Gimmick or Viable Combat feature?

[MrStabby]

I am building a theme for a series of encounters for a cult of an ancient death god.

One thing I was looking to add to some of the more powerful enemies (so no more than two per encounter I guess) was a save or die effect.

Specifically I was thinking a melee weapon attack would deal damage as normal but would also trigger death saves (after damage). At the start of the PC's turn they make a death save. 3 Successes and the effect ends. 3 Fails and they die. Criticals count for double as usual. Anything that would stabilise removes the effect. Anything that would cause a failed death save does so.

The only real difference between falling unconscious and this is that the PCs would not be unconscious and would be free to act as normal.


I see this acting to give the players a choice of what risks to take. Risks of failed death saves - including critical failures, taking hits and generally dicing with death. This vs the risks of using too many resources, taking too many turns for combat due to using actions to heal rather than inflict damage.



If you were my players how would you react to this? I am guessing the concept might be in play for three encounters. Players are level 12 so there is no shortage of resources. Out of the 5 players 4 can cast healing spells. Would it be a cheap trick or add some entertainment to these encounters? I don't see much risk of too many failed death saves - +4 form a paladin in the group, bless as an option, bardic support...

[Sigreid]

I don't have a problem with it in principal. How likely would it be for your party to realize normal stabilizing stuff would work? How would it interact with class features that hold off death?

[Galadhrim]

Would you still get two automatic death save failures from taking damage? If so, a player could end up dead before any other player got a turn. That doesn't seem like your intent. It would probably suck for you and your players.

[Tiadoppler]

Tracking an additional effect that doesn't end on the first save is kind of annoying. What if, when the attack hits, there's just an immediate death save? That's a bit less random than needing 3 successes to end a condition.


Because this condition requires 3 successes to end:

Let's assume you have a 75% chance to succeed at a death save. The chance of succeeding 3 times in a row is 42%. That means there's a 58% chance of failing at least one death save... after each hit? Do the successes needed to end the condition reset each time the player is hit?




Edit: I'd recommend NOT having this on an at-will ability. 1/day is better for this. Maybe one enemy, with a 1/day aoe that does this would be okay. Death Saves are meant as a way to SAVE a character by keeping them technically alive after HP loss... not as an alternative HP system to kill a PC with.

I'd suggest that the mechanics you use prevent this ability from killing the PC if the PC is still at positive HP.

[Mjolnirbear]

With a 50% chance to fail on a death save, and having very recently died from a natural one *and* watched a player two weeks later also die from a natural one, I would be incensed to see this, especially if I were a melee character.

I heartily recommend against it.

[Aett_Thorn]

I think that it would be a fun and unique challenge. It might push for different tactics going into fights for the party, where they need to set up some situations where the melee characters can get some bottlenecks so that they can't be attacked by too many enemies, and therefore they get hit a bit less often.

I would say that if you can find a way to balance this in some other fights so that melee isn't the ONLY ones who are screwed, it'll be fine. Or at least let the melees be able to use the weapons for a bit after their owner dies. Turning weapons like this against the enemies should be allowed.

[imanidiot]

I would just have the PC in question make one Death save. If they succeed nothing happens. If they fail have them mark off one Death save and tell them that it doesn't go away until they take a long rest.

I use effects like that pretty often for magical traps or "death" spells. If they get 3 failed saves and drop to 0 Hp they die. If they get 1 or 2 and drop to 0 they just start with that many failed saves.

[Anonymouswizard]

If you were a group that carried failed saves with you until the next long rest (one of the best houserules I've seen on this forum), then monsters with a 1/encounter one death save version of this could be interesting.

It should also appear gradually. At the beginning you don't seem then, then they start getting used by nearly-dead opponents as a 'soften them up for the next guys', then after you've spent enough time to give PCs a few failed death saves enemies begin using it proactively to try and take them out quickly.

If you do this you should make sure a non-long rest way to remove a failed Death Save exists, especially if you give some enemies in a climactic encounter a ranged version (say 40ft, because yes I'm a massive troll who totally would give a boss enemy high movement speed, the ability to force instant death saves at 40ft, and an aura that damages everybody within 10 feet at the start of his turn).


The version you have isn't exactly bad, it's a decent way to run a save-or-die, but it'll cause complaints until the players get used to it.

[MrStabby]

Wow. Thanks for the replies. A lot of stuff here to think about/incorporate. My immediate reactions (I may come to different conclusions based on more thought later.



I don't have a problem with it in principal. How likely would it be for your party to realize normal stabilizing stuff would work? How would it interact with class features that hold off death?

Yeah the party will realise. I will give a lot of opportunity to come across enough historical accounts to warn them - if they don't pick it up I will explain how it works when they are under the effect. It seems a bit harsh to spring this on someone without an explanation.


Would you still get two automatic death save failures from taking damage? If so, a player could end up dead before any other player got a turn. That doesn't seem like your intent. It would probably suck for you and your players.

