Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Matthew77 12-21-06, 11:56 AM	My party has been losing a lot of characters to save or die spells lately so I've developed a new system. I would appreciate any suggestions or comments. (My sob story... 6th level Paladin with a backstory that I liked a lot, Will save of +11, Fort save of +12, triggers a Phantasmal Killer trap. Two low rolls later and I'm making a new character.) Possible solution: Life Points. Each creature has life points = Hit Dice. Any effect which would create a death effect, instead of killing the target, causes them to lose life points. Spells cause a loss of life points equal to the level of the spell, other abilities default to a loss equal to half the class levels or HD of the creator (for example an assassin's death attack). Very powerful death effects could also take a few life points away on a sucessful save. Life Points are regained at the rate of one per 24 hours. Unlike ability damage, life point healing cannot be increased by the heal skill, full bed rest or any rapid healing abilities. A negative level also decreases a character's maximum life points by 1. Spells that could restore a character to life can also be used to restore life points equal to the level of the spell. (Raise Dead = 5 points, etc..) If your life points fall below half of their maximum, you take a -2 on all skill checks, attack rolls, saving throws and ability checks. If your life points reach zero, you die. Any loss of life points resulting from a failed save causes you to immedately fall into a coma (helpless) for 10 minutes per point lost. This coma can only be broken by a spell that restores the life points, wish or miracle. The idea is that failing a save or die will still take you out of the fight, but if the rest of your party manages to win, you will be weakened and vulnerable, but have a chance to recover. It also makes save or die traps dangerous, but no longer an instant campaign ender.
Fargren 12-21-06, 12:21 PM	Try this: if you die because of a save or die effect, make a second save. If you pass the second save, instead of dying you are left at -x hit points, where X is the levle of the effect that would hae killed you.
Ra-Tiel 12-21-06, 12:44 PM	Alternatively you could use a system similar to "Arcana Evolved" ones: instead of outright killing a character, all "save or dies" inflict massive amounts of HP damage with an appropriate save for half. IIRC (been a long time since I last check AE) their equivalent to finger of death deals 2d10/CL with a Fort Save for half. Something similar already happened to disintegrate in DnD, so I wonder why it hasn't been implemented for all "save or dies". :thinks:
Keterys 12-21-06, 01:15 PM	Some others I've seen or done (in addition to the damage): Ability Damage Negative Levels Dying instead of Dead In the case of ability damage or negative levels, it may be something where you want it to hit over several rounds. For example, perhaps Phantasmal Killer does 2 con damage per round. Check out Cast in Stone for an idea on how to arbitrate those. Example replacement for 'death attack': Lethal: All sneak attack damage is maximized, and subject to crit multiplication. Fort save or take 1 Con damage per round until save is made. Nonlethal: All sneak attack damage is maximized as nonlethal, and subject to crit multiplication. Fort Save or fall unconscious . Each round may make another save to regain consciousness. In addition, you can also just make raising level harmful - take away a lot of the cost and/or make it give a negative level instead of a lost level. In one game I'm running, they get ~1 life point per PC per adventure that they can use up, but if they don't, get turned into extra treasure. OTOH, there's no raising in that game, either.
Tyler Do'Urden 12-21-06, 02:11 PM	Idunno... save or die spells are kind of supposed to kill you. That's the point. You make the save or you die. The level at which you should start encountering save-or-die magic is about the same level at which you can start raising the dead anyway. If you're encountering lots of death effects with little or no access to ressurection magic, then this is an issue more with the DM than with the system.
Ra-Tiel 12-21-06, 02:52 PM	Idunno... save or die spells are kind of supposed to kill you. That's the point. You make the save or you die. The level at which you should start encountering save-or-die magic is about the same level at which you can start raising the dead anyway. If you're encountering lots of death effects with little or no access to ressurection magic, then this is an issue more with the DM than with the system. Save or die effects might be supposed to kill the character, but that doesn't chance the fact that they are horrible from a game design point of view. It's always frustrating for a player to have a character killed because he rolled a 1 instead of a 2. Bringing the character back usually involves either the particular character or the whole party taking a substantional hit to their monetary resources (or the character level, in case of anything non-true resurrection like being used), thus lowering their power level and again increasing their chance of dying anyways. Not bringing the character back results in breaking the group's dynamic, forcing the players to get used to a new character and work out a new party balance. And having to readjust your party's tactics and modi operandi in a mid-to-high level game is also prone to resulting in more dead characters. This is even more true when the new character does not fill the same role as the old character did, like a heavy armor/reach weapon fighter dying and a wilderness rogue joining the party. In the worst case, the whole party gets wiped in the next tough encounter because a critical party role is unfilled and the encounter proves to become unbeatable (like when no party member is able to dispel the hostile druid's buffs, etc.) Also, Sleep, Phantasmal Killer, and so on are already available relatively early with little to no protection possible at that level. And I didn't even touch on that funny touch spell from IIRC Frostfell that can be used with Spectral Hand and inflicts 3d6 Dex damage... can you say "lesser metamagic rod of maximize"?
Tyler Do'Urden 12-21-06, 03:01 PM	Yes, those are the effects of a dead character. I submit that character death is a normal part of mid- to high-level play and if it's happening excessively, then it's an issue with the DM rather than the game system.
Grod_The_Giant 12-21-06, 03:21 PM	that's actually a good idea, Matthew77. It's never happened to me, but I know I'd be really upset to have a high-level character i've put a lot of effort into die because of a bad roll. It does kind of limit the use of save-or-dies, though. The first save-or-die is a 4th-level spell (Phantasmal Killer). When this would first be encountered, haracters would likely have, at the very least, 5 levels. At 20th level, they could soak up the save-or-dies, even Wail of the Banshee, with ease. I would limit Life Points to 10- you won't die from any one spell, but any two (except the aforementioned Phantasmal killer, but that's not too useful in any case) and you're toast. Slowing Life Point gain to 1 for ever 2 HD might not be unreasonable either. Finally, I would give a cumulative -1 penalty on all rolls for every lost Life Point (up to a maximum of 1). I would like to see a similar system with ability damage and level drain- I could never keep track of all that.
Keterys 12-21-06, 06:49 PM	I submit that character death is a normal part of mid- to high-level play and if it's happening excessively, then it's an issue with the DM rather than the game system. What's excessive? In higher level dnd combat, it should happen pretty much every fight. Save or dies are very pervasive in dnd. I also consider things like Flesh to Stone and Baleful Polymorph save or dies, for all intents, too. 'Save or Go Watch TV' for a PC or 'Save or Effectively Dead' for an enemy. In some games, you just die a lot, and you get raised a lot, and you blow through staffs of life and the like. It's just the pace of the game. From the perspective of, say, fiction, dnd's save or die mentality is really bad. So is dnd's constant raising of everything. But, it ties into dnd's "miniatures" roots. It's much nicer to have quick resolution when you're dealing with dozens of miniatures, and it doesn't get much quicker than '1 die roll, out of the fight'
Ra-Tiel 12-22-06, 12:47 AM	[...] I submit that character death is a normal part of mid- to high-level play and if it's happening excessively, then it's an issue with the DM rather than the game system. As already asked: what's excessive? I had my level 7 half-drow wilder being baleful polymorphed after suffering from an enervation (no, -3 to your already weak save is not funny :shifty: ). I had my level 13 soulknife killed in the first round against a necromancer by a readied finger of death. And seriously, if the DM cannot use some spells against the players because they are so horribly designed that instead of being a challenge they automatically ruin the players' fun, then there is something horribly wrong with these spells.
Keterys 12-22-06, 01:17 AM	then there is something horribly wrong with these spells. Yep. Also, part of the problem with a lot of them is that a successful save results in basically a complete waste of an action. That's why I like things like taking negative levels or ability damage instead... always take some penalty, but it's not a 100% penalty. For example, which would you rather face... 2d6 con, save for half or death, 15 damage on save. All depends on the save dc and your bonus eh? Or does it?
CroBob 12-22-06, 02:23 AM	Try this: if you die because of a save or die effect, make a second save. If you pass the second save, instead of dying you are left at -x hit points, where X is the levle of the effect that would hae killed you. Much better, since HP is "life points".
Tyler Do'Urden 12-22-06, 04:28 AM	As already asked: what's excessive?Well that varies from group to group, doesn't it? How about "often enough to make you want to start a thread complaining about it." From your posts, I predict that in your group, twice would be excessive.
Keterys 12-22-06, 09:36 AM	There are lots of games where the DM just won't use save or dies cause he finds them disruptive to the game. There are others in which death is just really easy to recover from. There are yet others where people are just immune to 99% of save or dies, cause damned if they'll let that happen. Of course, dispels and disjunctions become quite scary lead-ins. There are people who assume their DM always cheats so as to never fail a save or die on important NPCs (I've talked to such people; they just never prepare those spells because they assume the DM will just fudge the roll... which is a horrible failure of any kind of trust) But, yeah, I haven't hit too many games in which fireball or scorching ray is disallowed, so it's something about save or dies that makes it come up more. :) Another one in case it wasn't mentioned - At one point Andy Collins (I believe) suggested 20d6 + 1d6 per caster level for death effects (regardless of whether they had a save). Ie, so your disintegrates would do their 30-40d6 damage, vorpal would only chop off your head if 38d6 did that, etc. Of course, in 3.0 save or dies were especially bad since you could amp your save DCs like +10 or so more than you can in 3.5, such that you were looking for 20s.
angryman 12-22-06, 10:05 AM	What's excessive? In higher level dnd combat, it should happen pretty much every fight. Save or dies are very pervasive in dnd. I also consider things like Flesh to Stone and Baleful Polymorph save or dies, for all intents, too. 'Save or Go Watch TV' for a PC or 'Save or Effectively Dead' for an enemy. Pretty much every fight? Look at the Monster Manual. You can count the monsters with Death magic on two hands. (or three) MOST monsters don't have a death effect. That leaves casters. Necromancers tend to have them a lot, but PCs can prepare if they know of it. Depends on the game, but I haven't encountered that many. Flesh to Stone etc are much better than save or die because they don't kill you. They can be removed without spending 25,000 gold.
