Instant Death

[Tsuga C]

I have few issues with any sort of "instant death" or "instant, total incapacitation" spells and/or abilities being included in the game so long as:

• they allow a saving throw;
  
• such abilities are available for use by the opposition and our party (reciprocity is important);
  
• they are high-level abilities and are thus not terribly common;
  
• any potential assassin class or kit that focuses on delivering instantaneous death does not find this focus negated by 95%+ of high-level opponents through immunities or a simple 1st level spell (NWN1 assassin Death Attack was negated by Protection from Evil);
  
• repeating for emphasis, these sorts of insta-kill spells and abilities are not common as it's not very sporting to disallow players to extricate themselves from sticky situations by dropping some sort of nuke on them without warning.
  

Let properly balanced assassins do their dastardly deeds with lethal grace, let rare and expensive poisons fell party members with a single dose + failed save, and let a Great Wyrm like Smaug splatter foes like so much roadkill with a thunderous tail swipe...so long as our party is operating under the same rules and has the opportunity to pay them back in spades.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Tsuga C

[HereticSaint]

Should there be spells that mechanically work as, "if you don't save versus this, you die", not in my opinion. I much rather the game just control Hit Point inflation and have regular spells (as long as they are equal level spells, cast by equal level spellcasters) be that dangerous. I think protection against magic should be something invested into via character traits/feats/training and equipment just like you need to do to be more durable against physical attacks.

 

To me, that opens up more build options and expands the gameplay. Sure, you can have some ridiculously armored fellow who is trained to have incredibly adept avoidance of melee attacks. But spells will be more dangerous, so you have to rely on your party members using spells to protect said party member against magic. Then you have a range class who has incredible magical protection, but not so much physical protection so you have to be careful of their positioning and be acutely aware of the potential of Rogues and the like sneaking up on them. Or you could have a more well balanced character who can skirmish and take a bit of punishment from both, but if you have an enemy (like a boss type character) who is incredibly adept at a single aspect then they can't just facetank everything they do without backup.

 

So, more or less my answer is, "depends on what direction they go in with gameplay, class and item mechanics". But more no than yes.

[Water Rabbit]

Save or die -- how boring. There are plenty of other magic systems than D&D that create more tactical options that just save or die. Frankly I hope the magic system looks nothing like D&D. I play D&D and have enjoyed games build around them, but can we try something new for a change?

 

Also, most of the spells mentioned would be for much higher level play than has been mentioned by the developers who seem to be thinking 3-12th level power for the game (in D&D terms).

Edited November 1, 2012 by Water Rabbit

[YourVoiceisAmbrosia]

As long as there is some way to prepare or counter it. It can get pretty aggravating to nearly defeat an enemy and then, out of nowhere, INSTANT DEATH.

[Attero]

I think there is room for some awesome "instant kills" with this setting - like spells that rip soul from body or monsters that feed on souls. And then you could have spells to resummon soul that recently left its body or when you kill the monster recently captured souls that were not yet devoured return to their bodies (note: requires body to be rather undamaged , soul that left body due to its failing cant be returned)

Edited November 1, 2012 by Attero

[PsychoBlonde]

Let properly balanced assassins do their dastardly deeds with lethal grace, let rare and expensive poisons fell party members with a single dose + failed save, and let a Great Wyrm like Smaug splatter foes like so much roadkill with a thunderous tail swipe...so long as our party is operating under the same rules and has the opportunity to pay them back in spades.

 

Ugh, don't remind me, DDO recently added tail attacks for the new dragons in the epic content. Nothing turns a powerful character into a chump like having a dragon one-shot kill you WITH ITS ASS.

[Tsuga C]

Ugh, don't remind me, DDO recently added tail attacks for the new dragons in the epic content. Nothing turns a powerful character into a chump like having a dragon one-shot kill you WITH ITS ASS.

 

Perhaps we'll have the opportunity to temporarily team up with such a beast for a single sidequest in P:E and the Tailswat of Doom will be on our side for once. Hey, I can dream, can't I?

[kabaliero]

As long as there is some way to prepare or counter it. It can get pretty aggravating to nearly defeat an enemy and then, out of nowhere, INSTANT DEATH.

i liked that post cause of.. several reasons..

[Karkarov]

Long story short. No. Save or die spells are RNG at their worst and don't belong in games that have been properly balanced and tested. BG2 I fail a save an instant die? I get pissed cause I lost 5 minutes of my life and reload a save. That isn't good gameplay.

