i have been considering the massive damage rules. as written, they rarely play a part in any game until relatively high levels, or extremely lucky criticals. even then, it is primarily an "against the players" rule that players themselves, save spellcasters at the high-middle levels and above and relatively powerful rogues, get to use.
my idea, then, is this. reduce the massive damage minimum to 20 hp in a single hit, with a dc of 5. for every 3 hp of additional damage, the dc increases by 1. thus, 50 hp of damage in a single hit is a dc of 15. the difference is at 65 hp of damage, the dc is a 20, instead of 15. this, of course, makes massive damage a little more deadly, but in return the players actually get to see massive damage rule in their favor occasionally.
so, i guess the final question is this: am i missing something that would make this version of massive damage a player-killer?
the other guy
Your system has merit and at first I thought, "Yeah, that seems cool" but then on further reflection ...
Lowering the amount of damage that is consider "massive" to 20 followed by the 3 pt modifier would work fine at lower levels but by mid and high levels it's going to throw complicated math into every battle and really bog things down, don't you think? While your system is probably more realistic and dynamic I'm sure the powers-that-be settled on the current system because it allows the concept while still being stream-lined and easy to impliment.
The d20 modern system makes the massive damage threshold equal the person's CON score. A feat is available that can raise the threshold by +3 each time it is taken.
I like that system myself and have considered using it in D&D, but won't try it until my next campaign starts as I don't like changing house rules in the middle of a campaign.
If I implement that system, I will also allow Action Points and Hero Points.
Lowering the threshhold to 20 hp may seem cool, but consider what you'll be putting your PCs through. At high levels, most of the damage they'll recieve will be higher than 20, so it will only be a matter of time before one of them rolls a low saving throw and dies.
Mathematically, by lowering the threshold, you're condemning your PCs to certain death.
Ultradan
Personally, I don't consider "save or die" one of the fun parts of the game. I'd say I don't use it, except massive damage has never come up in my campaign.
One of the options I've seen (I believe in Unearthed Arcana), is to adjust the threshold by 10 for each size catagory (40 for small, 60 for large, etc.). That's kind of cool.
Taking into account F2K's and Ultradan's opinions...
I like the d20 modern idea as a variation of what was originally suggested, as F2K posted; I also acknowledge Ultradan's point - that lowering the threshold that far would mean more player deaths (as well as monster deaths), which, while being more realistic, would take some fun factor out of the game.
Suggested compromises:
- Make the threshold 2 x CON
- Make the threshold CON + Character Level
- Both: threshold = 2 x CON + Character Level
The threshold doesn't rely on a sliding calculation, so it's simpler to remember and implement, and it adjusts for CON score and level.
Opinions?
M
Personally, I don't consider "save or die" one of the fun parts of the game. I'd say I don't use it, except massive damage has never come up in my campaign.
One of the options I've seen (I believe in Unearthed Arcana), is to adjust the threshold by 10 for each size catagory (40 for small, 60 for large, etc.). That's kind of cool.
This was always my take as well - its an optional rule and since I can't really see how it makes the game more fun to play I just don't use it at all.
Death by "massive damage" breaks the hit point model and for that reason alone should simply be ignored. Besides, it really doesn't add anything to the game.
Death by "massive damage" breaks the hit point model and for that reason alone should simply be ignored. Besides, it really doesn't add anything to the game.
It keeps the players honest, for one. PCs don't run roughshod through a town if one good fireball can drop them-- as it would in real life.
Death by "massive damage" breaks the hit point model and for that reason alone should simply be ignored. Besides, it really doesn't add anything to the game.
Personally, I think the Hit Point model isn't even close to realistic and that the Massive Damage optional rule evens it out a bit - even though I rarely remember to use it :-P
Anytime a character can survive a 50-foot fall, in armor, and then stand up and fight in melee six seconds later, you've got a broken system...
I use 'fractal' damage for falling damage (i.e. - 30' fall = 3d6+2d6+d6), which helps that one case, but Massive Damage represents that one, fatal blow that can be given by a lucky shot...
Other optional or house rules I've considered, regarding damage and realism:
- Link the CON score to HP damage: If HPs lost = total CON bonus, lose 2 CON points to match (but no additional HP damage, that already being accounted for)
- Limit actions based on HP damage: If more than 50% of HPs lost, reduce actions to partial as if clobbered
- Link DEX score to HP damage: Same system as CON, but DEX bonus loss stacks on CON bonus loss
Of course, there can be feats taken to overcome these penalties and there is additional administrative overhead to consider, but I've thought to include these rules at one time or another.
M
thanks for all the feedback. part of the reason why i dropped the idea here is that i have been reading the posts here for the past couple weeks and noticed little, if any, flaming, and, perhaps more importantly, alot of good ideas/advice based on the original post have appeared. please do not let this post stop additional discussion, i am extremely interested in this aspect of the rules, since i am primarily a player (though i am also our secondary dm), i get to make these rolls, and think its pretty lame that i can get hit by 100 points of damage and only need to roll better than a 1 with high fort save characters.
tog
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16
|
An idea I had regarding massive damage was setting the level as set in d20 modern but instead of death. The PC must save vs. crippling injury: 1pt of ability damage per 10pts of HP damage ability score determined randomly by 1d6. The Dm uses the cause to explain the damage. For example: Head trauma could cause the loss of Intelligence, Wisdom, or even Dexterity. While serious scarring could cause Charisma damage. Almost any attack can be explained in such a way to explain permanent ability damage.
Locke1520,
That's a cool idea! I was waffling on it when one of my players actually approached me to say he thought it was fair and flavorful and should be added to our house rules. I agree that it seems a fair way to handle massive damage and avoids that whole nasty "save or die" situation. Consider your idea swiped!
Palladium/Rifts had a good side effect of cybernetics that might be good in a mass damage situation. Basically, the effect of having that kind of damage done to your body caused side effects such as constant pain, blurred vision, etc.