Been reading about the deadly Hold Person + coup de grace combo.
I know this is a rather infamous tactic, and its mechanics have been set in stone through oceans of debate... but I feel that this boarderline exploit should be nurfed in some way.
So what do you people think about a house rule where; when the target is subject to a coup de grace, the target receives a will save with a +4 bonus, on a successful save the target does not break the effect, but is allowed enough freedom of movement to convert the coup de grace attempt into a normal hit.
Thoughts?
EDIT: For newcomers, instead of changing the spell. My idea has changed to the following:
A character cannot be coup de graced in the same round that he was affected by the condition that rendered him 'helpless', unless the attacker possesses a feat or ability that allows him to do so. IE: Dastardly Finish.
Don't worry about it. That's my take.
If the rule is to help the PC's then role behind the screen for their saves. If this rule is for the big bad guy then maybe. It is your game after all.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
In the interest of removing all save-or-die effects from the game, I'd rule out the fort save-or-die and just go with auto-hit-crit. I might also make them roll hit just to check for a critical miss. But I wouldn't do any more than that.
So you want a third save added to the hold person + coup de grace combo?
Flesh to stone only needs one and you're basically dead.
I say if it really affects anything, just have the coup-ed character not get hit.
Or apply some homebrew trait on him/her to make them never helpless.
Well, when I DM, I try to play my monsters like they would realistically play. I rarely DM fiat, and when I do it's to save a player from some bs death... but, when I have an enemy with Hold Person, and they know that they can use it and just slit the PCs throat... well, it makes for dead (and cheated) players. So I'm trying to make it so the players have a better chance, and my NPCs can remain lifelike in their tactics.
|
8 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Tell them to get their will saves up. Tell them by killing them.
Yeah, it's a pretty clean kill, stemming already from two failed saves - initial Will save plus the failed Fort save from coup.
One might argue that the event is no more or less "unfair" than a low hp party member being on the wrong end of a raging barbarian's 2hr pwr attack crit. (generally the result of two succesful dies rolls in the contrary direction).
PC death builds character, literally.
InsaneFox wrote: Well, when I DM, I try to play my monsters like they would realistically play. I rarely DM fiat, and when I do it's to save a player from some bs death... but, when I have an enemy with Hold Person, and they know that they can use it and just slit the PCs throat... well, it makes for dead (and cheated) players. So I'm trying to make it so the players have a better chance, and my NPCs can remain lifelike in their tactics. Considering that CdG is a full round action with AoO coming at them its unlikly that the enemy will try it unless everyone is down (party probably dead anyway) or one guy rushed on ahead (that guy should have hid better). If the party is wiped to unconciousness then you can always have them captured instead of killed outright.
Mergy wrote: So you want a third save added to the hold person + coup de grace combo?
Flesh to stone only needs one and you're basically dead.
A third save on a 2nd level spell that is being used in a save or die situation.
Flesh to stone is a 6th level spell...
Once players get phantasmal killer the gloves are off... but Cleric level 3 is a bit early for save or die.
Talonhawke wrote:
Considering that CdG is a full round action with AoO coming at them its unlikly that the enemy will try it unless everyone is down (party probably dead anyway) or one guy rushed on ahead (that guy should have hid better). If the party is wiped to unconciousness then you can always have them captured instead of killed outright. Easily combated by a 5 ft step in many situations.
InsaneFox wrote: Mergy wrote: So you want a third save added to the hold person + coup de grace combo?
Flesh to stone only needs one and you're basically dead.
A third save on a 2nd level that is being used in a save or die situation.
Flesh to stone is a 6th level spell...
Once players get phantasmal killer the gloves are off... but Cleric level 3 is a bit early for save or die. As opposed to a 1st level wizard sleep + CdG?
InsaneFox wrote: Talonhawke wrote:
Considering that CdG is a full round action with AoO coming at them its unlikly that the enemy will try it unless everyone is down (party probably dead anyway) or one guy rushed on ahead (that guy should have hid better). If the party is wiped to unconciousness then you can always have them captured instead of killed outright. Easily combated by a 5 ft step in many situations. Even if there is no AoO letting three to four other people move in to kill you while you finish off one guy who can't do anything isn't the best use of the creatures tactics.
