Post/Author/DateTime	Post
psiphre 08-13-05, 08:57 AM	(If this has been discussed before, or if it would be more appropriate on another board, please let me know and I'll move it) Death from massive damage is the most ridiculous rule in D&D. the "death from massive damage" rule is that whenever a medium sized creature takes 50 hit points of damage in a single attack (or 60 for a large creature, 70 for a huge creature, and so on and so forth) the target of said damage must roll a fortitude save (DC 15) or die instantly. this makes no sense. What is it based on? By the selfsame rule (unless it's excepted specifically in the monster manual description), a great wyrm black dragon could be killed in a single attack dealing 80hp of damage and a bad fort save, when 80 hp isnot even 15% its (average) hit points. a 10th level fighter with 100 hit points (not too ridiculous with a decent con mod) can take only half his own hit points (50%) in damage before having to fort save or die. a 20th level fighter with 200 hit points (still not ridiculous) can only take 1/4 his own hit points (25%) in damage before having to fort save or die. however, a first level fighter with ten hit points can take 10 hit points worth of damage (100%) in a single attack and only be "staggered" - or take 9 hp of damage (90%) and still act as if he had taken no damage at all. considering the relative nature of the term "massive damage" (9 hp is "massive damage" to a character with only 10 hp, whereas 80 hp is a mere flesh wound to a gargantuan great wyrm), how on earth is this rule in any way justified other than "it's in the RAW"? :confused:
robertliguori 08-13-05, 09:02 AM	Taking more than 50 (or 60, or 70, etc.) damage with one blow represents being delt such a staggering wound that regardless of your capacity to take similar wounds, you may well have been hit in the vitals. Moreover, it shouldn't be an issue: at the levels at which you truly can laugh off 50 points of damage, what's a DC 15 fort save anyway?
Derren S. 08-13-05, 09:03 AM	I simply ignore this rule as it 1. Makes no sense. 2. Doesn't improve the game as players suffer most from the rule. 3. Increases the strength of wizards even more as usually they do this much damage and not fighters (untill high level). Taking more than 50 (or 60, or 70, etc.) damage with one blow represents being delt such a staggering wound that regardless of your capacity to take similar wounds, you may well have been hit in the vitals. Moreover, it shouldn't be an issue: at the levels at which you truly can laugh off 50 points of damage, what's a DC 15 fort save anyway? Why is 50 HP a staggering wound when you have for example 600 HP? And with the abstract HP system, thos hit isn't even a physical hit as HP also represents luck and the ability to dodge. And you fail a DC 15 fort save at least every 20 rolls as a 1 on a save is a automatic failiure, so statistically any creature only survives at best 20 such hits no matter what its fortsave is. A monster probably never gets hit by massive damage 20 times, but PC will.
tharivol266 08-13-05, 09:22 AM	it is based on trama. if u had 7000 hp and u got hit by a wrecking ball in real life u might die u wont just be like "oomph...ow" and it isnt really that big of a deal because when u get to the level where 50 dmg wont kill u neways a fort save of 15 is nothing. ur prolly just sour because one of ur characters got a nat one and died on one right? edit: i ingore this rule when it comes to spells just because it seems like it should only happen physically.
Derren S. 08-13-05, 09:24 AM	A DC 15 is laughable except when you roll a 1 (5% of all times) which kills you.
Donraj 08-13-05, 11:28 AM	I like this rule because it adds realism. It basically makes it so any attack can potentially kill you. That helps prevent people metagaming that they can "take" a given attack and being blaise about the prospect. If anything I think that it should be less then 50 hit points and that the fort save should be higher.
Derren S. 08-13-05, 11:43 AM	But they can take any attack as long as it doesn't deal more than 50 damage. A knight (lvl 20 fighter for this example) facing by 5 militamen (lvl 3 fighter) armed with crossbows. In reality the knight would be either dead or lucky enough to quickly get behind some cover, in D&D the knight would charge without a second thought. The HP system itself is not realistic, so the massive damage rule is even less realistic.
Anthus_Longblade 08-13-05, 06:58 PM	A knight (lvl 20 fighter for this example) facing by 5 militamen (lvl 3 fighter) armed with crossbows. In reality the knight would be either dead or lucky enough to quickly get behind some cover, in D&D the knight would charge without a second thought. Er... that's why the DMG tells us that, typically, the knight is a 1st level fighter and the militiamen are 1st level warriors. In neither case does the knight stand a chance.
