PDA

View Full Version : An interesting option for true save-or-dies



Gan The Grey
2010-04-02, 04:37 AM
I hate save-or-dies. With a passion. I have an increasing level of distaste for the various types of save-or-dies, ranging from a mild annoyance for spells like 'Sleep', to a mouth-foaming anger at a unsuccessful save vs. the deadly glare of a Bodak.

I can ignore my displeasure at the milder forms of save-or-dies, but the true save-or-dies really have a way of destroying any fun both the DM and the players are having. On the one hand, the spells are generally an all-or-nothing situation that, if the players know what's happening, can really serve to temporary ratchet up the situation's intensity. On the other hand, when they fail a save, it's extremely anti-climactic.

But I can't just completely eliminate save-or-dies completely. I like the scary nature, the iconic 'Finger of Death' and 'Power Word: Kill' and, because every one of my players cringe at the mere mention, Bodaks. (See Bodak white-tail deer)

So...here's my fix. Unlike other damaging spells where the caster rolls a series of damage dice determined by the spell entry and his level, a failed save-or-die roll requires the player to roll the damage based on his particular character build. Instead of flat-out death, the player rolls a number of dice equal to his level and class HD. For example, a 5th level fighter/2 level rogue would roll 5d10 + 2d6 damage.

I see this as a way to give players one more chance to keep their character from dying. Con bonuses would help represent their tenacity, a stronger hold on life. Of course, you may have to adjust these rules depending on the way you play your games. It wouldn't really work in games where players take full HP per hit die.

Thoughts?

EDIT: I'd like to add one more question. I know how this affects single castings of spells like Finger of Death, but how do you feel about this change for something like a Bodak that can use this ability every round? Really, in this instance, even with a high save, you are just praying that you don't roll a 1.

Greenish
2010-04-02, 04:40 AM
Doesn't that favour low hit die characters, since their Con bonus represents larger amount of their total hitpoints?

J.Gellert
2010-04-02, 04:48 AM
And in the end, it's the same thing. An attack that just kills you outright, only this time your chances are determined by a different roll.

Sure, the chances of success are probably higher, but you can achieve that simply by saying "All saves vs death are rolled with a +4 bonus". The HD way seems unnecessarily complicated.

You can what Mutants and Masterminds is doing, where every attack is a save-or-die. Make the rolls "graded". "If you fail your save vs death, you are disabled. If you fail by 5 or more, you are unconscious at -1 hps. If you fail by 10 or more, you die." So most of the time you will be nearly completely screwed, but in reality only a Band-Aid away from resuming the fight.

And it still rewards high Fort saves, which are "nerfed" by making save-or-dies a HD roll.

Myou
2010-04-02, 04:50 AM
Doesn't that favour low hit die characters, since their Con bonus represents larger amount of their total hitpoints?

Yeah, and makes save or dies utterly worthless, since you can already do 2d6/caster level on a failed save with a disintegrate, or 1d6/caster level with no save/reflex half with plenty of other spells.

Gan The Grey
2010-04-02, 04:53 AM
Doesn't that favour low hit die characters, since their Con bonus represents larger amount of their total hitpoints?

Sure, but how much? Mathematically speaking. Plus, to me, it seems like save-or-dies are more useful against the high hit die characters, characters that are harder to whittle down with damaging spells. Save your fireball or disintegrate for bard or sorcerer. Hit the cleric or fighter with your Finger of Death. The only problem I see with this logic is that most save-or-dies are Fort saves, which the high hit die classes have as good saves.


Yeah, and makes save or dies utterly worthless, since you can already do 2d6/caster level on a failed save with a disintegrate, or 1d6/caster level with no save/reflex half with plenty of other spells.

The difference between a modified save-or-die and a disintegrate is that disintegrate scales with the level of the caster, but a save-or-die scales with level of the target. This can make a difference when you are fighting something with much more HD than you.

But you are right otherwise. My opinion, it doesn't make them worthless though, as it does add another interesting twist to the system to keep the players interested.

pasko77
2010-04-02, 04:54 AM
I hate save-or-dies. With a passion.

Thoughts?

