tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post7474133718582318437..comments2024-03-29T00:32:33.920-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: Save or Die, Part IIIJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-13758518711029346212009-07-17T07:30:40.512-04:002009-07-17T07:30:40.512-04:00Effects that bypass the ablative combat subsystem ...Effects that bypass the ablative <em>combat</em> <em>sub</em>system that is just <em>one part</em> of the game keep that subsystem from making the game feel too odd, especially outside of combat.<br /><br />Play however you want, but realizing that the tyranny of hit points was a misinterpretation on my part is one of the things that brought me back to D&D and which make it fun for me again.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-18168313526337347742009-07-17T04:26:46.443-04:002009-07-17T04:26:46.443-04:00A dislike for the "easy death/easy resurrecti...A dislike for the "easy death/easy resurrection" cycle certainly contributes to the Save or Die problem, but it's not the biggest problem.<br /><br />The real problem is that the mechanic <a href="http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/saveordie.html" rel="nofollow">bypasses the successful and effective ablative combat system at the heart of the game</a>. The result isn't fun to suffer or to inflict and tends to break down badly at higher levels of play (particularly in later editions).Justin Alexanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02227895898395353754noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-7939422888100685302009-07-10T16:38:44.688-04:002009-07-10T16:38:44.688-04:00I can’t locate my copy of First Fantasy Campaign a...I can’t locate my copy of <i>First Fantasy Campaign</i> at the moment, but as I recall, that was originally the case. You made a save to avoid being killed by an attack. Hit points were invented because that much “save or die” wasn’t fun.<br /><br />...for them. For some games, I think very deadly combat like that would work. I don’t know that I’d call it D&D, though.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-51932025584463083352009-07-10T16:32:44.408-04:002009-07-10T16:32:44.408-04:00@ akkots
D&D without HPs could be an interest...@ akkots<br /><br />D&D without HPs could be an interesting experience (although arguably not D&D anymore, not that I want to get into THAT debate again!). You could also combine saves and HP - I am envisioning perhaps your garden variety physical attacks requiring a save vs. damage, success resulting in no damage and failure resulting in a significant loss of HP (perhaps twice as much damage as normal D&D, so a dagger could do 2d4, etc.) Particularly strong creatures/attacks and natural 20s would require a save with failure resulting in crippling, each failed save resulting in the temporary loss of a limb, eye, etc. Called shots to the head and other such attacks might require a save vs. death. This of course would be much more deadly than regular D&D but it might be fun with the right party (a bunch of sneaky guys who excel at avoiding direct conflict might do fine). It of course would also be not very old school, what with all the extra rolling and rules for what began as a very simple attack and damage mechanic! I guess I have gotten pretty far of the original topic but it has been an interesting digression (for myself at least).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-43221980640098575432009-07-10T16:20:40.569-04:002009-07-10T16:20:40.569-04:00Thanks Carl for your insight, really I don't t...Thanks Carl for your insight, really I don't think "save or die" doesn't work, but imho neither is the best way to manage certain effects. At the moment I prefer other solution, but understand the game could be still enjoyable with it. I wondering on D&D without HPs, managed only by "save or...". Could be interesting. <br />"When I want to play something else, I will pull another game from the shelf." Or starting to deeply houseruling D&D as a lot of people do since 1972 ;) It depends on how much would you like the game is different.<br />PS Robert, definitly agree, variety is a good thing in many aspects of life!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-11587345400739858932009-07-10T15:46:12.060-04:002009-07-10T15:46:12.060-04:00D&D has always seemed to me a "genre"...D&D has always seemed to me a "genre" or "world" unto itself, rather than a simulation of anything else in particular.<br /><br />When I want to play something else, I will pull another game from the shelf.Dwayanuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07388657516129827977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-45802589466775206622009-07-10T13:48:28.272-04:002009-07-10T13:48:28.272-04:00“Variety” That was exactly the word that came to m...“Variety” That was exactly the word that came to my mind.<br /><br />We want a variety of character classes. We want a variety of races. We want a variety of weapons. We want a variety of spells. We want a variety of magic items.<br /><br />A variety of threats leads to a variety of strategies and tactics to be employed.