Instant Death

[Jarmo]

 

 Because many of us here actually have passing knowledge of decent spell systems, where you have spells like Hold Person, Power word Stun, Dire charm, Sleep, Flesh to stone, etc. All of which are ALSO Un-mitigateable, 100% or 0%, no matter what spells. They just won't kill you. For example, If you save against a stun spell, you're home free. If you Fail your save, that's it. Your character is out of commission. Completely taken out of the combat encounter, through no tactical fault of your own (other than the fact that you didn't prepare ahead of time to protect against it.) Ditto with all the others.

But you don't have a problem with any of those. Do you. Nope, you just have a problem with the ones that can kill you.  

 

 

 

 

 

For the record, I have a problem with all of those. A stun that either doesn't affect you at all or puts you 100% out of commission.

I'll much rather have states of stunnedness between 0-100%, with durations from a blink of an eye to minutes.

 

Like hitting an attacking lion or a mugger with a taser.

It's not like a certain percentage of either would be completely unharmed and a certain percentage would be knocked out. 

 

I'll much rather have something like "stun points" where you can put a big guy out of commission by slapping him several times,

the combined effect doing the thing where the first strike fails.

 

Also, from totally charmed, through grudgingly accepting some non-combat instructions, to totally resisting the charm. In increments.

 

Get stung by a tiny scorpion or a cow-size wyvern. Poisons of different strengths.

Not 20% chance to immediately die from first and 80% from the second, but varying states of "poisoned".

 

Hold person. From totally held so hard you can't blink to slightly hindered or completely unaffected. 1-100% depending on stuff.

 

 

What I don't have problems with, is effective insta-kill. So the demigod lich has a death ray, ok.

Lets say, the ray does 10d6 points of damage, so it kills a war elephant in a couple of turns, or (likely) completely disintegrates a 1st level warrior.

Heck, a halberd is effectively an insta-kill weapon if you're hitting a 1st level mage with 2 HP's!

But it's not a throw saving throw against death (10% chance) and throw saving throw against death (70% chance) at 10th level.

[Stun]

I'd be ok with such a system applied to weapons.

 

But Wizard/Priest spells, at least at the higher levels, should be a little more profound than that. There should be a distinct difference. Magic is legendary. Supernatural. It's *more* than the person who's using it. Make it rare, and give it all the user consequences you think it deserves, but don't dilute it. Magic should never be comparable to a police taser, or whatever. if it is, then the system is crap. You just sucked all the "magic" out of magic.

Edited June 5, 2013 by Stun

[Randomthom]

From an in-game perspective, instant-death spells make a lot of sense.

 

Magic is a tool and often a weapon. It would make absolute sense therefore that this "weapon" has been developed by wizards to be as deadly as possible.

 

Perhaps the use of such spells could be considered highly illegal or taboo or simply very difficult to master. Maybe the Gods have deemed them too powerful to be allowed into mortal hands and so are quick to respond to any development of magic of these sorts.

 

Additionally, what about instant death by non-magical means, poisons, massive damage etc. Maybe the solution could be to have lots of instant death (a lá Game of Thrones anyone? ) and it's just something that you have to deal with and treat every fight as if it might be your last.

 

I agree with a previous poster though that possibly the best way to deal with this is simply to control HP inflation. If nobody has crazy-high hit point totals then you don't need instant death spells etc. to create the tension & feeling of vulnerability with the player.

[Morgulon the Wise]

1. instant death should have a narrative background

2. you or your foe have to make a lot of preparances (in narrative style or in time before finishing the cast/the poison/ the blow) before releasing a banshee scream out of a soundproof bottle, you have for example search for the right material of the earplugs - your fingers won't do - to protect your group against it. And even then you have to look out who you kill or not. And monsters without hearing senses could tend to be immune...

3. consequences

 

There should only be up to 10 instant death possibilities in the game. Maybe there should even exist a list ingame of prohibited ways or legendary methods (in an assasins guild given from master to master). A boss with an instant death ability should be known for such. If you kill him you should have the opportunity to steal his way of instant killing if your party has nothing against it.

 

Instant death in your hands should be a one-time-use thing. Not something your wizard casts dayly.