Dragonsong wrote: InsaneFox wrote: Mergy wrote: So you want a third save added to the hold person + coup de grace combo?
Flesh to stone only needs one and you're basically dead.
A third save on a 2nd level that is being used in a save or die situation.
Flesh to stone is a 6th level spell...
Once players get phantasmal killer the gloves are off... but Cleric level 3 is a bit early for save or die. As opposed to a 1st level wizard sleep + CdG? Sleep can be broken by a standard action from an ally.
Not that I'm saying that's balanced either.
Talonhawke wrote: InsaneFox wrote: Talonhawke wrote:
Considering that CdG is a full round action with AoO coming at them its unlikly that the enemy will try it unless everyone is down (party probably dead anyway) or one guy rushed on ahead (that guy should have hid better). If the party is wiped to unconciousness then you can always have them captured instead of killed outright. Even if there is no AoO letting three to four other people move in to kill you while you finish off one guy who can't do anything isn't the best use of the creatures tactics. I wouldn't try it on a party vs. 1 monster encounter. But a cleric with some lowbie friends.... oh yes.
Ikos wrote: Yeah, it's a pretty clean kill, stemming already from two failed saves - initial Will save plus the failed Fort save from coup.
One might argue that the event is no more or less "unfair" than a low hp party member being on the wrong end of a raging barbarian's 2hr pwr attack crit. (generally the result of two succesful dies rolls in the contrary direction).
PC death builds character, literally.
Depending on the enemy, that's a near impossible fort save for most classes. I mean, Iike to be ruthless.... but fair.
Has'Kar wrote: I say if it really affects anything, just have the coup-ed character not get hit.
Or apply some homebrew trait on him/her to make them never helpless.
I don't mind the helpless part... if a PC gets held and beaten into unconscious, that's life... he had just better pray that the enemies aren't inclined to rip his throat out like a wild dog or a zombie would. In that case, he may still live. But a coup de grace is game over, man.
Hudax wrote: In the interest of removing all save-or-die effects from the game, I'd rule out the fort save-or-die and just go with auto-hit-crit. I might also make them roll hit just to check for a critical miss. But I wouldn't do any more than that. Yeah, or just make it a regular attack against a flat-footed ac... but might stick with instant hit. It's hard to critically fail stabbing an armored mannequin.
InsaneFox wrote:
Sleep can be broken by a standard action from an ally.
Not that I'm saying that's balanced either.
Who if he is close enough to stop the CdG is close enough to probably get his AoO off.
Remeber i can share a space with the helpless guy. So no 5ft step unless you have a reach weapon.
Talonhawke wrote: InsaneFox wrote:
Sleep can be broken by a standard action from an ally.
Not that I'm saying that's balanced either.
Who if he is close enough to stop the CdG is close enough to probably get his AoO off.
Remeber i can share a space with the helpless guy. So no 5ft step unless you have a reach weapon. Well, depending on the encounter, you wouldn't necessarily be in a position to move into the helpless person's square.
I mean, I'm not just shooting down your opinions, I just see many more ways that hold person + cdg can be accomplished and remain efficient and tactically sound.
Sounds like what you're actually looking for are Hero Points.
InsaneFox wrote: Mergy wrote: So you want a third save added to the hold person + coup de grace combo?
Flesh to stone only needs one and you're basically dead.
A third save on a 2nd level spell that is being used in a save or die situation. Hold person + CDG is already hard enough to pull off:
- It requires a standard action (to cast the spell), one or more failed Will saves, a full round action (CDG), and a failed Fort save (CDG).
- If hold person isn't cast on a character already engaged in combat, the target will get a second save on their turn before anything can get a full-round action in on them to CDG them.
- If the target is already in combat, it still requires good coordination or lucky initiative setup to get in the combo in the right order without the players having turns in between to get their ally to safety (paralyzed creatures can't resist a drag maneuver, so it's trivially easy to drag them away).
