This is a major factor in my decision to always start parties at 3 or 4 (the other major factor being how uninteresting most classes are until you subclass). Early levels are super swingy to the point where even a set of non-crits can easily tear through a party. That is hardly fun for anyone.
Interesting indeed. I myself both think that lvl 1 is too deadly but overall the deadliness is nicely balanced.
So I'd answer either to make it more deadly or about the same, BUT I would also make low levels less deadly.
I think this boils down to what I said earlier, that the deadliness differs greatly between tiers.
So I think this poll is not a very good study. It should be divided into tiers for more accurate results.
Someone mentioned that low levels are flat out boring. I very much agree that this is the bigger problem. Also way too little room for customization throughout the game. The straight forw character progress is great for beginners and those who care little about mechanical tweaking, but it can also become boring quite quickly.
Especially since most campaigns end prematurely - a common PPRPG problem I've heard and experienced.
I think the DM critical hit problem is significant, and perhaps an easy solution is just ban it, until the characters reach level 3. ?
Rephrasing this
Player characters die too easily at Tier 1 play (L1 - L4). If it should be fixed, how could it be fixed?
There are a thousand ways to skin it but my take on it is
Q: why are player characters dying early?
1, low hp 2, insta-death rule 3, monsters crit rule 4, 2* death save fails on Nat 1 5, monster attacking unconscious character for 2* death save fails 6, stupid player decisions 7, player characters standing toe-to-toe with monsters when they should run 8, party split 9, DM rolling in the open 10, DM not using their RAW discretion to do what they want 11, some other event/rule?
What’s the fix (if any is needed at all)?
Low HP: Games are sometimes started at L2 or higher discussion around granting extra HP at low level so the players don’t die so easily or the boredom of low level play - some fiddling around the edges by WotC with first level feats. I don’t think any changes to hp would fix the underlying issues.
Insta-death: you got hit hard, Really freaking hard! Representing what? Loss of limb, decapitation, bleeding out through a femoral artery etc. I suggest that the player immediately rolls a death save: <10 you dead, >=10 you dying but not insta-dead (similar to a crit confirmation roll)
Monster crits: WotC have gone for the low hanging fruit and said no to monster crits in a play test, but there are plenty of monsters that can still deal enough damage to insta-kill a player that has already been damaged and it doesn’t help with nat 1 death save rolls or the coup de grâce of a monster attacking an unconscious player. My monsters will still crit
Nat 1 death save fails: you rolled a 1, I think you are FUBAR unless someone tries some healing on you soon as the dice-gods are against you or it’s just not your lucky day. I would not change a thing - this creates focus for the team
Monster attacking unconscious player: The monsters have smarts and are very protective of their “kill”. DM has the right to play them which ever way they choose. They could go after new threats or chew on the unfortunate at their feet.
Stupid player decisions: player wanders off by themselves during a dungeon crawl, or tried to fight something underwater when they can not breath underwater… I’m just not going out of my way to stop the Grick or Ochre Jelly eating the bloody stupid player that thought wandering off was okay. The swarm of Quippers won’t need to eat for a week.
Players standing toe-to-toe with the monster: I’ve got 1 HP left, I can take it. Really? No Really? You have dodge and disengage as options and you are choosing to stand and take a hit from the Hobgoblin with allies beside it? I’m not going to waste my time fudging the roll.
Party split: I thought it might be a good idea… Not great at low levels unless you can run away really fast. Fix - let their character die, they will learn
DM rolling in the open: I think that if you choose this gritty type of play it’s all about the chaos of the dice roll and storyline comes second. I’m not sure that there needs to be a fix to anything in this circumstance, but YMMV
DM doesn’t use discretion: DM’s fiat to use or discard any rule but many are blinkered by RAW. Does it really need more words written into it to say play the game how you want to
There are too many variables, but i see the real options as the somewhere around the first four I listed if indeed it does need to be “fixed”. Of them I would only change the insta-death in RAW to be a confirmation roll that the player bled out. The others I would leave as is.
So actually, in 1e RAW a blow can only drop one to 0 or, optionally, to -3, and beyond that, they bleed one point per round, dying if they reach negative 10. So that is 10 (or 7) rounds, vs 3 death saves. There were no skills yet, so no skill check to stabilize someone, either.
lol, ah there it is!