If it has been cast, it should KILL. No percentages. Only with the right timing and preparations. It should be fun to perform it, because you have only one of each.

[Lephys]

Riight. Can we reign in the disingenuous debating for a moment or two? Stop pretending that your beef is with the 100% or 0%, "no matter what!" nature of save or die, when what you REALLY dislike is... lethal combat.

I'm sorry... while you're at it, could you please tell me what I'd like for dinner tonight? Because I obviously can't be as sure as you can. 8P. Thanks a bunch.

 

Because many of us here actually have passing knowledge of decent spell systems, where you have spells like Hold Person, Power word Stun, Dire charm, Sleep, Flesh to stone, etc. All of which are ALSO Un-mitigateable, 100% or 0%, no matter what spells. They just won't kill you. For example, If you save against a stun spell, you're home free. If you Fail your save, that's it. Your character is out of commission. Completely taken out of the combat encounter, through no tactical fault of your own (other than the fact that you didn't prepare ahead of time to protect against it.) Ditto with all the others.

The point: You have typed it. (see gold text above). Regarding the stun, your character isn't "completely taken out of the combat encounter." He's still standing there, and will recover after a time. Therefore, protecting him is still a feasible tactical factor. Possibly even removing his stun. Worrying about him isn't pointless just because he got stunned. And, guess what? If he gets stunned with LOWER health, it's going to be more difficult to protect him so that he can return as a factor in your combat encounter. Maybe you could've been more careful with him, because he was lower on health. Etc.

 

When a foe swings a weapon, it either hits or it doesn't, no matter what! *gasp*. But guess what? It produces a finite and variable effect, dependent upon oodles of other factors, even after the "no matter what" part. Guess what doesn't. That's right, insta-kill abilities, whose nature it is to nullify factors. (such as HP and armor values, etc.). Your resistance effectively becomes evasion, and everything else is rendered pointless.

 

NOPE. If I Maze or Deep Slumber your Fighter, I have just instantly taken him out of combat....no matter what. You no longer control him. You can no longer use him. Whatever 'gameplan' or "tactics" you had involving him have just been flushed down the crapper. And it doesn't make a lick of difference how tactical you were before I cast that spell. If I cast that spell on your Fighter, and he fails his saving throw, he's just as good as dead, and will remain that way for the rest of the encounter (assuming my party doesn't decide to take advantage of his disabled state and KILL HIM AS HE LAYS THERE, DEFENSELESS.) But that's life. Excuse me, that's an accurate simulation of the perils of any real combat: sometimes you get unlucky and the best laid plans of mice and men fail at the blink of an eye. Suck it up princess, as the saying goes.

I forgot... in real combat, the only thing stopping us from ABSOLUTE disablement is a will/fort save and/or some magic resistance. Heh. You're right on one thing, at least: If those abilities are so instant and absolute, and so ignoring of all factors "save" one (see what I did there?), then they're just as bad as insta-killing abilities. So, at least we're in agreement on something.

 

But like I said before, your only beef is with Tough combat where instantaneous and absolute death is actually a possibility. You're simply Trying to mask this fact by putting up feeble fluff arguments to try and make boring, predictable, non-exciting, non-lethal, combat sound like some sort of 'logical' improvement to how things were in the Icewind dales and the BG games. The mechanics behind Save-or-die are Exactly the same as the ones behind save-or-be-disabled... and there's no way around this bottom line.

I fixed your statement, with red text.

 

Also, "tough" combat? Haha...

 

"Man, this fight is really complex and difficult..."

"Why? What's wrong?"

"Well, you see, if that guy decides to cast a single spell, I might just die."

"Can't you stay far away from him, or hide behind something?"

"Nope. It's all up to chance, and whether or not he feels like trying to kill me."

"Wow, that IS tough!"

"I know, right?! I've gotta figure out some kind of strategy that involves him deciding to simply NOT will me to death."

 

You're right, Stun. Why on earth am I ignorantly advocating tactical control and reaction to a plethora of factors that determine the outcomes of things, when we could, instead, have all the depth and complexity of a tavern game of dice? o_O. What was I THINKing?!

