We Used the new death and dying rules and it saved our ninja

[KarinsDad]

Ah. I think I understand. You only regard it as metagaming when people actually use the numbers in their play. I, on the other hand, consider it metagaming to base decisions on the character knowing the mathematical nature of his world, whether or not the player mentions those numbers.

For instance, I think it's less "metagamey" for the player to shout "OUCH!! That takes me down to -8 hit points!" than it is for him to think: "Well, since I know that falling 70 feet can't deal enough damage to kill me, I jump off the cliff to escape."

The first is just what happens when something in-game overwhelms a player. The second is the player actually making a decision based on the mathematical nature of hit points. As a player, he knows the fall can't deal enough damage to kill the character, so he has his character act on that knowledge. To me, that is textbook metagaming, and far, far worse than blurting out his negative hit point total.

I think both could be equally metagaming. Someone who blurts that out might be doing so to get other players to metagame in his behalf, not because he is really so shocked. Especially if he plays in a game where table talk is discouraged.

 

[JohnSnow]

I think both could be equally metagaming. Someone who blurts that out might be doing so to get other players to metagame in his behalf, not because he is really so shocked. Especially if he plays in a game where table talk is discouraged.

Perhaps. I don't entirely disagree. I guess the latter (jumping off a cliff on purpose, secure in the knowledge that you'll survive) just bugs me more than does the former.

 

[KarinsDad]

Perhaps. I don't entirely disagree. I guess the latter (jumping off a cliff on purpose, secure in the knowledge that you'll survive) just bugs me more than does the former.

I've never seen anyone do that in the game, so I don't think about it too much.

I did have my PC jump off a cliff once, but my PC had a Feather Fall spell available (and was actually pulling an enemy off the cliff with a rope).

 

[Victim]

The only complaints I have with the new rules is this:

1) The negative range seems too wide. Again this is from 3e glasses, but judging from the monsters we've seen now it doesn't look like there will every be a time at high levels when a character will go from conscious to dead, it will always be up to unconscious. So the only way for a dm to kill a character is to beat the unconscious body, and then he looks like an ass

I dunno. In a 3.x context, it seems like it'd come up often enough reasonably. Consider: a monster takes a 5' step and full attack, drops the PC early in the attack routine, and then has no other targets within reach. He might as well finish off the PC with his remaining attacks. Yeah, that happened to me.

Similarly, if healing is abundant, then leaving KO'd people alive can be troublesome. If enemies can't take out the healer, then finishing off wounded characters is a pretty reasonable plan.