And even after being revived, you're in a coma for 1d6 turns. Then have to take a week to actually get to 1 hit point, sorta. A WEEK. And, if you get past -6 hit points you may incur a scar or even loose a limb! Haaa!
I think the DM critical hit problem is significant, and perhaps an easy solution is just ban it, until the characters reach level 3. ?
Rephrasing this
Player characters die too easily at Tier 1 play (L1 - L4). If it should be fixed, how could it be fixed?
There are a thousand ways to skin it but my take on it is
Q: why are player characters dying early?
SNIP!!!
Insta-death: you got hit hard, Really freaking hard! Representing what? Loss of limb, decapitation, bleeding out through a femoral artery etc. I suggest that the player immediately rolls a death save: <10 you dead, >=10 you dying but not insta-dead (similar to a crit confirmation roll)
SNIP!!!
anywho that’s my 2cp
Yes, that list is pretty much what everyone has contributed to this conversation. That is, if one wanted to make a rule for this situation.
. I didn't make a poll, not a bad idea!
I'm still leaning on insta-death just being a little too easy to happen, at levels 1 and 2, for a DM Crit to one shot a character.
Considering a form of this rule (Zero Hit Points) has been around since AD&D, I don't think I'd eliminate the rule. But perhaps raise the damage required to trigger insta-death. Perhaps three times a characters HP, instead of just twice the total?
I think the DM critical hit problem is significant, and perhaps an easy solution is just ban it, until the characters reach level 3. ?
Rephrasing this
Player characters die too easily at Tier 1 play (L1 - L4). If it should be fixed, how could it be fixed?
There are a thousand ways to skin it but my take on it is
Q: why are player characters dying early?
SNIP!!!
Insta-death: you got hit hard, Really freaking hard! Representing what? Loss of limb, decapitation, bleeding out through a femoral artery etc. I suggest that the player immediately rolls a death save: <10 you dead, >=10 you dying but not insta-dead (similar to a crit confirmation roll)
SNIP!!!
anywho that’s my 2cp
Yes, that list is pretty much what everyone has contributed to this conversation. That is, if one wanted to make a rule for this situation.
. I didn't make a poll, not a bad idea!
I'm still leaning on insta-death just being a little too easy to happen, at levels 1 and 2, for a DM Crit to one shot a character.
Considering a form of this rule (Zero Hit Points) has been around since AD&D, I don't think I'd eliminate the rule. But perhaps raise the damage required to trigger insta-death. Perhaps three times a characters HP, instead of just twice the total?
imho
If you are referring to my comment about the Poll, I was referring to the Reddit poll Golaryn referred to. 😄 Sorry for the mixup. I didn't use the quote feature because the quotes in this thread are already so long. 😁
I think the DM critical hit problem is significant, and perhaps an easy solution is just ban it, until the characters reach level 3. ?
Rephrasing this
Player characters die too easily at Tier 1 play (L1 - L4). If it should be fixed, how could it be fixed?
There are a thousand ways to skin it but my take on it is
Q: why are player characters dying early?
1, low hp 2, insta-death rule 3, monsters crit rule 4, 2* death save fails on Nat 1 5, monster attacking unconscious character for 2* death save fails 6, stupid player decisions 7, player characters standing toe-to-toe with monsters when they should run 8, party split 9, DM rolling in the open 10, DM not using their RAW discretion to do what they want 11, some other event/rule?
What’s the fix (if any is needed at all)?
Low HP: Games are sometimes started at L2 or higher discussion around granting extra HP at low level so the players don’t die so easily or the boredom of low level play - some fiddling around the edges by WotC with first level feats. I don’t think any changes to hp would fix the underlying issues.
