-10 dead and PC survivability


New Rules Suggestions

Sovereign Court

One of the things I’ve always hated about D&D is the fragility of the characters, low level PCs drop with a goblin’s confirmed critical, and high level PCs sometimes roll poorly in save or die situations. Some players probably enjoy this, they love building a new PC and trying them out, but I for one hate it. I also love building characters, but I generally go past the stats and spend some serious time building backgrounds and character motivation, and having a PC sliced down with a lucky (or unlucky) roll doesn’t sit well with me. I’ve noticed that Pathfinder (as well as 4th) has attempted to rectify low level survivability by giving PCs more hit points – I don’t much care for this solution. A first level character should be somewhat fragile, if you can’t be intimidated by a great axe at this level when’s it going to happen? What I’d like to see is PCs become more resilient to dying rather than more resilient to damage. Here’s some of the ideas I’ve been kicking around:

-10 is out, PCs can survive to –Con

Constitution determines how tough you are, so why is it that when a PC is knocked to the negatives the gnarled old dwarf dies as quickly as the asthmatic wood elf? Death’s door should be determined by the character’s constitution score wouldn’t you think? PCs can now survive to –CON before dying.

New Condition: Dying
1)-10 dead is gone. PCs now can survive up to –CON before dying.
2)The disabled condition now extends from 0 to –CON
3)After –CON PCs are dying loosing 1 HP a round until they have taken additional damage equal to CON bonus x Level. At this point the PC is dead.
4)Magical healing or use of the heal skill will stop the PC from losing any more HP but does not remove the dying condition. A PC must be healed back to positive HP before the dying condition is removed.
5)PCs do not heal normally while dying. Other characters may attempt to use the heal skill once per day to revive the fallen PC if magical healing is unavailable. The DC is equal to the total negative damage and the PC is healed 1 HP + the amount the check was exceeded by.
6)Massive damage rules and save Vs death now gives the dying status rather killing PCs outright. On a failed save the PC is immediately dropped to –CON -1, or simply apply the damage taken (which ever drops the PC lower). If this is enough damage to kill the PC outright then the PC is dead.

This change would make the PCs much harder to kill. An eighth level dwarven fighter with a 16 Con and 91 hit points could fight as normal until he took 91 damage, take partial actions until he dropped to -16, and linger at death’s door until he took a further 24 damage . . . meaning that this tough little dwarf could take 130 damage without being killed.

Hero points:

I first came across this idea in the Warhammer RPG. I think they may have been called fate points or some such. It’s a very simple fix: instead of complicating things with new conditions or rules simply give PCs hero points (let’s say an arbitrary 2 at level1). These are essentially “get out jail free” cards. Anytime a PC would be killed outright a PC may cash in a hero point and essentially avoid the catastrophe all together. In the case of massive damage or instant death the PC is instead dropped to -1 and stable.

New hero points should be awarded any time a PC does something extraordinary. Defeating a major villain, saving a town, or doing something particularly heroic are all great reasons for earning hero points. If a DM is using a pre-made adventure the completion of a module is also a great time to award a hero point. PCs are not invincible though and the gods only give so many chances so a PC can only hold a maximum of 3 hero points in reserve at a time. Only PCs and named villains should have hero points but I allow PCs to spend their own hero points to save their cohorts.

_____________
These are just some ideas I’ve been thinking about. Please feel free to post your own ideas or critics of these three.

Grand Lodge

What about people that have a negative CON modifier? How many Fighters or Barbarians raise their CON anyway? 10+CON (no lower than 10) is a tad more manageable.

Sovereign Court

My thinking was that at the higher levels those big monsters hit pretty hard. CON of 14 is pretty standard at my table, but I see your point, characters with 10 or less con would die after -CON by my math! So what about 10+(CON bonus X level)?


I've seen -CON for dying enough that I would be willing to accept it. What I'd like to see changed is the idea that a peasant can't kill a housefly with a single swat (or a rat in a rat trap) because it has -10 hit points as well - don't you think SIZE should scale into negative hp as well? o_O.

However, if you believe characters to be too fragile at 1st level, then feel free to start at 2nd or 3rd level. I've done it myself plenty of times, but at the same time I always like to start new groups or characters in a new game world out at 1st level. For me, 1st level is when the characters are "all too human" and can be taken out by anything that would probably kill a normal person. Combat is slightly de-emphasized because a wise DM knows 1st level combat can be so deadly. There's no need to ramp up the power level at 1st if you can just jump over it.

Its also just one of the other irks I have with 4th level. "Why start with 4 hit points when you can start with 22 ?!?"

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 16

I also factor size into the "death threshold", but changing it to -Con works for me.

In order to reduce situations where a warrior gets knocked down to 3 HP then dies from the next blow, I house-rule that characters can fall unconscious as a reflexive action. Whenever struck or injured, anyone can declare their character "unconscious from the shock of the blow". They are then actually unconscious, but most foes move on to other opponents at that point.

I've considered allowing "dying" characters a 5-foot "stagger" before they fall, reducing the chance that they will need to stand up under attacks of opportunity.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Didn't pathfinder already move the Dying to Death point from -10 to -10 or -Con which ever is lower. That is why I interpreted the glossary entry on dying [p122].

Sovereign Court

Maezer wrote:
Didn't pathfinder already move the Dying to Death point from -10 to -10 or -Con which ever is lower. That is why I interpreted the glossary entry on dying [p122].

Yep, that's the way I read it as well, I missed that when I read through the second release. Thanks Maezer. It's a pretty common house rule so I'm glad it's going to be included.

Now as to my suggestions about extending the staggered condition to -CON, and the new complications to the dying condition, I forgot to explicitly state this, but these conditions would only apply to player characters and named enemies. -10 dead should still apply to most other NPCs in the game. Other NPCs simply aren't made of the same stuff as great heroes and villains are.

I should also note that I find Staggered and Disabled interesting conditions, but ones that rarely come up. Extending that threshold could make combat more interesting IMO, letting a PC try to move away from combat or letting them gamble by trying to get those last few blows in could make a battle far more interesting then the going from full effectiveness to dropping dead that combat usually produces.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 2 / New Rules Suggestions / -10 dead and PC survivability All Messageboards
Recent threads in New Rules Suggestions