I was wondering what others thought about these aspects of the D&D (and NWN) rules. Several designers (such as Monte Cook) have eschewed both of these elements in their own materials and revisions. I think NS could be enhanced by limiting and/or removing these two elements from the game.
1. "Save or die" spells. Retain the save, but instead of instant death the target takes a great deal of damage (such as a % of their hp) when failing the save and avoids the damage when making the save.
e.g. Finger of Death: save vs. fort (death); failure: target's hp is reduced by 75%; save: no damage.
The "death" effect would remain the same for purposes of bonus saves vs. death granted by items, spells, etc.
2. Immunities. Remove immunities from the game, but instead grant a significant bonus to save versus the effect the immunity was originally against.
e.g. Death Ward: +6 save versus death effects.
...
Thoughts?
"Save or Die" and immunities...
"Save or Die" and immunities...
"Cats aren't domesticated, they're just not big enough to kill you." -Phil Athans, former WotC employee
-
Lorkar1
DnD is all about stuff like this; in PnP, 20th level or higher is a game of craps trying to avoid snake eyes, as almost every creature who hits you will hit for more than 50 damage at a go, triggering the non-NWN event called "massive damage"... make a F-DC 15 or die immediately. So basically, every high level encounter gives you a 1-in-20 chance of rolling a 1 and kicking it several times a round due to automatic failure. Death magic is surprisingly forgiving compared to that, eh?
Save-or-die magic is fundimental to DnD... gotta love it!
Save-or-die magic is fundimental to DnD... gotta love it!
~DM Yonwe
Lolth - Goddess of the Drow
Velsharoon - God of Undeath
Lolth - Goddess of the Drow
Velsharoon - God of Undeath
If you removed death effects from NS4 then it because NS4 based on NWN, not NWN based on DnD. As stated above death effects always have been a corner stone of DnD and well should aslways be.
On a side note.... i dont really agree with the changes to harm and heal, i thought they served there purpose well the way they were. As it is now greater restore is a better heal spell than heal itself. Harm is well nowhere near strong enough IMO.
On a side note.... i dont really agree with the changes to harm and heal, i thought they served there purpose well the way they were. As it is now greater restore is a better heal spell than heal itself. Harm is well nowhere near strong enough IMO.
-
Death Dealer1
- PKer
- Posts: 1263
- Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 8:59 pm
- Location: the land of aaahhhhh's, where dorothy lives ;)
focus in harm and heal and you will see a difference. of course for some reason my lvl 26 cleric only does 150 damage with harm no matter what, the graph said something about 300-800 or so.
death spells are death spells if you take the death out of it your just making it an evocation spell for damage. i would like to see harm have a 5-10% chance of killing you though...since you are draining hp at a massive incalculable rate
death spells are death spells if you take the death out of it your just making it an evocation spell for damage. i would like to see harm have a 5-10% chance of killing you though...since you are draining hp at a massive incalculable rate
if i didn't do it...someone else would have.
Seems a bit weak since it's the last direct-damage/single-target cleric spell.