<br /><br />Hmm...have I just argued myself into supporting 3e’s ability damage? ^_^Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-53240613218881441572009-07-10T13:45:02.767-04:002009-07-10T13:45:02.767-04:00just another thought - as a player, I find it much...just another thought - as a player, I find it much easier to deal with a characters death if it is because of MY crappy roll, not a DM's brilliant damage roll. I know it is all random dice rolling, but somehow if I roll that 1 on a savings throw it feels like I deserve it, while if the DM rolls a bunch of 6's on damage dice and I end up toasted it feels like I had no control over it. I realize that this is not logical, but there is something to be said about having control of your own destiny through your own dice rolling.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-64514543641650070542009-07-10T13:42:59.783-04:002009-07-10T13:42:59.783-04:00"If finally I have to face a big monster, wit..."If finally I have to face a big monster, without "save or die" effect, too strong for me, it will affect my HP and I've still the possibility to survive (and escape, bargain, bluff or beg for life). [snip] But if I have to face a beholder death ray, a disintegration spell, or a howling banshee, my HP will be completly useless."<br /><br />Well that is where the savings throw comes in, isn't it? You have at least as good of a chance to survive the death ray or disintegration, etc., as you do to survive the meteor storm - you just have to make your save! The variable part is just put on the other side of the table - damage dealing effects require the DM to roll for damage, and a high roll might very well mean instant death, while save effects require the player to roll a save, and a low roll might very well mean instant death. <br /> You could think of HP themselves as a non-variable save against damage that increases with level. Something that does a ton of damage could still kill you just as dead as a death effect, and would be more likely to kill you at lower levels than higher levels, also just like a death effect. The only difference is that with a save vs. death you have a chance to avoid that death even at 1st level (sure, you might have to roll really high) while at 1st level you have NO chance to avoid death from that meteor swarm (or even fireball)! Yes, savings throws and HP are two different mechanics, but IMO that adds variety to the game.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57675598229719900192009-07-10T11:00:37.048-04:002009-07-10T11:00:37.048-04:00Rob thanks for your suggestions, in reality I'...Rob thanks for your suggestions, in reality I'm using those methods since a long time, in every D&D editions or other game I usually play :)<br />The point was another: If finally I have to face a big monster, without "save or die" effect, too strong for me, it will affect my HP and I've still the possibility to survive (and escape, bargain, bluff or beg for life). If I have to face a mighty wizard meteor swarm, it will affect again my HP (and still possibility to survive). But if I have to face a beholder death ray, a disintegration spell, or a howling banshee, my HP will be completly useless.<br />For me is still weird, but doesn't mean I cannot live with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-82995946966522693002009-07-10T10:42:11.799-04:002009-07-10T10:42:11.799-04:00@akkots:
"How can I get XP for gp if I don&#...@akkots:<br /><br />"How can I get XP for gp if I don't kill the monsters guarding them?"<br />Some methods: Stealth, trickery, negotiations. Better than almost anything else is figuring out how to render the monster harmless. A medusa with a sack tied over its head is pretty non-threatening, as is a wraith in a sunlit room, or a fire elemental when you have Protection from Fire cast. Every now and again you'll have a straight-up fight, but the trick there is learning what's worth killing and evading the rest. You don't want to fight giant centipedes, or wolves, or wandering goblin patrols, because they have barely any treasure. You DO want to fight the cheif at the goblin lair, though, because that's where he stashes the plunder he stole from all those caravans.<br /><br />"How can be so fearful fight a monster with save or die effect if is very easy to resurrect?"<br />Well, losing a cherished character can get pretty visceral, even if you can bring him back. Besides, there's still a cost to dying, even if its only XP or gold, and unless the group recovers your body they may not be able to return you to life, after all...<br /><br />"PS. Was a long time ago, but when I played several adventures old school I can remember that it was not so easy anticipate a hazard. Sometimes it was a trap to occur, or simply open a door, beyond which there was a beholder or a banshee waiting for us... not a question of smartness or prudence..."