Play 4th ed.
What?:smallwink:

Gan The Grey
2010-04-02, 05:01 AM
Play 4th ed.
What?:smallwink:

Not gritty enough. Save-or-dies? Too gritty. Le sigh.


And in the end, it's the same thing. An attack that just kills you outright, only this time your chances are determined by a different roll.

Sure, the chances of success are probably higher, but you can achieve that simply by saying "All saves vs death are rolled with a +4 bonus". The HD way seems unnecessarily complicated.

No, it isn't the same thing. The chances are not the same, because it still includes the saving throw. In the current rules, you fail the save, you are dead. Just dead. With the modified rules, you get another chance, another chance that puts the luck in the player's hands. It pits your chances of rolling high on your HP per level vs. your chances of rolling high on the damage of the spell. If you roll high on your damage, it might kill you. If you roll low, you might still be alive, but nearing unconsciousness. If you roll moderately, you might be alive, but dying. It adds a little more variety to your save or dies, other than 'Nothing happens, or you die.' Cuz THAT'S fun.

Arbitrarious
2010-04-02, 05:08 AM
What we've done in my games is that save or dies set you at -1 and dying. Most people will die without aid quickly, but your team mates can save you under most circumstances. Works well. Save or dies are feared without being character enders every time they work.

Runestar
2010-04-02, 05:08 AM
PHB2 does offer an interesting variant on the SoD theme. Call of stone slowly turns the target to stone over 4 rounds if he fails a fort save each round, each failed save imposes a penalty to certain stats.

You could work towards revising other SoDs with this in mind. For example, finger of death could take 3 rounds to work, and require 3 failed fort saves. Each time the target fails a fort save, he incurs some penalty, such as losing a fraction of his current hp?

Gan The Grey
2010-04-02, 05:11 AM
PHB2 does offer an interesting variant on the SoD theme. Call of stone slowly turns the target to stone over 4 rounds if he fails a fort save each round, each failed save imposes a penalty to certain stats.

You could work towards revising other SoDs with this in mind. For example, finger of death could take 3 rounds to work, and require 3 failed fort saves. Each time the target fails a fort save, he incurs some penalty, such as losing a fraction of his current hp?

Actually, I really like this, too. Maybe save-or-dies apply a different, worsening status affect each round as well. Like shaken first, then fatigued, then exhausted, and each round also does a certain amount of damage as well.

Divinech
2010-04-02, 05:28 AM
You can what Mutants and Masterminds is doing, where every attack is a save-or-die. Make the rolls "graded". "If you fail your save vs death, you are disabled. If you fail by 5 or more, you are unconscious at -1 hps. If you fail by 10 or more, you die." So most of the time you will be nearly completely screwed, but in reality only a Band-Aid away from resuming the fight.

And it still rewards high Fort saves, which are "nerfed" by making save-or-dies a HD roll.

Uuuh, I like that! That way save-or-dies can incapacitate you without outright killing you (and without dealing some measly hp damage). I think I will incorporate that into my houserules. Thanks :smallsmile:

pasko77
2010-04-02, 06:00 AM
Not gritty enough. Save-or-dies? Too gritty. Le sigh.


Believe me, I feel your pain. When I first read on the PHB "you recover every healing surge and every hit point every day" I didn't believe it.

le sigh :)

Everyman
2010-04-02, 09:43 AM
My group played around with the a houserule for literal save-or-dies. In a nutshell, they reduced a character to -1 (and not stable) on a failed save, outright slayed a character if they failed by more than 5, and reduced a character's current HP by 10% on a successful one (minimum of 1 point of damage).

jseah
2010-04-02, 09:53 AM
You could make them tactical instead.

Say, you need uninterrupted line of sight for three rounds to cast a save or die. As simple as walking behind someone else or attempting to hide (need HIPS since the target is being observed) is enough to break it.