- If the target is both already in combat and none of their allies get to act in between the spell being cast and the melee monster CDGing them, there's still the matter that a 3rd level cleric's ally is unlikely to deal too much damage even with a crit unless the DM is being a total jerk, in which case it doesn't matter anyway.
- And, frankly, the combo doesn't last very long in terms of levels. It's OK at 3rd cleric level, but by the time you hit 7th cleric level everything's going to make the save fairly reliably.
Hudax wrote: Sounds like what you're actually looking for are Hero Points. Hero points severely reduce the risk of death. I believe a good campaign is one that's difficult but doable. If a player finds a clever way to beat an epic encounter... than he deserves a bonus. Good or bad luck? Well, shit happens. If they play badly, hopefully having their face smashed will educate them...
But, cheap kills and get-out-of-jail free cards are no fun. (I do allow hero points, but I remove the cheat death option.)
Anyway, I would rather discuss why my addition wouldn't work, why it's not fair, or what could be improved upon it.
Whether or not it's necessary is purely opinion.
Seriously, I really don't see how two saves at level 3 is a big deal. They need to make a will save or stop someone from standing over them for a full turn or make a fort save.
If your players die to this, it was their time. Re-roll another character, and get Iron Will this time.
I understand what you're saying.
But you're not looking it at the same way.
The fort save is often made at a 15% or less success rate.
NPCs can hold action to preform combination maneuvers.
That level range is played often and player characters shouldn't be facing save or die effects, in my opinion.
If the NPCs are delaying actions specifically to set up an instant hold person/coup de grace combo at level 3, then either:
A) The DM is being a jerk, or
B) The party is facing a veteran squad of assassins or special-operations soldiers, and unless the paralyzed person is someone they're intentionally setting out to kill, they're not likely to CDG them mid-combat.
In neither case will nerfing hold person make a difference.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Hero Points are specifically for failed saves--this is the only reason they were created in the first place, to protect PCs from death-by-suck. If this is the aspect of them you removed, then you removed the only thing that makes them functional and might as well remove them entirely.
That being said, your suggestion would work. The +4 is roughly the same bonus as a rerolled d20 (which is +3 increase on average), and the denial of the CDG would negate the save or die. So that's fine. But IMO you're taking something away with your right hand and giving it back with your left.
The fort save can be pretty much a joke.
Level 5 fighter with x3 weapon in two hands and 18 strength:
+ weapon training: 1
+ weapon enhancement: 1
+ weapon specialization: 2
+ power attack: 6
+ strength 18: 6
X3
DC 36 + dice Dice will average at least 13.5 for a normally one handed battle axe or one end of an orc double axe. The lowest DC will be 39.
A level 20 character with a fast fort save would need great fortitude and 22 con to make that save 10% of the time. If the weapon damage dice come up ones. I think it varies by table whether crits role extra dice or multiply the original dice.
Level 5 rogue with a punch dagger
+ weapon enhancement 1
+ sneak attack 3d6
X3
minimum DC 15, but a lot of dice are being rolled so the probability curve has a pretty high peak. average DC is 39.
Surely if you plan to coup de grace the victims of your buddy's hold person spell you have a deep critting weapon rather than shallow, right?
Atarlost wrote: Surely if you plan to coup de grace the victims of your buddy's hold person spell you have a deep critting weapon rather than shallow, right? Like I said, if the DM sets this up specifically, it's either A) a jerk DM, or B) a specially-trained hit squad. Nothing will help in the first case (certainly not house rules which would require the DM to set them up), and the second case is something that's just plain not likely to happen at 3rd level, at least at random.
EDIT: Also, sneak attack is not multiplied on a critical.
I just don't see the in-game reasoning for another save just because you're threatened.
On the same coin, I don't see why my proposed edit is a big deal either. It only, and specifically resolves an issue many people have with the combo.
As of yet, despite all of the opposition, nobody has stated why it's a bad edit.
At this point i am honestly not sure if your serious or just trying to argue this till your blue in the face yes it can be deadly at level 3 so can a barbarian with a scythe if he crits. So can a pair of rogues who flank you. So can a simple acid arrow spell.