<br /><br />In a well-planned old school adventure, you should be able to get that information most of the time. Even assuming you can't learn something useful from an NPC, traps can be found with ten-foot poles or summoned minions. Scrying and clairvoyance spells can be used to scout ahead. Beholders might be spotted by petrified victims, dead carcasses, and lots of vertical shafts everywhere (they fly!). The area near the lair of a banshee is sure to be littered with the corpses and skeletons of unlucky dungeon delvers and scavengers. And never underestimate the value of flat out running for your life.Big McStrongmusclehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07067031012393190130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-31537216907619380382009-07-10T08:42:52.446-04:002009-07-10T08:42:52.446-04:00Do not agree on exceptions effect in earlier editi...Do not agree on exceptions effect in earlier editions were more interesting. At least I think they seemed more interesting due to the novelty of the game, and there's a lot of room for "lateral thinking" also in 3e or 4e.<br />But ultimately I agree with you. An inconsistent mechanic with the rest (save or die vs hp) does not mean it is wrong or not fun. Indeed, it can be (and often is), more fun. <br />I much appreciated your post, thanks. (After all I enjoyed with o/a d&d for over 20 years)<br />PS I also don't belive there's "a right way to play".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-13094105679925524922009-07-10T07:57:33.779-04:002009-07-10T07:57:33.779-04:00This isn’t meant to be a slam, but just an observa...This isn’t meant to be a slam, but just an observation. 4e touts its exception-based design. Yet (in my admittedly small experience with it) those exceptions have a lot of sameness to them. In earlier editions, the exceptions—like a monster with a “save or...” effect—were more interesting.<br /><br />How can you get the treasure without killing the monsters guarding it? Well, that’s the crux of the puzzle, right? If there were a simple answer, it wouldn’t make the game more interesting.<br /><br />To give one example though: I had a group that used smoke to keep some killer bees from attacking whilst they carefully removed the stash of treasure.<br /><br />A common complaint about early editions is that combat was just stand-up fights of hp attrition. One of the many reasons this shouldn’t be the case is monsters with exceptional abilities. A stand-up fight against such monsters is foolish. You have to find a way to neutralize the monster’s ability or attack it indirectly or figure out how to avoid it.<br /><br />As for not being able to anticipate a hazard, I can only suggest that either the DM isn’t giving fair warning, the PC’s aren’t be cautious enough, or both. That doesn’t mean that a “save or die” situation should <em>never</em> occur without warning, but it shouldn’t be commonly occurring without warning.<br /><br />How can there be fear with easy resurrection? Well, I’ve never played in a game where resurrection was really easy, but read Gygax’s story of fighting the golem in Maure Castle. Even with scrying, teleportation, and wishes/resurrection, that wasn’t considered a cakewalk by any means. First, if it hadn’t been for good preparations, there would have been no resurrection. Secondly, while wishes/resurrections were available, they were a limited resource. Gygax’s band now had less of them to use against future dangers. Thirdly, resurrection was not a sure thing, and there was a limit to how often a single character could be resurrected. To just make three points about that story.<br /><br />(And let me say that I’m not trying to say this is “the right way to play”. TINWWTP. I’m just trying to explain why <em>this</em> way isn’t wrong. ^_^)Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-52186823100114177642009-07-10T04:45:03.876-04:002009-07-10T04:45:03.876-04:00Partially agree, but not clear to me:
How can I ge...Partially agree, but not clear to me:<br />How can I get XP for gp if I don't kill the monsters guarding them?<br />How can be so fearful fight a monster with save or die effect if is very easy to resurrect? <br />Then prefer to not include specific edition consideration... in 4e, my group lost 6 characters in few months...<br />Partially agree, but not clear to me:<br />How can I get XP for gp if I don't kill the monsters guarding them?<br />How can be so fearful fight a monster with save or die effect if is very easy to resurrect? <br />Then prefer to not include specific edition consideration... in 4e, my group lost 6 characters in few months...<br />PS. Was a long time ago, but when I played several adventures old school I can remember that it was not so easy anticipate a hazard. Sometimes it was a trap to occur, or simply open a door, beyond which there was a beholder or a banshee waiting for us... not a question of smartness or prudence...<br />But yes, It was not logical, but pretty funny, because all was new and weird for us.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-22542105735928032292009-07-10T04:23:08.771-04:002009-07-10T04:23:08.771-04:00"I hope the same, but try to put an medium or..."I hope the same, but try to put an medium or high level pc against a monster with a 'save or die' effect, and then against a monster (with the same XP value) without a it. Don't you think that 'survival expectations' would be very different for each case?"