Insta-death: you got hit hard, Really freaking hard! Representing what? Loss of limb, decapitation, bleeding out through a femoral artery etc. I suggest that the player immediately rolls a death save: <10 you dead, >=10 you dying but not insta-dead (similar to a crit confirmation roll)
Monster crits: WotC have gone for the low hanging fruit and said no to monster crits in a play test, but there are plenty of monsters that can still deal enough damage to insta-kill a player that has already been damaged and it doesn’t help with nat 1 death save rolls or the coup de grâce of a monster attacking an unconscious player. My monsters will still crit
Nat 1 death save fails: you rolled a 1, I think you are FUBAR unless someone tries some healing on you soon as the dice-gods are against you or it’s just not your lucky day. I would not change a thing - this creates focus for the team
Monster attacking unconscious player: The monsters have smarts and are very protective of their “kill”. DM has the right to play them which ever way they choose. They could go after new threats or chew on the unfortunate at their feet.
Stupid player decisions: player wanders off by themselves during a dungeon crawl, or tried to fight something underwater when they can not breath underwater… I’m just not going out of my way to stop the Grick or Ochre Jelly eating the bloody stupid player that thought wandering off was okay. The swarm of Quippers won’t need to eat for a week.
Players standing toe-to-toe with the monster: I’ve got 1 HP left, I can take it. Really? No Really? You have dodge and disengage as options and you are choosing to stand and take a hit from the Hobgoblin with allies beside it? I’m not going to waste my time fudging the roll.
Party split: I thought it might be a good idea… Not great at low levels unless you can run away really fast. Fix - let their character die, they will learn
DM rolling in the open: I think that if you choose this gritty type of play it’s all about the chaos of the dice roll and storyline comes second. I’m not sure that there needs to be a fix to anything in this circumstance, but YMMV
DM doesn’t use discretion: DM’s fiat to use or discard any rule but many are blinkered by RAW. Does it really need more words written into it to say play the game how you want to
There are too many variables, but i see the real options as the somewhere around the first four I listed if indeed it does need to be “fixed”. Of them I would only change the insta-death in RAW to be a confirmation roll that the player bled out. The others I would leave as is.
Honestly, this is one of the reasons I prefer to run and play in campaigns that start at level 3 ... SNIP!
Everything you wrote, everyone must read.
I don't really know, but watching some online DMs and games I noticed they all started the campaign with level 3 characters for their players. Which is what every experienced player and DM does right now?
And it solves the insta-kill problem at levels 1 and 2. Just skip levels 1 and 2.
One possible explanation for this is that most classes gain their subclass at 3. Playing in a game where you have to wait a session or 2 to get your subclass, meanwhile clerics go brrrr, may not be fun for a lot of folks.
There's really no point narratively to play levels 1 and 2 once a player does it the first time to learn the game. It's like the tutorial mission in an MMO - no point in playing it when you roll up the new character.
This is not fully true; Starting at lower levels allows you to explore your characters arc from the near beginning to end, this can help the audience (for streamers) get attached to your characters, and it can allow you the player to enjoy being a character who evolves, changes, and grows as you step out of the role of a fledgling adventure and step into the role of a mighty hero. Great D&D shows (such as High Rollers) have started awesome campaigns at levels 1 or 2, and watching the characters in Aerois make it all the way to level 16+ has been incredibly satisfying and enjoyable.
In other words, start at whatever level you want to start at. Every level has advantages and disadvantages, and I personally enjoy lower levels. Yes, those levels do have some problems. Yes, they can be a bit harder and insta-kills are a tad bit more common. But as I said above, every level has problems. And high levels have other CR balance issues to. So not only can you get lots of encounters that are waaay to easy there, but you can encounters that are way too hard as well.
As I said earlier, monster crits don't make the game "hardcore" and they don't make insta-kills that much more common. They just make things a bit harder on rare occasions, but they don't unbalance things at low levels much at all. Personally, I am all for playing low levels. And while low levels do have their problems, I think it is important to say that monster crits are not actually that much of a terrible problem then.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
There's really no point narratively to play levels 1 and 2 once a player does it the first time to learn the game. It's like the tutorial mission in an MMO - no point in playing it when you roll up the new character.
This is not fully true; Starting at lower lev...
SNIP!
Dude, that's brilliant. Because you are a great DM. :)
I'm a little surprised no one has brought up the 'war gamer' vs. 'role player' dynamic that has pretty much been around for decades.
