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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5933222" data-attributes="member: 42582">Well I gave a suggestion upthread about how it might be done by tweaking the dying rules: there could be an optional rule that any killing strike requires a successful attack roll to be made - so Reaper couldn't kill, Magic Missile would require an attack roll to be made in this one special case, etc. A variant on this would be to allow a saving throw against any auto-damage that would kill.Probably this rule wouldn't be satisfactory either, though, because it would get in the way of magic missile and fireball auto-kills, whereas autokills are exactly what many people want out of those spells (especially fireball).Which then, once again, raises the question "does magic always get to be better because it's magic?" I mean, just as you express incredulity at the Reaper guy never missing, I could express incredulity that of all the hundreds of koblod warriors that have been fireballed over the years, almost none have survived (in classic D&D kobold max hp 4, a fireball of 7 or greater damage will autokill (I'm assuming a round up of 3.5 to 4), odds of 6 hp on a 6D fireball are 1 in 46656, and odds of a kobold saving are, I think, 1 in 5 (17+ on d20 required), meaning that fewer than 5 in a million kobolds have ever survived a fireball from a wand of fireballs).If magic is allowed to have autokills for free, however unrealistic, and martial/mundane is not, that will cause its own issues!Hence my view that perhaps an inclusive design, with the appropriate options, is possible - but it strikes me as pretty tricky, because so many apparently conflicting preferences are in play (of which "gritty martial but gonzo magic" is only the most obvious).</blockquote>

Verification