Quote from: jhkim;823679Look, you're nitpicking at a vague idea I haven't even written up. Depending on what the costs and penalties are for death charms, it could easily be tougher than the current situation instead. For example, a death charm could require that the next action after the reaction be used up to recover.

And now you're looking at added table bookkeeping... Really, it's just getting into the weeds now, your design brainstorming. You will be more successful getting what you want by adjusting the core game conceits. You can waste time with minor dials and switches or you can adjust the major gates & levers.

The game is doing exactly as intended. To change that you have to change the foundation, not the structures that rest on it. Piecemeal change will get piecemeal results.

Quote from: jhkim;823679I think this is a philosophical difference. I have strongly disliked most CCG influence on RPG design, because I feel that it leads to rules that are based on abstract game balance without any regard to the reality that is being portrayed.

Fair enough. But one of the biggest CCG influence on RPG design is exception based design — which is exactly what you are doing. I'm telling you, from a CCG perspective, how to avoid CCG half-solutions. Don't want to follow CCGs, good, look at the core assumptions and work from there first. Adjusting the base structure avoids future CCG patchwork thinking. My RPG perspective prefers to keep CCG mechanics mostly away and in check, and the best way for my RPG design to recognize them is through my CCG perspective.

On the surface,  the problem of having a player with  nothing to do because their character died seems irreconcilable with the other extreme of the "revolving door of death". Not sure if that can be reconciled with minor tweaks or changes, but I like the earlier idea of shortened/deadlier combats and/or use of morale rules.

Other than that, I think you'd have to attack the problem from the perspective of giving the dead character's player something to do while their character is out. That gets into dirty hippy meta gaming areas, tho. Things like Shock's audience die that get added to help another person in their conflict.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;823727Other than that, I think you'd have to attack the problem from the perspective of giving the dead character's player something to do while their character is out. That gets into dirty hippy meta gaming areas, tho. Things like Shock's audience die that get added to help another person in their conflict.

I have them play the opponents.

Quote from: jhkim;8236381) More believable than current 5th ed.
2) Keeps the current dynamic where PCs keep each other in the fight, and it is rare for a player to be sitting out for a long time because his PC is unconscious or dead.

i'm not sure if what you want is possible. to me the problem you describe lies in the fact that "the current dynamic" isn't very "believable" at all. as soon as you increase believability, the dynamic you want to retain will be removed (or at least greatly reduced).

your idea about preventing the player going down in the first place is interesting, but if you go that route you'd also need to restrict getting a player back up once he is down. if you don't you just add another turn of the revolving door.

you also have to be careful about creating more problems than you solve. opaopajr does have a point.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;823727On the surface,  the problem of having a player with  nothing to do because their character died seems irreconcilable with the other extreme of the "revolving door of death". Not sure if that can be reconciled with minor tweaks or changes, but I like the earlier idea of shortened/deadlier combats and/or use of morale rules.

There is no way to completely keep all PCs in play - but there is no need for the solution to be 100%. Clerics and other healing magic improve the situation a lot compared to games with no healing. Healing magic gets deployed to the PC who goes out of the fight, keeping them in for longer. Once the healing magic is completely used up, then typically everyone is pretty hurt - and there is only a short time left before the fight is over one way or the other.

Just making the fights shorter can be good for many things, but it doesn't solve the ratio. If damage comes more quickly, then it is more likely that a player will be taken out in round 1 or 2. If a player is out for over half the fight for each fight, then that's still cumulatively a lot of time sitting out.


I don't know how exactly I'd balance them, but I think that death charms rather than healing seems like a decent solution for believability. Purely in terms of the fiction, the result is that instead of character dropping with fatal wounds and popping back up, the characters are disoriented after a death magic charm turns aside the fatal blow. I'd still be interested to hear other ideas.

In particular, believability problems I have with 5th ed are:

1) If you're very low on hit points or unconscious, it doesn't matter how much damage you take - a cat scratch is just bad as a dragon bite in every way.
2) In terms of healing magic, it doesn't matter how bad final damage was. If a PC was taken out by a 30 hit point damage fire blast, or a 1 hit point dart, the amount of healing to bring them around is the same.
3) Dying and first aid are ridiculously fast compared to real life. Every dying character either bleeds out dead in seconds - and requires only seconds of first aid - or they are stable and will come around on their own.
4) This isn't exactly believability, but the dropping and popping up seems out of genre.