<br /><br />I think part of the point is that save or die effects discourage the mentality that a party of PCs should just wade into every fight because it will be balanced to their level and there is little chance of them dying. Yes, obviously the survival expectation is going to be lower when fighting a creature with save or die than a creature without it, so that gives a powerful incentive to NOT FIGHT the creature with the save or die effect! I know, kind of a novel concept if you are used to 3e or 4e, but the older and more deadly editions of the game saw an awful lot of players avoiding combat with creatures that could kill them. This is another reason why the XP for gold rule makes sense in the early editions - if the only source of XP is killing monsters, then the scenario you outline above is unbalanced as you point out. But honestly, all the way up to 2e you got such a piddly small amount of XP for killing creatures that it alleviated that imbalance and just encouraged groups to avoid the deadly monsters. As somebody mentioned above, one experience getting killed by a giant spider will have a group avoiding cobwebbed rooms or crossing them with extreme caution! In my experience, very little in 3e or 4e instills any kind of actual fear in a player, because if the DM is following the guidelines laid out in the sections of the DMG explaining how to balance encounters, the party should always come out on top with minimal player deaths. There is a thread right now at rpg.net about a guy playing 4e who actually experienced a character death! Of course, he had to roll three consecutive 1s on the skill check his DM kept making him reroll before this occurred... Everyone seems quite shocked and is congratulating him on taking it so well. - I hope this does not come across as edition bashing, because I play 3e and 4e as well as earlier editions, but I can recognize a different culture of expectation about player death in the newer editions. You get your bliss in 3e and 4e by doing stupendous amounts of damage to crazy powerful creatures with your badass party, you get your bliss in earlier editions by having to skulk around fearful for your very life and running from vermin!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-55157552839204555642009-07-10T03:53:40.883-04:002009-07-10T03:53:40.883-04:00As far as 3e goes, I find it the least heroic vers...As far as 3e goes, I find it the least heroic version of D&D, because it stays highly lethal at all levels, and per the RAW a Raised PC loses a level, while you can bring in a new PC at party level, so there's a strong disincentive to Raise.<br /><br />My own approach to Raise in a pseudo-medieval setting is that it requires an intact body, and enemies routinely decapitate their dead foes, preventing Raising.<br /><br />BTW I find that the Judges Guild Wilderlands setting is the best for following through the implications of "Gygaxo-Arnesonian" D&D, including raise dead; when running that setting you can do it purely by RAW and it all works fine because the setting assumptions are not in conflict with the rules (unlike Greyhawk!).Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01173759805310975320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-43969913946255419342009-07-10T03:50:27.742-04:002009-07-10T03:50:27.742-04:00"Just because there are rules for advancing t..."Just because there are rules for advancing to high levels does not mean that the game requires every character to do so - death is and always has been a part of D&D, and people who have "survival expectations" should remember that it is a personal preference and not a feature of the game, until such a time as the rules of the game itself spell out that players cannot die. Which I hope will never happen."<br />I hope the same, but try to put an medium or high level pc against a monster with a "save or die" effect, and then against a monster (with the same XP value) without a it. Don't you think that "survival expectations" would be very different for each case?<br />Save or Die effects are great, but I think there's should be the same uncertainty with HP, otherwise they're a great thing not coherent with the system.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-85857950677001799652009-07-10T03:30:32.374-04:002009-07-10T03:30:32.374-04:00IMHO Zzarchov hits the point. There's no reaso...IMHO Zzarchov hits the point. There's no reason to endure 10 ax strokes, or a meteors swarm, and then shot to death on a banshee. Why "combat prowness" is not considered when a character is faced with a beholder or a bodak? IMHO it's because weird effects were "a must" in the beginning of D&D, when we had a lot of things not very logical, but very funny (at least the first or second time they happened).<br />Deadly traps, monster with strange (and deadly) powers, gave to the game a sort of uncertainty that made the game more fun and always new.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-79063662833763572622009-07-09T23:35:56.538-04:002009-07-09T23:35:56.538-04:00Zzarchov, for me hit points represent combat prowe...Zzarchov, for me hit points represent combat prowess. A thrown dagger in combat goes against hp. In a dagger at your throat non-combat situation, however, I’d be more likely to call for a saving throw when the villain decided negotiations are over and it’s time to cut.<br /><br />Personally, I tend to think falling should be some sort of “save or injury”, but hp serves as a stand-in for “injury”. Still, I think there comes a point at which the DM has to say a particularly long fall for a high level character is more dangerous than the straight hp damage.