Reading the AD&D DMG recently, I was reminded of how deeply wargamer the rules were. I get that 5e is skirting that dynamic, and leaning into role playing. But hey, I gotta say I like the 5e rules. And liking a lot of OneDND UA. Though, not Heroic Inspiration. That's crap man.
btw peeps, what is the origin of the insta-kill rule? I'm an ole AD&D guy who came into 5e, and it didn't exist then. When was this rule introduced, or appeared?
…
AD&D era, -10 was dead. Or might have been 0 was dead with an optional -10 rule... quite a long time ago, now.
Oh that's right! Wasn't dead at 0 in the PHB, which was published first. Then, the DMG had the -10 rule. ?
I forgot about the -10 hit points to die. You lost a hit point every round, or something? Bleeding out, basically was the concept? And that rule is buried somewhere in the old DMG. I'm too lazy to go look for the page number right now. lol Lazy DM.
Checked, it's not in the DMG. But I do remember this rule! Where from???
AD&D DMG page 82
Zero Hit Points:
When any creature is brought to 0 hit points (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until 10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes.
When any creature is brought to 0 hit points (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until 10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes.
not sure about the origin of insta-death
Yes, thx, we found the old rule earlier. But yea, the insta-death rule is new to me. Where did that rule come from?
And I think this rule is the real problem here, not Critical Hits. Anyho posting this rule for clarity...
Instant Death
Massive damage can kill you instantly. When damage reduces you to 0 hit points and there is damage remaining, you die if the remaining damage equals or exceeds your hit point maximum.
For example, a cleric with a maximum of 12 hit points currently has 6 hit points. If she takes 18 damage from an attack, she is reduced to 0 hit points, but 12 damage remains. Because the remaining damage equals her hit point maximum, the cleric dies.
Yeah, this is a strange rule IMO and I agree that this is the problem.
And it's completely obsolete by lvl 5.
A lvl 5 wizard with +1 con has 27hp.
>Takes damage and has 1 hp left.
>Someone shoots a fireball, one of the biggest dmg spells at that level. Deals avg 24dmg. Nah, deals above average 27dmg. Not enough to instakill from 1HP.
>Same situation. Let's say his bastard backstabbing friend paladin tries to off him. Hits him with a greatsword smite, using his biggest slot and GWM. 2d6+4 + 3d8 + 10 = 32dmg. Yeah! That does it. Enough to get him from 1hp to instant death!
>Mage cr 6, so generally a bit tough for lvl 5, could blast Cone of Cold for 8d8, which is 32avg and therefore barely enough by +5.
>CR 6 Brass dragon firebreath is a solid 36avg.
Under these very specific circumstances of having 1hp for a squishy class is theoretically possible to insta kill.
If this was a d8 hit die class with +2 in con = 38hp . Then even these scenarious wouldn't work.
And none of these situation would work if the squishy wizard had even 10HP left instead of one.
So maybe in a very rare case you can come across an instakill at lvl 5. But it's highly unlikely
When any creature is brought to 0 hit points (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until 10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes.
not sure about the origin of insta-death
Yes, thx, we found the old rule earlier. But yea, the insta-death rule is new to me. Where did that rule come from?
...
4th Ed rule in PHB, Ch 9 Combat, Death & Dying, p 295
Death: When you take damage that reduces your current hit points to your bloodied value expressed as a negative number, your character dies.
Bloodied Value: You are bloodied when your current hit points drop to your bloodied value or lower. Your bloodied value is one-half your maximum hit points (rounded down).
So taking damage that takes you into a negative equal to half your hit points was instant death
This is not fully true; Starting at lower levels allows you to explore your characters arc from the near beginning to end, this can help the audience (for streamers) get attached to your characters, and it can allow you the player to enjoy being a character who evolves, changes, and grows as you step out of the role of a fledgling adventure and step into the role of a mighty hero. Great D&D shows (such as High Rollers) have started awesome campaigns at levels 1 or 2, and watching the characters in Aerois make it all the way to level 16+ has been incredibly satisfying and enjoyable.
While I do see the point of this, how many of those campaigns (especially ones that livestream to an audience) have killed off the level 1 or 2 character right as the campaign was starting, forcing the player to roll up a new one? Honest question as I haven't seen High Rollers.