Quote from: Opaopajr;823693I'm telling you, from a CCG perspective, how to avoid CCG half-solutions. Don't want to follow CCGs, good, look at the core assumptions and work from there first. Adjusting the base structure avoids future CCG patchwork thinking. My RPG perspective prefers to keep CCG mechanics mostly away and in check, and the best way for my RPG design to recognize them is through my CCG perspective.

Can you suggest more concretely what this would look like?

Quote from: jhkim;823795In particular, believability problems I have with 5th ed are:

1) If you're very low on hit points or unconscious, it doesn't matter how much damage you take - a cat scratch is just bad as a dragon bite in every way.
2) In terms of healing magic, it doesn't matter how bad final damage was. If a PC was taken out by a 30 hit point damage fire blast, or a 1 hit point dart, the amount of healing to bring them around is the same.
3) Dying and first aid are ridiculously fast compared to real life. Every dying character either bleeds out dead in seconds - and requires only seconds of first aid - or they are stable and will come around on their own.
4) This isn't exactly believability, but the dropping and popping up seems out of genre.

Doesn't Crypt & Things have hit points represent fatigue or something like that? I read somewhere that it or some other system had HP represent fatigue and then any damage after that went to the Constitution attribute.

Not sure how this would your issue with the cat scratch, however. If I've read correctly on some reviews, I think Sine Nomine's Scarlet Heroes does something funky with damage die where a damage die roll  below a certain number does 0 damage. Might be worth looking into.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;823796Doesn't Crypt & Things have hit points represent fatigue or something like that? I read somewhere that it or some other system had HP represent fatigue and then any damage after that went to the Constitution attribute.

5e's HP are pretty much fatigue points. This is exactly why downed characters can pop back up if you can get them back up to to at least 1 hp.

The thing is that once down you are absurdly vulnerable. A cat in 2 turns of determined effort can take down anyone who has dropped to 0 as long as the cat hits. The trick here is that the cat has to actually hit. Against an unarmoured baseline DEX target its 50/50 even with advantage.

That aside there are still examples where a lowly critter can take you out.

The big difference is that if the cat got you then it was likely someplace small and vital like a major artery. If a dragon got you then you were likely splattered all over the walls.

Quote from: Omega;823803The big difference is that if the cat got you then it was likely someplace small and vital like a major artery.

That's probably the easiest way to fix that. Besides, cats can be pretty vicious.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;823811That's probably the easiest way to fix that. Besides, cats can be pretty vicious.

My cat developed epileptic seizures at random moments. Shed bite down on something in the process with incredible force. Which happened to be my finger, twice to the bone. ow.

One of my cousins got her wrist laid open accidentally while playing with a cat. That was... messy...

Quote from: jhkim;823638No, I think I miscommunicated. In terms of game play dynamic, I am very with 5th ed - but I have problems with the believability of the popping to dying and back so often.

I'm happy to hear other thoughts on the topic, but my two requirements are:

1) More believable than current 5th ed.
2) Keeps the current dynamic where PCs keep each other in the fight, and it is rare for a player to be sitting out for a long time because his PC is unconscious or dead.

My current thought it to keep magic roughly the same, but instead of a PC dropping fatally wounded and then being brought back by another PC casting a cure spell - we have the alternate of the PC almost being fatally wounded, and the wound is prevented by another PC casting a death charm spell (perhaps cast as a reaction). Taking a death charm might cause someone to lose a move or some other penalty. That's just an idea, though - I'm not particularly advocating it at this point.

I don't find the death charm idea even remotely believable. Either the caster has precognitive knowledge of which hits are going to be fatal, and casts it to prevent it, or the caster is editing history after the fact. Neither works like any fantasy I have read.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;823796If I've read correctly on some reviews, I think Sine Nomine's Scarlet Heroes does something funky with damage die where a damage die roll  below a certain number does 0 damage. Might be worth looking into.

