Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 3869431" data-attributes="member: 1465">I think you expressed my concerns better than I did. If a character is helpless like for example bound in chains, then I see no problems in letting someone slit his throat. In that case, we don't even need a rule about CdG except in very rare circumstances, because if the killer wants him dead, he gets him dead (magic or special protection against such an attack notwithstanding). With the CdG rules, it doesn't matter if he wins the ST. The killer just CdG him again, and again. The rule is useless for a really bound character (once again, except in very rare circumstances where perhaps someone has a chance to stop the killer, but even in this case the CdG only changes the time allowed to save the victim, making it faster to kill).The concern I have is in combat. Spells that turn someone into helpless have been called &quot;save-or-screwed&quot; because with CdG they are close to be &quot;save-or-die&quot;. CdG cannot always be used, because the killer needs to first get close and the CdG, so most of the times it would take 2 rounds, so ok maybe the problem doesn't happen too often. Still, some spells like Hold Monsters were revised because they were too deadly, and CdG as a full-round-action makes them more deadly than they could be. This is why I wonder why not removing CdG in combat instead.(edit: and please, let's stop the silly argument about medical realism of the CdG rule because everyone is just pushing to prove his point, but whatever rule or not rule it's never going to be realistic enough)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Li Shenron, post: 3869431, member: 1465"] I think you expressed my concerns better than I did. If a character is helpless like for example bound in chains, then I see no problems in letting someone slit his throat. In that case, we don't even [I]need[/I] a rule about CdG except in very rare circumstances, because if the killer wants him dead, he gets him dead (magic or special protection against such an attack notwithstanding). With the CdG rules, it doesn't matter if he wins the ST. The killer just CdG him again, and again. The rule is useless for a really bound character (once again, except in very rare circumstances where perhaps someone has a chance to stop the killer, but even in this case the CdG only changes the time allowed to save the victim, making it faster to kill). The concern I have is [I]in combat[/I]. Spells that turn someone into helpless have been called "save-or-screwed" because with CdG they are close to be "save-or-die". CdG cannot always be used, because the killer needs to first get close and the CdG, so most of the times it would take 2 rounds, so ok maybe the problem doesn't happen too often. Still, some spells like Hold Monsters were revised because they were too deadly, and CdG as a full-round-action makes them more deadly than they could be. This is why I wonder why not removing CdG in combat instead. (edit: and please, let's stop the silly argument about medical realism of the CdG rule because everyone is just pushing to prove his point, but whatever rule or not rule it's never going to be realistic enough) [/QUOTE]

Verification