Save or Dies Converted to Save or Con Damage

[Gray5656]

I have heard people mention this houserule several times ( or maybe it was one person mentioning it in several different places I can't remember:smallamused:)

I wanted to know if it is any good?

Does it change the dynamics of higher levels?

[AstralFire]

I've never heard of this one, though I've often contemplated turning them into Save or Damage.

[erikun]

I've mentioned using Coup de Grace (or attacking while helpless, or swimming in lava) as dealing damage directly to the Con score. It gets rid of the messy auto-crit/full damage stuff that you'd otherwise do to get through an opponent's HP. It works reasonably well, as deadly attacks can still kill you, but standard fights aren't much more dangerous.

I also get rid of negative HP. If you drop to 0 HP, you start bleeding Con. Someone needs to patch you up before you bleed to death (and even when they do, you're weaker after bleeding out for a few rounds).

I haven't converted Save-or-Die into Con damage. I'd like to, specifically allowing the Assassin's Save-or-Die into a damage-Con attack (minus the sneak attack damage, of course). Perhaps you're talking about someone else, though.

[Gray5656]

I recall Reading somewhere on this forum, about how they converted spells like finger of death into save or 4d6 con damage, or something like that.

[Jack_Simth]

I recall Reading somewhere on this forum, about how they converted spells like finger of death into save or 4d6 con damage, or something like that.
It doesn't actually nerf the wizard overly much, though. They just switch from the Save or Die spells to the Save or Lose spells.

[Collin152]

It doesn't actually nerf the wizard overly much, though. They just switch from the Save or Die spells to the Save or Lose spells.

Losing enough Con to make you lose generally makes you die.

[Thurbane]

Sounds like a decent houserule to me...put it in line with the change of poison from 2e to 3e (save vs. death became save vs. ability loss).

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Sounds like a decent houserule to me...put it in line with the change of poison from 2e to 3e (save vs. death became save vs. ability loss).Spells that won't be affected by this:
The Orb Line
Glitterdust
Enervation
Haste
Summonings
Contingency
The majority of Save-or-Lose spells
Celerity

Pretty much every spell from every school except Necromancy would retain the same power level. If you're going to re-balance, do it better.

[Thurbane]

Well, I was referring specifically to save-or-dies, not save-or-sucks. *shrug*

[AstralFire]

Spells that won't be affected by this:
The Orb Line
Glitterdust
Enervation
Haste
Summonings
Contingency
The majority of Save-or-Lose spells
Celerity

Pretty much every spell from every school except Necromancy would retain the same power level. If you're going to re-balance, do it better.

Well, you have to start somewhere, don't you?

And there's not really a good way to prune summonings except to make them completely unusable in-combat unless you specialize for them.

[Jack_Simth]

Losing enough Con to make you lose generally makes you die.
Not what I meant. I meant the wizard changes his spell selection to accommodate.

Save or Die a lot less reliable? Fine. Instead of Phantasmal Killer, you use Enervation. Instead of Finger of Death, you use the offensive version of Plane Shift, and so on.

[Gray5656]

Yes, it probably would not nerf a serious wizard to any real extend, but might be useful in a less optimized campaign.

Also, it might be good for the dm who doesn't want to use save-or-dies, because they can be really unfun if you get killed by just rolling a one. At least this option gives you slightly higher chances of survival, while still doing something.

I guess its not meant to be so much of a nerf to wizards, more of an allowing of the use of Finger of Death and other spells, in a less optimized campaign, where perhaps the players have not pumped there saves as much as they should have. It really just allows the dm to throw spells like that without worrying that they will take out pc's so easily as to be anticlimactic.

[Collin152]

Not what I meant. I meant the wizard changes his spell selection to accommodate.

Save or Die a lot less reliable? Fine. Instead of Phantasmal Killer, you use Enervation. Instead of Finger of Death, you use the offensive version of Plane Shift, and so on.

Ah.
This is true.

[tyckspoon]

And there's not really a good way to prune summonings except to make them completely unusable in-combat unless you specialize for them.

You could just leave them alone. Most Summons aren't a particular problem; it's the Calling spells that break things. (go go rules pedantry!) And possibly zoo-master Druids using Animal Growth, but that's more to do with Animal Growth being such a ridiculously good buff. Many of the Calling effects aren't too much of a problem either, if you either are willing to accept the results of nearly unfettered access to Wish or make a rule to limit what it can do. Gate is the big offender- maybe just split its 'call a creature' function off into a new 9th level Summoning spell with an XP component. Since it's now Summoning, you can't actually do anything permanent to the resulting creature, which disqualifies some of the more egregious Gate abuses. Probably should also borrow the rule that a summoned creature can't use its own summoning powers from the fiends in order to curtail Titan chains and the like.

