What level is appropriate to encounter save or die effects?

[Lanefan]

Re: save-or-die effects:

I'm curious what the general feeling is here towards them. When do you feel it's appropriate for characters to encounter effects that require their death to hinge on a single die roll regardless of their hit points?

First level. Start as you mean to go on.

I'm not suggesting using them willy-nilly, but a spider in a 1st-level module with a save-or-die poison effect is just fine by me.

Lane-"there are acceptable losses"-fan

 

[diaglo]

level 1.

at each level different effects have different meanings. like hold person. or say magic missile. 2-5hps is gonna kill a commoner.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

First level is okay with me. I don't have a problem with save-or-die.

 

[lukelightning]

Also many games/campaigns have "action points" or "fate points" that you can use to save yourself, which frees the DM from worrying too much about what to do about SoD effects.

And the only thing more fun than petrifying the rogue with a surprise medusa is saying "remember that action point you spent to boost your pickpocket on the tavernkeep...you're gonna regret not having it now!" and then petrifying him.

 

[ashockney]

Using the guidelines provided in the SRD, right around 8th - 10th level:

1) The use of hp damage spells are more efficient uses of these spell slots below 5th level
2) The access to counter their effects enter the game at the same time (raise dead)
3) Comparable CR creatures out of the MM enter the game around this time

In my own personal opinion, the opportunity cost of save or die at any level is disproportional to the rest of the game. If you look at the damage/hp curve, save or die doesn't belong, and takes unnecessary leaps. Disintegrate (3.5 style) was an excellent step in the right direction. The -10 hp character death rule is also a problem with the scaling damage, making sudden character deaths for too easy. These things are particularly true when compared to the amount of work and reduced fun produced by character death, based on my experience. You can absolutely threaten a character/party without wheeling and dealing character deaths left and right. It frankly, cheapens the game. For example, you finally overcome the giants, defeat their king, uphold the crown, then...oops, missed that find traps check on the loot box, didn't catch the symbol of death and, well, sorry friend rogue, that fort save is not very good. ???

Alternatively, character activity should come and go in stages of condition:
Active
Moderately Wounded - Fatigued
Seriously Wounded - Weakened
Critically Wounded - Immobilized
Unconscious
Dying
Dead

I think it is good that you can move up and down these conditions from combat damage, or moved directly into these conditions from a variety of effects, such as a basilisk's glare, poison, etc.

I don't disagree that skilled combatants should be able to more quickly "critically" wound opponents with weapon and spells, however, it should only rarely result in immediate character death.

 

[The Shaman]

During character generation.


(Yeah, I'm a classic Traveller player. )

 

[DwarvenDog]

As a general rule I only start including save-or-die effects when the PC's have a means of coping with them. I think in most cases this means between 7th and 10th level.


- deadly poison? If used at lower levels I drop hints that there are poisonous plants/critters around in the hopes that a PC might memorize delay poison. Failing that I am generous with the DC for survival/alchemy to locate an antidote. Otherwise it's 7th level when the cleric can/should have memorized Neutralize Poison.

- [death] effects? I will always drop hints about negative-energy areas, giving someone a chance to put up a death ward spell. I pull out the stops when PC's have ready access to teleport and raise dead. Or break enchantment for petrification effects.

- the aforementioned fungus with death spores I would only use in a party with a paladin, giving that character a chance to use their most-useless ability, cure disease n per week.


I don't generally like to let life or death fall to a single poor roll, especially if the group is well prepared. That's not to say I don't, I haven't, or I won't again... it's just not my favorite thing on the menu.

 

[diaglo]

During character generation.


(Yeah, I'm a classic Traveller player. )

you, sir, are da mang... i mean Shaman.

 

[kigmatzomat]

At 1st level a decent arrow shot is unconscious-without-save to many characters. A critical arrow hit is die-no-save for virtually everyone until 2nd or 3rd level. At 5th level a decent fireball can wipe out most parties (especially if it is cast by another PC).

So I see no real reason why "save or die" is such a shocking thing to 9th level characters. They've lived with "save or die" or even "die no save" from the beginning.

 

[Merkuri]

At 1st level a decent arrow shot is unconscious-without-save to many characters.

But then you have as many as 10 chances to stabilize, and your fellow players can whip out a heal check or a minor heal spell to save you from death. That's not a true one-roll = death situation.

A critical arrow hit is die-no-save for virtually everyone until 2nd or 3rd level.

But to get a critical, you have to roll twice. There's also the chance that the bad guy can roll poorly on the damage and only put you unconscious. So you have four die rolls (2 attacks, 2 damage rolls) that can cause death. Not a one roll = death situation.

At 5th level a decent fireball can wipe out most parties (especially if it is cast by another PC).

Here you can roll a reflex save and the caster can roll low damage. Two chances to live.

So I see no real reason why "save or die" is such a shocking thing to 9th level characters. They've lived with "save or die" or even "die no save" from the beginning.

My problem is when a character's life hangs on a single die roll. Make it two or three and I'm fine. All of those examples you quoted above need at least two rolls to go the right way to cause a death.