What Has To Be Save-Or-Die?

[Roland55]

Epic tier threats should lay on the save or die effects.

Arch-devils, demon lords, great wyrms, demi-liches and demigods. Each should have a signature power that snuffs out life like a candle.

Because epic level heroes can handle that sort of thing. They can pop back to life, assume bodies of pure energy, resurrect their allies, etc.

Heroic and Paragon? No thanks.

Whereas I really side more with Ahnehnois in this, I think I could go with Wormwood's posture. I know there are a LOT of current D&D players who just hate "save-or-die" spells ... and I'm willing to compromise to continue playing at the same table with them in the same game.

For myself, I love the adrenaline surge of going up against "save-or-die."

 

[mmadsen]

Honestly, when it comes to hit points, I, definitely, don't want them being used for things like Medusa's gaze.

I would prefer to see plot immunity come from a separate mechanic in the form of hero points.

What if we rename hit points to hero points? One use of these hero points is to reduce a killing blow to a mere flesh wound.

 

[Deadboy]

I HATE save-or-dies. I don't understand why a game with a perfectly workable (if admittedly arbitrary) mechanic that determines whether I live or die - i.e., hit points - has ways to completely short circuit that mechanic based on a single die roll. Not only is it not fun for a single die roll to either cause me to lose a character or at least be removed from play for a significant amount of time, it really just doesn't make sense. And it encourages lots of players to cheat. I know that if a single die roll determines whether my near future will be "have fun playing D&D" or "go get a beer," I'm breaking out my die that no one else can see the numbers on and having fun playing D&D. It can be deadly to you but I intend to be immune. All of which I hate doing and shouldn't have to do in a well-designed system, i.e. one without save-or-dies.

Coming back to my "makes no sense" point: If save-or-dies are brought back, do you know what I think has to be save-or-die? SWORDS. Because I don't get why something that is made up gets to be more lethal than something that can kill people in real life.

I agree with Keterys - monsters should have different effects when they reduce a character to 0 hp. A medusa turning a character that she just reduced to 0 hp to stone is very flavorful, provides an interesting challenge should the players wish to bring the character back, and doesn't short circuit the hit point system needlessly.

 

[serch]

Definitely, if you want to reintroduce save or die rolls you need some mitigating factor and some tactics tossed into it, like hero points or something to that effect. Ideally, getting over a combat encounter should be a factor of the power level of the PCs, their tactic abilities and luck, in that order. If you introduce save or die without some counterbalance you end altering that order dramatically.

 

[Tortoise]

Tossing in some thoughts without reading the entire thread.

There are spells for slow poison and neutralise poison in most editions (all?).

Something to keep in mind is that the intent with poisons was that they didn't actually kill immediately and those spells could save a life.

In some of the old-school books it takes a full turn (10 minutes) for death for some poisons, quicker for others, but they still take the victim out of combat, incapacitating them. Failure to delay the poison by slowing it, or to neutralise it, lead to the death of the victim at the end of that 10 minute turn.

I like playing it that way since not only does it match closer to reality, but it leaves open a window for survival in the right curcumstances.

Got anti-toxin?

 

[Stormonu]

Definitely Petrification. Other than that, I can't really think of one.

Most "death effects" (Power Word Kill, Finger of Death, Disintegrate, Assassinate, etc.) I think should just do hit point damage. They kill you by reducing you to 0 hp. Surviving the damage would be similar to making the save against it, though unlike the all-or-nothing of current save-or-dies, going through hit points would mean the spellcaster still did something to you.

Most of the D&D weapons that the fighter wields can kill you just as dead as quickly as a wizard's spells. I don't see why the wizard should get a pass where the fighter doesn't.

And, thinking about it, I wonder if even Petrification shouldn't have to go through your HP before it petrifies you. It could be something that does ongoing damage