[Tsuga C]

That isn't good gameplay.

 

Would it be equally poor gameplay if one of your party members (rogue/assassin) snuck up behind an annoyingly difficult to overcome opponent and put a poisoned blade into his heart and thus assassinated the problematic opponent?

[Hormalakh]

I remember beating the dragon Firkaag with two malison spells and a finger of death. That was quite unsatisfying.

[mstark]

^there were far too many ways to abuse that encounter

 

Long story short. No. Save or die spells are RNG at their worst and don't belong in games that have been properly balanced and tested. BG2 I fail a save an instant die? I get pissed cause I lost 5 minutes of my life and reload a save. That isn't good gameplay.

I disagree. I think bad gameplay is when you can charge into any fight knowing you never have to worry about anything unexpected happening. Too much of that in today's RPGs. IE games were very much about having to reload after a failed encounter, and re-think your entire approach to it. It was an experience, a meaningful one, because it made you think.

 

And you can't possibly call instant death spells, as per D&D, unbalanced - it's been worked on for nearly fourty years. Arguably one of the most balanced, unforgiving, and thought through role playing systems out there.

 

I'm not saying I'm for the game griefing you repeatedly just to "make it challenging", no. Spells and abilities like these certainly have their place in a realistic world, and I have nothing against them as long as they enhance gameplay.

Edited November 1, 2012 by mstark

[evdk]

I remember beating the dragon Firkaag with two malison spells and a finger of death. That was quite unsatisfying.

I thought it was fun.

[Hormalakh]

I remember beating the dragon Firkaag with two malison spells and a finger of death. That was quite unsatisfying.

I thought it was fun.

 

Nah I'd rather my fighters and mages wittle down his health and make it a fight worth remembering.

 

Do you like watching sport games (if at all) where one side crushes the other in the first quarter, or a really-close game where it's anyone game? Risk can offer excitement and games should be exciting! Instadeath is good for the peons and really annoying level 1 enemies that you can't be bothered with.

[Karkarov]

That isn't good gameplay.

 

Would it be equally poor gameplay if one of your party members (rogue/assassin) snuck up behind an annoyingly difficult to overcome opponent and put a poisoned blade into his heart and thus assassinated the problematic opponent?

 

No, because it doesn't require me to waste 5 minutes of my life and reloading a save. I wonder if you remember that this is a "game" it is supposed to be "fun". That said it is very easy for Obsidian to make instant death attacks simply not exist. Also it is easy to lay out an encounter to make it basically impossible for the "big bad" to be surprised by your assassin.

 

Also your example isn't RNG read (Random Number Generator) I had to sneak my assassin up there, give him the skills to make this attack/sneak effectively, give him the poison to do it (maybe I even had to craft it), and then the enemy still gets a save and may potentially live through the attack leaving my assassin with his pants down.

 

Power Word Kill - Save or die. No planning, no strategy, no crafted poison, no well timed cautious sneaking, just pure save or die. No thanks. Meanwhile the mage casts it from 30 yards away and is in no immediate danger when he does it. I make my save, he is fine, he just tries again next round or goes to a different spell.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Karkarov

[evdk]

Nah I'd rather my fighters and mages wittle down his health and make it a fight worth remembering.

 

Do you like watching sport games (if at all) where one side crushes the other in the first quarter, or a really-close game where it's anyone game? Risk can offer excitement and games should be exciting! Instadeath is good for the peons and really annoying level 1 enemies that you can't be bothered with.

No, I do not enjoy slowly whiting down some boss's bloated HP reserves, better it be done quickly. Give me my save or die. Edited November 1, 2012 by evdk

[Hormalakh]

Nah I'd rather my fighters and mages wittle down his health and make it a fight worth remembering.

 

Do you like watching sport games (if at all) where one side crushes the other in the first quarter, or a really-close game where it's anyone game? Risk can offer excitement and games should be exciting! Instadeath is good for the peons and really annoying level 1 enemies that you can't be bothered with.

No, I do not enjoy slowly whiting down some boss's bloated HP reserves, better it be done quickly. Give me my save or die.

 

A difference of opinion then. I'm sure this game will cater to both our needs. This is one case where "if I don't like it, I don't have to use it" really works.