This is not fully true; Starting at lower levels allows you to explore your characters arc from the near beginning to end, this can help the audience (for streamers) get attached to your characters, and it can allow you the player to enjoy being a character who evolves, changes, and grows as you step out of the role of a fledgling adventure and step into the role of a mighty hero. Great D&D shows (such as High Rollers) have started awesome campaigns at levels 1 or 2, and watching the characters in Aerois make it all the way to level 16+ has been incredibly satisfying and enjoyable.
While I do see the point of this, how many of those campaigns (especially ones that livestream to an audience) have killed off the level 1 or 2 character right as the campaign was starting, forcing the player to roll up a new one? Honest question as I haven't seen High Rollers.
Reminds me of one other thing related to this story arc for low levels.
Someone said lvl 1 characters are nobodies. That is true and I don't like it. But hear me out, it's not the concept that I dislike - it's the execution.
They are only absolute trash for a minute in usual dnd pacing. Unless you use long timeskips, the trip from lvl 1 dog water to level 5 master level stuff is an enormous leap and frankly doesn't make a really good story IMO.
Especially wizards who are supposed to be scholars who study for decades and centuries. They know a few starter spells and after one short (game world time) adventure they are casting lvl 3 spells which are pretty much the first Master level spells imo. To me this always calls for a built-in BG explanation for the progression, but it's probably just me)
(I consider spell levels 3-5 master spells and 6-9 grandmaster/archmage level stuff. And I think this interpretation holds at least some ground)
I've been thinking of a solution for my next game. I host a single player intro game for each player. It's set somewhere in the past when thet were noobs. Kind of get to know their history. That intro is like a tutorial that grants them those first 3 levels. Then timeskip to present.
So for example the intro was the wizard's early years. Now they are a journeyman mage with enough experience and material to study on their own. They are on the verge of figuring out some lvl 3 spells with just a few issues still existing. They have also already dabbled in more advanced magic and probably have a bunch of lvl 4 and 5 books too, but need to understand those lvl 3 issues before they can properly study the next ones. The leap is still big, but this smoothens the curve a little bit.
Martial classes call for a similar approach. Maybe druids too, but not necessarily. Altough fighting is a lot of confidence, combat wits and determination too which comes from winning fights. Miyamoto Musashi was amazingly talented, but it wasn't his secret. His secret was level head, willpower and absolute ruthlessness and murder instinct. The man did not hesitate to end lives.
Sorcs, locks and clerics are easy. Their powers just become stronger innatively or because their patron deems them worthy. So adventuring could do just that.
They are only absolute trash for a minute in usual dnd pacing. Unless you use long timeskips, the trip from lvl 1 dog water to level 5 master level stuff is an enormous leap and frankly doesn't make a really good story IMO.
Not really sure on this. Bilbo started out completely untrained but was at least level 2 or 3 by the time of the Battle of the Five Armies. All four of the hobbits in the Fellowship ended up even more impressive by the time of Return of the King. The entire journey for Frodo took 185 days, but that was including significant downtime in Rivendell and Lorien.
I think the Savage Worlds system captures this nicely as it separates people into Wild Cards and Extras. Extras are cannon fodder and even a lvl 1 untrained Wild Card can beat a bunch of Extras. So even if a Wild Card is trash compared to other WCs, they are still heroes.
I think in the LOTR narrative, the heroes are Wild Cards and orcs/goblins are extras. So even the still trash hobbits can effectively take part in the battle in Moria and kill orcs etc.
I believe there is a misunderstanding. That's exactly what Wild Card means. And Wild Card doesn't mean PC. NPCs can be Wild Cards too. All the fellowship members are definitely Wild Cards and not Extras in my opinion.
The point is that I don't think Bilbo or Frodo were ever lvl 1 DnD characters and that the DnD system works poorly to depict the characters of lotr or the hobbit. I brought up Savage, because in that system even the poor lvl 1 average people are still special if they are central characters - like in lotr and the hobbit.
In dnd you become special when you can do special things. It's not default, is my point. 😄 In lotr they are all special, even Merry and Pip who should in reality get torn to pieces by the first fierce orc. But they don't get torn to pieces, because they are Wild Cards and orcs are just extras.
