Your character died. Big deal.

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

It's considerably easier to make such decisions when they are built into the game.


RC

How, exactly, does one keep a baskilisk, a boadak, or a medusa, without anyone knowing it, and without leaving any sign of its existence?

It would be nice if the rules would remind you of that, especially when using random encounter tables.
But see Hussars example - when the enemy comes to you, things change a lot. If you wanted to, you could drop a Wizard memorizing Teleport and Gaze Screen together with a Medusa onto your PCs. At best you get the warning from detecting the Scrying sensor then, but would you be prepared for a Medusa?

And there is nothing in the rules forbidding it, nor is it entirely unreasonable to assume that such a thing could happen. Especially the enemy going after the PCs is something that one would expect to occur from a verisimilitude* point of view.

*) Hey, long time, no see, verisimilitude! And even typed correctly on the first attempt!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Hrm, in the Savage Tide AP, at one point one of the BBEG's sends a hit squad after the party. A number of bodaks riding templated undead dinosaurs teleport in on the party at some random point.

BTW: Be careful with spoilers!

I wonder how my DM will convert this encounter to 4E... But I would bet I would lose my PC in such an encounter. Bodaks are bane to all my characters, even if they have a Fort Save upped to the wazoo.

 

[FentonGib]

I agree with the analogy that when watching TV we get no control. However when Ensign X gets killed in Star Trek no-one cares. Kill off a major character and people get upset.

I remember in the Star Wars NJO books they kill off two major characters and a lot of people complained. Many saw it as a great thing, since even major characters could die... so you never know if Han's next flight is his last or not... but many didn't like it because they lost forever a character they loved reading about.

In my games players like an element of risk, and accept the consequences if they die (for good), but like films, the reactions are relative. New characters they've not yet connected with they don't mind much, but when you've been playing a character for years and he's grown from a level 1 church guard to a high level general commanding the whole army against enemy or evil forces - I've seen players cry when they've lost characters.

Most of my players don't mind "meaningful deaths" - sacrificing themselves for players, maybe holding that Balor off long enough for the church's Paladins to turn up and save the day. Players often remember these times nostalgically with "you remember x... that was a great death!" But they hate it when a random level 1 guard gets a straight 20 on an arrow shot followed by another 20 to confirm and a third 20 for a sudden death critical threat (or a 1 on a Fort save DC 15 when they have a +20 Fort save). They feel that the death has no meaning and is pointless. This ends up with players (in my experience) becoming frustrated and, if it happens too often, detaching from their characters and metagaming more with a "If I play my character concept I'll get killed by a random die roll, so I'll do what I think best to preserve my character."

In normal D&D raising dead is fairly easy for mid-high level players, but in games such as Ravenloft and other d20 games, it's not so easy because there's less magic, less money, or (in Ravenloft) a chance of returning not-quite-normal (undead). This heightens the issue for the players.

 

[Raven Crowking]

It would be nice if the rules would remind you of that, especially when using random encounter tables.

Agreed.

But, prior to 3e, the use of specific spells had potential major reprecussions for the caster (or those it was used on). If the argument is that WotC bunged up the system by making changes/additions without understanding why things were as they were in the first place, I have already agreed to that a long time ago.

I have also argued, if you recall, that the design blogs for 4e show signs of the same problem.


RC

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Agreed.

But, prior to 3e, the use of specific spells had potential major reprecussions for the caster (or those it was used on). If the argument is that WotC bunged up the system by making changes/additions without understanding why things were as they were in the first place, I have already agreed to that a long time ago.

Quite possible that 3E made things worse, but if you mention divination spells to discover threats - these seem even harder to get or use in earlier editions then 3E, so I don't see how these can turn out to be a default solution.

Under the premise that the rules or guidelines make it very clear that pure "Save or Die" situation without the DM providing opportunities for the players to become aware of the danger and prepare themselves against it, I would also allow Save or Die spells. But I am also fine with it removed from RAW and entirely be a DM decision to rule a certain scenario with a "Save or Die" effect after he has provided enough warning.

Keep of the Shadowfell even includes a "Die" effect in the final encounter. But it is very unlikely to be triggered accidentally, unlike a cavalry charge by Bodaks or a Medusa imprisoned in a dungeon room.

I have also argued, if you recall, that the design blogs for 4e show signs of the same problem.

