|
What do you think about a house rule where you use a Fortitude save to roll to stabilize instead of Constitution?
My thought was to make it easier for higher level characters to stabilize than lower level, and make it easier for those classes with good fortitude saves.
I haven't run a lot of Pathfinder yet, so I'm going to wait to have more experience with the lethality of the system as is. I actually thought this was how the system worked at first, and I was surprised when I learned it's a con check and not a fort save.
What do you think?
You'll end up with the somewhat silly effect of characters stabilizing more at higher levels when the attacks are more and more preposterous. Then again, that's already and issue in the game.
You're right though, play it as written before changing anything. The fewer house rules you have, the less lookup time there is, and the easier for new players to join your group.
|
|
Anyone else want to weigh in on this? Has anyone tried anything like this?
Giving higher level characters more of a bonus to the roll is the point of the idea. This would be at least partially mitigated by the fact they get a penalty equal to their negative hit points. At increasing levels, this penalty is likely to grow as they take more damage on average.
You would still die at negative constitution, and the rules for massive damage would still be in effect, so I don't think it would be terribly unbalancing. It would just give characters who are bleeding out but not dead a better chance of stabilizing at higher levels.
Thoughts?
Anyone else want to weigh in on this? Has anyone tried anything like this?
Giving higher level characters more of a bonus to the roll is the point of the idea. This would be at least partially mitigated by the fact they get a penalty equal to their negative hit points. At increasing levels, this penalty is likely to grow as they take more damage on average.
You would still die at negative constitution, and the rules for massive damage would still be in effect, so I don't think it would be terribly unbalancing. It would just give characters who are bleeding out but not dead a better chance of stabilizing at higher levels.
Thoughts?
If you want higher level characters a better chance to stabilize, the this method is fine. I employ a different rule however. Here is the section from my house rules. This is a conglomeration of my old system using the D% roll and 4th Ed. dying rules.
Dying. A creature who drops below -1 HP is considered to be both Unconscious and Dying. A character can drop to -10, minus their positive Constitution modifier before dying. A negative Con mod likewise changes the point of dying to -9 or even less!
At the end of a round in which a creature’s HP has dropped to a negative total, the character will roll a D% to stabilize. The character is considered injured and "bleeding."
The character will stabilize if they roll the CON score or lower on the roll. From that number to 50%, the character will still lose -1 HP, but will not improve or worsen with regards to bleeding out. On a % roll of 51-100, the character will lose -1 HP. If this does not kill the character, the character can continue to roll each round. If the character "bleeds" three rounds before stabilizing, the character dies. To be clear, immediately on the third fail, the character dies. Any free action attempts (cures) to save the character must come before the third failing roll.
For example, Bash the Fighter has a CON score of 12 and MAX 19 HP. Unfortunately, Bash fell down a large pit trap earlier in the day and currently only has 7 HP. After being hit by a kobold arrow, Bash drops 4 more points to 3 HP and then receives an Acid Orb spell which does 7 HP damage. Bash drops to -4 and is now dying. At the end of the round, bash rolls D% to stabilize. On a roll of 1-12, Bash would stabilize and not lose HP. Bash would also stabilize if he were subject to a Heal skill attempt, or any magical healing. Bash rolls and get a 62. He drops to -5 and has failed once. The following round, Bash again attempts to stabilize, and rolls a 45. He still loses a HP but has only failed bleeding out once. On the third round, Bash rolls a 88 and drops to -7. He has now failed twice and is grave danger of bleeding out. This could be the party's last chance to help Bash. If, by the end of the next round, he has not been healed, Bash will have to roll to stabilize again. If he rolls 51-100 he will die instantly.
I actually run with the Fortitude instead of CON house rule myself. I make the difficulty 10 + number of HP negative ... so if a character is at -6 HP, the stabilization difficulty is 16.
I do agree that higher level characters should have an easier time stabilizing, and that fighters should stabilize better than wizards. That's why I run on Fortitude rather than CON.
If it would destroy the campaign, the character slips into a coma, instead of dying outright.