Matthew77 12-22-06, 10:28 AM	The thing that bugs me about save or dies is that there are no "smart tactics" that can mitigate them. HP damage you can prepare for.. if your main tank starts getting low, switch him back from the first line of combat. If you take 50 HP of damage during a fight, you know that you need to be more careful in the next one. Short of buying a scarab of protection or a wand of death ward, there is nothing you can do to tactically prepare for a save or die. When my characters die, I like to be able to say "oh, here's where I made a mistake and that's why I died." When the only answer is "I rolled a 1 when I was at full health walking down a corridor" that is a meaningless and annoying death to me. I also don't like the all or nothing aspect of most save or dies. I'd much rather see some sort of graduated scale. Maybe some way of dropping the saving throw roll altogether and making the damage dependant on how much the DC exceeds your saving throw modifier? Thanks for all the suggestions, and lets keep thinking about the issue!
058 12-22-06, 11:00 AM	Players get attached to characters. They like the backstory, or perhaps simply the character's style. Losing a character and being forced to roll up a new one is simply an irritant, and losing one against something that you have no defence for is simply stupid. Finger of Death and all that stuff is great for players to use, or baddies to use on non-player characters to make the players hate them, but not for use against the players. Death simply carries too great a penalty in this game. If there's a system set up such as in Neverwinter Nights, where upon death you are recalled to a temple set up to keep you out of danger, then death becomes less of an issue. Yes, it's still a problem (Guys! The Wizard's now back in town and we're still fighting!), but it is no longer the sort that will cause the players to up and leave, or quit playing with any enthusiasm because they've just lost someone that they've worked rather hard on building. My solution to the death problem is not implementing life points or any such (although I like your idea a lot), but implementing a system in which death becomes less of a burden. Right now, for my next campaign, I'm thinking that the killed character will have to make his or her way through the spiritual realm to a portal or something similar, while his or her living allies simultaneously must search for someone with the power to resurrect - or for reagents for use in a resurrection spell. Once the reagents, the spell, and the dead character are all in the proper places, poof, the character's back from the spirit world with no xp penalty.
Sphyre 12-22-06, 12:35 PM	Save or dies are harsh, yes. I'm with Tyler that they are supposed to kill you if you fail them. A lot of save or dies have appropriate ways to gain immunity to many of them. That's actually one of the better systems I've seen to make save or dies weaker, and kudos to you for that. If you're interested you may read on to the houserule that I've implemented that works for my group. Save or dies are as normal. Whenever you would lose a level (such as after being ressurected after having been subject to a save or die, or fail to remove a negative level 24 hours later) you gain a permanent negative level that cannot be removed by any means. When you level up, you lose the permanent negative level. This makes death (and in correlation, save or dies) hurt, but not be excessively harsh. Adventuring is dangerous business. HP is actually the weakest way in which trying to kill someone because you don't kill them until you get them to 0 or -1 HP they are still at full power.
Ra-Tiel 12-22-06, 12:47 PM	Well that varies from group to group, doesn't it? How about "often enough to make you want to start a thread complaining about it." The problem is, save or die effects are equally disruptive to both players and DMs. Players loose their characters in an instant, which in the middle of an ongoing campaign could very well mean that this player can pack his stuff and go home, as roling up a mid- to highlevel character the DM can drop right into the action again is nigh impossible. This brings a fun evening to a screeching halt and utterly ruins the group's fun. DMs, on the other hand, suffer from a similar burden. Apparently you have never prepared a campaign concluding battle, worked out tactics for your BBEG (be it blackguard, pit fiend, or great red wyrm), only to have the party wizard win initiative and go " mage's disjunction and quickened (rod) finger of death " on your BBEG to find your complex and interesting encounter being ended in a rather anti-climactical way by a natural one. Of course the DM could fudge the dice. But would that be fair? The player just used one of the efficient tactics available to his character. If you make your BBEG survive the attack despite a natural one on the save, you're effectively cheating the player of his normally deserved victory. From your posts, I predict that in your group, twice would be excessive. Actually, they were from two different groups and I just used them to illustrate that I too have had my share of [nearly] insta-killed characters. But nonetheless, on both occasions my involvement in the campaign was either ended, or "suspended" for about two hours. And that is absolutely not annoying when you've only got ~8h to play per week. :rolleyes:
calvinNhobbes 12-22-06, 02:35 PM	The game does have numerous counters to "save or die" type spells including death ward, mind blank (for phantasmal killer), break enchantment, etc. Of course, I think the issue is most PCs are optimized more towards the offensive than defensive. Example, when a spellcaster picks their spells, they don't tend to load up on a bunch of situational defensive spells first, they instead go for the flashy offensive stuff. Every choice has its consequences, in this case it is save or die.
theotherdraxen 12-22-06, 02:35 PM	My party has been losing a lot of characters to save or die spells lately so I've developed a new system. I would appreciate any suggestions or comments. (My sob story... 6th level Paladin with a backstory that I liked a lot, Will save of +11, Fort save of +12, triggers a Phantasmal Killer trap. Two low rolls later and I'm making a new character.) It's probably a houserule, but paladins are immune to fear, and Phantasmal Killer kills you with fear. Your paladin shouldn't have been subject to it for logical reasons, but there's probably no mechanic that stands in the way. Also, you might want to try this: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20051216a "Andy Collins, Senior Developer Death Hurts: Instead of losing a level from raise dead and similar spells, characters come back to life with a permanent negative level that goes away only after the character advances in level. This ensures that characters don’t fall behind in experience and more importantly that players don’t fall behind in fun, but it preserves death as a meaningful penalty that does more than simply make the party poorer."
archcomponent 12-22-06, 03:23 PM	Save or dies are supposed to be a lethal threat. That is the point. If you do not like the threat of death in your campaign, try getting rid of them instead of making save or dies fail to kill. Really, by the time the party faces a Bodak, they should be more than able to avoid or deal with character death.
058 12-22-06, 04:29 PM	It isn't incapability to deal with death that is the problem with save-or-dies, it's the simply lack of any player-related action. It's entirely up to the die whether you live or die (heh, pun) - even in the worst combat situations, the player can make an attempt, some harebrained scheme or at least an escape, but with a save-or-die, you fail, that's it, you're done for.
Ra-Tiel 12-22-06, 04:49 PM	The game does have numerous counters to "save or die" type spells including death ward, mind blank (for phantasmal killer), break enchantment, etc. Of course, I think the issue is most PCs are optimized more towards the offensive than defensive. Then you could possibly point out other means than a 1minute/level level 4 cleric-only spell that only affects a single target that protect you from death effects in the PHb? :thinks: Example, when a spellcaster picks their spells, they don't tend to load up on a bunch of situational defensive spells first, they instead go for the flashy offensive stuff. Every choice has its consequences, in this case it is save or die. And as we all know spells are undispellable? DnD enforces the "the best defense is a strong offense" point of view. While you waste your resources (spell slots and actions) to protect against the enemy, the enemy is already attacking. On the other hand, if you used your resources offensively, the enemy might already be dead before he could even move. --------------- [...] Really, by the time the party faces a Bodak, they should be more than able to avoid or deal with character death. Bodak: CR 8. Minimum level to cast raise dead: Clr 9. --> Fail. Not speaking of the 5k gp the party looses from bringing back the dead character...
calvinNhobbes 12-22-06, 05:05 PM	Then you could possibly point out other means than a 1minute/level level 4 cleric-only spell that only affects a single target that protect you from death effects in the PHb? :thinks: First, it is not a cleric only spell, paladins and druids can also cast it. Second, last I checked, death effects tend to be 4th level or above, so death ward is on the scene in time. Third, a cleric or druid with death ward will most likely be able to cast it as many if not more times than whatever death effect they are trying to protect themselves from. And fourth, 5+ minutes is long enough to prep for a battle, have the battle, and recover afterwards. You just have to know what you are up against and when. Perhaps try using some divinations some time. Also, try a scarab of protection if you are really paranoid about death effects. And as we all know spells are undispellable? So the BBEG spends a round dispelling the death ward and you get a free round to whoop his butt. In addtion, that is like saying all spells can be counterspelled. DnD enforces the "the best defense is a strong offense" point of view. This just reinforces my statement from before. Perhaps that is how you play it, but that is not how everyone does. If you make a character with a weak defense, don't be surprized if he ends up dead. While you waste your resources (spell slots and actions) to protect against the enemy, the enemy is already attacking. How is it wasted? If your death ward counters his finger of death, how is it wasted? In general a party gets more actions than the enemy. If one character can spend his actions neutralizing the enemies actions, that leaves the rest of the party to kick ass. The battle may take longer and use up more party resources, but then there's less a chance someone ends up dead (EDIT: which drains ALOT more resources). On the other hand, if you used your resources offensively, the enemy might already be dead before he could even move. Maybe, or maybe its the PCs that end up dead. Your entire post just proves my previous statement so beautifully. Thanks. :D
archcomponent 12-22-06, 07:16 PM	Bodak: CR 8. Minimum level to cast raise dead: Clr 9. I think this has been covered: Second, last I checked, death effects tend to be 4th level or above, so death ward is on the scene in time. A party should be able to handle a bodak and its death gaze no problem by this level. I do not see how they - if properly played - get seriously impacted by the attack.