I'm very much familiar with Tolkien's work. This misunderstanding is probably more due to me poorly explaining the WC/extra thing from Savage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Finland GMT/UTC +2
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
lol! So well said. Thx EurobeatJester:)
example. :)
Interesting indeed. I myself both think that lvl 1 is too deadly but overall the deadliness is nicely balanced.
So I'd answer either to make it more deadly or about the same, BUT I would also make low levels less deadly.
I think this boils down to what I said earlier, that the deadliness differs greatly between tiers.
So I think this poll is not a very good study. It should be divided into tiers for more accurate results.
Someone mentioned that low levels are flat out boring. I very much agree that this is the bigger problem. Also way too little room for customization throughout the game. The straight forw character progress is great for beginners and those who care little about mechanical tweaking, but it can also become boring quite quickly.
Especially since most campaigns end prematurely - a common PPRPG problem I've heard and experienced.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
Rephrasing this
Player characters die too easily at Tier 1 play (L1 - L4).
If it should be fixed, how could it be fixed?
There are a thousand ways to skin it but my take on it is
Q: why are player characters dying early?
1, low hp
2, insta-death rule
3, monsters crit rule
4, 2* death save fails on Nat 1
5, monster attacking unconscious character for 2* death save fails
6, stupid player decisions
7, player characters standing toe-to-toe with monsters when they should run
8, party split
9, DM rolling in the open
10, DM not using their RAW discretion to do what they want
11, some other event/rule?
What’s the fix (if any is needed at all)?
Low HP: Games are sometimes started at L2 or higher discussion around granting extra HP at low level so the players don’t die so easily or the boredom of low level play - some fiddling around the edges by WotC with first level feats. I don’t think any changes to hp would fix the underlying issues.
Insta-death: you got hit hard, Really freaking hard! Representing what? Loss of limb, decapitation, bleeding out through a femoral artery etc. I suggest that the player immediately rolls a death save: <10 you dead, >=10 you dying but not insta-dead (similar to a crit confirmation roll)
Monster crits: WotC have gone for the low hanging fruit and said no to monster crits in a play test, but there are plenty of monsters that can still deal enough damage to insta-kill a player that has already been damaged and it doesn’t help with nat 1 death save rolls or the coup de grâce of a monster attacking an unconscious player. My monsters will still crit
Nat 1 death save fails: you rolled a 1, I think you are FUBAR unless someone tries some healing on you soon as the dice-gods are against you or it’s just not your lucky day. I would not change a thing - this creates focus for the team
Monster attacking unconscious player: The monsters have smarts and are very protective of their “kill”. DM has the right to play them which ever way they choose. They could go after new threats or chew on the unfortunate at their feet.
Stupid player decisions: player wanders off by themselves during a dungeon crawl, or tried to fight something underwater when they can not breath underwater… I’m just not going out of my way to stop the Grick or Ochre Jelly eating the bloody stupid player that thought wandering off was okay. The swarm of Quippers won’t need to eat for a week.
Players standing toe-to-toe with the monster: I’ve got 1 HP left, I can take it. Really? No Really? You have dodge and disengage as options and you are choosing to stand and take a hit from the Hobgoblin with allies beside it? I’m not going to waste my time fudging the roll.
Party split: I thought it might be a good idea… Not great at low levels unless you can run away really fast. Fix - let their character die, they will learn
DM rolling in the open: I think that if you choose this gritty type of play it’s all about the chaos of the dice roll and storyline comes second. I’m not sure that there needs to be a fix to anything in this circumstance, but YMMV
DM doesn’t use discretion: DM’s fiat to use or discard any rule but many are blinkered by RAW. Does it really need more words written into it to say play the game how you want to
There are too many variables, but i see the real options as the somewhere around the first four I listed if indeed it does need to be “fixed”. Of them I would only change the insta-death in RAW to be a confirmation roll that the player bled out. The others I would leave as is.
anywho that’s my 2cp
lol, ah there it is!
And even after being revived, you're in a coma for 1d6 turns. Then have to take a week to actually get to 1 hit point, sorta. A WEEK. And, if you get past -6 hit points you may incur a scar or even loose a limb! Haaa!
Yes, that list is pretty much what everyone has contributed to this conversation. That is, if one wanted to make a rule for this situation.