I don't think I recall, especially because I don't know if you argue that the 4E design team didn't notice the problematic changes between AD&D and 3E, or if they saw the same problems.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Quite possible that 3E made things worse, but if you mention divination spells to discover threats - these seem even harder to get or use in earlier editions then 3E, so I don't see how these can turn out to be a default solution.

In any edition, knowledge is power. Heck, this is a truism in real life as well. Divinations are always worth more than fireballs.

Under the premise that the rules or guidelines make it very clear that pure "Save or Die" situation without the DM providing opportunities for the players to become aware of the danger and prepare themselves against it, I would also allow Save or Die spells.

Again, if you look at the 1e books, you will discover that the DM had control over what spells were available in his world. An NPC didn't have the best available spell merely because it was the best available spell.

Keep of the Shadowfell even includes a "Die" effect in the final encounter. But it is very unlikely to be triggered accidentally, unlike a cavalry charge by Bodaks or a Medusa imprisoned in a dungeon room.

If the imprisoned Medusa is the one in KotB, do you know anyone who actually fell for it? I don't. Without exception, every player I know twigged to the fact that you couldn't see her face.

I don't think I recall, especially because I don't know if you argue that the 4E design team didn't notice the problematic changes between AD&D and 3E, or if they saw the same problems.

Our discussion of it related specifically to the 15-minute adventuring day, and lethality of combats. I argued that the 4e paradigm, as described, would cause the DM to eventually throw more and more powerful challenges at his party, eventually requiring them to use their dailies and then rest, or the party would find the combats too predictable. This is because the 4e model creates too narrow a gap between what is a challenge and what is lethal.

(I expected that the "shine" of the new game would last a year before reports of this started coming in. I was wrong in this; I am hearing them already.)


RC

 

[Fifth Element]

But, even so, there is some "final" save, which is the same as the first save in a SoD game.

I've written this before: you're being far too literal. Please consider the context of the discussion, rather than just the three specific words being used.

It's all about the decision points, as stated earlier. It's not the fact that there's a single die roll causing death, it's this single die roll with nothing the players can do about it. And no, divination magic and Gather Information will not always (often?) do it for you.

See the bodak example above for a non-mythological example.

 

[Fifth Element]

Again, if you look at the 1e books, you will discover that the DM had control over what spells were available in his world.

But what about 2E? 3E? We're not just talking about 1E here. We're talking about editions that have "traditional" SoD effects.

If the imprisoned Medusa is the one in KotB, do you know anyone who actually fell for it? I don't. Without exception, every player I know twigged to the fact that you couldn't see her face.

We're very impressed. I remember I didn't "fall" for it either.

That changes nothing. This is a single encounter example, which is easily countered by the bodak encounter described above.

 

[Fifth Element]

It always eventually comes down to one die roll, and it is (IMHO) a myth that there was little a player could do beforehand or that "There's little thought involved, just following the checklist of things adventures should have."

Again, see bodak example above. Or should characters immediately start casting death ward every time they detect a divination sensor? That wouldn't help against teleporting medusas anyway.

There are just too many different types of SoD effects to be adequately prepared for all of them. And adequate information is not always available.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

In any edition, knowledge is power. Heck, this is a truism in real life as well. Divinations are always worth more than fireballs.

No, they are not. Sometimes just having the Fireball is better then knowing that you need a Fireball.

Again, if you look at the 1e books, you will discover that the DM had control over what spells were available in his world. An NPC didn't have the best available spell merely because it was the best available spell.

Yes, he does have the control. But how does he use this control? And a Medusa or Bodak doesn't need any spells to know, they just do their tricks.

If the imprisoned Medusa is the one in KotB, do you know anyone who actually fell for it? I don't. Without exception, every player I know twigged to the fact that you couldn't see her face.

I haven't played Keep of the Borderlands. Remember, I am a child of 3E (or Shadowrun, but the majority of my RPG life I played 3E)

Our discussion of it related specifically to the 15-minute adventuring day, and lethality of combats. I argued that the 4e paradigm, as described, would cause the DM to eventually throw more and more powerful challenges at his party, eventually requiring them to use their dailies and then rest, or the party would find the combats too predictable. This is because the 4e model creates too narrow a gap between what is a challenge and what is lethal.

Maybe it is my awareness of the 15 minute adventuring day problem that makes me try my best to avoid it these days... I feel like I am still challenged - dailies are used with great care. Though we've noticed that it might be best, overall, to use one or two dailies total (over the entire party) in most encounters.

We'll talk again in a year or 8 years.