Low levels are deadly and once again you said you like to be tactical this is in no way the best mid combat tactical decision for any monster or class.
Fozbek wrote: If the NPCs are delaying actions specifically to set up an instant hold person/coup de grace combo at level 3, then either:
A) The DM is being a jerk, or
B) The party is facing a veteran squad of assassins or special-operations soldiers, and unless the paralyzed person is someone they're intentionally setting out to kill, they're not likely to CDG them mid-combat.
In neither case will nerfing hold person make a difference.
If you want to get personal about.
My PCs TRY to kill my players. And do, frequently, but my players love me for it.
The people I play with, don't like easy mode... but at the same time, they hate dying to a bs game mechanic. So instead of pulling punches, I'd prefer to just fix the mechanic.
InsaneFox wrote: On the same coin, I don't see why my proposed edit is a big deal either. It only, and specifically resolves an issue many people have with the combo.
As of yet, despite all of the opposition, nobody has stated why it's a bad edit.
To be honest you have not convinced me that the "fix" is a good edit.
TriOmegaZero wrote: I just don't see the in-game reasoning for another save just because you're threatened. Threatened? How do you mean?
Also, people seldomly survive cdg saves at the level hold person is an issue.
It isn't a "BS game mechanic". It's good tactics, if that's how you're playing the game. If it's that prevalent, your players will adapt; holding a readied action to smack spellcasters as they cast usually prevents low-level casters from getting off spells, for example. Or just don't dump Wisdom.
Here is an easy fix stop using the combo. If you think its a BS mechanic stop using it. Here lets try some other examples which ones need extra saves.
Sleep+Cdg
Hold person+ lava
Hold person + deep water.
Critical hits at low levels.
Nonlethal damage till unconcious + Cdg
Sneaking into camp + Cdg
InsaneFox wrote: TriOmegaZero wrote: I just don't see the in-game reasoning for another save just because you're threatened. Threatened? How do you mean?
Also, people seldomly survive cdg saves at the level hold person is an issue. People seldom Survive CdG at any level for the most part the DC is high because its hard to get set up for it hard out of combat let alone in the middle of a fight.
OilHorse wrote: InsaneFox wrote: On the same coin, I don't see why my proposed edit is a big deal either. It only, and specifically resolves an issue many people have with the combo.
As of yet, despite all of the opposition, nobody has stated why it's a bad edit.
To be honest you have not convinced me that the "fix" is a good edit.
I don't believe a 2nd level spell was intended as a save or die spell. Hold person, at that level, is a control spell. Even rogues don't get to cdg legitimately until 5d6 SA die, and that takes just as much setup.
InsaneFox wrote: OilHorse wrote: InsaneFox wrote: On the same coin, I don't see why my proposed edit is a big deal either. It only, and specifically resolves an issue many people have with the combo.
As of yet, despite all of the opposition, nobody has stated why it's a bad edit.
To be honest you have not convinced me that the "fix" is a good edit.
I don't believe a 2nd level spell was intended as a save or die spell. Hold person, at that level, is a control spell. Even rogues don't get to cdg legitimately until 5d6 SA die, and that takes just as much setup. Or decent str and a scythe at any level or even a Katana or Wakazashi which add +4 to the DC.
Fozbek wrote: It isn't a "BS game mechanic". It's good tactics, if that's how you're playing the game. If it's that prevalent, your players will adapt; holding a readied action to smack spellcasters as they cast usually prevents low-level casters from getting off spells, for example. Or just don't dump Wisdom. Exploitation of game mechanics is also just good tactics if you think about it.
InsaneFox wrote: I don't believe a 2nd level spell was intended as a save or die spell. Hold person, at that level, is a control spell. Even rogues don't get to cdg legitimately until 5d6 SA die, and that takes just as much setup. So I take it you object to CR 1 ghouls, then? They can paralyze on each of three natural attacks.
Yes, hold person is intended to be very, very dangerous. That's why it allows a save every turn, and why it gives the paralyzed condition rather than stunned or dazed.