 

While we're at it, let's make combat even tougher by simply multiplying all enemies' health pools by 1,000, and giving them resistance to all damage types. That should make things more tactical and interesting. I'm loving this brainstorm we've got going on! Come now, how else can we make sure combat has depth? Let's keep 'em coming!

[Stun]

I'm sorry... while you're at it, could you please tell me what I'd like for dinner tonight? Because I obviously can't be as sure as you can. 8P. Thanks a bunch.

<Gag> Give it a rest. You barged in here in your very first post of this thread screaming about the catostropic, game-killing nature of One Hit KO's *period*, and then when we showed you Sawyer's post, where he confirms that PE will HAVE enemies who can Kill you with one hit, you shamelessly changed gears, did a complete 180, and began your soapbox about the evils of the system itself, where you can get killed despite your party's so-called "perfect" tactical game plan. But then, when you were shown a large list of things a party *can* do within that system to combat and protect themselves from Failing a save or Die spell check (ie. tons of Options), your response was: Er... um... No, that doesn't count! Death is still a factor, therefore NO!

 

No one is pretending to read your mind here. No one needs to. You're being painfully OBVIOUS. You don't want to worry about dying due to bad luck. That's fine. You're not a minority here. But be honest and ADMIT it.

 

 

 

The point: You have typed it. (see gold text above). Regarding the stun, your character isn't "completely taken out of the combat encounter." He's still standing there, and will recover after a time.

Likewise with Death, in the system we're describing, your character isn't "completely taken out of the combat encounter" either, he's still laying there and can be Raised... in the very next round if need be.

 

Of course this has already been pointed out to you, but like I said, the fact that death is an existing element, makes it bad, despite the fact that the system itself is EXACTLY THE SAME.

 

When a foe swings a weapon, it either hits or it doesn't, no matter what! *gasp*. But guess what? It produces a finite and variable effect, dependent upon oodles of other factors, even after the "no matter what" part. Guess what doesn't. That's right, insta-kill abilities, whose nature it is to nullify factors. (such as HP and armor values, etc.). Your resistance effectively becomes evasion, and everything else is rendered pointless.

Save or die spells do the same thing. And you know it. So here's what you're saying here:

 

Weapons that can hit or miss = OK

 

but:

 

Magic that can kill or not = bad.

 

I rest my case. Your issue is only with death. Admit it already. You are literally saying here here that you're ok with the "binary" 100% or 0%, "no matter what" mechanic.... right up until the consequences for failure become serious. The fact that you are (falsly) trying to argue that Save or Die eliminates other factors (like, you know, a rogue's ability to evade a death ray.... or a mage's ability to absorb, deflect, reflect that ray, or a fighter's ability to Improve his saves, or flat out resist Death effects via items, potions etc....) Is just you attempting to deny the fact that the system is exactly the same with save or die, as it is with save or be disabled. Or, block and take no damage. Or boost your health and survive the Tarrasque's bull rush.

 

I forgot... in real combat, the only thing stopping us from ABSOLUTE disablement is a will/fort save and/or some magic resistance.

Correct. The mechanics we're describing are conceptual methods designed to simulate situations in real life where sometimes one gets lucky and survives a dangerous situation, and sometimes he doesn't, despite all his planning, intelligence and experience.

 

 

The rest of your post is nothing more than your signature stream of consiousness, "lets lull the opponent to sleep with a bunch of words that aren't saying anything in the hopes that he gives up and then we can pretend we "won" the debate. So I'm going to brush it aside every time I sense you're doing it.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Stun

[Lephys]

I'm sorry that the way of things upsets you to the point of complete denial, but tactics thrive on factor-outcome variance, and insta-everything's-over abilities that hinge upon a single dice roll are quite literally on the opposite end of the spectrum from variance of any kind. 3 possibilities, even, are exponentially greater than a mere 2, especially when one of them is the absence of effect.

 

I didn't make things so. I'm simply voicing observations. And if you'd like to ignore them, or decide I'm making things up, then that's totally your prerogative. Maybe less close-minded people actually garnered some value from this discussion. If not for your constant objection to everything I was saying, I would never have questioned everything I was saying, myself, to quite such an extent. So thanks for that at least. ^_^

[Morgulon the Wise]

Possibilites of effect should be determined by the way who casts how the instant kill. A warrior type could for example kill himself with the staff of whatsoever death, while a mage just points and kills a lot of foes (It shouldn't be written on it how to use - you should get your info elsewhere - in libaries or from yet living witnesses).