Tyler Do'Urden 12-22-06, 10:32 PM	And that is absolutely not annoying when you've only got ~8h to play per week.I envy you. We've never had a session last that long. The problem is, save or die effects are equally disruptive to both players and DMs.Well if you're the DM, and you don't like save-or-die spells, why not just omit them? What's to be gained by nerfing them to the point of being less deadly than direct damage spells?
Vashwood 12-22-06, 11:05 PM	I tend to roll alot of 20s and such, but only as a DM (it's become something of a joke among my group). As such, I instituted action points as part of my campaign, but with some differences. First, actions points cause you to reroll your d20, and you take either your old or new roll, whichever is higher, and add a d6 (this cannot force your die roll total above 20). As my group tends towards collosal failures like rolling 1s, the reroll gives them some sort of chance on saves and such, even if they haven't cranked their saves through the roof. Second, should any of my group suffer an effect that would outright kill them (ability damage, death effects, massive amounts of hp damage) they expend an action point, and only fall to -9 and stable. Depending on the circumstances, I might also give some penalties when they wake up, to represent the trauma of their near death experience, but in general these two effects keep the group alive through the worst of our screw ups. My in-game explanation for all this is that fate is on the group's side ... essentially, history does not want them to fail, and so it is much more difficult to permanently dispose of them. Of course, this also means some villians have these benefits as well.
Ra-Tiel 12-23-06, 03:47 AM	First, it is not a cleric only spell, paladins and druids can also cast it. Yeah, right. Forgot about that. But a druid needs to be level 9 to cast it, and a paladin must be level 14 (assuming an 18 Wis) or level 15. Seems to me to come a bit late for that bodak the party faced at level 7 or 8. :rolleyes: Second, last I checked, death effects tend to be 4th level or above, so death ward is on the scene in time. A level 8 cleric can cast death ward exactly 4 times if he has an 18 Wis and the Death domain. Otherwise he can only cast it 3 times. And there are a heck more usefull spells at level 4, like freedom of movement, divination, dimensional anchor, or spell immunity. So the cleric is indeed very hard pressed to use his highest spell slots to only prepare death ward. Third, a cleric or druid with death ward will most likely be able to cast it as many if not more times than whatever death effect they are trying to protect themselves from. See my point above. Only if exclusively focusing on death ward the cleric can perpare as much of them as are necessary to cover the whole party. If he does not, the left out characters have a flat 5% chance of dying. In case of certain monsters with gaze attacks, that is per round. And fourth, 5+ minutes is long enough to prep for a battle, have the battle, and recover afterwards. If you can prepare for the battle. You just have to know what you are up against and when. Exactly this is the point. Perhaps try using some divinations some time. You mean divinations that take up the same spell slots as death ward? :rolleyes: Because the level 4 spell divination is the only spell available at that level that can provide information about an extended period of time and the actions therein. Also, try a scarab of protection if you are really paranoid about death effects. Which with its market price of about 38k gp is a real deal for a level 8 party? :shifty: So the BBEG spends a round dispelling the death ward and you get a free round to whoop his butt. In addtion, that is like saying all spells can be counterspelled. --> Quicken. He can dispel the protection spells and attempt to slay the character in a single round. Heck, he even has a move action left. This just reinforces my statement from before. Perhaps that is how you play it, but that is not how everyone does. If you make a character with a weak defense, don't be surprized if he ends up dead. No. It's just like a psion manifesting vigor in the first round of combat. The manifester has just spend PPs and an action to make himself a better punching bag for the enemy, instead of using his resources to either completely remove himself from the opponent's reach (psionic fly, concealing amorpha, ...), or attempting to neutralizing the opposition (entangling ectoplasm, ectoplasmic cocoon, ...). A character specialized in defense has a hard time surviving combat, as strange as that sounds. Because you cannot gain absolute protection against something in DnD without the usage of many restricted abilities. A nat20 is an autohit on any attack roll regardless of the target's AC (only to be countered by miss chances), and a nat1 is an autofailure on any saving throw regardless of the character's save bonus and the DC (only to be countered by immunities or rerolls). Therefore, the character is spending limited resources on only avoiding/dodging the enemy's attacks, while the enemy just goes through with his attack routine. The character counts on out-lasting the enemy in order to survive the combat, which is not a safe bet imho. How is it wasted? If your death ward counters his finger of death, how is it wasted? In general a party gets more actions than the enemy. If one character can spend his actions neutralizing the enemies actions, that leaves the rest of the party to kick ass. The battle may take longer and use up more party resources, but then there's less a chance someone ends up dead (EDIT: which drains ALOT more resources). Perhaps, because the enemy has ranks in spellcraft and knows that his finger of death won't work on that character? :rolleyes: Either he targets someone else with it, or he uses another tactic. Like forcecaging the cleric instead, thus removing him from the rest of the party and breaking line of effect of any of his spells, forcing him do deal with the forcecage first. Or dominating the barbarian instead, making him attack the wizard, thus diverting the party's attention on two threats instead of one. Maybe, or maybe its the PCs that end up dead. Your entire post just proves my previous statement so beautifully. Thanks. :D On the contrary, you have proven my point. I must thank you. :P --------------- [...] A party should be able to handle a bodak and its death gaze no problem by this level. I do not see how they - if properly played - get seriously impacted by the attack. As mentioned above, a level 8 cleric can cast death ward only then 4 times if he has the Death domain, an 18 Wis, and prepares nothing else with his highest level spell slots. If just one of those is not met, at least 1 character will have to go without protection. And which one would that be? Remember that any unprotected character has a flat 5% chance to automatically die if he is forced to make a save. Fighter/Paladin/Barbarian/Ranger/Monk? Usually melee guys, so giving the opponent a miss chance by averting eyes/using blindfolds just makes the combat last longer and take more resources. Rogue/Bard? Usually also to be found as support in melee/skirmishers. Averting eyes/using blindfold impairs their ability very much as their attacks are useless. Also, these characters suffer from inherently weak Fort saves, making them even more susceptible. Sorcerer/Wizard? They also cannot avert their eyes because they need line of sight to their spells' targets. And a weak Fort save makes them (just like rogues/bards) vulnerable to save or dies. Distance is not a save protection, because the bodak can just move closer. Cleric/Druid? If they just hold back and support the other characters, it could work, but again distance is not a save protection. Also, these characters tend to be in close range to the combat because of the "touch" range of healing spells. --------------- [...] What's to be gained by nerfing them to the point of being less deadly than direct damage spells? They are not less deadly than direct damage spells. The OP's suggestion has save-or-dies still being deadly, but not so immediately. The effects are just delayed a little. My suggestion with making save-or-dies causing damage at 2d10/CL - Fort save half is weak? I don't know what direct damage spells you're using in your games. :confused: And the suggestion from (supposedly) Andy Collins to make save-or-dies deal damage to 20d6+1d6/CL is also weak compared to direct damage spells? :thinks:
calvinNhobbes 12-23-06, 10:25 AM	Yeah, right. Forgot about that. But a druid needs to be level 9 to cast it, and a paladin must be level 14 (assuming an 18 Wis) or level 15. Seems to me to come a bit late for that bodak the party faced at level 7 or 8. :rolleyes: Guess, you have never heard of wands.:rolleyes: And there are a heck more usefull spells at level 4, like freedom of movement, divination, dimensional anchor, or spell immunity. As you have pointed out, not if he is facing a bodak. See my point above. Only if exclusively focusing on death ward the cleric can perpare as much of them as are necessary to cover the whole party. Who says he has to cover the whole party. The range on the bodak's death gaze if 30 ft. Cast death ward on the melee fighter so he can tank the bodak while everyone stays back and provides support. Your battle tactics are not very good. If you can prepare for the battle. Like, I said, your battle tactics are not very good. You seem to prefer the more kick-in-the-door, glass-cannon type of PCs. Exactly this is the point. You mean divinations that take up the same spell slots as death ward? :rolleyes: Because the level 4 spell divination is the only spell available at that level that can provide information about an extended period of time and the actions therein. Really? Hmmm... detect undead, 1st level divination, bet that would be useful in finding out where that bodak is. :rolleyes: Not to mention they do not need to use up spell slots. Ever heard of scribe scroll? :rolleyes: Which with its market price of about 38k gp is a real deal for a level 8 party? :shifty: Yes, we all know that 8th level parties are bombarded by non-stop death attacks. :rolleyes: Obviously scarabs of protection are for higher level parties where death effects are more prevalent. However, an 8th level party could easily afford an item that casts death ward X times/day if for some reason all they fought were bodaks. --> Quicken. He can dispel the protection spells and attempt to slay the character in a single round. Heck, he even has a move action left. So now we are talking about quickened dispels (ie 7th level spells)? Then I laugh at your death effects. 13th+ level character can easily afford scarbs of protection, not to mention contigency, anti-magic fields, spell turning, death wards, etc, etc. No. It's just like a psion manifesting vigor in the first round of combat. The manifester has just spend PPs and an action to make himself a better punching bag for the enemy, instead of using his resources to either completely remove himself from the opponent's reach (psionic fly, concealing amorpha, ...), or attempting to neutralizing the opposition (entangling ectoplasm, ectoplasmic cocoon, ...). I don't use psionics, so this means nothing to me. A character specialized in defense has a hard time surviving combat, as strange as that sounds. No one said they specialized in defense, and perhaps you are just not very good at making PCs with any defensive capabilities. Because you cannot gain absolute protection against something in DnD without the usage of many restricted abilities. No one said absolute. But when it comes to "save or die" type effects, every little bit helps. A nat20 is an autohit on any attack roll regardless of the target's AC (only to be countered by miss chances), and a nat1 is an autofailure on any saving throw regardless of the character's save bonus and the DC (only to be countered by immunities or rerolls). That's why you try to make sure you don't need to make a saving throw (ie. death ward) Therefore, the character is spending limited resources on only avoiding/dodging the enemy's attacks, while the enemy just goes through with his attack routine. The character counts on out-lasting the enemy in order to survive the combat, which is not a safe bet imho. Exactly, it's your opinion, which I, and several other posters, do not agree with. Perhaps, because the enemy has ranks in spellcraft and knows that his finger of death won't work on that character? :rolleyes: Spellcraft checks are not automatically succesfull. :rolleyes: And who said only one character was warded. Once again, ever heard of wands? Either he targets someone else with it, or he uses another tactic. Like forcecaging the cleric instead, thus removing him from the rest of the party and breaking line of effect of any of his spells, forcing him do deal with the forcecage first. So, your death ward defense worked! You forced the enemy to use different tactics. Or dominating the barbarian instead, making him attack the wizard, thus diverting the party's attention on two threats instead of one. And the barbarian could make his save and crit the BBEG and kill him in one hit. There are a gazillion possible scenarios with different tactics and counters, what's your point? That no strategy is full proof? Thanks captain obvious! :rolleyes: But my point is if you know you are going up against a necromancer who loves finger of death, perhaps death warding the party first ain't a bad strategy. On the contrary, you have proven my point. I must thank you. :P Actually, I've proven you know nothing about battle tactics and are probably not a very good player. :P