Yep.  Scarlet Heroes damage system in a nutshell:

When you roll damage, you don't do HP equal to the roll.  If the rolled damage (including modifiers) is 1 or less, you do 0 damage.  If it's 2-5, you do 1 damage.  6-9 does 2 damage.  And 10 or more does 4 damage.  This damage is applied as normal to the HP of PCs, but is hit dice of damage to monsters and NPCs - a 10+ damage roll (4 damage = 4 HD lost) one-shots an ogre.  Excess damage carries over to other enemies of equal or worse AC, so that 10+ rolled damage hit could take out four orcs instead of the ogre.

But I don't think that's really applicable to the situation being talked about here.

Quote from: jhkim;823795In particular, believability problems I have with 5th ed are:

1) If you're very low on hit points or unconscious, it doesn't matter how much damage you take - a cat scratch is just bad as a dragon bite in every way.
2) In terms of healing magic, it doesn't matter how bad final damage was. If a PC was taken out by a 30 hit point damage fire blast, or a 1 hit point dart, the amount of healing to bring them around is the same.
3) Dying and first aid are ridiculously fast compared to real life. Every dying character either bleeds out dead in seconds - and requires only seconds of first aid - or they are stable and will come around on their own.
4) This isn't exactly believability, but the dropping and popping up seems out of genre.

1) No. Because being struck Unconscious from 5' melee (the only way to be scratched or bit) is at Advantage and a Critical Hit. You have a very real chance of Instant Death with a dragon. It is almost impossible to suffer Instant Death from a cat claw (you'd need a max HP of 2 and remain at 1st lvl).

i.e. Adult Red Dragon bite: 19 average, 28 max (2d10+8) pierce damage PLUS 7 average, 12 max (2d6) fire damage {total 26 average, 40 max damage}.
Critical is 30 average, 48 max (4d10+8) damage PLUS 14 average, 24 max (4d6) fire damage {total 44 average, 72 max damage}.
i.e. Young Green Dragon bite: 15 average, 24 max (2d10+4) pierce damage PLUS 7 average, 12 max (2d6) poison damage {total 22 average, 36 max damage}.
Critical is 26 average, 44 max (4d10+4) pierce damage PLUS 14 average, 24 max (4d6) poison damage {total 40 average, 68 max damage}.

2) That is a bookkeeping conceit of the game. They don't want to deal with negative HP, and I understand where they are coming from.

3 & 4) Yes, they -- bleeding out and patched back up -- are ridiculously fast. And it is another conceit of the game. It definitely creates the whack-a-mole effect you're lamenting. I have, too. It's rather jarring to my old school sensibilities.

However, dying and first aid has been abstracted into a rather useful abstraction called the Death Save and Stabilize time. Similar to the eyebrow raising nature of Short and Long Rest, it seems off upon first look. However, it is an abstract metric easily resized to your campaign -- which is a remarkable plus.

The DMG has already given example on how to rework Short Rest and Long Rest to alter the pace of one's own game. Similarly you can rework the time on Death Throw checks and being Stabilized. Instead of Death Throws every round, 6 seconds, you can do it every minute or 10 minutes. And instead of Stabilized recovering consciousness in 1d4 hours, you can convert that into Short Rests or Days.

Quote from: jhkim;823795Can you suggest more concretely what this would look like?

I did already, in post #9.

Quote[...]
As for 2) Part of 5e's conceit is hitting more often and letting HP bloat sort it out. Now you either want to bloat HP so as to drag out the combat, OR increase the miss ratio and lower the attack to-hit. The former will eventually drag the game. The latter moves closer towards TSR D&D where whiffing was more common.

The easiest way to accomplish whiffing without bloat is to adjust the Attribute Derived Modifier Progression Rate. So instead of +1/-1 each two points over/under 10, switch that to +1/-1 each three points over/under 10. (Instead of 12 (+1), 14 (+2), ... make it 13 (+1), 16 (+2), ...) This then lowers the Attribute dependency, increases Proficiency Bonus value, and creates more whiffing to lengthen that combat frame before whack-a-mole occurs.