Anthus_Longblade 08-13-05, 07:00 PM	A knight (lvl 20 fighter for this example) facing by 5 militamen (lvl 3 fighter) armed with crossbows. In reality the knight would be either dead or lucky enough to quickly get behind some cover, in D&D the knight would charge without a second thought. Er... that's why the DMG tells us that, typically, the knight is a 1st level fighter and the militiamen are 1st level warriors. The game is more realistic than many people seem to think, if you don't over-exaggerate.
Kheldar 08-13-05, 07:04 PM	I like death from massive damage, if you build a good fighter PC he can really benefit from this rule. (Albeit you have to hope your opponent rolls poorly for his fortitude save.) Our group does away with the rule for spells. . . It's something we've all agreed on. :)
Laranis Callirr 08-13-05, 07:11 PM	Analogy to understand massive damage: Step 1: Obtain level 20 fighter. Step 2: Remove fighter's heart (to represent 50 damage). Step 3: Watch fighter die. Alternatively: Step 1: Obtain level 1 peasant. Step 2: Drop 20 boulders on peasant (to represent 50 damage). Step 3: Watch peasant die. As you can hopefully see, massive damage represents an outrageously damaging blow. Like crashing into a wall at 200km/h.
green_yawgmoth 08-13-05, 08:18 PM	The rule for massive damage IMC is losing half or more of your total hp in a single strike is a DC 15+ 1/10 damage or death. That way you actually notice the rule at any level; it's not just a waste of ink, the way it is now. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
Derren S. 08-13-05, 09:30 PM	Anthus, when you want replace the lvl 20 knight with a lvl 10 knight. Same result. And that is not exaggerated as it is a rather normal situation in D&D. Point is the D&D HP system is not realistic so trying to bring realism into it is fruitless and it screws up the system. Analogy to understand massive damage: Step 1: Obtain level 20 fighter. Step 2: Remove fighter's heart (to represent 50 damage). Step 3: Watch fighter die. And how do you know that removing ones heart does 50 damage? This is not the case because as you said removing ones heart kills you, but the 20 lvl fighter would still be alive after a 50 damage hit so it must be something non lethal for him.
Laranis Callirr 08-13-05, 09:54 PM	And how do you know that removing ones heart does 50 damage? This is not the case because as you said removing ones heart kills you, but the 20 lvl fighter would still be alive after a 50 damage hit so it must be something non lethal for him. Of course a level 20 fighter wouldn't die with a 50 damage hit. But he still needs a heart to live. And you can slice a heart in half with a 1d4 dagger. The whole point is that massive damage represents a single blow that prevents a character's body from functioning properly.
psiphre 08-13-05, 10:17 PM	Of course a level 20 fighter wouldn't die with a 50 damage hit. But he still needs a heart to live. And you can slice a heart in half with a 1d4 dagger. The whole point is that massive damage represents a single blow that prevents a character's body from functioning properly. :confused: why do you think a first level fighter with 10 hp can take 90% of his hp in damage in a single blow without it represenging "a single blow that prevents his body from functioning properly", but a tenth level fighter with 100 hp(who necessarily has more experience functioning while damaged) can only take 49% of his hp in damage and still function?
Laranis Callirr 08-13-05, 10:44 PM	:confused: why do you think a first level fighter with 10 hp can take 90% of his hp in damage in a single blow without it represenging "a single blow that prevents his body from functioning properly", but a tenth level fighter with 100 hp(who necessarily has more experience functioning while damaged) can only take 49% of his hp in damage and still function? Because to a first level fighter, ANY blow is "a single blow that prevents his body from functioning properly." :rolleyes:
psiphre 08-13-05, 10:49 PM	Because to a first level fighter, ANY blow is "a single blow that prevents his body from functioning properly." :rolleyes: if "blood staying in veins, arteries and capilaries" is "proper functioning of the body", then any damage done "prevents a body from functioning properly". 1hp of damage makes both the 1st level fighter and the 20th level fighter bleed. :mad:
Laranis Callirr 08-13-05, 11:15 PM	if "blood staying in veins, arteries and capilaries" is "proper functioning of the body", then any damage done "prevents a body from functioning properly". 1hp of damage makes both the 1st level fighter and the 20th level fighter bleed. :mad: No, die. They both die. A first level fighter dies with any blow, and a level 20 fighter dies if his heart ceases to funcion, or his spinal chord is snapped, or his brain clots.