Keterys 12-23-06, 10:59 AM	Pretty much every fight? Look at the Monster Manual. You can count the monsters with Death magic on two hands. (or three) MOST monsters don't have a death effect. I did say 'higher level'. I'll also note that you're missing the fact that PCs can be the ones supplying those save or dies, but someone already touched on that fact. So, let's look at some high CR monsters, say, CR 15 onwards. As a note, any creature capable of doing 50 damage in a single hit or with free casting of 5th level spells or higher basically qualifies. Some groups do house rule massive damage, though, and I'll note such things. Angel, Planetar (CR 16) - Yes Angel, Solar (CR 23) - Yes Demon, Balor (CR 20) - Yes Demon, Marilith (CR 17) - Weak Yes (save or unconscious on constrict, also mild power attack and crit, and it can summon a Nalfeshenee which can feeblemind) Devil, Horned Devil (CR 16) - Very Weak Yes (crit for massive damage) Devil, Pit Fiend (CR 20) - Yes Dragons, Many - All dragons of CR 15+ are capable of triggering massive damage, and most could access 5th level spells. The very weakest examples (notably, the CR 15 white dragon) would have to do some combination of power attack, critical, dive attack, or something similar. Almost all others have breath weapons up to doing 50 or more damage, can cast high enough level spells, and can trivially do 50 damage in a hit without critting. Formian Queen (CR 17) - Yes (17th lvl Sorcerer) Marut (CR 15) - Yes (Circle of Death, Plane Shift) Nightcrawler (CR 18) - Yes Nightwalker (CR 16) - Yes Tarrasque (CR 20) - Yes (Massive Damage on any attack) Titan (CR 21) - Yes (Massive Damage on any attack, including the quickened Chain Lightning each round, Gated creatures) And that's it for CR 15+ creatures that I see. If I missed any major ones in the monster manual, let me know. I actually expected more 'No', but really at high level doing 50 damage is sooo easy. Not that the proposed house rule helps with that. In a game without that rule, things look a bit better.
Fargren 12-23-06, 11:07 AM	Like, I said, your battle tactics are not very good. You seem to prefer the more kick-in-the-door, glass-cannon type of PCs. The problem is, in some campaigns it's the monster who kick in the door, and the player's have little way of knowing what's coming, much less to prepare. Random encounters, for example. And dying because of a save or die in a random encounter sucks.
calvinNhobbes 12-23-06, 11:13 AM	The problem is, in some campaigns it's the monster who kick in the door, and the player's have little way of knowing what's coming, much less to prepare. Random encounters, for example. And dying because of a save or die in a random encounter sucks. If your campaign world has bodaks randomly walking around the countryside then either everyone is a 10th+ character, or everyone is dead. Random encounter does not equal surprized. So you run into a bodak randomly, guess it is a good thing you have that wand of death ward. It's all about being prepared for anything, that is what an adventurer who wants to stay alive does. EDIT: also, divinations are considered weak, but knowledge is power. Most players just don't get this. A smart party should rarely be clueless about what they are up against.
Fargren 12-23-06, 11:18 AM	If your campaign world has bodaks randomly walking around the countryside then either everyone is a 10th+ character, or everyone is dead. Random encounter does not equal surprized. So you run into a bodak randomly, guess it is a good thing you have that wand of death ward. It's all about being prepared for anything, that is what an adventurer who wants to stay alive does. Nah,m thankfully I've never had a Bodak as a Random encounter. But random encounters can occur in les populated areas too, were it may make some sense. And even if not all random encounters have death effects, some might And REs are not the only kind of encounters that you may not be preapred for. Surprise attakcs and ambushes are common in my campaigns, and they usually come when the party isn't expecting them(not much of a surprise if it were any different). With a a good listen check, or some divinations, maybe we a have a round to preapre. At most. And if we don't know what's coming, wating a Death Ward is probably a bad plan.
calvinNhobbes 12-23-06, 11:21 AM	Nah,m thankfully I've never had a Bodak as a Random encounter. But random encounters can occur in les populated areas too, were it may make some sense. If you are out in the wilderness, you are in dangerous territory, you better be prepared for anything, as well as extra prepared for what the "common" monsters in the area are. A little gather information goes along way. And even if not all random encounters have death effects, some might And REs are not the only kind of encounters that you may not be preapred for. You should be if you want to stay alive. Surprise attakcs and ambushes are common in my campaigns, and they usually come when the party isn't expecting them(not much of a surprise if it were any different). With a a good listen check, or some divinations, maybe we a have a round to preapre. Exactly, that round is the difference between life and death. At most. And if we don't know what's coming, wating a Death Ward is probably a bad plan. If you don't know what's coming you deserve to die.
Fargren 12-23-06, 11:26 AM	If you don't know what's coming you deserve to die. If the enemies that set an ambush didn't prepare something we wouldn't be prepared for, then they deserve to die. My DM dosn't metagame to ake things easier. Some imformation is just not available. And yeah, the round of preparation is usually neccesary to make ncounters surviavable, but when all you know is the there's a menace, and you have only a round to prepare without even knowing what the menace is, then you better prepare something that will surelly be usefull, instead of wasting resources in something the might be.
Ra-Tiel 12-23-06, 01:10 PM	Guess, you have never heard of wands.:rolleyes: Wands, indeed. With a market price of 750 x Spell level x Caster level, a simple wand of death ward would range at 21k gp. Quite affordable for a level 8 party, indeed. Not withstanding the feat investment the cleric (who gets so many bonus feats and has no other useful feats to take :rolleyes: ) had to make if he decided to make one for the party himself. As you have pointed out, not if he is facing a bodak. And you are quite effectively avoiding my point. Congratulations if your DM is "Hey party, behind the next door's a bodak. I suggest you should read up the MM entry and prepare appropriately before opening the door." The DMs I played under were quite different from that, and at best we could guess what we'd face in a certain adventure locale. Who says he has to cover the whole party. The range on the bodak's death gaze if 30 ft. Cast death ward on the melee fighter so he can tank the bodak while everyone stays back and provides support. Your battle tactics are not very good. I would seriously recommend improving your argumentation technique. Seems you cannot even be bothered to read up a monster in the SRD before you make statements about it. Otherwise you would have noticed that the bodak's death gaze has a range of 15 ft.. And how is the cleric supposed to heal the fighter while staying 20 ft. away from him? Or "forgetting" about the fact that any ranged attack suffers a -4 penalty for shooting into melee and the fighter provides the bodak with soft cover, improving his AC by +4 against the rest of the party? Hmmm? Also, you have read but obviously not understood my post. If you had, you wouldn't be seriously arguing that "staying back" was a sufficiently safe tactic against a limited range death attack. Someone should perhaps tell you that DnD is not like Final Fantasy, where monsters just stand there and do nothing else but make their attacks. Last I've heard, the DM can make monsters move around in battle, and have them move past or around the frontline characters. :rolleyes: Like, I said, your battle tactics are not very good. You seem to prefer the more kick-in-the-door, glass-cannon type of PCs. But your battle tactics are? Just staying away from the dangerous monster and placing the fighter infront of it? Very good tactic, indeed. Really? Hmmm... detect undead, 1st level divination, bet that would be useful in finding out where that bodak is. :rolleyes: Not to mention they do not need to use up spell slots. I don't know if I should go :rofl: or :weep: on that. How in all layers of the Abyss is detect undead helping the cleric preparing his spells in the morning? I guess actually seeing the bodak is less a problem considering its meager hide check of +2. But the tricky part is knowing that you have to face a bodak on this day. What makes the situation worse is that cleric/druid/paladin don't have the option to leave spell slots open and prepare spells later that day. This only works for the wizard. Ever heard of scribe scroll? :rolleyes: Again, either the cleric has to take the feat himself, or he is preventing the wizard from doing something useful in that time (due to the cooperation rules for creating items). Yes, we all know that 8th level parties are bombarded by non-stop death attacks. :rolleyes: Obviously scarabs of protection are for higher level parties where death effects are more prevalent. However, an 8th level party could easily afford an item that casts death ward X times/day if for some reason all they fought were bodaks. Of course, there are no better items a high-level character would want to wear on the amulet slot. Amulet of mighty fists, amulet of health, hand of glory, amulet of the planes, ... So now we are talking about quickened dispels (ie 7th level spells)? Then I laugh at your death effects. 