By altering the Attribute Mod Progression you lower hit chance, increase missing, and lessen reliance on HP bloat. You also make Proficiency in weapons incredibly useful as that +2~+6 becomes far more powerful.

Or, if you are still set upon death charms (gawd this sounds like Exalted...), work it from using the core rule abstractions instead of inventing a new, small fix function to healing spells.

For example, want players to Death Spiral? Have people opt to take Exhaustion levels instead of Swooning, but have them recover from it slowly and naturally.

Another, want them to take more time? Give them HD amount of "Near Misses." Every near miss swipes one from their HD pool. Eventually going down will be more economical.

There's lots of ways to approach it from an RPG perspective before making micro-exceptional effects that tend to benefit small classes and stuff.

Quote from: Opaopajr;8239331) No. Because being struck Unconscious from 5' melee (the only way to be scratched or bit) is at Advantage and a Critical Hit. You have a very real chance of Instant Death with a dragon. It is almost impossible to suffer Instant Death from a cat claw (you'd need a max HP of 2 and remain at 1st lvl).

If you're going to nitpick... An adult red dragon bite has 10 foot reach, so 5 foot melee is not the only way to get bit. So a character could take a 26 damage red dragon bite from 10 feet and get 1 failed Death Save, and another character could take a 2 damage cat scratch from 5 feet away and get 2 failed Death Saves. Both of these characters would pop back up to the same hit point total with a single Healing Word spell.

Quote from: OpaopajrAs for 2) Part of 5e's conceit is hitting more often and letting HP bloat sort it out. Now you either want to bloat HP so as to drag out the combat, OR increase the miss ratio and lower the attack to-hit. The former will eventually drag the game. The latter moves closer towards TSR D&D where whiffing was more common.

The easiest way to accomplish whiffing without bloat is to adjust the Attribute Derived Modifier Progression Rate. So instead of +1/-1 each two points over/under 10, switch that to +1/-1 each three points over/under 10. (Instead of 12 (+1), 14 (+2), ... make it 13 (+1), 16 (+2), ...) This then lowers the Attribute dependency, increases Proficiency Bonus value, and creates more whiffing to lengthen that combat frame before whack-a-mole occurs.

Quote from: Opaopajr;823933By altering the Attribute Mod Progression you lower hit chance, increase missing, and lessen reliance on HP bloat. You also make Proficiency in weapons incredibly useful as that +2~+6 becomes far more powerful.

OK, I don't see how this accomplishes anything of what I want. It sounds like this is intended to increase the length of combat, when I'm happy with the length of combat. My issue is with the believability and feel of having characters pop up and down.

Quote from: apparition13;823834I don't find the death charm idea even remotely believable. Either the caster has precognitive knowledge of which hits are going to be fatal, and casts it to prevent it, or the caster is editing history after the fact. Neither works like any fantasy I have read.

I've seen many cases in fantasy fiction of undoing the effect of something that just happened as well as precognition and more significant time travel. Also, it doesn't require precognition to for someone to have a good idea if an approaching blow is fatal.

That sounds like a good idea, actually. The spell could be cast like a defense - i.e. the spell can be applied as a reaction after the attack roll or save, but before damage is rolled, and then kicks in later when the character is brought down to 0 hit points.

I think it's much better that it be rare for PCs to go down, and bad but not fatal if they do go down. IMC hp can go negative, so the seriously wounded can't easily be got back in the fight. But they only die at minus max hp, not the minus CON of PF which makes death very frequent. One advantage of this is that players fear the prospect of going down, so encounters can be less threatening - I'm also using slow healing which has a similar benefit. Fights shouldn't all have to be knife-edge affairs - and if I want that sort of encounter centric play 4e does it much better.

Quote from: jhkim;823679I have strongly disliked most CCG influence on RPG design, because I feel that it leads to rules that are based on abstract game balance without any regard to the reality that is being portrayed.

Might want to rethink that whole "WotC D&D" thing then.  CCG-derived design philosophy is what they do.

I see your point though, how you can minimize it, but sometimes the best way to minimize is to choose a different game that doesn't have it at all.