Update DDO to 4th ed Dying rules immediately

[MysticTheurge]

Agreed and agreed. 3.0 and 3.5 are way to heavy on rules for me. This has bred the "rules lawyers" and has lessened RP because of the constant need to check a rule. I tried it for a while and didn't like it. I'll try 4.0 and see if it's changed.

A DM who was going to make up rules to keep the game running smoothly in second edition will probably still do the same thing in third edition (unless, because the rules are simpler, he just knows what the rule is off the top of his head).

A DM who is going to spend a long time looking up rules in third edition, was going to do the same thing in second edition (only it would probably take longer since chances are there wasn't actually a rule for it and so after looking for five to ten minutes he'd end up having to make one up anyway).

If you perceive that there are more people who want to "follow the rules" in third edition that's probably largely because those people simply didn't play D&D back under the second edition rules because they were too frustrating, convoluted and hard to learn/use.

[Riggs]

Having the death threshhold as a percentage of hp is a good idea. DDO however has a high amount of hp overall, and especially dwarf barbs say. So a lower threshold than 25% as was suggested in the OP should cover it fine.

-150 is pretty high. -30 to -50 is maybe not out of bounds. 10% of hp would give some reasonable numbers, while at the same time not forcing everyone into the same -10 slot. Also makes the prospect of getting a downed ally up much easier than just 'use some res scrolls'.

It would be a good change, and probably not too hard to implement.

Arguing about adding in every single new rule to the game is not really productive or practical.

[Heladron]

Agreed and agreed. 3.0 and 3.5 are way to heavy on rules for me. This has bred the "rules lawyers" and has lessened RP because of the constant need to check a rule. I tried it for a while and didn't like it. I'll try 4.0 and see if it's changed.

EDIT: I just read the post above this one and it's funny that one person sees 3.0 and 3.5 as speeding up the game and one doesn't. I have to ask this as an example - How does rolling a crit and then rolling for confirmation of that crit speed up the game compared to the old way of just rolling a crit with no confirmation?

I'll elaborate a little bit about this.

I think the D20 stack for critical and instant death is pretty cool. First roll of 20 equals hit. If next roll hits then you do damage x multiplier. If that second roll is a 20 however you get to roll again for a heroic instant kill. That can be quite fun and all it requires you to do it make additional die rolls. Part of the fun of the game is the die rolls. Kids love rolling dice and so do adults. Except now, you know you hit with the 20, but now you're adding rolls for dramatic effect. Plus it buys time to create that spectacular narrative while the dice are being thrown.

Another example of how 3e simplifies things, spells having a DC based on 10 + spell level + attribute modifier. It's a simple rule of thumb that keeps your head out of the books during game play. You basically know the DC for any spell a monster or character is going to cast.

It's rules of thumb like that that make the game play faster.

The AC rules make the 3e games faster. You don't need to remember a THAC0 chart, all you have to do is remember that rolling a D20 and adding your modifiers needs to be >= the defenders AC. Very simple and makes the game faster for everyone since it can be summed up simply. Sure the THAC0 box on a character sheet was simple math too, but you had to look it up to adjust it vs. just remember a simple rule based on D20.

Leveling is easier to manage from a DM stand point. If you have certain goals for your campaign you can create the encounters to ensure that the game and characters progresses the way you intend it to a lot easier since you know every class is using the same scale.

Personally, I've found that I can pare down the rules a lot easier with 3e and higher than I could with the AD&D line.

Currently I'm teaching the game to my nieces and nephews, who range from 12-25. It's important to keep everyones attention and I've managed to incorporate a lot of story with a nice balance of dice play, without going rule crazy on all of them.

Overall I think D&D needs to start to pare down it's rule books. But that is my opinion since I simplify the game to fit my audience. We seem to have a good time together so that's what is really important. If you can do that with 2e then wonderful. The D&D game has been providing fun for me for 25 years and counting, but the past 4+ years have been a lot easier for me since I made the step to 3.5 rules.

[MysticTheurge]

As another possibility:

HP gained from enhancements don't count for your 10% (or 25% or whatever).