ChaosSaber 08-14-05, 12:11 AM	While I do see some logic in the massive damage system, I prefer to use the version where 1/2 of your max HP constitutes massive damage, and the save DC is based in part on the amount of damage taken. It makes it more realistic at low levels and more of a threat at high levels. I only allow massive damage from physical blows, but I do include force effects and damage from conjured matter in the definition of physical damage, because I believe massive damage results from a large concussive impact or lasceration, that can be produced by both martial or magical means. As a little aside, I also include rules for massive loss of Power Points or Magic Points (if using a point system). With 'Massive Depletion' of more than 1/2 max mental resources, you must make a fortitude save based on the amount of point loss or suffer a siezure, causing unconsciousness and reducing your point reserve to 0.
psiphre 08-14-05, 12:21 AM	While I do see some logic in the massive damage system, I prefer to use the version where 1/2 of your max HP constitutes massive damage, and the save DC is based in part on the amount of damage taken. It makes it more realistic at low levels and more of a threat at high levels. I only allow massive damage from physical blows, but I do include force effects and damage from conjured matter in the definition of physical damage, because I believe massive damage results from a large concussive impact or lasceration, that can be produced by both martial or magical means. "death by massive damage" would make some kind of sense if it were written as "50% of hit points in a single blow". but wouldn't that be just like system shock? :P :P
Encard 08-14-05, 12:42 AM	The rule for massive damage IMC is losing half or more of your total hp in a single strike is a DC 15+ 1/10 damage or death. That way you actually notice the rule at any level; it's not just a waste of ink, the way it is now. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif Eh... Current or max? If you're talking about max HP, I'm curious - why do wizards have a much easier time surviving a massively damaging attack than fighter or other larger hit die characters who're supposedly better at taking big hits?
psiphre 08-14-05, 01:18 AM	why do wizards have a much easier time surviving a massively damaging attack than fighter or other larger hit die characters who're supposedly better at taking big hits? if I'm reading right, and if my math is right, he doesn't: 10th level fighter has 100 hp takes 50 dmg from full life fort save or die! dc = 15 + 1/10 of damage taken (5) = 20 con score = 13 fort save = +8 (total) needs to roll 12 or better to live 40% change of living 10th level fighter has 60 of 100 hp takes 30 dmg fort save or die dc = 15 + 1/10 of damage taken (3) = 18 con score = 13 fort save = +8 (total) needs to roll 10 or better to live 55% chance of living 10th level wizard has 40 hp takes 20 dmg from full life fort save or die dc = 15 + 1/10 of damage taken (2) = 17 con score = 13 fort save = +4 (total) needs to roll 13 or better to live 35% chance of living 10th level wizard has 20hp from 40 takes 10 dmg fort save or die dc = 15 + 1/10 of damage taken (1) = 16 con score = 13 fort save = +4 (total) needs to roll a 12 or better to live 40% chance of living ...and that's with questionable con scores. {edit} regardless, it's a bad rule. my rule of wrist is that any house rule that adds arithmatic or dice rolling is a poor one.
green_yawgmoth 08-14-05, 02:00 AM	Eh... Current or max? If you're talking about max HP, I'm curious - why do wizards have a much easier time surviving a massively damaging attack than fighter or other larger hit die characters who're supposedly better at taking big hits? Maximum HP was my current idea, but how do you figure that they have an easier time? From psiphre's max hp numbers, the wizard takes less damage to knock into MD danger and has a lower % chance of living that the fighter. And I would like to know why adding a rule that adds rolling or math (i.e. the two most common things in D&D) automatically makes it a bad houserule, even when it's altering an existing rule. :confused: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
psiphre 08-14-05, 02:03 AM	I would like to know why adding a rule that adds rolling or math (i.e. the two most common things in D&D) automatically makes it a bad houserule, even when it's altering an existing rule. :confused: it's just MHO. more math slows down the game. more rolling slows down the game. the game, where dice and math are concerned (and both rolling and arithmatic are concentrated pretty much into combat and traps) is slow enough without more of the same. once again, just my humble opinion. :)
weasel fierce 08-14-05, 12:20 PM	The hit point system makes no sense in its current form, so best not to worry about it. Massive damage is there as a means of reflecting that if you get hit hard enough, you CAN die from it, even if you have 300 hit points.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 08-14-05, 02:22 PM	1hp of damage makes both the 1st level fighter and the 20th level fighter bleed. :mad: Nope. 1 hp might make the 1st level Fighter bleed, but it doesn't even touch a 20th level Fighter. HP is more than physical toughness.
