|
Okay so I don't like pathfinders rules for death and dying. I didn't like 3.5s rules for dying either. I like the concept behind the dying rules in 4ed, but I do not like the execution.
Here's my problem, I don't like the fact that a person who's fallen to terrible injuries knows exactly how many rounds he has until he dies. Negative hp countdowns make dying extremely dull for the player unless they have only 1 or 2 hp to go.
4th edition tried to change that by adjusting it to a d20 roll but instead made it worse by giving the character a guaranteed 3 rounds at minimum, also trending the odds to the players favor with more positive results than negative.
So I took the 4ed rules and altered them, and now dying characters are as exciting as being up fighting in my games. Here's how it works.
When a character reaches negative hp or is given the dying condition through spells or effects, the player on his turn rolls a d20 with the following results
1: character dies.
2-10: character gets worse
11-19: character remains the same
20: character stabilizes at 0 hp and awakes staggered.
a character can roll the gets worse result up to 3 times, on the third get worse result, the character is dead.
Negative HP no longer counts down during dying. The only way to die from negative hp loss is if you are damaged while dying (i.e. an enemy takes the time to stab a fallen character).
Separating dying from HP also allows the dying condition to be applied through spells or conditions, whereas before it couldn't for example, in my games there is also a rule for limb loss.
A nat 20, followed by a nat 20, followed by a confirmation roll results in the loss of a limb. A character who looses a limb must make a dc 20 fortitude save or fall unconcious from shock. Regardless of the result of the save the character gains the dying condition until receiving magical healing or a DC15 heal check to stabilize.
roll a d12 to find out which limb is severed (may need to be adjusted based on # of limbs creature posseses) Creatures with amorphous forms (such as oozes and some aberrations) are immune to limb loss.
So as you can see it's possible to be conscious while dying. In my games these rules have made for exciting situations. We had a scenario where two characters where unconscious and dying every time their roles came up a hush fell over the table as people anxiously waited to see what came up. I never had that happen in 3.5 where dying was as exciting as did you make the roll, no, take another -1. Anyways I'm just sharing these rules so that hopefully someone else will have as much fun with them as our group has.
|
I agree with your complaint about dying in the game. I just don't like the way it is done. It is anticlimactic to have the player sitting there counting HP and going "Yeah I can take the hit no problem, I'll let the Black Knight run me through with his lance, what do I care..."
I use a variant system that works well for me.
Use Hit Points as normal.
Criticals do not get multiplied at all, just roll the normal damage as usual, but apply it to CON. As soon as CON is damaged apply the staggered condition. When CON is reduced to 0, you die (can soften this by applying a FORT save of some kind -NOTE I do NOT reduce Fort saves and such from this damage).
In combat, a good lucky roll can kill you, so pay attention. You want to make a living in combat, treat it with respect.
Now, as always I apply rule number one to executing this, is it fun for everyone? In other words, having the side kick minion off a PC due to a lucky roll is no fun, so I will fudge the results to keep it exciting. I might say, "the kobold got a Crit! He rolls a... 3!? Dang stupid dice!" When in fact the sucker rolled a 15! It is scary, for the player, never knowing for sure when I will kill him, and I hide the fudging pretty good.
It also has the potential for the PCs to get a lucky shot in and drop their BBEG! Honestly is it any more exciting to play out fifteen rounds of hack and slash EVERY single time they meet a boss, or can the occasional unexpected crit that drops the baddie be just as exciting?
Now keep in mind all of this relies upon a GM being a story teller and not just a glorified computer routine cranking out boring rule after boring rule.
A rule at my table: if you're unconscious, you (the player) can't speak! It works wonders in creating a sense of urgency in the other players. I also encourage rolling the %dice to stabilize even after you may have done so, just to keep the others guessing.
|
|
A rule at my table: if you're unconscious, you (the player) can't speak! It works wonders in creating a sense of urgency in the other players. I also encourage rolling the %dice to stabilize even after you may have done so, just to keep the others guessing.
While that probably works for the other players. If I went down with -1 HP and I had a 13 con, I'd still be bored off my ass until I got healed, there's no suspense for the person who's down, unless he's one or two away from dying.
Seems a little grim. Question - if they make the character remains the same roll three times, do they stabilize? If not, then this is heavily weighted towards people dying. If that's what you want in your campaign, good for you, I wouldn't try it.
Just out of curiosity did you houserule 3.5s death and dying rules? In 3.5 it took 10% on a percentile to stabilize. Granted on a roll of 10 or less you didn't die, however you also couldn't wake up and rejoin combat either, so I consider it give and take. And in my games it's worked well. In my last game, the Monk woke up on his own twice. And the wizard was down eight rounds before getting revived. Anywho, there is the fact that I do enjoy grim and gritty games. I use paizo's crit hit and crit fumble decks and in my game every enemy who rolls a crit draws from the deck. So maybe it is darker than I thought, but still in 3.5 you had a 10% chance of stabilizing and remaining unconscious, and in my game you have a 10% chance of stabilizing and waking up.
Oh, and we've used the 20/20/hit rule forever. It was actually an optional rule in 3.0, but it was sudden death instead of loss of limb. An interesting variation.
Yeah I know, I altered it from those rules because I've actually rolled a 20/20/hit a couple of times, I didn't like that it was insta-death. Also I hated how there were no rules for limb loss. So I combined those two dislikes and wound up with something I'm quite eager and happy with. I do like the idea of an insta-death rule though, and I think extreme luck should be rewarded. So in my games a 20-20-20 is an insta-death. and a 1-1-1 is an insta-death fumble :)