13th+ level character can easily afford scarbs of protection, not to mention contigency, anti-magic fields, spell turning, death wards, etc, etc. And exactly how many members of a typical party can "enjoy" the "benefits" of contingency, anti-magic field, spell turning, et al? Also, too bad that spell turning won't stop a bodak's death gaze (because it's a "su" ability) or a devourer's trap essence attack (because it is "range: touch"). I don't use psionics, so this means nothing to me. You know, this is sooooo poor style... Ok, extra for you: It's just like a wizard casting false life in the first round of combat. The caster has just spend his spell slot and an action to make himself a better punching bag for the enemy, instead of using his resources to either completely remove himself from the opponent's reach (fly, invisibility, ...), or attempting to neutralizing the opposition (web, black tentacles, ...). No one said they specialized in defense, and perhaps you are just not very good at making PCs with any defensive capabilities. So you suggest having a halfassed offense and a halfassed defense, being able to do none of that with enough punch and hoping the DM's a nice guy and doesn't slaughter your characters? No one said absolute. But when it comes to "save or die" type effects, every little bit helps. And back we are at desperately grasping for everything that provides us with a little benefit because save or die spells have an absolute rediculously overpowered influence on the campaign by virtue of a single roll. That's why you try to make sure you don't need to make a saving throw (ie. death ward) See above. Exactly, it's your opinion, which I, and several other posters, do not agree with. "Several others?" Please point them out. So far, I've only seen you, archcomponent, and Tyler argue for save or die effects. Even Sphyre (who basically agreed with Tyler) had a houserule making the resulting character death less painful for the player which clearly indicates that there is something wrong with that aspect of the game. Every other poster in this thread has either presented house rules for this topic, or spoken out against the current design. Spellcraft checks are not automatically succesfull. :rolleyes: And who said only one character was warded. Once again, ever heard of wands? So? Let's see... we're talking about a caster able to throw finger of death. This suggests at least level 13. This leads to a base Spellcraft check of 16. We add in Int (being conservative and only guessing a 22 Int) we already have 22. The absolute minimum check result possible is 23. If you now look up the Spellcraft skill description, you'll see that this allows the caster to automatically identify any spell of level 8 or less when cast. Also, you are completely omitting the cost of opportunity to get all characters death warded. Only the cleric/druid/paladin can safely operate the wand, bard and rogue only with a skill check, and all other characaters rather likely not at all. This means that (at best) two characters have to spend two actions each, doing nothing else but activating the wand. Not talking about the fact that death ward is "range: touch", so the whole party is playing sitting duck for two full rounds... So, your death ward defense worked! You forced the enemy to use different tactics. Yes, I "forced" the enemy to use different tactics. But did the death ward really save me? Not really. I just spent my action and spell slot, and the enemy does something equally harmful to me/the party, which could have been prevented alltogether if I had done something offensive against the enemy. And the barbarian could make his save and crit the BBEG and kill him in one hit. There are a gazillion possible scenarios with different tactics and counters, what's your point? My point is that you place way too much trust in the characters always knowing what they are up against, never being surprised, and entering any encounters where save or die effects play a part always with death ward up and running on the whole party. That no strategy is full proof? Thanks captain obvious! :rolleyes: But my point is if you know you are going up against a necromancer who loves finger of death, perhaps death warding the party first ain't a bad strategy. I would strongly suggest resorting to a dictionary before trying to sound like a smartass but only making yourself look dumb. Well, how is the party supposed to know the necromancer's personal favorites before the very first encounter? Gather Information does not cover this area as the classical necromancer tends to stay away from people, you know... Actually, I've proven you know nothing about battle tactics and are probably not a very good player. :P You see, we could have had an interesting discussion. But then you decided to step down and insult me on the part of being a poor player. Personal insults like this are the last resort people use when they have no other arguments left and are desperately grasping for straws. Therefore, this discussion is over on my part. Unless you learn better manners and actually put some efforts into your arguments (like researching some facts) I won't talk to you again. Good bye.
Evillain 12-23-06, 08:42 PM	The beautifull thing in DnD is that everybad thing that happens to your character can be undone (or almost). So it jsut extends on the party's quest. OF course save or dies need to be take care of specially, but without the thrill of the kill their's no fun in adventuring... By the way calvinNhobbes, even if i respect your opinion on battle tactics against bodaks, i really think you should threat your fellow dungeon-dragoniers with a little more respect. Your battle strategies might be different, but it does not mean one is a better tactitian than the other. If you want to flame someone, please do it in the privacy of your own home.
OneWinged4ngel 12-23-06, 09:53 PM	Here's an idea: Save or dies could be made a lot less of a very sudden cutoff for a character and less of a threat if one simple thing happened: They took a one round casting time, like many summon spells do. The upshot of this is basically that the party has one full round to interrupt the caster before the spell gets off. The effect of this is basically that Save or Dies are harder to pull off, and also that the party (on either side) should be more interested than usual in protecting the caster so he can get the killer spell off. Additionally, it ups the usefulness of Evocation a bit, since it would be even more useful for simply clearing out the weaker enemies, while save or dies should be reserved for the big enemies.
Keterys 12-24-06, 05:27 PM	Save or Dies don't necessarily need to be nerfed - after all, they rarely have much of an effect when you make the save (Destruction an obvious exception), and you are expected to make that save a fair amount. So if you're upping the casting time, you should consider upping the effect on a successful save.
deldyrra 12-24-06, 10:11 PM	so, Tyler Do'Urden amd calvinNhobbes... why couldnt you try to post something here that was actually helpful and productive? by bashing everything anyone says against the core rules being the best, you guys are accomplishing nothing and just proving yourself as hostile f*cks. Why try and give this guy ****, they're just trying to find a way to make their game more fun and balanced for their players. sheesh, grow up and stop trying to defend the game developers, their imperfect humans like us and probably dont give nearly as much a **** about you as you do them.
Evillain 12-25-06, 02:04 AM	Basicly save or dies are a part of the game, all or nothing, they are balanced the way they are. If you don't like em don't use them, but i expect that the pary mage is gonna be frickin ****** when 1/2 of his offensive spells will be rendered useless. (PC can use saves or die too, and more effectivly!)
Sphyre 12-25-06, 04:58 PM	Basicly save or dies are a part of the game, all or nothing, they are balanced the way they are. If you don't like em don't use them, but i expect that the pary mage is gonna be frickin ****** when 1/2 of his offensive spells will be rendered useless. (PC can use saves or die too, and more effectivly!) The nice thing about a lot of save or dies is they is many of them are "Save or be screwed" or "save or be removed from combat" or "save or be majorly inconvenienced" as opposed to actually saving or dying. This coupled with deathward leaves very few "as good as save or dies" abilities to really be overwhelming with. Even when it comes to the wizard/sorcerer, a lot of the save or dies aren't actually instant death. At least, in a loose somewhat accepted definition of the phrase. Your opinion may vary. I don't think save or dies are balanced. But neither do I think the game is balanced. The fact that it's imbalanced can bring a lot to the game or take a lot away from the game depending on the individual. I actually like it when my character dies, when I'm playing a PC. I don't like the idea that my character isn't doing something dangerous, something I wouldn't do normally due to my common sense and lack of being a severe situation that would cause me to take high risks. That's part of the imagination of the game that draws me to it. As a double edged sword, I certainly see why making a character just to have it die of a single roll can feel anti-climactic, and unfulfilling for your character. I certainly sympathize with those who want to make Save or dies weaker. I certainly, when I started playing D&D felt they were too strong, while my opinion has changed so has the game. In 3e my first character was a wizard that I played from 1-21. After casting haste, I could rattle off 2 save or dies a round, not including if I was in a situation that merited casting time stop to almost garuntee death for anything while the rest of the party felt worthless, as my character was more powerful than all of their characters combined.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 11:23 AM	And yeah, the round of preparation is usually neccesary to make ncounters surviavable, but when all you know is the there's a menace, and you have only a round to prepare without even knowing what the menace is, then you better prepare something that will surelly be usefull, instead of wasting resources in something the might be. I guess I prefer to play in games where scouting and recon are a part of the game, instead of just wandering around waiting for random creatures to attack me for no apparent reason.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 11:44 AM	By the way calvinNhobbes, even if i respect your opinion on battle tactics against bodaks, i really think you should threat your fellow dungeon-dragoniers with a little more respect. Your battle strategies might be different, but it does not mean one is a better tactitian than the other. If you want to flame someone, please do it in the privacy of your own home. A certain poster on this thread (and we know who) has been rude, sarcastic, and arrogant since his intial post. Go back and read it. I retaliated when I should have just ignored his immature behavior. Don't put they blame on me, I didn't start the fire. :D
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 11:47 AM	I would seriously recommend improving your argumentation technique. Seems you cannot even be bothered to read up a monster in the SRD before you make statements about it. Otherwise you would have noticed that the bodak's death gaze has a range of 15 ft. This one statement shows how rude, arrogant and wrong you have been the entire time. You should read the MM and SRD. IT IS 30 FEET!!!! Good bye. Good riddance.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 11:50 AM	so, Tyler Do'Urden amd calvinNhobbes... why couldnt you try to post something here that was actually helpful and productive? Presenting in game counters to death effects is not helpful and productive? Whatever dude. :rolleyes:
Fargren 12-28-06, 12:18 PM	I guess I prefer to play in games where scouting and recon are a part of the game, instead of just wandering around waiting for random creatures to attack me for no apparent reason. That's mildly offensive, but I'll let it pass, assuming it was not your intention to be rude. What I meant is that in some campaigns, the players have no way of knowing what will hit them. For example, in the campaign I currently DM, there's a price on the character's head in a cerain empire they are trying to overthrow. Whenever they venture into the empire, they may be spotted, and mercenaries may chase them. Mercenaries tend to be resourceful, and they can, for example, buy monster in the black market. The players may know the are being followed (or they may not know even that), but it's almost imposible for them to know exactly what kind of menace they will face. And even if there is a way for them to find out, it generally takes a lot of time to actually get this information. And if they are in a mission, then they may not have that kind of time. If it's possible to get the information without making a significant effort, then the mercenaries deserve to die There are many other opportunities in wich characters have no way of knowing what will attack them, even if it's not a random monster.