psiphre 08-14-05, 05:33 PM	Nope. 1 hp might make the 1st level Fighter bleed, but it doesn't even touch a 20th level Fighter. HP is more than physical toughness. that's going to be a situational call. if you poke someone in the eye with an knife, they are going to bleed whether the damage comes out of 10 hit points or 1000 hit points.
High Octane 08-15-05, 08:53 AM	If you dont mind Ill just copy my post from another thread. The fort save is not that high, and actually being hit with a single strike for 50 damage is pretty rare unless you are facing a caster. Only spells like a maximized fireball (effective what, 7th level spell) or a disintegrate (6th level last I remember) will cause that much damage, and at that level there are already instant death effect spells. By that time, you can afford the occasional resurrection. Massive physical blows like that would only come from the tarrasque, a titan, or a 2 handed weapon wielding giant of the higher variety. In all cases, CR 13 or higher. (I dont have the books, but you get the idea) Yes the fighter will take a lot of damage, but remember this: 50 damage has to happen in ONE BLOW, if it happens in several attacks in one round, the character doesnt have to make a fort save. The fort save is what, 15? Lets see, at that level (13) your average fighter has a base fort save of +8 I belive, and being a fighter he will probably have a con of at LEAST 14 naturally (probably more) and an item increasing it another 4 to 18, making it a +4 modifier to fort. So being conservative thats a +12 to fort save. That means he has to roll a 3 or higher to save. 90% chance of survival. And that is being conservative. It will most likely be that you need to roll a 1 to save. What about other classes? Well clerics and druids have almost as good a fort save, and they can cast protections on themselves so they shouldnt be taking THAT much damage. Rogues have evasion and high reflex saves, so spells are easy to avoid, and they should avoid melee combat with anything that does 50+ damage anyway. Arcane casters are likely to DIE from the 50 damage without the massive damage save anyway, so they take measures to avoid such things as well. also Anyway, you have to understand that getting hit with 50 damage is one HELL of a blast verse say the 6 hit points of an ARROW, it doesnt matter WHO you are! But, through force of will, luck, skill, and straight grit, higher level characters CAN survive what kills your normal guy, but EVERY TIME? People hit THAT hard could easily go into shock and die, even if the initial damage doesn't kill him outright. Thats the "realistic" logic behind it. If you want to argue how it affects game mechanics though, I would say its only there to throw the fear of death into upper level characters to stop "Dont worry, with all the hit points I have I can take all those maximized fireballs EASY!"
Derren S. 08-15-05, 09:00 AM	50 damage is a "hell of a blast" for a commoner, but for high level heroes who can jump from the highest mountain known or swim through lava for a short time without magical help and survive 50 damage is nothing.
High Octane 08-15-05, 09:09 AM	50 damage is a "hell of a blast" for a commoner, but for high level heroes who can jump from the highest mountain known or swim through lava for a short time without magical help and survive 50 damage is nothing. No they can't and no it isn't.
Gilean 08-15-05, 09:26 AM	An epic/high level feat to negate it might be in order. When playing gritty game, I make massive damage threshold equal constitution score. A feat to increase it by character level. DC equals half of the damage dealt. Toughness improves it by 1, in addition to normal benefits.
erc1971 08-15-05, 09:50 AM	I don't use this rule, simply because I don't want all the front line PC's dying every other session. Face it, at higher levels 50 damage can happen alot. And at epic levels, 50 damage probably happens more often than not. With all those save or die rolls, the PC's will be dying, because they will roll a 1 eventually. I just don't use the rule, since PC's falling left and right doesn't seem too heroic.
CaviosDaryll 08-15-05, 01:02 PM	While it is true that fifty damage will be happening at higher levels, most of you do not realize that it is also true that you have a very high fortitude save at higher levels, so it is much easier to pass the DC. Also, at higher levels you tend to have better items to give you more AC and the like, so you also tend to get hit less often.