[Chronos]

Most Summons aren't a particular problem; it's the Calling spells that break things. (go go rules pedantry!)With summoning spells, it's simple enough: A summoned creature will refuse to use any spell, or any ability simulating a spell, that has an expensive material component or XP cost. Now, you can't quite import that rule directly to calling spells: The image of a wizard calling up a demon out of a pentagram to grant him wishes is too iconic. What you could do, though, is give all calling spells an optional XP component (for Gate, in addition to the one it already has). When a caster casts a calling spell, he can choose to spend any amount of XP on it he wants. The called creature will then use spells/spell-likes with expensive material or XP components, up to a limit of the amount of XP the wizard put into the spell (with material components counting as 5 GP = 1 XP).


As for save-or-sucks, some of them could just swap in some other form of ability damage or penalty instead. Sleep might decrease your Wis, for instance, while paralysis could be a decrease to your Dex. The really tricky one, I think, would be Baleful Polymorph. When you turn someone into a toad, the toad is still perfectly healthy; it's just useless for actually doing anything.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

With summoning spells, it's simple enough: A summoned creature will refuse to use any spell, or any ability simulating a spell, that has an expensive material component or XP cost. Now, you can't quite import that rule directly to calling spells: The image of a wizard calling up a demon out of a pentagram to grant him wishes is too iconic. What you could do, though, is give all calling spells an optional XP component (for Gate, in addition to the one it already has). When a caster casts a calling spell, he can choose to spend any amount of XP on it he wants. The called creature will then use spells/spell-likes with expensive material or XP components, up to a limit of the amount of XP the wizard put into the spell (with material components counting as 5 GP = 1 XP).The problem is stuff like Wish as an SLA(which means no XP cost).

[Collin152]

The problem is stuff like Wish as an SLA(which means no XP cost).

Read:
Simulating a spell with an XP cost.

He's got it covered.

[Gavin Sage]

Strictly speaking there its very hard to create any sort of fix for save-or-die. Because instant death is well either going to be broken good because it works that like it says on the tin, or is near useless because the tin lied.

Changing to Con damage is well changing the effect to no longer be a save-or-die really. It takes a chunk of hitpoints and a renders a save penalty. Leave the hitpoints to the fighter to chew on and cast a save-or-suck spell at that point.

Better fix might be to attach say an XP cost to casting a save-or-die so a mage is reticient to prepare only Finger of Deaths all the time. Or an exspensive material component and that the DM makes hard to acquire enmass. Or put a PW:Kill style limit on absolute death case while everything over it takes say 50% HP damage.

[AstralFire]

Strictly speaking there its very hard to create any sort of fix for save-or-die. Because instant death is well either going to be broken good because it works that like it says on the tin, or is near useless because the tin lied.

...There is a happy medium. The problem with, for example, Final Fantasy insta-kills is that they have no medium. If the spell did respectable if not huge damage instead (with a chance at doing enough to insta-kill even a tough mook) no one would mind it.

[nagora]

I've mentioned using Coup de Grace (or attacking while helpless, or swimming in lava) as dealing damage directly to the Con score. It gets rid of the messy auto-crit/full damage stuff that you'd otherwise do to get through an opponent's HP.
Just make it an auto-kill as it was in 1e. You can give a high level victim a save if you want (with damage done as normal if they save).

I don't have any major problem with save or dies; I have a problem with DMs who put them in places where the characters could not reasonably expect them and therefore try to avoid them. Likewise, high-level spells are fair enough - do you expect an arch-mage to not be able to deal death with a snap of his/her fingers?

[AstralFire]

Likewise, high-level spells are fair enough - do you expect an arch-mage to not be able to deal death with a snap of his/her fingers?

To someone who's supposed to stand an even shot of defeating him and is in pretty good health and raring to go? Yes.

To a level 5 commoner, then by all means, insta-death away.

[Jim Profit]

I love being creative. As such, I'd rather houserule every D&D monster then rely on the 4th edition manual. Here's one of my favorite monsters..