 

There should be no percentages.

[Homer Morisson]

Possibilites of effect should be determined by the way who casts how the instant kill. A warrior type could for example kill himself with the staff of whatsoever death, while a mage just points and kills a lot of foes (It shouldn't be written on it how to use - you should get your info elsewhere - in libaries or from yet living witnesses).

 

There should be no percentages.

 

That I really like!

A bit of "Careful what you fiddle with!"-realism could really spice things up in a good way.

Such things might be linked to your intelligence level for instance... I can already imagine it:

 

Before you, you see a wooden staff lying on the path. Although there are no trees to shade it and the sun shines directly upon the blackened wood,

the staff seems to radiate an aura of cold. You find it strange that such an object would just be left lying around. What do you do?

 

Depending on your attributes and character class, the options might be:

 

Pick the staff up -> You pick the staff up and immediately feel the cold entering your arm and crawling towards your heart ...

 

Non-Mage class: ... You try to drop the staff, but it seems frozen to your hand. You feel the cold has almost reached your chest already, your only option is to cut the staff from your hand...

 

This might give the character a permanent malus on his dexterity, if he has to really force it from his hand, or a temporary malus until a healer can fix the not-so-great damage, or even no damage at all, if he is really skilled (or lucky) - which in turn might be influenced by the dexterity attribute of the character, just how well he is able to unstuck the staff without amputating his fingers.

 

Mage class: You try to drop the staff, but it seems frozen to your hand. You feel the cold has almost reached your chest already. How do you react?

 

The mage class might have several more actions availabe to him, ranging from conjuring magical flames to melt the staff from his hand (Risk of burning his hand, as above cutting hand), or he might try to use his magical powers to subdue the staff and push the cold back into it (merely to be able to drop it), or he might try to fight the staff's power and to master it, gaining permanent control over it.

 

Examine the staff without touching it -> You kneel down to take a closer look at the staff. Immediately you feel the aura of cold getting stronger, almost reaching out to you.

You see some strange cuts and gashes on the staff ...

 

Non-mage class: ... but although they look to be more than simple variations of wood, or scars of battles long gone, there is no way for you to make sense of them. The cold seems to become more intense the longer you are kneeling over the staff. What do you do?

 

This would be the investigation option for non-mage classes with fairly low to average intelligence, the only options left for them at this point would thus be to still pick up the staff (see above) or to play it safe and leave it well enough alone.

 

Mage class 1: ... You get the feeling that these are not just random, but part of a rather complex inscription. But with just seeing one side of the staff, you can't deciver the meaning of those markings - it is clear however that this staff must hold great power. What do you do?

 

This would be the investigation option for mage classes with slightly above-than-average intelligence, the options available could be something like:

 

- Pick up the staff and try to read the whole inscription (see above)

- Try to see more of the inscription by nudging the staff with your boot

-> You carefully nudge the staff with your boot to turn it, but the staff does not budge. As you pull back your foot, your boot comes off - it is frozen to the staff!

-> Leave the staff alone, or pick it up anyway despite all the signs of danger (this being this characters advantage of being at least given fair warning not to take this staff lightly)

 

Mage class 2: You immediately realize that these are not just random markings, but part of a complex inscription. After carefully studying this part of the inscription, you are sure about two things: that he who commands this staff would have a terrible power at his command, and that this staff was not meant for mortal hands. What do you do?

 

This would be the investigation option for mage classes with exceptional intelligence, or for mage class 1 as well, if the character would have obtained lore about certain objects of power before trying to use the staff. The available options would be:

 

- (Alignment going towards evil): Being aware of the dangers, you pick up the staff after having ...

 

This is where it might branch off again depending on what powers the mage class has available to them:

... conjured magical flames around your hands to counter the staffs' freezing effect

... made yourself exceptionally resistent against cold by casting spell xyz

... put on heavy leather gloves, being inspired by the boot-accident

 

The first two options might then result in the character being able to wield the staff for as long as he can successfully maintain both his concentration and the magical protection he has set up, so that he could use the staff either for a limited amount of time per day, or maybe even just once because it drains him too much.