Derren S. 08-15-05, 01:31 PM	The attack bonus rises faster than AC, so it will get more likely that the first attacks hit. And no matter how high your Fortsave is, you die on a 1.
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 01:34 PM	So a 5% chance of dying from something that inflicts enough physical punishment to kill an elephant ? Not bad, I'd say :)
Derren S. 08-15-05, 01:35 PM	When you are five times as healthy as an elephant and this 50 damage is only a scrath to you and you fight enemies who regullary deal 50 damage then it is bad. Also an elephant would only die when it rolled a 3 or less as it has 104 HP and +12 Fort.
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 01:48 PM	Its still only a 5% chance, if you fail only on a 1. Im trying to think of any other RPG, where the routine chance of an experienced character dying from a blow is only 5%. In any event, if you dont like it, ditch it. Everything in the books are optional rules
Derren S. 08-15-05, 01:53 PM	Its still only a 5% chance, if you fail only on a 1. Im trying to think of any other RPG, where the routine chance of an experienced character dying from a blow is only 5%. You sound as you are completly ignoring that you can still die from HP loss and other bad things and not only from massive damage. Show me the RPG where at higher levels there is always a 5% chance to die from an attack in addition to the normal dangers of dieing.
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 02:06 PM	If you have 300+ hit points, then a 50 HP blow isnt going to do much. 6 of them might, but thats no different than if you have 30 HP, and are getting hit for 5. As for other systems, Runequest / Drakar och Demoner has most fights end with a character being incapacitated from limb or body damage, before their hit points run out, due to the location system. In Call of Cthulhu, a gunshot will deal more damage on a max roll, than you are ever likely to have hit points. A critical in Warhammer can deal frightening amounts of wounds, and is possible on any hit, making it not likely, but definately possible, that a brigand with a pitchfork could seriously maim or kill you. I think RPG combat benefits from being lethal and having a definite chance of death. If you dont share that view, then change the rules, untill they fit what you feel they should be. The Massive damage rule is there, simply to reinforce the point that it IS possible to die from a single attack, even if you are a mighty hero. Its not very elegant or streamlined, but D20 combat generally isnt.
Derren S. 08-15-05, 02:15 PM	CoC and Warhammer is just high damage on a critical hit, nothing like the massive damage rule. You can get the same results when a orc babarian critically hits a lvl 1 wizard with a greataxe and rolls high. Runequest sounds a bit like it but it is not death. And when you use the massive damage rule in high level games be sure that your fighters will die fast even though they have still many HP left.
EvilDuck 08-15-05, 02:34 PM	Of course a level 20 fighter wouldn't die with a 50 damage hit. But he still needs a heart to live. And you can slice a heart in half with a 1d4 dagger. The whole point is that massive damage represents a single blow that prevents a character's body from functioning properly. Removing a fighter's heart through magic armor, sinewy flesh, and strong bone takes more than one attack, you know. I'm doing away with massive damage entirely.
was_fired 08-15-05, 02:50 PM	I suggest you remove the real culprit hear, the natural 1 auto fails a save / attack, and move to open rolling. Using open rolling a natural 20 is a reroll with a +20 modifier, and a natural one is a reroll with a -20 modifier. Using that we find our HP monsters do much better with massive damage. Take a look at the dwarven barbabarian at 10th, 20th, and 30th (+6 ench at level 10 and rages +4 and great fortitude, +5 wish at level 20 and rages +8, and +2 more ench at level 30 along with 2 Con boosting feats and another 4 from epic fortitude) we start with 20 Con and put everything into it: At 10th level we have 32 Con, 190hp, and +20 to his Fort save. 50 damage is 26% of his HP and he has a 1.25% chance of failing his save. At 20th level we have 44 Con, 495hp, and +31 to his Fort save. 50 damage is 10% of his HP and he has a 0.75% chance of failing his save. At 30th level we have 50 Con, 800hp, and +43 to his Fort save. 50 damage is 6.25% of his HP and he has a 0.15% chance of failing his save. As you can see the REAL problem is not the massive damage rule. The REAL problem is the idea of auto-failures in a system of save or dies.