Or even just make it 25% of base HPs, not con mod, not enhancements, not greater false life items. Just a quarter of your base.

[MysticTheurge]

How does rolling a crit and then rolling for confirmation of that crit speed up the game compared to the old way of just rolling a crit with no confirmation?

It doesn't. That's why 4E is doing away with confirmations.

[Invalid_86]

That was already addressed in the original post.

Even if you dropped it from 25% to 10% of your original hps that is still alot of hps in this game.

[Heladron]

It doesn't. That's why 4E is doing away with confirmations.

Ahhhh! But now I have to come up with the gory details of a spectacular critical hit in milliseconds vs. the seconds when the players are rolling dice.

How are they going to handle the instant kill rule? Just curious.

[Invalid_86]

Agreed and agreed. 3.0 and 3.5 are way to heavy on rules for me. This has bred the "rules lawyers" and has lessened RP because of the constant need to check a rule. I tried it for a while and didn't like it. I'll try 4.0 and see if it's changed.

Did you play 1st edition? You basically had to be a rules lawyer just to figure out how to play the game.

God rest Gygax's soul, he was a great idea man but a horribly disorganized writer. Go back and look at the 1st edition DMG again with fresh eyes- it was about as organized as a written the night before it was due term paper, while hung over and sucking down three Red Bulls.

[MysticTheurge]

How are they going to handle the instant kill rule?

Um... I think you made that rule up.

[Angelus_dead]

Um... I think you made that rule up.

The rule about three natural 20s producing a super-critical instant-kill is not his invention. It is a moderately widespread house rule (which happens to be bad for gameplay).

[MysticTheurge]

The rule about three natural 20s producing a super-critical instant-kill is not his invention. It is a moderately widespread house rule.

Ah, yes. Perhaps, "I don't think that's actually part of the rules" or "I think that rule was made up by someone who did not officially write the D&D 3.5 rules" would've been more accurate than "I think you made that rule up" but neither had quite the same ring.

[Heladron]

Um... I think you made that rule up.

I did no such thing. It's in the 3e DMs guide. Can't quote a page number for you, but I believe it's in the game play section. I thought it was an interesting rule so I've incorporated it in my games because it adds spice to an already fun situation and again buys me time to think up a descriptive critical hit without saying the same junk over and over due to lack of time.

It's when you roll a 20 on your confirm critical roll it results in instant death threat, which must then be confirmed as well. It's probably one of those rule suggestions that they throw in from time to time in the PHB and DMG. But trust me it is in the DMs guide. I've tried to find references on the web, but they don't have exact DMG quotes.

EDIT: I found the rule. It's on Page 64 of DMG 3e. It's on the right hand side of the page under Variant: Instant Kill.

[Angelus_dead]

Ah, yes. Perhaps, "I don't think that's actually part of the rules"

Also notice that the triple-20 rule is actually close to a widely disregarded D&D 3.5 rule: Death from massive damage

When a high level fighter makes a critical hit, he's likely to inflict over 50 damage at once (a Power Attack Scythe makes it a certainty). By the official rules, that should force the victim to make a fortitude save or instantly die. The fort DC is 15, which high level monsters will pass on anything but a natural 1.

Therefore, a 5% chance of instant death following a crit is approximately the same whether it's an official rule, or a house rule. (The difference with the house rule is that 50 damage from a Cone of Cold or Harm won't also threaten instant death)

[MysticTheurge]

It's probably one of those rule suggestions that they throw in from time to time in the PHB and DMG.

Ah, well I suppose that's possible.

Anyway, for more on 4E crits and why damage multiplication (and by extension instant-death hits) are bad, there's this article at WotC.

[Heladron]

Ah, well I suppose that's possible.

Anyway, for more on 4E crits and why damage multiplication (and by extension instant-death hits) are bad, there's this article at WotC.

Interesting article. That is going to make game play much faster and I guess I better start creating a bunch of fill in the blank critical hit descriptions or I'm going to be slowing down the game going ummmmmmmmmmmm..."some gorey description of the death." LOL.

Dice maxing criticals is definitely a 4E rule that wouldn't go over well in DDO.