What's the Problem with Save-or-Die?

[Hussar]

I think my biggest issue with SoD is with SoD area of effects. Medusa's gaze is a good example, or any similar gaze attack - Bodak being poster child here.

It's just too bloody lethal. 4 PC's, even with only a 25% chance of being effected, means that in any given round, someone is very, very likely going to die. And, the effect gets even more pronounced the larger the group is. A creature should not dramatically ramp UP its lethality every time you add a PC to the encounter.

Somebody with better math than me can do the calculations, but, I do know that a group of 6 PC's is considerably more likely to suffer PC losses against this sort of attack than a 3 PC group.

Never mind what happens if you use TWO gaze attacks.

No creature should ever have virtually a guaranteed chance to whack a PC, regardless of the PC level.

 

[Fede]

The point of my multiple save solution is to simulate combat.

The fighter engages the orc hits 3 times. The orc dies.
The wizard casts death spell on the orc and hits 3 times. The orc dies.

The first turn argument doesn't work. I have seen archer PCs Swiss Cheese a major enemy away and I've seen charging brutes smash a foe first turn with lucky rolls on initiative.

I'm sorry, it seems that I wasn't clear. When I said "in one turn", I didn't mean that it is a problem because it happens in the first turn of combat. I meant that all the saves are made in the same turn instead of being spread out on multiple turns.
This way, the end result is that when you use the SoD spell with the system you propose, there is still a chance of killing the enemy in one action. It's a more nuanced chance, being based on different scores instead of one only, but is still a Save or Die.
And the comparison with the fighter doesn't hold, because the main point of SoDs is that they bypass hitpoints.

So, your solution can solve the "SoD problem" if the problem is that they are not accounting for all the variables of combat (if that is what you meant with "The point of my multiple save solution is to simulate combat.").
This doesn't work for me because that is not my problem with them. My problem with them is their instant lethality.

Edit: I forgot to add, I'm talking about the "classic" type of SoD and Minigiant's version, not about Mearl's new proposal.

 

[am181d]

Save or Die is inherently *non*-dramatic. It's blink-and-you-miss-it combat. Whether it's PC vs. NPC or NPC vs. PC, you want that sense of impending doom. That's why I favor a countdown clock in place of most SoD mechanics.

I'm OK with a SoD mechanic (or even a no-save-and-die mechanic) when powerful creatures are taking on relatively low level creatures, where simple damage attacks would also be enough to destroy them. We don't need Bill the Bookkeeper to heroically fight off the Medusa's gaze.

 

[Hassassin]

A creature should not dramatically ramp UP its lethality every time you add a PC to the encounter.

Isn't that true for all area or other multi-target attacks that have any chance of killing someone?

Throw two fireballs at a single character and she has a decent chance of surviving. Throw them at four and someone is very likely to die. Of course, the four character party will deal with the enemy faster and it's their fault for staying within a 20' radius.

 

[FireLance]

After thinking about this issue, I have decided that I would like save or die better if there was always a fairly easily accomplished way to avoid having to make that potentially lethal save that causes some inconvenience to the PC.

In other words, I want the threat of save or die to force the PCs to fight under conditions that they would normally never subject themselves to, but I don't want the actuality of a failed save and a dead PC.

So, I want PCs to blindfold themselves before fighting a medusa. I want them stuffing cloth in their ears before facing a banshee. If some undead horror has an aura of life draining that forces anyone who ends his turn next to it to save or die, I want to see PCs scrambling away from it every time it gets close.

Of course, this gives save or die a few prerequisites: the effect must be telegraphed, so that the PCs can readily recognize the danger, the counter must be obvious, so the PCs don't do the wrong thing by mistake, and the ability needs to be "warmed up" so that the PCs will always have at least one round to react (no surprise round deaths, please).

That, for me, would give me all the fun of save or die with none of the downsides.

 

[Bluenose]

The saving throw was designed to give an adventurer some chance to avoid at least the worst effects of terrible magical and mythic powers.

If these effects are removed from the game then what is there to separate the fantastic from the mundane? If myth and magic can accomplish nothing but dealing damage do we really need it at all?

If magic isn't going to have a distinctly different feel from the everyday then get rid of it.

Being able to Fly isn't good enough? To speak with dead creatures, harm groups of people at a distance by making a ball of fire explode among them? Making your skin hard as stone, so you can't be hurt by weapons? Protecting yourself and others from a dragon's flaming breath? Putting someone to sleep with a word, a gesture, and a pinch of sand?

All those seem quite fantastic to me. As far as I can tell, what you're asking for is those and to be allowed to entirely bypass the hit point system in a way that isn't allowed to anyone else.

 

[Hassassin]

[...]the ability needs to be "warmed up" so that the PCs will always have at least one round to react (no surprise round deaths, please).

Regarding this point, I would like to see SoD spells that take multiple rounds to cast. An enemy necromancer behind a small army of ghouls casting powerful death magic that the wizard says will take half a minute to complete: cool.

It also works for PCs. The wizard starts casting his one big (ritual?) spell, and the rest of the party have three rounds to fight for their lives. If using the "complex tactical combat" module, add small secondary effects each round so the player won't get bored.

(Don't want to cast three round spells? Don't select one. Simple.)

 

[drothgery]

The big issue with save-or-die effects is that if they work often enough that PCs are going to use them (which is more often than the mathematically optimal cut off, I'd bet) ...

• they lead to very short fights
• it's unlikely that martial characters have access to similar save-or-die effects, which plays havok on game balance
• it's likely that enemy casters will have access to similar save-or-die effects, which means PCs are going to die a lot

... while if they don't work often enough, they're just going to be wasting space in the rule book because PCs will use more reliable spells with less extreme effects.

 

[Hussar]

Isn't that true for all area or other multi-target attacks that have any chance of killing someone?

Throw two fireballs at a single character and she has a decent chance of surviving. Throw them at four and someone is very likely to die. Of course, the four character party will deal with the enemy faster and it's their fault for staying within a 20' radius.

Yes and no. For one it is fairly unlikely that you will hit the group with multiple fireballs round after round for the entire combat. Whereas with aoo sod effects that is exacly what you are doing.

 

[Sunseeker]

I don't hate SOD, I just want to see it maintained as a very rare and potent power. And I would like to make it maybe more along the lines of SSSoD.