Keterys 12-28-06, 12:48 PM	Basicly save or dies are a part of the game, all or nothing, It's pretty easy to change them, as noted. In the Dnd minis game, many save or dies only work if your hp are below a certain amount, and certain figures only lose 100 hp instead of dying. In Arcana Unearthed/Evolved, Monte Cook revised the game to remove almost all save or die type effects. (though he still has a disintegrate that does massive damage, or what not) Jonathan Tweet has spoken out to say that he wished they used hit points more, instead of mechanics (such as save or dies) that ignore them. So, Andy Collins, Monte Cook, Jonathan Tweet... all have said save or dies _aren't_ a part of the system that has to stay as it is, and those are some of your core designers for the system. The OP's house rule doesn't really change save or dies all that much, even - it's still save or be removed completely from the combat.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 01:29 PM	For example, in the campaign I currently DM, there's a price on the character's head in a cerain empire they are trying to overthrow. So the PCs know to watch their backs and keep on their toes, they even know which empire is after them and I assume if they have some ranks in the right knowledge checks and gather information, the most likely enemies the empire will send against them. Whenever they venture into the empire, they may be spotted, and mercenaries may chase them. Mercenaries tend to be resourceful, and they can, for example, buy monster in the black market. If the PCs have ranks in the appropriate skills, they should be able to find out if someone happened to buy a cockatrice. If you as the DM want to deny the PCs any chance of finding out what surprizes you have waiting for them, go ahead, but as the DM you are artificially manipulating the scenario to your advantage. The players may know the are being followed (or they may not know even that), but it's almost imposible for them to know exactly what kind of menace they will face. Not really. Not if they are smart and do a little investigation. If they all have mental dump stats, then sure, they deserve to die. And even if there is a way for them to find out, it generally takes a lot of time to actually get this information. Better taking a few days finding out what you could possibly be up against, then spending 5000 gp to raise your buddy. And if they are in a mission, then they may not have that kind of time. Opportunity costs. I tend to play PCs and NPCs with the idea they would perfer to stay alive. If the mission has to be delayed to ensure survival, so be it. If it's possible to get the information without making a significant effort, then the mercenaries deserve to die. It should take effort, and the PCs should try to get it or quit their whining. There are many other opportunities in wich characters have no way of knowing what will attack them, even if it's not a random monster. Only if the PCs wander around clueless. Many of the CRs listed assume the PCs know what they will be up against and prepare accordingly. PCs just don't sit around in the inn waiting for random monsters to bust down the door and attack them. If the PCs don't bother to ask around and find out the rumors of what monsters may exist in a region before the head out, or load up on anti-undead items before heading into an ancient tomb, etc. then they are stupid and deserve to die.
Keterys 12-28-06, 01:38 PM	Many of the CRs listed assume the PCs know what they will be up against and prepare accordingly. As far as I can tell, this is only true for dragons, if it's true for any at all. Many creatures' CRs are reduced to a pittance by a properly prepared party.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 01:46 PM	Many creatures' CRs are reduced to a pittance by a properly prepared party. Only if you play all your creatures stupid. Any creature of significant intelligence should be investigating the PCs as well and have appropriate counters.
Keterys 12-28-06, 01:52 PM	Really? Cause I've found that spectres have awesome ways to get around death wards ;) The rest can vary from campaign to campaign wildly. Often, one side has no ability to research the other, barring extreme uses of divination magic. In fact, in many campaigns there is no real option to "take extra time" to figure stuff out. You go, or you lose.
Fargren 12-28-06, 02:00 PM	So the PCs know to watch their backs and keep on their toes, they even know which empire is after them and I assume if they have some ranks in the right knowledge checks and gather information, the most likely enemies the empire will send against them. The empire doesn't send enemies against them, they just hang posters wiht their faces, a small list of their known abilites, and a tempting amount of gold. Anyone intersted in money could attack them If the PCs have ranks in the appropriate skills, they should be able to find out if someone happened to buy a cockatrice. If you as the DM want to deny the PCs any chance of finding out what surprizes you have waiting for them, go ahead, but as the DM you are artificially manipulating the scenario to your advantage. There are ways to find out, but they are usually just not worth it: the cost could be risking to fail a mission on wich a hig amount of people's lives depend. Also, they are not the only pesrons that are being chased. They may find out someone bought a cockatrice, and it may have nothing to do with them. Not really. Not if they are smart and do a little investigation. If they all have mental dump stats, then sure, they deserve to die. There are three characters with great int and social/knowledge skills in the party (a bard and two psions). They sometimes do manage to get the information in time. Better taking a few days finding out what you could possibly be up against, then spending 5000 gp to raise your buddy. Yeah, but maybe taking a few days means the city you are defending get's burnt to ashes because you didn't found out how to stop the army in time. Opportunity costs. I tend to play PCs and NPCs with the idea they would perfer to stay alive. If the mission has to be delayed to ensure survival, so be it. Delays are dangerous. My PCs ussually have to fight against the clock. It should take effort, and the PCs should try to get it or quit their whining. Again, th effort may not be worth it Only if the PCs wander around clueless. Many of the CRs listed assume the PCs know what they will be up against and prepare accordingly. PCs just don't sit around in the inn waiting for random monsters to bust down the door and attack them. If the PCs don't bother to ask around and find out the rumors of what monsters may exist in a region before the head out, or load up on anti-undead items before heading into an ancient tomb, etc. then they are stupid and deserve to die. As ash been posted, this si supossedly only true for draogns. In my experience, that theory is true.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 02:03 PM	Really? Cause I've found that spectres have awesome ways to get around death wards ;) A spectre is listed with INT 14, WIS 14, CHA 15. Those are fairly impressive mental stats for a CR 7 encounter. Death ward has a finite duration. It's called hit and run tactics. I'm sure a spectre with those mental stats is familiar with them. The rest can vary from campaign to campaign wildly. Agreed. I guess I prefer more complex tactical challenges, with both sides countering each other, instead of run up to monster X and roll some dice. Often, one side has no ability to research the other, barring extreme uses of divination magic. I disagree. General knowledge (oh say like the range of a bodak's death gaze) could be learned with enough knowledge ranks or seeking out someone who actually fought one and survived. In addition, PCs are usually the aggressors. They are the ones breaking into the lair of monsters. Why would intelligent monsters not have methods for spying and observing the party. Setting traps to test their strengths and weaknesses so they can exploit them later if needed. In fact, in many campaigns there is no real option to "take extra time" to figure stuff out. You go, or you lose. Or you just give up and find a different adventure. If your DM throws a hissy fit and tries to railroad you then he is not a good DM.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 02:12 PM	The empire doesn't send enemies against them, they just hang posters wiht their faces, a small list of their known abilites, and a tempting amount of gold. Anyone intersted in money could attack them All the bounty hunters have to go on is posters with their faces? They should invest in some disguises, skills or spells. There are ways to find out, but they are usually just not worth it: the cost could be risking to fail a mission on wich a hig amount of people's lives depend. If they are dead or captured, the mission fails anyway. They need to protect themselves first. Also, they are not the only pesrons that are being chased. They may find out someone bought a cockatrice, and it may have nothing to do with them. True, but it could. When it comes to save or die, better safe than sorry. There are three characters with great int and social/knowledge skills in the party (a bard and two psions). They sometimes do manage to get the information in time. If they have "great" INT and CHA skills they should be getting information most of the time, unless you are artificially inhibiting their abilites. Yeah, but maybe taking a few days means the city you are defending get's burnt to ashes because you didn't found out how to stop the army in time. But if you end up dead the city is screwed anyway. In addition, it is a group for a reason. Let the smart guy fiddle with the battle tactics, while the social guys do some investigating on who is trying to kill them. Delays are dangerous. My PCs ussually have to fight against the clock. Only thing more dangerous is charging ahead without looking. Again, th effort may not be worth it Sure, it might not, but it could be life saving. As ash been posted, this si supossedly only true for draogns. In my experience, that theory is true. I guess it depends if you play the creatures to their full potential or not.
Vaalingrade Ashland 12-28-06, 02:29 PM	Save or dies simply aren't fun *or* cinematic, IMO. If you're playing a class with a low save of that kind, you're gone no matter what you do more than half the time. If you're playing a class with a high save of that kind, you're fine probably 90% of the time. There's no time for a last minute rescue, no hope for intervention, just poof. Major down note in the game, time to GNC and contrive some trite way to force a new guy into the group with the heavy cloud of how pointless and anti-climatic the character's death was. What I do is this: SoD's put you at -5 and dying and unconcious (regardless of Diehard or whatever). That way, there's still hope, there's still clear danger and theres actual drama to it.