And then remove or increase the save DC. Makes the situation progressive. 1. "That wizard is staring at me. " 2. "uh, I think it's a save or die. can I reach anyone?" 3. "Uh, guys? I really need some cover, NOW!" 4. *splat*

Serpentine
2010-04-02, 09:57 AM
Interesting idea... I'll think about whether it could work in my game. In the meantime, here's my houserules for it:
Save or Die Spells
Save or Drop Deads
Finger of Death, Wail of the Banshee, Circle of Death, Slay Living, Weird, Phantasmal Killer, Symbol of Death
The target falls to -5 hp, and automatically fails all subsequent stabilisation checks. Break Enchantment (or a higher-level Cure spell used in the same way, or Remove Curse for spells of a lower level) removes the spell and returns the target to 0hp and unconscious. When the target falls to -10hp, they fall into a coma, are helpless, and take appropriate penalties for starvation and thirst if necessary. A Heal check DC 10 + spell level is necessary to realise the victim is still alive, unless that person knows the spell cast (spellcraft/Knowledge (arcana)). In order to come out of the coma, someone must perform 5 successful consecutive Heal checks (DC = Spell DC), and Break Enchantment cast at the same time.
For every round a character is unconscious from one of these spells, there is a cumulative 5% chance of losing one point from a random ability.

Cloudkill
As “Save or Drop Dead”, but comatose victim dies 1d4 rounds after reaching -10hp if not removed from the cloud.

Flesh to Whatever
Flesh to Stone, Glass strike, etc.
Target takes 1d6 Dex damage per round as their body turns to stone from the inside-out. When the target reaches 0 Dexterity, they are solid stone (or whatever). Cat’s Grace delays the transformation according to the extra Dex granted. Remove Disease slows the transformation by 1 round/3 caster levels. Break Enchantment ends the transformation. Once complete, removal applies as normal.

Baleful Polymorph/other Transformation
Transformation takes 2d4 rounds to complete. The Will save to retain self-awareness occurs the round after completion. If this save succeeds, the target may reattempt the Fortitude save in a number of rounds equal to ½ the caster level, at a new DC of the spell DC + the amount by which the first attempt was failed. If this save fails, the target may try again every 1d4 days + 1/previous attempt, at the new DC + 1 per attempt. A character that failed the initial Will save may retry in the same manner as the Fortitude save, before undergoing the Fortitude attempts.
- Too complicated?

“That Was So Cool” Spells
Power Word Kill?, Implosion, Destruction
The force of these spells has a magical kick-back that blasts the caster. If the target makes their save, the caster takes ¼ of the target’s HD in damage (e.g. 8d12HD = 2d12 damage). If the target fails, the caster takes ½ their HD in damage (Reflex save for half).

Disintegrate
A target that fails their Fort save takes 2d4 points of Con damage each round, of which 1 is drain, for a number of rounds equal to Caster Level. Bear’s Endurance slows it, but it can only be stopped before death with Break Enchantment.

Green Beam of Prismatic Spray
Target takes 1d6 Con/round until dead, or Break Enchantment used.

The Glyphstone
2010-04-02, 09:58 AM
You could make them tactical instead.

Say, you need uninterrupted line of sight for three rounds to cast a save or die. As simple as walking behind someone else or attempting to hide (need HIPS since the target is being observed) is enough to break it.

And then remove or increase the save DC. Makes the situation progressive. 1. "That wizard is staring at me. " 2. "uh, I think it's a save or die. can I reach anyone?" 3. "Uh, guys? I really need some cover, NOW!" 4. *splat*

see, that's basically the same as removing them from the game entirely. No wizard who's survived long enough to actually cast a SoD would ever do so, since he could do far more damage simply by blasting at you and your friends, instead of surrendering 3 rounds of actions. There's a reason why the Assassin's Death Attack is seen as the PrC's worst class feature, despite being its 'signature move'.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-02, 10:10 AM
Interesting idea... I'll think about whether it could work in my game. In the meantime, here's my houserules for it:
Save or Die Spells
Save or Drop Deads
Finger of Death, Wail of the Banshee, Circle of Death, Slay Living, Weird, Phantasmal Killer, Symbol of Death
The target falls to -5 hp, and automatically fails all subsequent stabilisation checks. Break Enchantment (or a higher-level Cure spell used in the same way, or Remove Curse for spells of a lower level) removes the spell and returns the target to 0hp and unconscious. When the target falls to -10hp, they fall into a coma, are helpless, and take appropriate penalties for starvation and thirst if necessary. A Heal check DC 10 + spell level is necessary to realise the victim is still alive, unless that person knows the spell cast (spellcraft/Knowledge (arcana)). In order to come out of the coma, someone must perform 5 successful consecutive Heal checks (DC = Spell DC), and Break Enchantment cast at the same time.
For every round a character is unconscious from one of these spells, there is a cumulative 5% chance of losing one point from a random ability.

