Save or die spells/effects

[Psion]

I might have to think about that fix though. It seems like it would make fast healing and regeneration all too convenient solution for death effects. I might have to tack on a rule about that.

 

[BryonD]

If you declare that the damage is always all lethal, then the regeneration part is solved.
Though Fast Healing is an issue. Maybe it also stops all previosuly existing fast healing effects for 1 min/level.

That would allow naturally fast healing creatures to be exposed to the same death threat as any other creature, yet still completely recover quickly if they do make it out of the combat. It also allows newly applied healing effects to still work.

 

[Psion]

If you declare that the damage is always all lethal, then the regeneration part is solved.
Though Fast Healing is an issue. Maybe it also stops all previosuly existing fast healing effects for 1 min/level.

Yeah, that's along the lines of what I was thinking.

 

[thedungeondelver]

I have tried to contemporize in the new year but I just could not get down, even to try it out, with a version of D&D that drifted so far away from ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS that save vs. death was removed. Or save vs. magic or fortitude saves, reflex saves and so forth to avoid the effects.

That's just so alien to me that I'd feel like I was playing CHAMPIONS or some other game.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Suffering adversity detracts from the fun of cultivating a character build, and is a deprotagonising element, so it it will be the first on the chopping block. Right after Vancian magic, I mean. Objectively speaking, more fun can be had if they go away.

Golly, I'm an active poster today. Lots of good threads.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic above or not, but I think you are right on. Deprotagonizing is such a great, descriptive term.

Adversity, conflict, and risk are integral to the protagonist, though. In the literary sense, these are the forces of antagonism, essential to the hero.

The real trick in design is to keep the risk real, while mitigating the actual possibility of campaign-halting character death.

Good movies and stories do it all the time. We're never in any real danger of losing our protagonist, so we watch not so much to see whether the hero will win, but how he will win, and what choices/risks/sacrifices he will have to make on the way.

 

[Psion]

The real trick in design is to keep the risk real, while mitigating the actual possibility of campaign-halting character death.

Good movies and stories do it all the time. We're never in any real danger of losing our protagonist, so we watch not so much to see whether the hero will win, but how he will win, and what choices/risks/sacrifices he will have to make on the way.

To be frank, that's not what I want out of a game. To me, that's part of what sets a game apart from a show, gives me something that a typical TV show fails to deliver.

I recall an SF TV show where half the crew of the ship are caught inside a giant space monster, bemoaning how they are going to die. But I knew they wouldn't. It all came off so hollow.

It's the same feel I get if I ever find myself saying "the DM won't kill us." After I noticed a palpable difference in my enjoyment level of a game in which the DM is willing to tip the PCs back on their heels, and even claim one or two, I adopted the technique and now, would never go back to the "holodeck safeties" approach. Everytime I read about astounding fights in the game that take many casualties like here -- and experiencing breathtaking fights myself -- I find that too much of a safety net really prevents this sort of exhilarating game from happening.

But there is more. I found that once you have such a session, the players get the point and don't casually assume their characters won't die. This means that without making every fight a knock-down/drag-out, the game takes on a more tense feel.

This relates back to the topic at hand. If players know their PCs can die, there is a more palpable sense of dread. Creatures that have such abilities SHOULD inspire such a feel. I feel that stripping them of the capability to snuff out the life of a character robs creatures of some of the emotional content they bring to the game.

Rejoining the topic of "not considering PC death a valid option", the typical RPG is not about the exploits of a single character, but a group. A "campaign halting character death" is not the death of a PC. It's a TPK. So long as once character remains, the group can go on. (And as barsoomcore demonstrates here, there's even some wiggle room there.)

 

[Darklone]

Another houserule for the save or die spell to neg hitpoints change: Similar to WoT, cured damage is converted to non-lethal damage (same for fast healing and regeneration).

But I wouldn't like to see it in the core rules, that change would be too drastic IMHO and too far away from that good old tasty and crunchy D&D feeling.

Psion: Shameless plug for the shortstory in my sig, it's the best fight we ever had... But I experienced as well that players start to enjoy games a lot more as soon as they don't expect anymore "the DM will see us through it alive".

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

To be frank, that's not what I want out of a game.

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm all in favor of PC death.

To me, that's part of what sets a game apart from a show, gives me something that a typical TV show fails to deliver.

I recall an SF TV show where half the crew of the ship are caught inside a giant space monster, bemoaning how they are going to die. But I knew they wouldn't. It all came off so hollow.

That's because the typical TV show is crap.

I am confident in your mastery of suspension of disbelief despite your exposure to crappy shows with no dramatic tension.

And it's easy to say, "I don't want to model my campaign on movies or stories!"

But at the end of the day, you (and your players) want to tell a good story. The fundamentals of a good story don't really change depending on the medium; the fundamentals of a good story haven't changed through the history of human existence, from Gilgamesh to now.

This relates back to the topic at hand. If players know their PCs can die, there is a more palpable sense of dread. Creatures that have such abilities SHOULD inspire such a feel. I feel that stripping them of the capability to snuff out the life of a character robs creatures of some of the emotional content they bring to the game.

I agree. In spades. I live for the palpable sense of dread.

But that's because no designer has found a reasonable alternative to save-or-die spells.

I'm certainly open to the possibility that save-or-die IS the best design, despite its weaknesses.

 

[thedungeondelver]

This also kind of relates back to the loopy notion of a "save game" feature in D&D: it discourages smart play and leaves players slowing the game to a halt as they try one stupid thing after the next (instead of really thinking about how to get around a particular encounter) because, hey, there's no penalty for trying pointless, ridiculous things. A character won't die in an encounter against a beholder, for example, if there's no death ray involved. Or disintigration.

 

[Darklone]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I'm all in favor of PC death.

Who said: "Death makes life worth living."?

I agree. In spades. I live for the palpable sense of dread.

But that's because no designer has found a reasonable alternative to save-or-die spells.

I'm certainly open to the possibility that save-or-die IS the best design, despite its weaknesses.

I tend to agree. Yet I'm looking forward to what people have to offer as alternatives how to make low level spells like the good old lovable Sleep spell interesting again.