Dark Brandon 12-28-06, 03:05 PM	I also Dislike the save or die, both as player and DM. I cannot deny the joy and excitment when a save or die spell works on a BBEG. It's an instant that is usually talked about for years about the one time, you killed major badguy X with one spell. After all he only needed a 5 or more to save...but the gods saw in your favor. In my gaming group it is instances like this (actually any instance where they fight a BBEG and survive) that are remembered most. Or the instance where you can see certain death and you need to be saved (Illithid brain extraction for example). On the other hand, it's not really all that memorable when a random/encounter kills a party member outright with a save or dies spell. As such, I like ashland's idea, and will probably adopt it. Perhaps something akin to Final Fantasy, where if a save or die is failed, a character has a certin number of rounds before they are dead.
sigma999 12-28-06, 03:20 PM	My house rule for... [Death] effects: the spells/effects deal Constitution damage instead, an amount equal to the caster level. Stun/Paralysis: Dexterity damage and reduced movement speed (which should be tied to Dex or something similar anyways but isn't) Nauseate: Strength damage Daze: Intelligence damage (same as a boxer being hit in the head a lot... can't think straight, analyze situations!)
Keterys 12-28-06, 03:30 PM	It's called hit and run tactics. In most cases where I've had to face spectres, they've been welcome to do so, because we're going to get something in a tomb, or whatever, and we get it, then we leave. Either way, you clearly like a style of gaming that is perfectly fine, but actually isn't the default dnd style of play. In many campaigns, you can choose to ignore an adventure because you don't like the time pressure, but it can actually mean choosing to play a new campaign, or one drastically harder. (ie, cause the God of Darkness does take over. Or because you chose to not take action, many innocents died, causing the paladin to fall, etc) In one campaign I'm running, they have a certain amount of time before a red dragon breaks out of its prison, causing problems. Shortly thereafter, demons break out, killing off some useful allies. Shortly thereafter, some other allies die. A bit more time after, the world ends. Really, how they do any of the stuff in the middle is fine... bad stuff will happen, no matter what. If they do more research to stop the world from ending, then they're not spending time gathering resources to stop the dragon, or preventing the demons from breaking out, or vice versa. Really, any of the mid points can happen and it just makes things more difficult (removing a source of healing, item crafting, and refuge), but if they ignore the thing that ends the world, then the world ends, and they lose. Campaign over, new campaign. Of course, in that campaign they have plenty of information in general... what they don't have is time to constantly rest and reprepare new spells, so they tend to get what info they can and take on the thing they think they can deal with. "Kraken and Aboleth have stuff we need... hmm... but that's underwater, and we'll want freedom of movement too... so that's tomorrow...' etc. - but every _hour_ counts to them in that campaign. In another, it's not quite so bad... they're measuring how long til they have to do things in weeks or months, and there's no "the world will end" though they're all good people with family, obligations, etc so there is "my home city will be sacked" and "my knight order will be massacred"... currently they're trying to defeat something in the middle of a land of nightmares, so they have no ability to research it, beyond the creature ultimately in charge. At any moment, almost anything could attack them, and has, because they're creatures created from their thoughts and the thoughts of others. That's a bit closer to the dnd site-based moving through the tower, 'Hey, he's got a flesh golem... now otyughs... whoa, bodaks' that you tend to find in stock dnd modules.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 04:23 PM	Either way, you clearly like a style of gaming that is perfectly fine, but actually isn't the default dnd style of play. There is no default style of play. In one campaign I'm running, they have a certain amount of time before a red dragon breaks out of its prison, causing problems. Shortly thereafter, demons break out, killing off some useful allies. Shortly thereafter, some other allies die. A bit more time after, the world ends. There's a difference between a time constraint and trying to force your players to play blind. Denying them the chance to find out more info about this red dragon (like favorite spells or battle tactics), or extra info on demons and their weaknesses, is just trying to force the game forward and make it easier on you as the DM. At higher levels, PCs just need to cast a spell to obtain extra info. I seriously doubt 6 seconds to cast visions is too time consuming. Really, how they do any of the stuff in the middle is fine... bad stuff will happen, no matter what. I prefer to let the PCs action actually have an impact on the campaign world. but if they ignore the thing that ends the world, then the world ends, and they lose. Campaign over, new campaign. Why? Are they the ONLY heroes on the entire planet that can save it? High level characters can just travel to another plane and exist there. Just because a world is destroyed does not mean the campaign is over. Also, who says they lose? Just because they did not play the adventure the way you wanted does not mean they lose. Perhaps they don't really care if the world ends, as long as they got their penthouse in the astral plane. ;) That's a bit closer to the dnd site-based moving through the tower, 'Hey, he's got a flesh golem... now otyughs... whoa, bodaks' that you tend to find in stock dnd modules. Not all modules are that way, only the really bad ones. Good modules have a specific group of monsters that have a reason to be there.
Keterys 12-28-06, 05:14 PM	prefer to let the PCs action actually have an impact on the campaign world. Oh, they're having an impact. They're saving people, or saving the world, or whatever. But it doesn't mean that bad stuff still isn't going to happen. It's just different bad stuff, in different places, with different amounts of allies. If they ignored everything, things would get really bad. They're spread too thin to save everything, though. Why? Are they the ONLY heroes on the entire planet that can save it? Close enough. All those other allies I mentioned can help them. If they don't do it, though, then the allies will die (to the dragon and demons), and nobody will else will be able to stop it (or know to stop it) I mean, they can mix things up on their end... they could try enlisting more of the 'bad guys' to help them. They've already made a deal with a devil to help them, after all. Other than that, they're actually in an enclosed demiplane. They can't get out to get help in time, and nobody is going to come looking in time. There is no default style of play. Which, if true, also proves my point. Your style of play isn't something you can rely on for balancing creatures. For every gather information that lets you know that Bodaks have recently become scarce in their availability after the cult whose after you hired them all to kill your group... there are bodaks who are lying in coffins waiting to be disturbed where they could be any form of undead, or hiding behind 1-way mirrors in a necromancer's layer waiting to spring out, or called in by a fiendish trap that dispels death wards as its first step... only the really bad ones. Good modules have a specific group of monsters that have a reason to be there. Actually, you just called many modules by folks like Bruce Cordell and Monte Cook 'really bad'... and I'll note in the example I gave of a 'Flesh Golem' 'Otyugh' and 'Bodak'... those could all just be standard trappings for a wizard tower, where he created a flesh golem to protect an entrance, otyugh to clear waste and protect a route, and bodak to mop up living enemies. Either way, this is the 'house rules' board, so keeping an open mind about rules changes does seem like the operating norm. Some people really don't like save or dies, so should seek out alternate solutions. Personally, I'm not sure I consider finger of death that much worse than flesh to stone for general disruption effect, and if you're only getting through a couple notable fights a night, baleful polymorph is also quite a let down, even if it can be removed after the fight (hopefully). So, I'm a step past the original poster who doesn't like character recycling needlessly (and, in general, a generic 'poof you're dead' trap is about as inglorious as it gets)... I don't even like the character having to sit out the rest of the night needlessly. I mean, sure, it happens... I critted a disintegrate last session first round that took a character out for a fight. But, it was a crit, and he got a save... all in all, it was something like a 2.4% chance of actually happening. That's really not all that bad, and he's in the same danger of dying to a 'lance crit' since he's just not a high hit point character. A lot better than if he'd actually had the 45% chance to die from the disintegrate without it being a crit, anyhow.
Vaalingrade Ashland 12-28-06, 05:23 PM	There is no default style of play. I think he means 'my style of play, which is the style everyone should follow'.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 05:54 PM	Other than that, they're actually in an enclosed demiplane. They can't get out to get help in time, and nobody is going to come looking in time. So really, all that is lost is that one demiplane. The game does not have to be over if they don't suceed in stopping the demon invasion. In fact, the loss of the demiplane could be the beginning of an entire new chapter, ie. trying to take it back. Which, if true, also proves my point. No ifs about it. There is no default way to play D&D. Your style of play isn't something you can rely on for balancing creatures. What style is that? Playing the creatures by their stats as if they were living creatures as opposed to just PC target practice? I guess I prefer a little more consistency in my worlds than most. For every gather information that lets you know that Bodaks have recently become scarce in their availability after the cult whose after you hired them all to kill your group... Perhaps you should check out the bodak creature description. INT 6, treasure: None, usually located in the abyss, damaged by sunlight, chaotic evil, they would make really crappy choice for an assassin. You could never "hire" a group of bodaks. They would care nothing for your materials items and just kill you. Plus they aren't very smart. They would just ignore the cult and go around killing people. there are bodaks who are lying in coffins waiting to be disturbed where they could be any form of undead, I don't think so, you are thinking of mummies and vampires. Bodaks don't hang out in coffins. Bodaks should rarely even be found on the material plane. The only time you should just "run into" a bodak is in the Abyss, and if you are just hanging out in the Abyss for fun, you are one serious badass and probably have plenty of anti-death effect gear or hiding behind 1-way mirrors in a necromancer's layer waiting to spring out, or called in by a fiendish trap that dispels death wards as its first step... Why would a necromancer ever make those traps when he can makes finger of death or wail of the banshee trap? Same effect, but now he doesn't have a bodak free wandering around his lair. Actually, you just called many modules by folks like Bruce Cordell and Monte Cook 'really bad'... Some of them are really bad. They are mindless dungeon crawls. I'd rather play a computer game. They write what sells. It seems the current gaming generation sees D&D as barely more than another computer game and the authors pander to them. and I'll note in the example I gave of a 'Flesh Golem' 'Otyugh' and 'Bodak'... those could all just be standard trappings for a wizard tower, where he created a flesh golem to protect an entrance, otyugh to clear waste and protect a route, and bodak to mop up living enemies. No wizard would ever let a bodak wander around his tower. Especially knowing they have the potential to multiply. Otyugh make ok waste disposals, but gelatinous cubes are better. They require less maintenance, do not destroy metal, and have no INT, reducing the risk of the creatures plotting for themselves. Wizards want totally obedient, preferraly mindless slaves. Independent thought leads to treason. Either way, this is the 'house rules' board, so keeping an open mind about rules changes does seem like the operating norm. I have plenty of houserules, but coming to the boards and saying something is "broken" when you haven't really tried using the basic counters in the rules themselves just seems ridiculous to me. Some people really don't like save or dies, so should seek out alternate solutions. That's fine, but don't do it because you think they are unfair or broken. Do it because you like playing a safer, gentler D&D. That's really not all that bad, and he's in the same danger of dying to a 'lance crit' since he's just not a high hit point character. Exactly. For some reason people just don't like dying from something that doesn't do hit point damage. People complain all the time about save or die effects, but let's see how many people actually take the great fortitude feat.
calvinNhobbes 12-28-06, 06:02 PM	I think he means 'my style of play, which is the style everyone should follow'. Exactly. I find it entertaining that everyone assumes the rules are "broken" first before even considering their play style. I change rules all the time, not because I think they are broken, but because I prefer a certain flavor, or because I want to better model a specific combat manuevers.