. I didn't make a poll, not a bad idea!
I'm still leaning on insta-death just being a little too easy to happen, at levels 1 and 2, for a DM Crit to one shot a character.
Considering a form of this rule (Zero Hit Points) has been around since AD&D, I don't think I'd eliminate the rule. But perhaps raise the damage required to trigger insta-death. Perhaps three times a characters HP, instead of just twice the total?
imho
If you are referring to my comment about the Poll, I was referring to the Reddit poll Golaryn referred to. 😄 Sorry for the mixup. I didn't use the quote feature because the quotes in this thread are already so long. 😁
Finland GMT/UTC +2
Well put!
Finland GMT/UTC +2
One possible explanation for this is that most classes gain their subclass at 3. Playing in a game where you have to wait a session or 2 to get your subclass, meanwhile clerics go brrrr, may not be fun for a lot of folks.
This is not fully true; Starting at lower levels allows you to explore your characters arc from the near beginning to end, this can help the audience (for streamers) get attached to your characters, and it can allow you the player to enjoy being a character who evolves, changes, and grows as you step out of the role of a fledgling adventure and step into the role of a mighty hero. Great D&D shows (such as High Rollers) have started awesome campaigns at levels 1 or 2, and watching the characters in Aerois make it all the way to level 16+ has been incredibly satisfying and enjoyable.
In other words, start at whatever level you want to start at. Every level has advantages and disadvantages, and I personally enjoy lower levels. Yes, those levels do have some problems. Yes, they can be a bit harder and insta-kills are a tad bit more common. But as I said above, every level has problems. And high levels have other CR balance issues to. So not only can you get lots of encounters that are waaay to easy there, but you can encounters that are way too hard as well.
As I said earlier, monster crits don't make the game "hardcore" and they don't make insta-kills that much more common. They just make things a bit harder on rare occasions, but they don't unbalance things at low levels much at all. Personally, I am all for playing low levels. And while low levels do have their problems, I think it is important to say that monster crits are not actually that much of a terrible problem then.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Dude, that's brilliant. Because you are a great DM. :)
I'm a little surprised no one has brought up the 'war gamer' vs. 'role player' dynamic that has pretty much been around for decades.
Reading the AD&D DMG recently, I was reminded of how deeply wargamer the rules were. I get that 5e is skirting that dynamic, and leaning into role playing. But hey, I gotta say I like the 5e rules. And liking a lot of OneDND UA. Though, not Heroic Inspiration. That's crap man.
AD&D DMG page 82
Zero Hit Points:
When any creature is brought to 0 hit points (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until 10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes.
not sure about the origin of insta-death
Yes, thx, we found the old rule earlier. But yea, the insta-death rule is new to me. Where did that rule come from?
And I think this rule is the real problem here, not Critical Hits. Anyho posting this rule for clarity...
Instant Death
Massive damage can kill you instantly. When damage reduces you to 0 hit points and there is damage remaining, you die if the remaining damage equals or exceeds your hit point maximum.
For example, a cleric with a maximum of 12 hit points currently has 6 hit points. If she takes 18 damage from an attack, she is reduced to 0 hit points, but 12 damage remains. Because the remaining damage equals her hit point maximum, the cleric dies.
Yeah, this is a strange rule IMO and I agree that this is the problem.
And it's completely obsolete by lvl 5.
A lvl 5 wizard with +1 con has 27hp.
>Takes damage and has 1 hp left.
>Someone shoots a fireball, one of the biggest dmg spells at that level. Deals avg 24dmg. Nah, deals above average 27dmg. Not enough to instakill from 1HP.
>Same situation. Let's say his bastard backstabbing friend paladin tries to off him. Hits him with a greatsword smite, using his biggest slot and GWM. 2d6+4 + 3d8 + 10 = 32dmg. Yeah! That does it. Enough to get him from 1hp to instant death!
>Mage cr 6, so generally a bit tough for lvl 5, could blast Cone of Cold for 8d8, which is 32avg and therefore barely enough by +5.
>CR 6 Brass dragon firebreath is a solid 36avg.
Under these very specific circumstances of having 1hp for a squishy class is theoretically possible to insta kill.
