Where did % to stablize come from?

[kenobi65]

In the Star Wars RPG, I believe that stabilization only requires a DC10 Fort save. (Then again, many would argue that SWRPG, with the VP/WP system, is deadlier, so maybe this is a patch to make it not quite so deadly.)

 

[MeepoTheMighty]

We generally use % dice, roll under Con to stabalize. No clue why, it's just the way we've been doing it for years.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

I use the varient (or a varien t of the varient) from Unearthed Arcana. Roll a Fort save Dc = 10 + the positive version of whatever negative you are at. 'Bleeding' to death is just lame, this pretty much does away with it.

 

[MerricB]

I mentioned a while ago that I didn't like the -10 rule.

In the same vein, where did the percentage dice to check for stabliziation come from?

I think that during design they wanted a mechanic that allowed a PC to avoid death, but not to be a giveaway at high levels.

Being a fixed chance, it is a percentile roll. d20 rolls are only made for task resolution where the chance can be modified.

Cheers!

 

[JoeGKushner]

I use the varient (or a varien t of the varient) from Unearthed Arcana. Roll a Fort save Dc = 10 + the positive version of whatever negative you are at. 'Bleeding' to death is just lame, this pretty much does away with it.

Well, that's what I use in my Shackled City campaign, but I was just wondering where some of these odd ball things from earlier editions came from. They just seem so against the grain of the d20 philosphy.

 

[Slobber Monster]

Actually isn't it a flat 10%? Even worse. That's why I use a Con check for this. It's DC 19, so if you have no modifier, it's 10%, just as written, but if you're tougher it's easier. Since I also allow auto-success on a 20, it's not impossible for the frail, either.

I do the same thing.

 

[WhimsyTheFae]

Well, that's what I use in my Shackled City campaign, but I was just wondering where some of these odd ball things from earlier editions came from. They just seem so against the grain of the d20 philosphy.

It's probably as simple as a percentage is easier to denote when not refering to a save, skill check, attack, etc.

Instead of saying - You have a 2 in 20 chance of stabilizing each round, it was 10%. Why didn't they use an attribute check or saving throw? Probably something to do with it being to easy to stabilize at higher levels.

 

[Vanye]

Actually isn't it a flat 10%? Even worse. That's why I use a Con check for this. It's DC 19, so if you have no modifier, it's 10%, just as written, but if you're tougher it's easier. Since I also allow auto-success on a 20, it's not impossible for the frail, either.

We just add the Con bonus to the 10% for the total. IE, if you've got a +3 Con bonus, your stabilization chance is 13%.

It's simple, it works, and my pc's are happy with it. Especially when that Con bonus means they actually managed to stabilize.

 

[genshou]

I've always hated the 10% stabilization rule. It was used in the first 3E game I played in, and left a bad feeling in my gut. After that every game I was in used a DC 20 Fortitude saving throw. It halves the chance for a human commoner to make the save, but heroes are a lot more likely to succeed. Given the small gap between consciousness and death which is imposed by the 11-point buffer (including disabled at 0 hp), I don't have a problem with a character whose Fortitude save bonus is +18 or higher automatically succeeding on any roll but a natural 1.

 

[diaglo]

Well, that's what I use in my Shackled City campaign, but I was just wondering where some of these odd ball things from earlier editions came from. They just seem so against the grain of the d20 philosphy.

well it didn't come from OD&D. 0 = dead in OD&D.

i think the bleeding to death and crit/fumbles came about in The Dragon first.

so the more rules complexity required more rules to fill in the loopholes.