Keterys 12-28-06, 10:55 PM	Who said save or dies are broken? Why all the negativity to me on this? I'm just tossing out random ideas in response to someone. Perhaps you should check out the bodak creature description. Perhaps you should stop proving my point. These creatures can be minions. It's not terribly important how they get there originally or why someone thinks it's okay to have them. I've seen Bodaks used in tower setups, where they had their section. I've seen Bodaks imprisoned in Crypts trying to get out. They happen in adventures, and it doesn't mean those adventures suck. It's even beside the point - Bodak are just a convenient 'save or die' example. Wail of banshee traps can just be placed around (heck, they're even low CR). Death happens in dnd. All the time. If you want a game with less death (as, clearly, do some of the posters here), then there are a variety of possible solutions. Among them, giving more hit points, changing the save or die prevailing mechanism, boosting the party in other ways (such as by giving them more information, etc). Personally, I dislike many of the solutions people tend to offer in these cases because they nerf the save or die type spells (ie, by increasing the casting time, say). You can make the 'failed save' result much less severe at the same time that you make the 'successful save' result far more severe... then it's more like a fireball where the save matters quite a bit, but it's not quite so life or death. Anyhow, you're also overlooking the point that dungeon crawls are where this game started, and how many people still enjoy doing them. They're not horrible modules (necessarily) - they're ones that people enjoy doing. Even if it's not you, even if it's not me, that doesn't matter. The 'default' way to play the game doesn't assume you know tons about your opponent _or_ vice versa. A spectre in a tomb against a party with death wards on is basically window dressing. Many energy-based creatures against someone with energy immunity? Pretty screwed. Not everyone can dispel. Not every encounter can either side take a day to prepare for. Sometimes, a chance of winning is worth a chance of losing. I think people don't take great fortitude because A) it's not _fun_ B) they're already making a lot of these saves except on 1s C) prestige class prerequisites. I mean, I've seen people die to Bodaks cause 'eh, I only die on a 1 and this way we can kill it faster'. Haha. Or something. P.S. To be really exact, they are on a prison demiplane. If they fail to stop the equivalent of Tharizdun with an army of followers from escaping, it will burst out through the demiplane, destroying their home world. It will then proceed on a rampage destroying much of, if not all of, the multiverse, before a coalition of all gods possibly puts it down, again (but it may be more prepared this time). So, no, I'm really serious that if they fail to stop it, the game is over and the world has ended. They know that. They know... a fair amount about their opposition, and things they can do to stop it, but they're too pressed for time to prepare perfectly for every encounter. Oddly enough, the world is moving on separate from their actions so unlimited time to research and prepare just isn't an option.
Keterys 12-28-06, 11:14 PM	Another possible, to go with the 2d6 per level bit: d6 / caster level + X Con, Fort halves (X varies by effect, generally pretty low for the lower level death effects... 1 con might be reasonable to make it halve to nothing, too, but higher level effects should deal more (Implosion, for example could compare more easily to meteor swarm's 32d6)) Also, it may be worth noting that the OP's suggestion isn't _too_ far off the epic level handbook's suggestion to just look the other way X times per session or character (ignoring the occasional failed death save)... but, that just feels all kinds of wrong.
calvinNhobbes 12-29-06, 12:03 AM	Perhaps you should stop proving my point. These creatures can be minions. Not unless you are immune to their death gaze for some reason. Creatures that can kill you just by looking at you, are intelligent enough to plot against you, and have the ability to multiply without your control are not good minions. Any half way intelligent spellcaster would know that. It's not terribly important how they get there originally or why someone thinks it's okay to have them. Actually it is very important. If not you just have a random world with no reason. You might as well just go play a computer game. I've seen Bodaks used in tower setups, where they had their section. I've seen Bodaks imprisoned in Crypts trying to get out. They happen in adventures, and it doesn't mean those adventures suck. I would disagree, but I guess I just expect more. It's even beside the point - Bodak are just a convenient 'save or die' example. Wail of banshee traps can just be placed around (heck, they're even low CR). Death happens in dnd. All the time. If you want a game with less death (as, clearly, do some of the posters here), then there are a variety of possible solutions. Among them, giving more hit points, changing the save or die prevailing mechanism, boosting the party in other ways (such as by giving them more information, etc). Personally, I dislike many of the solutions people tend to offer in these cases because they nerf the save or die type spells (ie, by increasing the casting time, say). You can make the 'failed save' result much less severe at the same time that you make the 'successful save' result far more severe... then it's more like a fireball where the save matters quite a bit, but it's not quite so life or death. Agreed. Anyhow, you're also overlooking the point that dungeon crawls are where this game started, and how many people still enjoy doing them. Like I said, pandering to the masses. Doesn't mean it is high quality. They're not horrible modules (necessarily) - they're ones that people enjoy doing. Some people, not all, perhaps not even the majority. However, modules save time, so even people who do not necessarily like them use them anyway to save time and any D&D is better than none. The 'default' way to play the game doesn't assume you know tons about your opponent _or_ vice versa. Disagree. That is just the way you play. Check out the "Know your enemy" articles. With high enough knowledge checks you can practically play with the MM open as a player. A spectre in a tomb against a party with death wards on is basically window dressing. If you play the spectre as an idiot then yes. Most spectres are very intelligent undead. But even if that is the case, what can be more flavorful than a party having to constantly cast death wards, knowing that if they ever let their defense down they will be swarmed by the spectres just outside their vision. Many energy-based creatures against someone with energy immunity? Pretty screwed. Not everyone can dispel. Not every encounter can either side take a day to prepare for. Sometimes, a chance of winning is worth a chance of losing. Being a one trick pony is bad for NPCs, just like it is bad for PCs. Intelligent monsters know their weaknesses and would make effort to have a back up plan if countered. I think people don't take great fortitude because A) it's not _fun_ Exactly. People just want the big damage, and when thier glass cannons die they blame it on "unbalanced", "broken", game rules or mechanics. B) they're already making a lot of these saves except on 1s Every little bit helps. Plus if you don't like the auto suceed/fail of natural 20's or 1's, you can use the variant rule presented in the DMG, or just rule 0 it all together. I don't like the 5% autohit/miss rule either. Makes things too based on luck. I mean, I've seen people die to Bodaks cause 'eh, I only die on a 1 and this way we can kill it faster'. Haha. Or something. Exactly, they play stupid. 5%+ auto-death is no joke. The bodak has 20 ft/round speed and the death gaze has a 30 ft range. You shouldn't have to melee a bodak at all really. Plus it is a gaze attack, so you can even blind fold yourself or try and avert your eyes for an auto 50% chance to avoid the need for a save if you happen to get too close. I guess I'm just tired of people coming and whining about the rules when they play the game without any real thought or reflection.
Keterys 12-29-06, 02:42 PM	Check out the "Know your enemy" articles. With high enough knowledge checks you can practically play with the MM open as a player. Yeah, our group has 2 people who actually pretty much have it memorized... that said, note that the DCs for some of the knowledge checks can get extremely rude. Like for the Tarrasque :) I personally greatly dislike monsters that are completely countered by 1 spell, or even a small set of spells (look at the Balor fight example that wotc posted in an article sometime, where it spent several rounds finding out they were immune to most of its attacks and it trying to dispel), and as far as I can tell most CRs were set with a basic fighter/rogue/wizard/cleric party, with a minimal amount of foreknowledge on either side, put together. It doesn't make it the way it happens all the time, but it also means that the game shouldn't be balanced around assuming people have up death ward, mind blank, etc at all the times when they're most needed, and that challenges that rely on defeating them will have ways to dispel or bypass such defenses. I greatly dislike 'random dungeon crawls' due to the lack of forethought, the mapping, etc. But it doesn't mean I impose those limitations on others. Heck, I just like some games with less death _and_ less resurrection, so it matches more closely up with fiction and the death of something isn't just 10 minutes or a day to fix up. I also like games decided more by tactics than by who won initiative and who rolled a 1 first. From 3.0 to 3.5, a lot of the 'totally screwed' tactics were abated in part (no save touch winners like harm, imprisonment, annihilating shields, etc)... frankly, I'm okay with getting a bunch more. They did something with disintegrate to still keep it very serious - I did kill someone with it last week, and it still feels like disintegrate. So, why not some others? In other games, death happens a lot. If someone doesn't die in a fight, it wasn't a serious fight. Heck, I've had games where someone died multiple times a fight, due to other magical protections and contingencies. Sometimes it's nice to have options.
calvinNhobbes 12-29-06, 02:47 PM	Yeah, our group has 2 people who actually pretty much have it memorized... that said, note that the DCs for some of the knowledge checks can get extremely rude. Like for the Tarrasque :) Eh, the 10+HD is a guideline, and a very bad one at that, even the designers admit that, which was the reason for modification of it in MM 4 I believe, as well as the articles addressing it.