If this was a d8 hit die class with +2 in con = 38hp . Then even these scenarious wouldn't work.
And none of these situation would work if the squishy wizard had even 10HP left instead of one.
So maybe in a very rare case you can come across an instakill at lvl 5. But it's highly unlikely
Finland GMT/UTC +2
4th Ed rule in PHB, Ch 9 Combat, Death & Dying, p 295
Death: When you take damage that reduces your current hit points to your bloodied value expressed as a negative number, your character dies.
Bloodied Value: You are bloodied when your current hit points drop to your bloodied value or lower. Your bloodied value is one-half your maximum hit points (rounded down).
So taking damage that takes you into a negative equal to half your hit points was instant death
Wow, this is some evolution.
While I do see the point of this, how many of those campaigns (especially ones that livestream to an audience) have killed off the level 1 or 2 character right as the campaign was starting, forcing the player to roll up a new one? Honest question as I haven't seen High Rollers.
One other thing why I kind of dislike the arc of
Reminds me of one other thing related to this story arc for low levels.
Someone said lvl 1 characters are nobodies. That is true and I don't like it. But hear me out, it's not the concept that I dislike - it's the execution.
They are only absolute trash for a minute in usual dnd pacing. Unless you use long timeskips, the trip from lvl 1 dog water to level 5 master level stuff is an enormous leap and frankly doesn't make a really good story IMO.
Especially wizards who are supposed to be scholars who study for decades and centuries. They know a few starter spells and after one short (game world time) adventure they are casting lvl 3 spells which are pretty much the first Master level spells imo. To me this always calls for a built-in BG explanation for the progression, but it's probably just me)
(I consider spell levels 3-5 master spells and 6-9 grandmaster/archmage level stuff. And I think this interpretation holds at least some ground)
I've been thinking of a solution for my next game. I host a single player intro game for each player. It's set somewhere in the past when thet were noobs. Kind of get to know their history. That intro is like a tutorial that grants them those first 3 levels. Then timeskip to present.
So for example the intro was the wizard's early years. Now they are a journeyman mage with enough experience and material to study on their own. They are on the verge of figuring out some lvl 3 spells with just a few issues still existing. They have also already dabbled in more advanced magic and probably have a bunch of lvl 4 and 5 books too, but need to understand those lvl 3 issues before they can properly study the next ones. The leap is still big, but this smoothens the curve a little bit.
Martial classes call for a similar approach. Maybe druids too, but not necessarily. Altough fighting is a lot of confidence, combat wits and determination too which comes from winning fights. Miyamoto Musashi was amazingly talented, but it wasn't his secret. His secret was level head, willpower and absolute ruthlessness and murder instinct. The man did not hesitate to end lives.
Sorcs, locks and clerics are easy. Their powers just become stronger innatively or because their patron deems them worthy. So adventuring could do just that.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I think the Savage Worlds system captures this nicely as it separates people into Wild Cards and Extras. Extras are cannon fodder and even a lvl 1 untrained Wild Card can beat a bunch of Extras. So even if a Wild Card is trash compared to other WCs, they are still heroes.
I think in the LOTR narrative, the heroes are Wild Cards and orcs/goblins are extras. So even the still trash hobbits can effectively take part in the battle in Moria and kill orcs etc.
Dnd lvl 1 characters are extras too. 😁
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I believe there is a misunderstanding. That's exactly what Wild Card means. And Wild Card doesn't mean PC. NPCs can be Wild Cards too. All the fellowship members are definitely Wild Cards and not Extras in my opinion.
The point is that I don't think Bilbo or Frodo were ever lvl 1 DnD characters and that the DnD system works poorly to depict the characters of lotr or the hobbit. I brought up Savage, because in that system even the poor lvl 1 average people are still special if they are central characters - like in lotr and the hobbit.
In dnd you become special when you can do special things. It's not default, is my point. 😄 In lotr they are all special, even Merry and Pip who should in reality get torn to pieces by the first fierce orc. But they don't get torn to pieces, because they are Wild Cards and orcs are just extras.
I'm very much familiar with Tolkien's work. This misunderstanding is probably more due to me poorly explaining the WC/extra thing from Savage.
Finland GMT/UTC +2