The intent is to give a single failed save for taking damage. It will require some careful encounter design to ensure that the party has the tools to manage the risks. Coupled with "dumb" enemies like zombies with no ranged attacks it could be OK. The party can split up to ensure that no player can get multiple hits on them without a chance to be healed.


Tracking an additional effect that doesn't end on the first save is kind of annoying. What if, when the attack hits, there's just an immediate death save? That's a bit less random than needing 3 successes to end a condition.


Because this condition requires 3 successes to end:

Let's assume you have a 75% chance to succeed at a death save. The chance of succeeding 3 times in a row is 42%. That means there's a 58% chance of failing at least one death save... after each hit? Do the successes needed to end the condition reset each time the player is hit?




Edit: I'd recommend NOT having this on an at-will ability. 1/day is better for this. Maybe one enemy, with a 1/day aoe that does this would be okay. Death Saves are meant as a way to SAVE a character by keeping them technically alive after HP loss... not as an alternative HP system to kill a PC with.

I'd suggest that the mechanics you use prevent this ability from killing the PC if the PC is still at positive HP.

A lot here to think about. Saves needing to be tracked is going to be a bit more bookkeeping, this is true and it is a bit of a downside. For the success - I would be keeping the condition "live" until it resulted in recovery or death. A subsequent hit would still count as a failed death save - it seems like penalty enough.

The AoE idea has merit. it certainly gets round the issue of some players being more victimised by it than others. On the other hand i like the idea of it being something that the party can play around - something they expect, fear and have to deal with. A more powerful up front AoE ability loses a little of that fear.

I do get that this use isn't the intention of the death saves and that this subverts it a little. I really wanted something with a feel of a doom clock and it being death coming for the PC in an abstract sense rather than any specific cause such as a damage type. That there was a mechanic already in the game I could grab for this was just my starting point.


With a 50% chance to fail on a death save, and having very recently died from a natural one *and* watched a player two weeks later also die from a natural one, I would be incensed to see this, especially if I were a melee character.

I heartily recommend against it.

OK, so this would be a strong vote against it. It seems i should maybe try and limit the in-game effects and make this more rare than i was intending. I don't know how you would feel about it if you could be immediately raised after the combat (high level cleric in the party). It is also at a level where this is a risk the party chooses - they can eliminate the effect at worst with only one death save to take.


I think that it would be a fun and unique challenge. It might push for different tactics going into fights for the party, where they need to set up some situations where the melee characters can get some bottlenecks so that they can't be attacked by too many enemies, and therefore they get hit a bit less often.

I would say that if you can find a way to balance this in some other fights so that melee isn't the ONLY ones who are screwed, it'll be fine. Or at least let the melees be able to use the weapons for a bit after their owner dies. Turning weapons like this against the enemies should be allowed.

The way I was thinking about working this would be to have one fight where this is a very minor element and a pretty easy fight - a live demonstration of the ability so the party gets how it works and can plan around it. Another fight where it is a big deal and how to manage the threat of this effect is a central theme to the encounter. Finally it may make a reappearance in the "boss" fight at the end - a tough fight where not everyone will expect to walk away.

There is kind of a balance (if a somewhat asymmetrical one). The tanks are exposed to more risk but it is the casters that really can carry the weight - the constant cost of healing is going to mean that their resources will be pretty severely strained in later fights that day. This will need a lot of care in encounter design. I do like your point about bottlenecks - defensive locations and similar to keep risk as low as possible.


I would just have the PC in question make one Death save. If they succeed nothing happens. If they fail have them mark off one Death save and tell them that it doesn't go away until they take a long rest.

I use effects like that pretty often for magical traps or "death" spells. If they get 3 failed saves and drop to 0 Hp they die. If they get 1 or 2 and drop to 0 they just start with that many failed saves.

This is an interesting take. If I have this right it puts the tension on the day rather than on the encounter? It would have a very different dynamic to the one I was looking for, but that is not a bad thing. It is worth thinking about. It does lose (to me anyway) a little of the vibe of unexplained doom stalking the player - there is still a real source of death played out if they are to die.


If you were a group that carried failed saves with you until the next long rest (one of the best houserules I've seen on this forum), then monsters with a 1/encounter one death save version of this could be interesting.

It should also appear gradually. At the beginning you don't seem then, then they start getting used by nearly-dead opponents as a 'soften them up for the next guys', then after you've spent enough time to give PCs a few failed death saves enemies begin using it proactively to try and take them out quickly.

If you do this you should make sure a non-long rest way to remove a failed Death Save exists, especially if you give some enemies in a climactic encounter a ranged version (say 40ft, because yes I'm a massive troll who totally would give a boss enemy high movement speed, the ability to force instant death saves at 40ft, and an aura that damages everybody within 10 feet at the start of his turn).


The version you have isn't exactly bad, it's a decent way to run a save-or-die, but it'll cause complaints until the players get used to it.

I was never really a fan of save or die effects. They seemed too brutal and lacking in interaction. I had hoped that by allowing some interaction with the effect on the clock that this could make SoD be a bit more fun.