What do you think of poison in d20


log in or register to remove this ad

I like the 3e mechanic but don't like how it breaks down at higher levels. Most poisons have Fort DC saves that are less than 18. Well, by 15th level most fighters are going to yawn at that even if they take 2d6 Con or Str damage. Because they know that a little healing or spell will fix them up right away. That's why I use the variant rule we created for Poisoner's Handbook that does hp damage every round in addition to ability damage. It makes poisons much more deadly and a reason to be feared. It's interesting to watch the party force the cleric to prepare slow poison and neutralize poison multiple times. :)
 

I prefer the Toxicant version (a pdf from Mad Kaiser)- it involves possible organ damage (brain, liver, kidney, lung, blood vessel, spine and nerve), straight hp damage, strokes, and a bunch more and that doesn't even cover the ~40 symptoms that can also be deabilitating. It uses real world toxins (plant, fungi, man made, snake, sea life, others) and has everything from plants that give rashes to VX gas.

When you use it, you generally need an index card for each toxin.
 

Ghostwind said:
I like the 3e mechanic but don't like how it breaks down at higher levels. Most poisons have Fort DC saves that are less than 18. Well, by 15th level most fighters are going to yawn at that even if they take 2d6 Con or Str damage. Because they know that a little healing or spell will fix them up right away. That's why I use the variant rule we created for Poisoner's Handbook that does hp damage every round in addition to ability damage. It makes poisons much more deadly and a reason to be feared. It's interesting to watch the party force the cleric to prepare slow poison and neutralize poison multiple times. :)

While I like that system, in my experience it is simply TOO deadly for low level play. So, IMO, the answer to how poisons break at high levels ends up breaking poisons at low levels.

What we've done is include a bunch of much higher DC poisons. 2d6 or 3d6 Con damage is devastating even for a high level fighter because in mid-combat, most bank on their massive hit points - so if they are down by half of their hit points, or even a third, the Con loss can wipe them right out. But again, this is a house-rule to fix the problem, but one that doesn't change the system at low levels.

Maybe I'll release a short PDF of all the poisons we use in our campaign, from low-level "ouch" poisons to the epic "puddle of goo" poisons.
 

So far you have convinced me that 3e method is more interesting, but that there is room for others, from the mundane that does 2d4 of damage, to the really weird with exotic consequences. Mmmmh... a lot more work to add to my netbook... :(
 

I, too, think that poisons are nifty, but more poisons need to be added for higher levels. For use in encounters, and for things like "Woo, I can wildshape into a big snake and bite things! Wait...the DC for the poison is 14. Well phoo." Because at 10th level, even a critter with a wizard's fort save is gonna make about half of the time. If it's a fightery monster with a con to match, up that to 75%, and then start thinking of feats and items that improve saves. And thats just for 10th level things. My solution for my campaign will be to make sure there are a wide variety of different poisons with different save DCs.
 



I like the ability damage thing in 3E, but I also miss the hp damage thing from 2E. I definitely don't like the "immediate onset" from 3E - it's just not very realistic.

We have a bunch of variant poisons in Crimson Contracts - stuff that deals no damage at all (makes you sick, prevents psionics use, or paralyzes you), as well as ones that deal ability damage and even a few that kill you outright on a failed save.
 

Turanil said:
So I would like to know your opinion (do you prefer AD&D 2e or d20/3e poisons);
I like both - I prefer d20/3e's immediate onset (as well as the ability score damage), but I also like 2e's hp damage.
 

Remove ads

Top