[Water Rabbit]

^there were far too many ways to abuse that encounter

 

Long story short. No. Save or die spells are RNG at their worst and don't belong in games that have been properly balanced and tested. BG2 I fail a save an instant die? I get pissed cause I lost 5 minutes of my life and reload a save. That isn't good gameplay.

I disagree. I think bad gameplay is when you can charge into any fight knowing you never have to worry about anything unexpected happening. Too much of that in today's RPGs. IE games were very much about having to reload after a failed encounter, and re-think your entire approach to it. It was an experience, a meaningful one, because it made you think.

 

And you can't possibly call instant death spells, as per D&D, unbalanced - it's been worked on for nearly fourty years. Arguably one of the most balanced, unforgiving, and thought through role playing systems out there.

 

I'm not saying I'm for the game griefing you repeatedly just to "make it challenging", no. Spells and abilities like these certainly have their place in a realistic world, and I have nothing against them as long as they enhance gameplay.

 

You mean nearly 40 years. TSR released its first game in 1974. That also does not mean it was good game design since they were creating a tactical game and not an RPG. They just ported the mechanics. Your argument is odd, do you still drive a Model-T Ford because it was designed 50 years ago?

 

Have you even played an RPG besides D&D? There are a plethora of games that use different mechanics that are far superior to the save or die system of D&D and allow for plenty of unpredictability and tactics.

 

I will also point out that the save or die mechanic has been a source of controversy every since I can remember and I started playing AD&D in 1978. There are also other mechanics that have been sources of controversy -- mechanics that I have seen destroy gaming groups in fact. Yes AD&D 1st edition was very unforgiving -- especially on players since eventually the 1000s of saves they would have to make would eventually destroy a character. Great fun. It is of course why 1st Edition is still the edition that everyone plays and we have just imagined the countless changes made to it by 2nd, 3rd, and 4th (and soon ultimate).

 

Other systems create lethal encounters without requiring a save or die mechanic. Yes, there are spells that can protect to some degree, but then you have to rely on recon-by-death to know a priori you would need them.

[Water Rabbit]

That isn't good gameplay.

 

Would it be equally poor gameplay if one of your party members (rogue/assassin) snuck up behind an annoyingly difficult to overcome opponent and put a poisoned blade into his heart and thus assassinated the problematic opponent?

 

Why would you need a save or die mechanic for this? A lethal attack is a lethal attack is a lethal attack. Beside poison is not an instant kill type of attack anyway.

[Tsuga C]

I wonder if you remember that this is a "game" it is supposed to be "fun".

 

My definition of fun doesn't include spending 30+ minutes grinding down an opponent with a bazillion hit points for the 3rd time because it's killed my protagonist twice before. Sometimes I do want to throw a Power Word: Kill at an opponent and other times I'll want to try the assassination. Of course, the latter is predicated upon having a skilled assassin in my party. Some parties might not tolerate such an NPC in their midst.

 

Bottom line, I want the option to use Harm (with a save), Power Word: Kill (with a save), assassination (with a save), and I also want you to be able to sit there for half the night chipping away at Mr. Mega Hitpoints if that's your desire. I'd rather go to bed on time, thanks.

[Tauron]

Those types of spells should be in. As much as they are annoying to PC, they feel rewarding whn your character reaches appropriate lvl to have them. Sometimes they are not smart to have, but I dont RP always what agrees with numbers. Becouse they were always and will always be awsome! I dont know about enemies, who and how and whn, what lvl of power they should be, but I want them for my self at least. I want to petrify my enemies and return same road to see statue that I made, I want to see them burn and turn to dust! I want to use spells like death spell, whn attacked by some stupid random low lvl mob and just keep on walking hollywood style, while their spirits wail to no avail as they are pulled to the other side! Yes, I want awesomness back! It might be juventile, less sophisticated, but it screams pure raw power. Some would use more guile, but I like my character to be a typical Bond villain type of character. It is funny also. So I just dont want imaginary power, I want to play it in the game. Playing Kotor 2, what was not awsome about Force Crush!

 

There should ofcourse be some sort protection, I am not immunity fan, but in these instances immunity against instant death, if right protection but it still may hurts. Depending on lvl and how they make magic work. Remeber spellturning high lvl. Let magelings kill themself plz.

 

One of good reasons why player would contemplate having someone dabbling in arcane arts to be part of your party. Just as much armor mitigates damage from conventional weapons, so one has to rely on magical against magical. To me it makes perfect sense.

