Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 5778617" data-attributes="member: 17106">It has to exist in some form. The glare of the basilisk. The touch of the lich. A pale green ray. All of these are classics. Even non-D&amp;D players know that looking at a medusa turns you to stone. Some of these things really should not have a save at all. Hold person, sleep, and the rust monster also need to exist in a non-neutered form. Save-or-die is a sine qua non; D&amp;D without Finger of Death isn't D&amp;D.There are two big questions that come off of it, though:*One, is there and should there be some way of playing the game without it? Certainly, some people seem pretty vehemently opposed to it. There is a wide range of preferences regarding the lethality of the game as a whole, and this is a significant cause of lethality. If you'e going to please everyone, there may have to be an off-switch to meet certain tastes.*Two, what other developments will be in the arms race? If a health system is adopted such that a fighter or rogue could realistically kill a powerful mage in one hit, then the sense of fairness for everyone increases.***A simple but important point. There are few enough of them that if you think they're a problem it's easy to ignore them. Now, if the DM likes save-or-die and the player's don't, that's not the rules' fault.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ahnehnois, post: 5778617, member: 17106"] It has to exist in some form. The glare of the basilisk. The touch of the lich. A pale green ray. All of these are classics. Even non-D&D players know that looking at a medusa turns you to stone. Some of these things really should not have a save at all. Hold person, sleep, and the rust monster also need to exist in a non-neutered form. Save-or-die is a [I]sine qua non[/I]; D&D without Finger of Death isn't D&D. There are two big questions that come off of it, though: *One, is there and should there be some way of playing the game without it? Certainly, some people seem pretty vehemently opposed to it. There is a wide range of preferences regarding the lethality of the game as a whole, and this is a significant cause of lethality. If you'e going to please everyone, there may have to be an off-switch to meet certain tastes. *Two, what other developments will be in the arms race? If a health system is adopted such that a fighter or rogue could realistically kill a powerful mage in one hit, then the sense of fairness for everyone increases. *** A simple but important point. There are few enough of them that if you think they're a problem it's easy to ignore them. Now, if the DM likes save-or-die and the player's don't, that's not the rules' fault. [/QUOTE]

Verification