Cloudkill
As “Save or Drop Dead”, but comatose victim dies 1d4 rounds after reaching -10hp if not removed from the cloud.

Flesh to Whatever
Flesh to Stone, Glass strike, etc.
Target takes 1d6 Dex damage per round as their body turns to stone from the inside-out. When the target reaches 0 Dexterity, they are solid stone (or whatever). Cat’s Grace delays the transformation according to the extra Dex granted. Remove Disease slows the transformation by 1 round/3 caster levels. Break Enchantment ends the transformation. Once complete, removal applies as normal.

Baleful Polymorph/other Transformation
Transformation takes 2d4 rounds to complete. The Will save to retain self-awareness occurs the round after completion. If this save succeeds, the target may reattempt the Fortitude save in a number of rounds equal to ½ the caster level, at a new DC of the spell DC + the amount by which the first attempt was failed. If this save fails, the target may try again every 1d4 days + 1/previous attempt, at the new DC + 1 per attempt. A character that failed the initial Will save may retry in the same manner as the Fortitude save, before undergoing the Fortitude attempts.
- Too complicated?

“That Was So Cool” Spells
Power Word Kill?, Implosion, Destruction
The force of these spells has a magical kick-back that blasts the caster. If the target makes their save, the caster takes ¼ of the target’s HD in damage (e.g. 8d12HD = 2d12 damage). If the target fails, the caster takes ½ their HD in damage (Reflex save for half).

Disintegrate
A target that fails their Fort save takes 2d4 points of Con damage each round, of which 1 is drain, for a number of rounds equal to Caster Level. Bear’s Endurance slows it, but it can only be stopped before death with Break Enchantment.

Green Beam of Prismatic Spray
Target takes 1d6 Con/round until dead, or Break Enchantment used.

I kinda like these cept it seems overly complicated.

We have been thinking about using a system of failed save VS death brings you to -1 and you fail all your stabilization checks. Until some one brings you out of death via healing (got to bring them above 0) then the person who "died" is at a -2 on all rolls for the rest of combat. Though we have been tossing around the idea of being fitigued instead. Not sure yet.


Though thinks like flesh to stone still work as they do normaly. mainly cuz we have never had an issue with that spell.

ericgrau
2010-04-02, 12:14 PM
Seems like a mountain of paperwork, though, since 95% of save-or-dies don't actually kill. So now, what, do you do the same thing for petrify or do you leave them alone so that everything can simply switch spells and be just as effective as before.

Other option is a party cleric with remove this, and grant immunity to that. The immunities, high fort and will saves, and SR of high level monsters is what makes SoDs sub-par against most enemies (not to be confused with SoS's, which often hit multiple enemies so that one is bound to fail, and are available at low levels). If the PC cleric is well prepared the party might be similarly protected. The only issue left is the huge luck factor involved; i.e., low chance of success, but when it does work, bam you're dead. Still favors monsters more than PCs since they have less chance of killing in other ways simply because they're weaker than the PCs.

SSGoW
2010-04-02, 12:40 PM
Hmm making spells base their damage on the target....

(spell level)d(target's HD - 1 die)

level 5 spell would cause 5d8 to a fighter

wizard gets level 5 at level 9 sooo basically the rolls would be
5d8 vs 9d10 so the fighter has a chance... depending on his rolls for hp (and his con mod of course)

To show that a wizard can cast his spell better as he gets higher level just give him a better chance at hitting with lower level spells? hmmm more thought will be needed for this....

Zergrusheddie
2010-04-02, 12:57 PM
With this interpretation, a Save or Die is less useful than just unloading with a butt load of damage with a spell.