Derren S. 08-15-05, 02:52 PM	The +30/-10 rule imo sounds better (and less time consuming) than open rolling. Or simply remove the 20/1 exceptions for saves alltogether.
NinjaE 08-15-05, 03:10 PM	Personally, I prefer the way D20 modern does it; con score equals massive damage point(with some bonuses from large+size). As weapons easily do about 2d6 damage, critical hits often turn lethal.
was_fired 08-15-05, 03:19 PM	The problem with closed rolling is that it removes the chance of extrodinary events. Such as a peasant actually harming a dragon with a longbow (say an AC 35 and a requirement to crit if he has a -4 to attack bringing the odds of this to 0.0000049% in order to crit and max damage). This event indeed any event which isn't within a certain range of your modifier would be removed rather than made unlikely. Face it though... it would be amazing to see THAT happen.
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 03:59 PM	CoC and Warhammer is just high damage on a critical hit, nothing like the massive damage rule. You can get the same results when a orc babarian critically hits a lvl 1 wizard with a greataxe and rolls high. Good point, though D&D is about the only system I have played that escalates hit points to a level, where this is nescesary Runequest sounds a bit like it but it is not death. Bleeding to death from a serious injury in the stomach can have its inconveniences, as can having no left arm ;) And when you use the massive damage rule in high level games be sure that your fighters will die fast even though they have still many HP left. Thats fine with me. People should die in combat. The "I hit you for 30 points", "I have 270 left" routine gets rather dull, IMO. When I play D&D, I mainly play low level games, for the same reason.
jasper 08-15-05, 04:18 PM	It is an optional rule. Don't use it. Or are you upset because one of your pcs failed it? My players don't like so I don't use it. Just like the triple crit rule my players liked the first time they brought down a dragon and you could see in their mind of if their 1st and 2nd level pcs can instant kill a monster. Then Jasper has more monsters than we have pcs and dice may just favor him occasionally at the wrong moment.
Derren S. 08-15-05, 04:38 PM	It is an optional rule. While you can argue that all rules are optional because of rule 0, the Massive Damage rule is not labeled as optional or variant rule.
weasel fierce 08-15-05, 04:41 PM	If it doesnt make the game better for you, there;'s no reason in the world, why it should be in your game.
KoboldSlayer 08-15-05, 04:46 PM	Anything that increases randomness is worse for the PCs than for the monsters. (Because a monster is likely to be only seen in one fight, and the PCs have to do fight after fight after fight. Granted, this is because the monsters are usually unfortunate enough to be DEAD after one fight, so whether this is actually "in their favor" or not is questionable. :P ) A PC is more likely to see massive damage death than any other single creature. However, one creature out of the many they fight is likely to die more often than one character out of their 4 to 6. The PCs will, in the course of their careers, hopefully bring down more dragons, giants, and puny orcs with "massive damage" than they will be brought down. But it sure hurts when your PC is the one that buys it on a failed save! I am thinking of changing the massive damage rules after reading what is presented here. Perhaps to massive death at "50 or 1/4 of your hit points, whichever is greater"...so a moot point until you start finding creatures that have 200 hp or more or the PCs start getting into the 200 hps. (Very possible with high level fighters and barbarians.) To those who have said it is hard to roll 50 points of damage for anything except spells and that those represent hits from titans or tarrasques or dragons, I put forward the example of a character in my game. He did not "optimize" his character or do any particularly cheesey build. He did take a solid, thought-out character sheet, but he has his flaws, as well...and he can do 50 points of damage fairly often and is not what I would consider "high level". He is a total level of 8, including ECL for his half-dragon template. He rolled an 18, which went into strength, since it was the first thing he rolled, and for this game I had the players roll straight down and keep their stats in order. So, that in itself took a fair bit of luck. Combined with the half-dragon template (+8 Str) and a greataxe (x3 multiplier), he fairly regularly scores a massive damage hit, since any critical he makes falls somewhere between 39 and 72...without Power Attack. If he dumps all his 5 BAB into power attack, he automatically forces a massive death save on a crit (minimum damage in that case comes out to 69). So, while he doesn't ALWAYS force a massive death save, it's way more common than, say a fight with a Tarrasque would be. When he gets high enough level, I imagine it will be almost every strike, since he's doing that with only 5 character levels and no Strength-boosting items.