 

The third option would result in the character being able to safely pick up the staff, maybe to then get a closer look at the inscription, but he would not be able to use it, since he would then find out that he has to hold it in his bare hands to wield its power. That would be on one hand simply a means of not making the staff too powerful through ease of use, and on the other hand I simply like the concept that Power (yes, with a capital P!) always comes at a price.

 

- (Alignment going towards good): Being aware of the dangers, and the terrible power this staff could unleash, you decide to take it with you and find a means of destroying it once and for all.

 

- (Alignment neutral): You decide to ignore the staff, the risks are just to high.

 

 

tl;dr: Give such insta-kill (or otherwise immensely powerful) objects a certain degree of character and background, weave it into the worlds' lore, and I would be more than happy.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Homer Morisson

[IndiraLightfoot]

_{Insta-death in PnP RPG:}

_{"You step into the black swirling portal, and suddenly your mind goes blank. Sorry, Hrufnur, but you are gone forever. Sadly, you were disintegrated."}

_{"Nooo!!! I've had Hrufnur since we begun this campaign two years ago. I'll never play this stupid game anymore, ever!!"}

 

_{Insta-death in CRPG:}

_{"You step into the black swirling portal, and suddenly your mind goes blank. Sorry, Hrufnur, but you are gone forever. Sadly, you were disintegrated."}

_*Reloads*

 

_{'Nuff said!}

 

_{P.S. The font sizes went bananas when I posted it. I simply can't get them to obey.}

[Stun]

I'm sorry that the way of things upsets you to the point of complete denial, but tactics thrive on factor-outcome variance,

Are you denying that there are at least a dozen different, and varying, factors inolved in a combat system scenario where save or die spells get used? Do you dispute the fact that both the player party, and the enemy has at least a dozen different tactical avenues they can take to decrease failure chances, become immune, avoid outright or even deflect partially the effects of a save or die spell?

 

If so, then you've never played the IE games. Simple as that. Or you're just being dishonest.

 

 

I'm simply voicing observations.

You mean blind guesses. Yes. Edited June 6, 2013 by Stun

[Jarmo]

_{Insta-death in PnP RPG:}

_{"You step into the black swirling portal, and suddenly your mind goes blank. Sorry, Hrufnur, but you are gone forever. Sadly, you were disintegrated."}

_{"Nooo!!! I've had Hrufnur since we begun this campaign two years ago. I'll never play this stupid game anymore, ever!!"}

 

_{Insta-death in CRPG:}

_{"You step into the black swirling portal, and suddenly your mind goes blank. Sorry, Hrufnur, but you are gone forever. Sadly, you were disintegrated."}

_*Reloads*

 

_{'Nuff said!}

 

 

 

I'm not sure if I see the point.

I see the difference and that it's more frustrating to die in tabletop.

 

But are you suggesting a gameplay relying on constant reloading is desirable in CRPG, or just that it's not so bad.

Is it just instant death or death in general?

 

Myself, I'd like to see "normal difficulty" to be about the same as a playthrough in normal tabletop gaming,

ie. you're supposed to be able to survive a first blind playthrough without dying or reloading once.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 you're supposed to be able to survive a first blind playthrough without dying or reloading once.

 

 

Oh gosh, no way! Just to clarify, I really love CRPG for what they are as opposed to PnP roleplaying: I want my games to be hard. I have no problems with dying many times over, single character or party, even at the hands of a badly infected rat in some nasty sewers. A CRPG where you are "supposed to survive a first blind playthrough without dying or reloading once" would be a sad thing, indeed, an abomination even.

 

The closest I've ever experienced such a walk-in-the-park CRPG was Kingdoms of Amalur - but I think I did die twice there for some reason. The things that made IE-games great, and of course NWN 1 & 2, was that they were at least occasionally challenging - especially BG2 and ToEE - they had strategic encounters that could wipe out my party if I wasn't tactical enough or if a few die rolls went against me. 

Edited June 6, 2013 by IndiraLightfoot

[Jarmo]

 would be a sad thing, indeed, an abomination even.

