Death from Massive Damage and High Level Play


High Level Play

51 to 58 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

James Jacobs wrote:
IF the death from massive damage rule stays in the game...

It should scale with damage so that high level wizards don't say "I rolled a 2, so I'm fine...gee that was exciting. NOT." every time they roll a DfMD save.

Honestly though, I can't imagine a gaming professional arguing that it is a good thing that high level tanks need to get resurrected several times per adventure just because they have a 5% chance to die every time a heavy duty monster hits them.

TS

Dark Archive

Just to be clear. When most people are talking death from massive damage are you saying save-and-die as in I need Resurrection or as in I'm at -1 HP?

Dark Archive

Personally I like option that death from massive damage sends you to dying as opposed to straight to dead. As much as I like to bring the pain to my players, I do understand that being dead is a major inconvenience (unless you are lich like me, and then it is a lifestyle choice) even for high level characters. Being dying is more of a tactical inconvenience (one easily overcome by healing, not the least of which is that pesky channeling clerics now do). Of course lazing about the battlefield all helpless and all has a certain risk attached to it, but this isn't a sewing bee now is it?

Of course, as I said before I am perfectly fine with death from massive damage becoming a sidebar optional rule. I already house rule pretty much every rule regarding death and dying as it is.

On a side note I would really like to play with the group that routinely (what was the comment? 6 times a session?) has characters taking half their HP in damage from a single attack and then failing a fairly mundane DC 15 fort save. What level are these guys that they fail that save on a regular basis? Doesn't really matter, count me in! ;)

Cheers

Dark Archive

Daniel Simonson wrote:

You know this started out as a death from massive damage thread, and is now, 'why the ---- are my characters skydiving' thread. That aside.

In our defense the OP did include references to falling and falling damage from intentional jumps.

Just saying. :)

Dark Archive

How about this system for "simple yet effective" for falling damage?

First lethal die rolled is a d4, the second a d6, the third a d8...d10, d12,d20 right on up to the seventh die rolled being a d100 with every die thereafter an additional d100.

Couple that with a scaling DC fort save and presto! Short falls kill only the weak or unlucky and falls from great heights pretty much kill everyone!

What do you think?


Lord oKOyA wrote:

How about this system for "simple yet effective" for falling damage?

First lethal die rolled is a d4, the second a d6, the third a d8...d10, d12,d20 right on up to the seventh die rolled being a d100 with every die thereafter an additional d100.

Couple that with a scaling DC fort save and presto! Short falls kill only the weak or unlucky and falls from great heights pretty much kill everyone!

What do you think?

So, I just fell 150 feet and roll the following:

3
4
6
5
11
17
76
27
42
85
19
33
92
77
58

Now how much damage did I take?

I have known many players at the D&D table over many years of playing who would have taken 10 minutes to add this up and still get it wrong.

Why even bother with dice at these levels?

Why not create a simple chart and only use dice for the low end:

Falls up to 5': 1d4
5-10': 1d8
11-20': 3d6
21-30': 4d10
31-40': 12d6
41-50': 60 HP
51-75': 100 HP
75-100': 150 HP
Over 100': Fort save, fail you die, save you are at -1 HP.

Just an example.

All things considered, I would rather have a simple chart on page 257 to look up than have to wait on a player (or me) to add a stack of d% rolls.

Dark Archive

DM_Blake wrote:


So, I just fell 150 feet and roll the following:

3
4
6
5
11
17
76
27
42
85
19
33
92
77
58

Now how much damage did I take?

Answer: More than enough to kill you. Twice. By the way, did roll and make your DC 29 fort save before you bothered to roll all those damage dice? Just asking. :)

DM_Blake wrote:
I have known many players at the D&D table over many years of playing who would have taken 10 minutes to add this up and still get it wrong.

If you do make your save and get into the damage dice rolling part of the equation might I suggest starting with the d100s first and once you roll enough to make you die you can stop rolling. The first(last) 3 or 4 rolls you made were probably enough to kill most 15th level characters. I do hope your players can add 3 numbers together. ;)

DM_Blake wrote:

Why even bother with dice at these levels?

Why not create a simple chart and only use dice for the low end:

Falls up to 5': 1d4
5-10': 1d8
11-20': 3d6
21-30': 4d10
31-40': 12d6
41-50': 60 HP
51-75': 100 HP
75-100': 150 HP
Over 100': Fort save, fail you die, save you are at -1 HP.

Just an example.

All things considered, I would rather have a simple chart on page 257 to look up than have to wait on a player (or me) to add a stack of d% rolls.

The problem here is twofold.

First the chart is still susecptible to meta-gaming, you have merely lowered the height with which they can safely judge their jump down from. (side note: is the damage on the chart cumulative?)

Second, as was pointed out by Roman (I think), you create a scenario (a failed save = -1HP) where players jumping from great heights actually want to fail their save. If you jump and make your save, you are hit with a ludicrous amount of damage, more than enough to send you rocketing past -1HP and right to dead (as in I need Resurrection) whereas if you fail your save you are simply reduced to -1HP (and now only need a cure spell to be up and at em). See the problem?

That is why the save must include something to the effect where the amount by which you fail the save results in a lower negative HP total you "achieve". Fail badly enough and you are just might end up dead (as in I need Resurrection).

The scaling damage die was merely a suggested "fix" for the problem of lethality for lower level characters. I am still operating under the assumption that we don't want all 10' to be automatically lethal to low level characters. Hence the softening of the damage dice at low levels.

It still needs a little tweaking for sure.

Dark Archive

DM_Blake wrote:


Why not create a simple chart and only use dice for the low end:

Falls up to 5': 1d4
5-10': 1d8
11-20': 3d6
21-30': 4d10
31-40': 12d6
41-50': 60 HP
51-75': 100 HP
75-100': 150 HP
Over 100': Fort save, fail you die, save you are at -1 HP.

Just an example.

Sorry. A second look at your chart reveals I misread the line about falls over 100'. Fail you die (as in need Resurrection) and save you are at -1 HP. Characters would obviously not want to fail their save here. However, if the save DC does not scale then you still end up with meta-gaming the jump. "I only have a 5% chance to fail my save for this 1000' jump." kind of thing.

By the by, I personally hate having to look up things (charts included) during play. It really affects the flow of the game IMO. And while your chart is simple, so are many other charts and I only have room in my noggin for so many things.

Also, is 12d6 really any easier to roll and add up than 3d100?

Cheers

51 to 58 of 58 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Design Forums / High Level Play / Death from Massive Damage and High Level Play All Messageboards
Recent threads in High Level Play