Save or die!

[Zappo]

After long years of meditation in a small Tibetan shrine, I've finally identified what I dislike the most about D&D.

Let's suppose the characters get to the big climactic final battle with the big climactic final dragon. The dragon says something like "Mwahahahaha, I'm gonna roast you!", the party cleric casts Destruction, and the DM rolls a 1 on the save. Doesn't that suck?

Save or die spells. They aren't particularly overpowered, what they are is simply anticlimactic. When used by the PCs, they either immediately put an end to the battle or do nothing/next to nothing - and both of those possibilities are annoying. When used on the PCs, they either kill one off, no ifs no buts, or do nothing/next to nothing. All the target can do is roll and hope.

Many rules in D&D - hit points, to name the first - are designed to make the characters (PCs and NPCs) survive through minor foes and make the big combats long and exciting without turning them into a string of "I attack - I miss, I attack - I miss...". Save or die spells do exactly the opposite thing!

There are a huge lot of them, and not only at high levels. Hold person can take a character out for long enough that he basically misses the fight, and any evil henchman can CdG him. Either that, or do nothing. Domination is even worse: not only it takes the party fighter out, but he's now beating you! Or, nothing happens.

There are ways to counter this, ways that all DMs employ - Death Wards, Free Action, Mind Bar or just piling up save-enhancing items to the point where the enemy will just give up trying to Disintegrate you to fix one side of the problem; Curses to lower the saves, Doom, and Dispels to fix the other. But why should we need to do this?

A character can go around knowing that he won't just get killed by a random brigand with a crossbow, though he will get hurt. Against those magics, however, his natural defenses (saves) are inadequate and unreliable. Why this disparity?

A prime example of this problem is in computer games. You eventually get a Death spell/ability/materia/whatever, and you will never use it because all tough foes are immune and the foes that aren't immune are so weak that it's faster to just punch them.

What do you think?

 

[Bragg Battleaxe]

Man, I couldn't agree more. There are plenty of spells at all levels that I have this problem with. Lots of spells because of their long durations, often take low level fighters out of the entire fight, leaving the other PCs in a very difficult posistion. Its just that annoying feeling that, despite all your planning, that after a long career as an adventurer, it all just comes down to luck.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Let's suppose the characters get to the big climactic final battle with the big climactic final dragon. The dragon says something like "Mwahahahaha, I'm gonna roast you!", the party cleric casts Destruction, and the DM rolls a 1 on the save. Doesn't that suck?

Err.. well, many high level creatures have SR to help avoid this.

Also- a lot of those high level save or die spells are limited by other factors- range being a big one. A dragon that starts the fight in close range is rather foolish in the first place.

I agree with your general sentiment, that such spells are anticlimatic- just ban them. That problem is solved.

FD

 

[Xarlen]

Exactly how many long battles have You been in?

My fights usually don't last but 3 rounds, TOPS.

Really, Save or Die spells are what make spellcasters effective Against fighters. Their evoc spells get sucked up by those huge HPs. Several other spells require fort saves. So, what Do they use against the fighter types? What does your fighter have to fear, then?

'Oh, you have a bad willsave.' 'For what? Nothing uses Will, now that the Save or Die spells are gone'.

On the other hand, a fighter can seriously nuke a mage.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Lots of spells because of their long durations, often take low level fighters out of the entire fight, leaving the other PCs in a very difficult posistion.

They could always move their stats so they get healthy ability bonuses to their weak saves. There are also feats that help out with saving throws.

A player is only a regular victem to a low save if they choose to be- or they got a cruel dm, of course. heh.

FD

 

[Frostmarrow]

A friend of mine invited a guy who wasn't in the campaign to play the villain in the final showdown. He took his mission very seriously and spent an entire day buffing the wizard and planning the encounter and what evil things he would say to the heroes once they arrived. Then he spent all night waiting for his cue.

By one o'clock the heroes finally reached the inner sanctum. Before the villain had said '...uh hello' the halfling ran up and decapitated him with his vorpal sword.

In the moment it kind of sucks (but that's the point). In the long run it evens out. Some die instantly and some are worn down, in the end everybody dies.

 

[Xarlen]

Also, if you throw out Save or Die spells, then spellcasters have to resort to even more annoying tactics: Fear.

And, of course, then you have the Flying, Improved Invisible, Hasted wizard, just so he can friggin' survive.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

He took his mission very seriously and spent an entire day buffing the wizard and planning the encounter and what evil things he would say to the heroes once they arrived.

He should have taken some time to do some divination spells.

FD

 

[Ravellion]

I also liked the idea of ability damage instead of instant death, as mentioned before in the thread on SKR's rant. (Ie. Medusa's gaze does dex damage. If DEX=0 you are stoned)

Rav

 

[Furn_Darkside]

I also liked the idea of ability damage instead of instant death, as mentioned before in the thread on SKR's rant. (Ie. Medusa's gaze does dex damage. If DEX=0 you are stoned)

That seems like a good solution to the problem.

FD