 

 

Ok. This here is a fence. You're on that side, I'm on this side. Neither is sitting on the fence, not even leaning on it either.

Which is fine by me, I believe I do see a bit  clearer why someone would like a game filled with deathspells. Thanks for clarifying. 

 

A shame PE seems to be more in your side and less on mine, but such is life. I'll live and enjoy the game as it is.

[IndiraLightfoot]

No problem!

 

Yes, we are probably on both sides of a fence on that issue, but actually I think instant death-spells are silly for CRPGs, and rather lazy game design, as I tried to demonstrate in my own silly way in another post in this thread, so we also agree on something here.

[Lephys]

Interestingly, simply "decompressing" the insta-death effect can make for even still-killy abilities that are much richer in nature. Just changing simple factors, so that it's not some all-in-one solitary dice roll makes all the difference in the world. Imagine if some spell had to strike you three times to kill you. And/or maybe the death spell is a slow-moving projectile that's dodgeable, or even able to be blocked by obstacles or shields (after all, you can't kill a shield). And/or maybe the spell must be channeled for 10 consecutive seconds to actually work.

 

I think the most important facet of this is that no ability (much less end-all-be-all insta-slay abilities) should ever hinge on too few factors. That's why a physical strike that happens to deal enough damage to kill you is not problematic.

 

- The enemy had to reach you to strike you

- The enemy had to not-miss.

- The enemy's damage output had to be of a certain value (meaning he couldn't be suffering too many penalties at the time).

- Your character's health had to be lower than the potential damage of the strike.

- Your character's armor had to be low enough (OR of the correct type) to fail to mitigate the damage coming from the enemy.

- Your character had to fail to block/dodge.

 

That's not even all of them. All the factors you have some modicum of control over, at least.

 

So, it's not really bad that an effect be insta-death. It's bad that it rely on so few factors (whether or not the ability was used, and whether or not you resisted; nothing more).

[Stun]

In 1st and (if I'm not mistaken)2nd edition pen and paper D&D, Disentigrate sorta works like that. It is essentially a ray. And if a mage casts it on a fighter, then it goes to work. His shield, weapon and armor have to make a saving throw or be turned to dust. If his armor fails, then He, himself must make a saving throw. But if his armor makes its save then it is assumed that the Ray failed to "penetrate" deep enough to get to him.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Stun

[Stun]

Myself, I'd like to see "normal difficulty" to be about the same as a playthrough in normal tabletop gaming,

ie. you're supposed to be able to survive a first blind playthrough without dying or reloading once.

What does this even mean? I don't think I've ever played a 60 hour table-top session(s) where our entire party went through from beginning to end without *someone* dying in battle, or from a trap, or from doing something stupid. It happens. And a DM who denies his players that kind of natural drama (which is a HUGE part of the entire system) is doing a gross disservice.

 

Fortunately, most good DMs make it up to the players. a dead character can be raised, or re-incarnated (I Once had a very high level Fighter-mage who I loved. He died from a Chromatic Orb. And, as it happens, we had no cleric with us and the nearest temple was days away. But... we were adventuring with a Druid, who managed to Re-incarnate him.... as a Centaur. That's right. A Centaur. And my DM allowed me to continue adventuring, with all my fighter and mage skills... as a centaur. It was great fun.) That's the way you do it in Tabletop. You don't "take away the possibility of death". You don't "make things easy". Instead, you find a way to continue the adventure WITH the element of death still there.

Edited June 6, 2013 by Stun

[Chippy]

Instant death is the single most reviled thing on my list of pet hates - it represents bad developer design in one single infuriating example.

 

That said I'm talking about different examples of it:

 

1. Glitchy - you bounce off another character and get catapulted several hundred game feet into the air, over a cliff, and die. 

 

2. Developer thinks their Bullfrog's Dungeon Keeper - you enter a dungeon, the first floor tile is an illusion with a DC of 30,000, and beneath is a dragons mouth agape and waiting for your character. 

 

3. Totally random - a meteorite flys through the atmosphere and blazes through your eyesocket, killing you instantly.

 

Then there's the developer/modder who think it's great fun  to have the meterorite crack you one in the eye (spilling blood/haze all over the screen and breaking the 4th wall) have you scripted/catapulted through the air and into the waiting jaws of a dragon - because THIS IS HARDCORE PC GAMING, and arn't you the silly gamer for relying on your character skills and not knowing where to step on the tiled floor of faith.

