I like to run a pretty bloody game where combat is something to be wary of, entered into reluctantly at times, especially if you dont have an edge.
I was thinking of dropping the Massive Damage Threshold to perhaps 30, bringing it in reach of some Crit x 3 weapons and the like for even lower level characters.
Thoughts? Would this be too deadly? How about droppinig the HP threshold but also making the save a bit easier, so it can happen more but typically doesnt?
If you're lower-level, a crit from a high-crit weapon is already plenty deadly. Massive damage'd be frosting on the cake even if it kicked in.
Mid levels, though, that does sound about right. A scythe crit isn't too likely to drop you to negatives, and you're still not likely to take 50+ damage from it.
|
you could set the threshold as a function of Hit Dice
say you chose a multiple of 5x
d6 classes threaten on 30 damage
d8 classes threaten on 40 damage
d10 classes threaten on 50 damage
d12 classes threaten on 60 damage
or if you chose a multiple of 4x
d6 at 24 damage
d8 at 32 damage
d10 at 40 damage
d12 at 48 damage
what DC were you considering? it currently sits at 15. so, 10?
Hmm, thats a really good idea. I just recalled that in the Conan:RPG, also a 3.5 offshoot, the Massive Damage threshold is 20, but then thats Hyboria, a very (Robert E. Howard driven) bloody game indeed. A multiplier of 3 seems a bit excessive to the lower die types, but 4 sort of singles them out entirely, while 5 doesnt change much except to make the higher types even tougher to hurt.
I may play test with 4 and see how it pans out and leave the DC at 15 for now sense your thieves and wizards are likely to be using it more often.
Hmm, I just had a thought. What about the larger creatures with HP bonuses? (Dragons and demons and such)
I realize they typically have Fort Saves that preclude the possibility of a massive damage effect but Im not sure I like that either, but thats another argument. (they do fail on a roll of 1 though dont they?)
Im not trying to get complicatecd but what do you think of this?
Massive Damage Threshold = Die Type x 3 + 1/level of target + 1/10th bonus HP.
Horned Devil = 15d10+135 so 30 + 15 = 45 + 13 = 58
Adult Black Dragon = 14d12+70 so 36 +14 = 40 + 7 = 47
Dog = 1d8+2 so 24 + 1 = 25 + .2 (round down) = 25 (Con is 15 so not likely to fail often anyway)
Comments? And while Im at it, should the larger creatures be immune to Massive Damage because of their high CONs? Is a roll of 1 the only way to have it affect them?
The problem with varying massive damage by hit dice type is multiclassing characters. What would the MDT for a 1st level wizard, 5th level barbarian (to go to extremes) be?
My suggestion would be to go for something like 15 + Con score + HD/level. Doing it like that accounts for both the inherent physical toughness of the creature (Con score) and the experience/power (HD/level), whilst making the number respectable at 1st level (assuming you haven't dumped Con, every character is going to be at 26+ to start).
|
|
multiclass gets best HD.
the whole X+Y+Z gets pretty complicated.
for larger/scarier creatures you could just increase the multiplier. maybe 6 for dragons and devils? (that's 72 and 60 respectively).
also i think DC 10 is fair to the lower HD/Fort classes, especially because DC 15 soon becomes trivial anyhow for high Fort/Con characters.
finally, if you have the Massive Damage optional rule implemented and threshold lowered, it takes a greater stage in your game, and you might consider how other new or old mechanics interact. for example, ought the 'deadly' weapon quality be changed to grant a -2 to the save vs MD?
I would think the highest HD type amoung the characters different classes would count. Your wizard spend some time 'working out' and is far less vulnerable to damage than your typical library denizen. I kind of like the attachment to the HD type as it reflects more than just physical toughness but a resistance to damage in general - tougher, more physical certainly but also more combat oriented etc.
I realize something like this might encourage your typical thief or magic user to spend a season as a fighter or get 'back to nature' as a barbarian for a summer just to gain the Threshold increase but honestly that may not be all that unrealistic.
We have Massive Damage thresholds at half hit points _or_ con score, whichever is higher.
Honestly, I like bloody games, but having a massive damage score so low that all characters risk dying of every single attack by a hobgoblin with a bow does not for a good game make, IMO.
Lowering massive damage threshold also punishes melee characters the most, while giving most to casters; melee characters both often rely on several "weaker" attacks while also being more likely to be the target of strong enemies single attacks, and casters are more likely to use single effects dealing large amounts of damage.
These will gain the most:
- Blaster casters.
- Wildshapers and companions focusing on a single big attack
These will lose the most:
- Rogues and anyone else reliant on many weaker attacks
- Anyone likely to be in melee
I don't know what other house rules you're using, that might change a lot, but applying this houserule to pathfinder as is is IMO a very bad idea.
For example, consider a 6th level blaster wizard; it'll likely do (5d6*1.5)+10 with a fireball to a large area of enemies (36 damage on a failed save, so a LOT of enemies that fail their saves will suffer massive damage). All of this while standing quite far back.
Meanwhile, a TWF rogue likely to be in melee will do something like:
+8/+8 (1d6+3+3d6; 19-20x2) meaning 6-27 damage with a crit possibly getting massive damage against a single enemy. This while being a low-AC target in close combat.
Well the RAW states there is a 50HP minimum so it isnt really even a factor in most games as is, which is another reason Im looking for a house rule on it. How often is 50 damage caused in one attack at most levels of the game?
As far as Massive Damage Hobgoblins go, even the lowest D6 hit dice wizard at level one could take 19 points before having to make a save and the Hob only does 1d8+3 but I get your point.
I agree that if you are rolling for massive damage on a regular basis against fairly well matched opponants then something is wrong, but as it is now, you never roll.
Hmm, perhaps there is a compromise wherein a lower threshold doesnt represent instant death but rather instant incapacitation, a really serious wound in other words. You fail, you drop to 0HP, not below. Think your typical broken shield arm, knock to the head or collapsed lung type of thing.
50 damage is often caused at middling levels by casters, and certain two-handed weapon fighters.
As you see in my example, 6th level wizard caused over 30 damage _average_ on an area attack.
A druid at 8th level with Beast Shape + Strong Jaw + Vital Strike can do something like 16d6+6 or thereabouts, for 12-102 damage, averaging 62 damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure if the threshold needs to be lower. The rule itself is optional because considering how much damage a character can do the game can get into game of 'Rocket Launcher Tag' even at 50 damage.
Hell it gets like that without massive damage. I don't have a real reason to disagree because if the goal is to put the fear of death into players it is terrifying. Also there's a limit to optimizing damage input allowing melee characters to focus on other things later in the game. But I'm still wary. 1 hit KOs can devolve into wrongbadfun as much as it could make coolgoodfun.
Could just make Threshold = Constitution score. Change the DC a bit (because DC15 is pitiful), so it's 10 + half damage. If you want massive damage to come up less often, make it Constitution Score x 2. It does elevate Constitution as a stat a -little- bit; ultimately, the best way to avoid massive damage isn't going to be making sure you can tank the hit, but not getting hit in the first place. It solves the issue about massive creatures and massive damage, because they get Constitution bonuses for being huge.
Also could make it so Massive Damage does not apply to energy damage, so wizards can't just cast a fireball and inflict massive damage on everyone in a 20 foot blast.