Arcane Thesis Orb of Force + Empower Spell + Maximize Spell is a 7th level slot, same as Finger of Death.

Shooting a level 15 Barbarian with Finger of Death does 15d12. The Orb does 116.25 damage, as opposed to an average of 97.5. Orb also only requires a touch attack, does not allow SR, and has no Save involved.
Shooting a level 15 Wizard with Finger of Death does 15d4. The Orb still does 116.25 damage, but this time Finger of Death drops to 37.5.

Save or Dies are tricky. They are either super crazy powerful ("Great. The Dragon rolled a 1 on his save. You guys win...") or they are just not worthwhile because they are often too high level, offer saves and SR, and many enemies are immune to their effects. The best way to avoid the game of Heads or Tails is just to not use them though.

Stubbed Tongue
2010-04-02, 02:38 PM
..... Break Enchantment used.

You do realize that break enchantment takes 10 rounds to cast right?

snoopy13a
2010-04-02, 02:44 PM
There's no reason that you have to use save-or-dies. Your NPC wizards could prefer direct damage spells and you can avoid monsters that have save-or-die attacks. Sure, the players may have an advantage in that they'd still be able to use save-or-die spells but that can be balanced by increasing the number or power of the baddies.

jiriku
2010-04-02, 02:59 PM
I have seen a variant proposed under which save-or-die effects instead deal several dice of Con damage.

Myself as DM, I simply do not use them. I can scare my players without that junk.

ericgrau
2010-04-02, 03:44 PM
Ya, simply not giving them to monsters does work. As for PCs, as mentioned high level monsters tend to be well defended against them making them fairly sub-par. For one, direct damage is faster on average. For all the guff direct damage got after Logic Ninja flaunted battlefield control instead, I still don't see how save-or-die supporters slipped in on the whole issue. Single target SoD's (but not multi-target SoS's) are really quite lousy against the high level monsters that appear at the same time as them.

Draz74
2010-04-02, 04:43 PM
I personally quite like the way the Death Domain power works. Roll a bunch of damage ... if it exceeds the target's HP, target dies. If it doesn't exceed the target's HP, no damage.

Godskook
2010-04-02, 05:07 PM
You're forgetting that wizard blasting, out of the box, still does 1d6/caster level reflex for half, and can easily be maximized or empowered, and I'm just using core. Any save or die worth casting should do significantly more damage than that, or it isn't worth casting.

Draz74
2010-04-02, 05:14 PM
You're forgetting that wizard blasting, out of the box, still does 1d6/caster level reflex for half, and can easily be maximized or empowered, and I'm just using core. Any save or die worth casting should do significantly more damage than that, or it isn't worth casting.

Was this at me? If it was, I have three things to say:

- if other magic (including blasting) is overpowering balanced Save-or-Dies, nerf it! :smalltongue:
- Save-or-Dies wouldn't have to follow the Death Domain ability exactly. They could have their damage boosted if they're just not worth it normally.
- Note that the Death Domain thing doesn't allow a save.

Godskook
2010-04-02, 05:49 PM
Was this at me? If it was, I have three things to say:

- if other magic (including blasting) is overpowering balanced Save-or-Dies, nerf it! :smalltongue:

I chose non-optimized evocation because it is an example in which the statement 'nerf it' does not apply. Evocation is already a sub-par choice for blasting, compared to things like psionics and DFAs. Nerf Evocation damage and you'd have to overhaul the entire system.

And no, it wasn't at you, it was at everyone suggesting 1 die of damage per target's HD. Tagging the L20 Fighter for 20d8(average: 90 damage) might sound like a good idea, but grabbing arcane thesis on a cone of cold and dumping empower and maximize on it will deal 90 + 15d6/2(average: 142), but Cone of Cold is an AoE. Any save or die that does comparable damage to a Cone of Cold isn't a save or die, its blasting.