Honestly I don't think it is a bs tactic.
Taking a full round action to finish off a helpless oponent is not really an efficent way for a guy to spend his actions.
Especially when there are three to four other opponents intent on killing and looting their bodies left to deal with.
That being said, it's your game. If you think it is fair and a problem you don't want to deal with then don't.
Personally I think it is unneceasary, as the only way they would get into that situation is if you, as GM, put them there, and if you have a problem with it, don't put them there.
I have lost characters to this before, I have never felt cheated because of it, and honestly would have thought my GM was being soft.
Fozbek wrote: InsaneFox wrote: I don't believe a 2nd level spell was intended as a save or die spell. Hold person, at that level, is a control spell. Even rogues don't get to cdg legitimately until 5d6 SA die, and that takes just as much setup. So I take it you object to CR 1 ghouls, then? They can paralyze on each of three natural attacks.
Yes, hold person is intended to be very, very dangerous. That's why it allows a save every turn, and why it gives the paralyzed condition rather than stunned or dazed. If a party fights a ghoul, they better hope that somebody has knowledge religion, so they know what to expect and fight accordingly.
A little more fair than you see a group of goblins, the goblin in the headress casts a shitty 2nd lvl spell, now his friend cdgs you... roll a natty or die.
Ironbar wrote: Honestly I don't think it is a bs tactic.
Taking a full round action to finish off a helpless oponent is not really an efficent way for a guy to spend his actions.
Especially when there are three to four other opponents intent on killing and looting their bodies left to deal with.
That being said, it's your game. If you think it is fair and a problem you don't want to deal with then don't.
Personally I think it is unneceasary, as the only way they would get into that situation is if you, as GM, put them there, and if you have a problem with it, don't put them there.
I have lost characters to this before, I have never felt cheated because of it, and honestly would have thought my GM was being soft.
In group combat, taking somebody out in one round is damn efficient.
Knowledge Check 1d20 + 20 ⇒ (15) + 20 = 35
Ah yes the Elusive Forum Troll in its native habitat.
Talonhawke wrote: Knowledge Check 1d20+20
Ah yes the Elusive Forum Troll in its native habitat.
Don't get what you're trying to say.
InsaneFox wrote: Ironbar wrote: Honestly I don't think it is a bs tactic.
Taking a full round action to finish off a helpless oponent is not really an efficent way for a guy to spend his actions.
Especially when there are three to four other opponents intent on killing and looting their bodies left to deal with.
That being said, it's your game. If you think it is fair and a problem you don't want to deal with then don't.
Personally I think it is unneceasary, as the only way they would get into that situation is if you, as GM, put them there, and if you have a problem with it, don't put them there.
I have lost characters to this before, I have never felt cheated because of it, and honestly would have thought my GM was being soft.
In group combat, taking somebody out in one round is damn efficient. Not quite as effeciant when you remember that somebody is already taken out of action with the hold. Yes, that person can get back in the fight with a passed save.
Anyway, like I said, it's your game. Run it how you want and screw what everyone else thinks. As long as you and your players are happy that is what matters right? Or do you really just need the anonymous members of a messageboard who will most likely never play in your game agree with you.
Fozbek wrote: InsaneFox wrote: I don't believe a 2nd level spell was intended as a save or die spell. Hold person, at that level, is a control spell. Even rogues don't get to cdg legitimately until 5d6 SA die, and that takes just as much setup. So I take it you object to CR 1 ghouls, then? They can paralyze on each of three natural attacks.
Yes, hold person is intended to be very, very dangerous. That's why it allows a save every turn, and why it gives the paralyzed condition rather than stunned or dazed. To elaborate let's compare spells. Forget who is using the spell, DM/player wise.
Phantasmal Killer lvl4 available at 7 wiz/8 sor.
vs
hold person lvl2 available at 3 clr/wiz, 4 sor.
phantasmal killer allows two different and passable saves. fear effect
hold person requires one willing friend. 1 save, granted at a -2 dc in comparison and a second save that requires a natty unless the attacker is a small child.
|