 

I have faith in Obsidian though; and in all fairness the infinity engine games always offered you a protection against instant death.  The only exception I think was some vorpal weapons and Monk abilities?.

[Lephys]

@Stun: Your reincarnation as a centaur is AWESOME! For what it's worth.

 

Regarding your argument against removing death from the equation... Death is not the problem. Death is just a destination. The journey is what I'm worried about. I don't care if Death is where we're going, but I don't want to get teleported there.

 

That's what you seem to be misunderstanding, as you keep suggesting we want to remove the very threat of death from combat. Like I don't want HP to be able to reach zero, or I don't want stuff to be able to deal damage. On the contrary. I just want an equation that doesn't always equal 0 HP, and I want damage for which the value actually matters. I don't want failure in combat to be reduced so a dice roll and a resistance value. I want to be able to react to the effects of something and possibly change them, then still be able to die.

 

I don't want:

 

Step 1 - Ability Use

Step 2 - ...

Step 3 - Profit! (death)

[cleric Nemir]

Wow,great thread. That "battle" between Lephys and Stun was fantastic. Powerful,like duel of yes and no,dark and light,black and white. Although I mostly agree with Stun - being that he is the champion of a system that we all love or else we wouldn't be here supporting all this. However,Lephys proved as a fine duelist,representing a side that we all should recognize - a need to improve. At least I see it like that,mind me.

 

But this one specific thing struck me after all this written here in the thread,generally. The disintegration spell.

 

That spell is the mage's ultimate strike,when you think about it. It completely destroys a person/object,the very matter that person/object is made of. You can't be resurrected. If anything deserves "special attention",it is that spell. I personally wouldn't change a thing with instant death spells so far,but I am also admitting that disintegration is scaring the living sh*t outa me when I encounter someone who can cast it. So I gave it a lot of thought and I am suggesting that if any spell is to be reworked - it is the disintegration spell. Make it a high prize. Something that can be cast only by the most skilled,something that takes insane concentration,make the casting procedure a small ritual rather then a snap of two fingers. That sort of power is truly godlike. Make noone resistant to it,it deserves that,but make it a living hell to obtain and cast.

I also suggest the divine version of it - destruction spell - completely out. Instead,I propose a soul eater/devour spell - something that destroys the essence that animates living beings,and leaves person dead beyond restoring. Also to be made a high prize.

[Jarmo]

 

What does this even mean? I don't think I've ever played a 60 hour table-top session(s) where our entire party went through from beginning to end without *someone* dying in battle, or from a trap, or from doing something stupid. It happens. And a DM who denies his players that kind of natural drama (which is a HUGE part of the entire system) is doing a gross disservice.

 

 

 

Someone dying at some point is fine, or several someones at several sharp points.

But a tough boss battle where you're pretty much expected to lose the whole party, several times, before figuring out the tactic to beat him?

Well my tabletop sessions weren't like that at all, we didn't even get to reload like ever never.

 

And yay for centaur reincarnation! 

[Lephys]

Awww, man, I can't believe I didn't think of this before! CANNOT PASS UP!

 

Hey Stun. ... I bet after you were reincarnated, you were the... Centaur of attention in that campaign.

 

 

COMMENCE THE FACEPALMING! u_u

[Jarmo]

 

Hey Stun. ... I bet after you were reincarnated, you were the... Centaur of attention in that campaign.

 

 

 

X_____x

[teknoman2]

insta death spells are a bit of a double edged sword. in certain cases, they can make for a good chalenge, while if they become of common use they become a bother. especially considering that they have a good chance to deliver their effect on your party members, while its hard at low levels and becomes impossible later on for them to affect enemies if used by you

in both BG, but especially in 2, i almost never used debuffs like sleep, confusion, fear, disintegration, death etc, simply because they had a very slim chance to work if they had any chance at all. while in arcanum, disintegration was a cheat, since it could 1 shot anything, even the final boss and it never missed

Edited June 8, 2013 by teknoman2