called "psychic damage". I believe that the 4e team may indeed be planning something just like that, where the usual mental attacks are also ablative with gradations of effect, rather than binary "all on or all off" I believe they were discussing a character with damage resistance that seemed overpowered because it also subtracted from "psychic damage"

 

[Lackhand]

While I wouldn't *mind* (bdum ching) that, I think it's premature speculation.

Far more likely to me is that that psychic damage referred to normal bodily harm, dealt via nosebleed.

 

[Sadrik]

The only place I would have a save or die effect is in the epic level range of effects. A martial vorpal effect, an arcane disintegrate ray, a divine slay living touch attack all are very thematic for high level play. However...

One of my main beefs with the current high level game is the myriad of save or die effects and the endless loop of spending 50k to true rez somebody after they botch a save. Note that also at this level the monsters don't stand up for very long because the damage output of the characters far exceeds the hp of most monsters. So it leaves them that one shot to "zap" somebody- so they toss their save-or-die effect hoping that the PC will fail their save. And ever so often the PC's do fail and it goes into the loop of spend resources to raise them back.

I would rather the effects be more interesting at high level than "roll a die- with a binary effect of live or die" I think the save or disable effects are more interesting and can be epic level. Flesh to Stone (1d6 dex damage every round until 0, then petrified), Feeblemind (1d6 int and cha damage every round until 1), Dominate (creature makes WILL save every round or is controlled), Trap the Soul (as is),

Save or die effects (some there is no save):
Slay living (should do con damage)
Phantasmal Killer/Weird (should do wisdom damage or "psychic" damage)
Undeath to Death (should do hp damage)
Holy Word/Blasphemy/Dictum/Word of Chaos (should offer a save and have less effect)
Destruction (same as disintegrate???)
Symbol of Death (drops to 0 con???)
Implosion (deals hp damage)
Cloudkill (deals hp damage or moved up in level)
Circle of Death (deals 1d6 con damage while in the circle???)
Finger of Death (drops to 0 con)
Power Word Kill (100 hp or less to kill)
Wail of the Banshee (???)

 

[D.Shaffer]

Completely removed? No. I think they still have a place in the game.

Made a LOT less prevalent and with huge warning stickers all over the place? Yes.

 

[howandwhy99]

Maybe it's removal is the eventual result of removing the "All characters start at 1st" rule of the game?

EDIT: 'cuz death doesn't mean much when you bring another character in at basically the same level of power as the old.

 

[useridunavailable]

Yes, but only when I use them.

 

[Celebrim]

I answered, 'Yes', but in answering yes it should not be construed that I think things should be left exactly as is. There is a problem, but simply removing them is not I think the answer.

 

[Psion]

Why is a bodak not suitable for a climactic encounter at low levels?

Well, I guess it could be if used properly. But as it's death effect is a gaze weapon it uses with impunity, it's pretty easy to not use properly.

There are better takes on a death-effect type undead. Like the crucifixion spirit (ToH II / Years Best D20 ).

 

[Mercule]

One of my main beefs with the current high level game is the myriad of save or die effects and the endless loop of spending 50k to true rez somebody after they botch a save. Note that also at this level the monsters don't stand up for very long because the damage output of the characters far exceeds the hp of most monsters. So it leaves them that one shot to "zap" somebody- so they toss their save-or-die effect hoping that the PC will fail their save. And ever so often the PC's do fail and it goes into the loop of spend resources to raise them back.

One of the main problems with current "high level" play is that the definition and scale of most "high level" events has changed considerably, while the save-or-die and raising spells haven't.

I can't speak for anyone else, but the 1E campaigns I played in stayed mostly under "name level" (10th, for the young punks). Even teleport was at the upper end of ucheivement. Things like disintegrate, finger of death, and raise dead were practically "epic level" spells of the day.

2E seemed to shift the curve up a bit immediately, with a gradual increase as time went on. 3E was at once both a natural outgrowth of what I saw and a completely different beast.

The biggest thing I've noticed, over the years, is the power level of dragons. It's been a while, but it seems that 8th level characters could challenge some of the more potent dragons in 1E. In 3E, you practically have to use Epic rules to play in the same leagues. I haven't checked, but I'd bet a lot of other monsters (at least outsiders) have gone through a similar escalation.

So, in one regard, all they've done is use bigger numbers to represent the same challenges. But, the spell levels, and caster levels at which they come, haven't changed significantly. The net effect is that the save-or-die effects and resurrections come a whole lot earlier in a character's career these days -- at least in effect.

I have absolutely no problem with save-or-die and resurrections. So long as they are epic or near epic in scale. With 4E running all the way to 30th level, I would prefer to see those effects limited to levels above 20, most of the time. Prior to that, only a few legendary critters should have save-or-die and any chance of bringing a character back from the dead should involve a quest to go and get the soul.

Those are elements of the genre, though. So, I very much want to see them retained.