<br /><br />Though there will always be gray areas. You make your best call, and if it didn’t work so well, you do it different next time.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-44910065428907454862009-07-09T23:17:09.349-04:002009-07-09T23:17:09.349-04:00Side note: While not R.E Howard's Conan, the...Side note: While not R.E Howard's Conan, the governator's Conan strongly featured rising from the dead. At Cost.<br /><br />Side Side Note: My problem with save or die is only thats it poorly used. Things that are "always deadly" are arbitrary. Being set on fire by a dragon should be save or die..as should being hit by a lightning bolt, as should being hit by an axe, as should being bitten by a spider. <br /><br /> Yet only some of those are save or die and its mostly at random and unfathomable which is which until you roll. If your character went to swordfight a goblin and you were told 'save or die versus the goblins thrown dagger', it does make sense, daggers are meant to kill people..but then what are HP for?Zzarchovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07714805545939725730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-7324639067753013382009-07-09T21:40:26.028-04:002009-07-09T21:40:26.028-04:00Which half of "save or die" is contraver...Which half of "save or die" is contraversial?<br /><br />that you can die suddenly or that at the last momment you might not?<br /><br />It's rare that I see it except in instanes where, by rights, you should just die. So it's not at the other end of resurrection spells but just another version of the same thing: making life really dangerous and then giving people an out. A very hard exam with a generous curveBrian (brian_cooper at hotmail d o t com)https://www.blogger.com/profile/02805168206752602148noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-3109401273926446632009-07-09T19:45:46.467-04:002009-07-09T19:45:46.467-04:00following the link Akkots posted above it is clear...following the link Akkots posted above it is clear that Jonathan Tweet falls into the camp that considers D&D to be a game for those wanting to play Aragorn and Conan (or at least some comparably heroic individual). Some people have "survival expectations" as Akkots and Tweet do, while others do not. As Tweet says -<br />"I like hit points because they allow players to manage the risks they're willing to take. It gives players an unrealistic level of control over their characters' fates, but that's what you want for a game that expects someone to survive dozens and dozens of hard-fought, toe-to-toe battles."<br /><br />The key there is that Tweet shifts the survival expectation from something that HE has to something that the GAME has - IMO, the game does not "expect" someone to survive dozens and dozens of hard-fought, toe-to-toe battles. Just because there are rules for advancing to high levels does not mean that the game requires every character to do so - death is and always has been a part of D&D, and people who have "survival expectations" should remember that it is a personal preference and not a feature of the game, until such a time as the rules of the game itself spell out that players cannot die. Which I hope will never happen.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07648499022366444265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-27904571951106251942009-07-09T19:38:36.805-04:002009-07-09T19:38:36.805-04:00I respect Mr. Tweet a lot, but—as I’ve said before...I respect Mr. Tweet a lot, but—as I’ve said before about that article—he’s just wrong on that point.<br /><br />Well, I’ll concede he’s right <em>for the edition he helped create</em>. As the game was originally conceived, however, hit points were not considered something that couldn’t be circumvented.<br /><br />In fact, I’d have enjoyed AD&D a lot more when I played it if I hadn’t tended to adopt the same attitude that JoT espouses.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-19759449147577439662009-07-09T19:35:03.948-04:002009-07-09T19:35:03.948-04:00IMO, the backbone of "survival expectations&q...IMO, the backbone of "survival expectations" in D&D should be player skill.Santiago Oríahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06004778441776946649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-45739087203699613702009-07-09T19:16:20.981-04:002009-07-09T19:16:20.981-04:00Hi James, I'm Stefano, lurking your blog so fa...Hi James, I'm Stefano, lurking your blog so far. Just my two cents:<br />The "save or die" circumvents HPs, which are the backbone for the "survival expectations" in D&D. It's enough for me to consider it one of the worst D&D "mechanic" ever (obviously IMHO). For me is not a matter of resurrection availability, character creation time or story line needs.<br />And as far as I know "save or die" was one of the most "ignored" or "forgotten" rules in my 20 years D&D experience (but it's just a personal).<br />In this respect there is a very interesting article (written some years ago) on the concept of HPs in Jonathan Tweet site: http://www.jonathantweet.com/jotgamehitpoints.html<br />Rgds, StefanoAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com