 

Hmm, Maybe, maybe, combo spells. You cast one, you cast the other and third migh result in instant death. Either desintigration, petrify, etc. I want powerfull to be powerfull again. I want our character to reach lvl it can do stuff you read about characters in lore books you find around laying. I want that to be one reasons for adventuring. aquisition of Power! To me it felt that game was unfullfilling whn reading about Elminsetr, Khelben Blackstaff, Jon Irencus and no matter how much we progress, we are not near their lvl of power! Now either make magic subtle so I can reason with that, but if it is near high magic world like Forgotten Realms, it always feels that yo just didnt reach high enough in the realms. At least not to the lvl other characters are portrayed. And to me if I am RP an evilish power hungry chracter, than that just feels lame. I want to go around look for spells, kill for them if needed be, Aquire secrets long forgotten and have them visualise through gameplay. This is mage character for me. Well that was my rant,

[Tsuga C]

Why would you need a save or die mechanic for this? A lethal attack is a lethal attack is a lethal attack. Beside poison is not an instant kill type of attack anyway.

 

I'm generally not in favor of any sort of attack that instantly kills without a save of some sort unless it's a matter of raw damage (e.g. fighter with heavy flail smacks simple kobold for 18hp, cave collapses and squishes party, etc.). Assassinations in AD&D bypass hit points and go straight to a percentage chance of outright killing the victim that varies depending on the level of the assassin and the level of the victim. Even if the assassination attempt fails, backstabbing damage still acrues and the victim might die anyway. Also, some poisons in AD&D are, indeed, save or die. This ability came at significant cost, so assassins weren't an "end-all-be-all" or "ne plus ultra" class.

 

One of my favorite characters from my tabletop days was an assassin, so insta-kill mechanics, so long as they're tested and balanced, don't bother me.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Tsuga C

[Sylvius the Mad]

I don't really care.

 

Except...

 

If instant death is possible for our enemies, then instant death should be possible for us.

 

There should be no asymmetry in the combat mechanics.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Sylvius the Mad

[kabaliero]

yeah, if there's gonna be spells like that, there shouldn't be bosses who are, like, "spell immunity, spell immunity --"

if u wanna 1-shot me, give me an ability to 1-shot that dude over there

 

and

 

make it reeeally hard for me to get him

 

not just with the resistances and stuff

but with all the things that a player would do to avoid that 1-shot spell

[mstark]

You mean nearly 40 years. TSR released its first game in 1974. That also does not mean it was good game design since they were creating a tactical game and not an RPG. They just ported the mechanics. Your argument is odd, do you still drive a Model-T Ford because it was designed 50 years ago?

 

Have you even played an RPG besides D&D? There are a plethora of games that use different mechanics that are far superior to the save or die system of D&D and allow for plenty of unpredictability and tactics.

 

I will also point out that the save or die mechanic has been a source of controversy every since I can remember and I started playing AD&D in 1978. There are also other mechanics that have been sources of controversy -- mechanics that I have seen destroy gaming groups in fact. Yes AD&D 1st edition was very unforgiving -- especially on players since eventually the 1000s of saves they would have to make would eventually destroy a character. Great fun. It is of course why 1st Edition is still the edition that everyone plays and we have just imagined the countless changes made to it by 2nd, 3rd, and 4th (and soon ultimate).

 

Other systems create lethal encounters without requiring a save or die mechanic. Yes, there are spells that can protect to some degree, but then you have to rely on recon-by-death to know a priori you would need them.

You make very good points, and I agree with you mostly. Just want to point out that what I said was that it has been under development for that time period, meaning I wouldn't drive the 40 year old Ford, I would drive today's Ford, because 40 years of development would have improved it, even if it's still using wheels. Because those wheels, being core to the car, stuck with it for all those years. This is getting terribly metaphorical, you know the world is a strange place when insta death is compared to Ford wheels.

 

Yes, there are other, likely better, systems. But D&D, as far as I can see, is a very robust system, and they've chosen, for all those years of development, to keep these spells in the system. Since the developers have said they want PE to maintain the feel of D&D, I'm fairly sure they'll be implementing similarly unforgiving systems, in one shape or another. Probably won't be exactly "save or die", but I'm not against the whole concept. Not in PE.

 

(if you look at the quoted text in your post, it does say 40 years, I edited it quickly after I first posted . And no, D&D certainly isn't without flaws )

Edited November 1, 2012 by mstark