Shadow Level: 12
Strength: -- Dexterity: 14 Constitution: 14 Intelligence: 12 Wisdom: 13 Charisma: 12
AC: 18 Reflex: 19 Fortitude: 18 Will: 18 HP: 50 Speed: 10 squares.
Feats: Weapon Finnease.

Racial Power: Shadow Concealment.
Depending on the lighting, a shadow is either granted concealment or total concealment.

Racial Power: Create Spawn.
A foe killed by the shadow's shadow touch must roll a d100 and roll equal to or lower then their wisdom or charisma score. (Whichever is higher) If they fail, they become a shadow within the next 1d4 minutes.

At will Power: Shadow Touch. (Melee)
Attack: Dexterity vs AC/Fortitude
Hit: 2d6 damage and an additional 2d6 damage. (See text)

The shadow touch attack deals 2d6 damage, if this damage equals to or exceeds the foe's fortitude defense, another 2d6 damage is dealt. This continues untill the damage is lower then their fortitude defense.


Low level characters beware.

[Reinboom]

To someone who's supposed to stand an even shot of defeating him and is in pretty good health and raring to go? Yes.

To a level 5 commoner, then by all means, insta-death away.

Hmm.
Save damage. Save vs taking damage to the save score itself. When the save reaches 0, you die. you get the negative effect of the spell in question (to accommodate sleep, and other save or lose).

I think I can apply this.

[Saph]

To be honest, I don't think it's necessary for higher levels. The reason I say this is because our WLD campaign has been going through levels 14-15 recently, and I've had a lot of first-hand experience.

The section of dungeon we're in has been very lethal, but it's rarely been the save-or-dies that are the problem. The fatalities over the last half-dozen sessions have been:

2 from direct damage (maximised fire storm)
1 from Constitution loss (mob attack by a group of seventeen wraiths and dread wraiths)
1 from save-or-die (wail of the banshee)

And save-or-dies from the party directed at the enemies are just flat-out useless. Everything is either immune to them, or is advanced with so many Hit Dice that it can only fail its save on a 1 anyway.

So I think in our game, it wouldn't have changed the dynamic, and wouldn't have made much difference full stop (apart from making things a little easier for the PCs).

- Saph

[nagora]

To someone who's supposed to stand an even shot of defeating him and is in pretty good health and raring to go? Yes.

To a level 5 commoner, then by all means, insta-death away.
I know saving throws have been battered by the ravages of passing editions, but surely even now the high level character is much less likely to be killed by such spells than a peasant?

[AstralFire]

I know saving throws have been battered by the ravages of passing editions, but surely even now the high level character is much less likely to be killed by such spells than a peasant?

Theoretically, yes, and SoDs don't look that great if you're glancing over core very casually. However, they're pretty easy to pump up, and I generally take issue with "or dieeeee!" as a mechanic in a rules-heavy system with an abstract mechanic like HP that is somehow equally applicable to dodging, surviving lava, and getting the life force sucked out of you, but not to someone using a spell to crush you.

[Gavin Sage]

...There is a happy medium. The problem with, for example, Final Fantasy insta-kills is that they have no medium. If the spell did respectable if not huge damage instead (with a chance at doing enough to insta-kill even a tough mook) no one would mind it.

Except FF shows the latter variety of near uselessness because they don't work on anything but the mooks you could take out fairly easy to begin with. At least to my recollection I haven't broken out the games in a while.

Now lots of damage is respectable, but its again changing the purpose. I don't have an issue with that. It is saying though there is no instant death because the notion is too unbalancing.

[Eldariel]

Gavin: The problem is stuff like Limit Break: The End. It kills every opponent in the game including the final boss. Everyone of those has something like that, be it Joker Doom or whatever.


Anyways, this is a great idea. The prime issue with SoDs is that they are pretty much "you save or new character". If you instead take considerable ability damage, you can still fix yourself up. Same with most other insta-kill things - you can counteract the spells even if you fail the save (for example, Ironheart Surge deals with a good number of the "lose"-conditions bestown - you can just Plane Shift instantly back when tossed to a random lethal plane, etc.).

So I think this change is great. It may not nerf spells overtly much, but it makes the fights more survivable and less reliant on a single die roll. As always, players should have multiples. I think I can make use of this, especially in another 3.5 rework. Spells should be lethal, but not instantly lethal to level 20 characters. Save-or-Sucks is what a Wizard should specialize in, since that gives the other party a fighting chance too, especially if they're prepared.