Nidogg
2010-04-02, 05:52 PM
If your party shirks from fighting through S-o-ds then remove their ultra spells. Spell turning, Greater dispell, high SR monsters, counterspelling or if your feeling evil Antimagic feild. or just Death ward. Bodaks and their Lather, rinse repeat bretheren are a pain though so have to be dealt with accordingly. How? Dont ask me...

ericgrau
2010-04-02, 06:03 PM
Was this at me? If it was, I have three things to say:

- if other magic (including blasting) is overpowering balanced Save-or-Dies, nerf it! :smalltongue:
- Save-or-Dies wouldn't have to follow the Death Domain ability exactly. They could have their damage boosted if they're just not worth it normally.
- Note that the Death Domain thing doesn't allow a save.

I'll be the first to say that direct damage is underrated, but even so if you nerf save-or-dies and if you nerf direct damage you'll quickly need to nerf many other spells too... pretty much all combat magic since you're nerfing SoD's which are the worst combat spells on average (barring crazy lucky as the main issue is that SoD's are too random). Pretty much only morning buffs and utility spells would be left untouched.

jseah
2010-04-02, 07:34 PM
see, that's basically the same as removing them from the game entirely. No wizard who's survived long enough to actually cast a SoD would ever do so, since he could do far more damage simply by blasting at you and your friends, instead of surrendering 3 rounds of actions. There's a reason why the Assassin's Death Attack is seen as the PrC's worst class feature, despite being its 'signature move'.
Why not let it not take your actions for the rounds then. You can study them like an Assassin's Death Attack. Basically, anything you do for those three rounds must involve your attention on that guy. (1 standard action/spell/attack that affects him counts)

So at least SoDs become tactically preventable and hard to use, but insanely powerful when they connect (to the tune of either no save or around +8)

Greenish
2010-04-02, 08:11 PM
What we've done in my games is that save or dies set you at -1 and dying. Most people will die without aid quickly, but your team mates can save you under most circumstances. Works well. Save or dies are feared without being character enders every time they work.That sounds great, many of the ideas thrown around here get too complicated for my small head, but that's simple and elegant.

Serpentine
2010-04-02, 10:05 PM
You do realize that break enchantment takes 10 rounds to cast right?I do now! Yeah, I'm not the best houseruler. Any thoughts on what to replace it with? And I'm more than happy to hear other criticisms about those...

Anonymouswizard
2010-04-03, 03:24 AM
How about this simple variant:

If you fail the save for a SoD you are on a number of negative hit points equal to the spell level-1. Each round, if you are not stabilized you take 1d3 hit points of damage instead of 1.

That means that a finger of death leaves you on -6hp, and if you are not cured or stabilized then you die in 2-4 rounds. Power word: kill leaves you at -8hp, and you die in 1-2 rounds.

It makes save or dies effective when they do work, but makes it s you have a chance to survive. However, I am also a believer in making save DCs increase with caster level.

PhoenixRivers
2010-04-03, 03:34 AM
Alternately, you can have SoD's do the following:

Victim's current HP become -1.
Victim's Maximum HP becomes 0.
Heal check (DC 20) required to tell the victim is alive.

Player can be stabilized as normal, but does not regain consciousness until HP>0. Break enchantment, Restoration, or more powerful healing magics can remove the Max HP limit.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-04-03, 04:24 AM
Alternately, you can have SoD's do the following:

Victim's current HP become -1.
Victim's Maximum HP becomes 0.
Heal check (DC 20) required to tell the victim is alive.

Player can be stabilized as normal, but does not regain consciousness until HP>0. Break enchantment, Restoration, or more powerful healing magics can remove the Max HP limit.That sounds like a great option when it comes to stuff like Finger of Death, but what about Destruction?

I also wonder how anticlimactic Finger of Death and other similar SoDs really are if you have a party Cleric with Revivify. "More like Finger of Inconvenience!" I always found Dominate Person/Monster to be much more annoying than the death spells.

Darastin
2010-04-03, 05:37 AM
I also wonder how anticlimactic Finger of Death and other similar SoDs really are if you have a party Cleric with Revivify.
Does Revivify even work on targets killed by [Death]-effects?


Back on topic:
IMHO, true save-or-dies only have limited applications. If I want wo win (or at least survive) a battle, I don't care if my opponent is stunned, nauseated, panicked, paralyzed, confused, dominated, walled in, teleported far away or outright killed as long as he is out for a while. OK, dominated would be better than the rest since it also adds an ally to my side, but otherwise, all of the effects mentioned above remove enemies from the scene.

However, there's still hit-and-run scenarios. If I can't (or don't need to) win immediately, then I'll try to strike fast, inflict as much long-lasting damage as possible and retreat before the enemy can retaliate. Most of the conditions mentioned above have no long-lasting effect, so they're useless here. True save-or-dies on the other hand actually weaken the opposition for quite a while - even in they have access to Resurrection, it costs valuable ressources that are usually quite limited and perhaps not available at all (Who carries around enough diamond dust for several Resurrections?).

Note: When I wrote "I", I never told whether I'm a PC or NPC - because from an in-game-perspective, it does not make a difference.

Changing true save-or-dies into save-or-disable makes them useless for the latter scenario and not much of a difference in the first (where battlefield control or domination are already better choices). I'd rather just make the saves easier to make them less nasty but still viable under the right circumstances.

Just my two Euro-cents;
Darastin

PhoenixRivers
2010-04-03, 05:40 AM
That sounds like a great option when it comes to stuff like Finger of Death, but what about Destruction?

I also wonder how anticlimactic Finger of Death and other similar SoDs really are if you have a party Cleric with Revivify. "More like Finger of Inconvenience!" I always found Dominate Person/Monster to be much more annoying than the death spells.

That's easy. Death spells that destroy the body still work as intended. At that level, PC's have access to resurrection.


Does Revivify even work on targets killed by [Death]-effects?


Back on topic:
IMHO, true save-or-dies only have limited applications. If I want wo win (or at least survive) a battle, I don't care if my opponent is stunned, nauseated, panicked, paralyzed, confused, dominated, walled in, teleported far away or outright killed as long as he is out for a while. OK, dominated would be better than the rest since it also adds an ally to my side, but otherwise, all of the effects mentioned above remove enemies from the scene.

However, there's still hit-and-run scenarios. If I can't (or don't need to) win immediately, then I'll try to strike fast, inflict as much long-lasting damage as possible and retreat before the enemy can retaliate. Most of the conditions mentioned above have no long-lasting effect, so they're useless here. True save-or-dies on the other hand actually weaken the opposition for quite a while - even in they have access to Resurrection, it costs valuable ressources that are usually quite limited and perhaps not available at all (Who carries around enough diamond dust for several Resurrections?).Many spells create things, or translocate people, or call in something that CAN resurrect.

Note: When I wrote "I", I never told whether I'm a PC or NPC - because from an in-game-perspective, it does not make a difference.

Changing true save-or-dies into save-or-disable makes them useless for the latter scenario and not much of a difference in the first (where battlefield control or domination are already better choices). I'd rather just make the saves easier to make them less nasty but still viable under the right circumstances.

Depends on the scale of the Hit and run. If it's several hits in a day, or even several in a 5 minute period, they can sap resources.

magic9mushroom
2010-04-03, 06:18 AM
If your party shirks from fighting through S-o-ds then remove their ultra spells. Spell turning, Greater dispell, high SR monsters, counterspelling or if your feeling evil Antimagic feild. or just Death ward. Bodaks and their Lather, rinse repeat bretheren are a pain though so have to be dealt with accordingly. How? Dont ask me...

Antimagic field isn't very effective unless you get the caster in it, and that can be difficult. Implosion ignores Death Ward (as does Holy Word). Spell Turning doesn't work against rays or area effects. SR can be Assayed.

Jergmo
2010-04-03, 06:20 AM
Disintegrate
A target that fails their Fort save takes 2d4 points of Con damage each round, of which 1 is drain, for a number of rounds equal to Caster Level. Bear’s Endurance slows it, but it can only be stopped before death with Break Enchantment.[/spoiler]

But...then you can't use it against Undead and objects. :smallfrown:

Serpentine
2010-04-03, 07:14 AM
But...then you can't use it against Undead and objects. :smallfrown:Oooo... Good point. Hrm. I'll have to think about that.