Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Ideas and suggestions for game mechanics and rules.
FoamBats4All
Githyanki
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2012 6:00 pm

Re: Thoughts of death

Post by FoamBats4All »

oldgrayrogue wrote:The solution to all of this IMO is to do away with the -6 floor. Now that we have the pause feature, can you just have a timed autopause whenever someone drops below Zero HP? Say for 20 seconds?
As Zelk has said before, we are not capable of doing this. Our "Delay 20 seconds then unpause" code would be affected by the pause state, and would not run. All game timers stop while the world is paused.

The current pause is only there so that if a DM is running a session and a PC falls to negative HP, they can analyze the situation, purely intended so that they are less likely to provide unfounded tech rezzes due to player dishonesty/incorrect recollection. We have no way to unpause the game with delays once we have paused it, via scripts.
User avatar
kid
Dungeon Master
Posts: 2675
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 11:08 am

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by kid »

Xanthea wrote:
Ithildur wrote:Looks like the topic shifted again
The OP wrote:But, since we seem to have a lot of house rules, here's another one: make it even more like DA and let people who get knocked below zero HP aquire some sort of wound.
Xan wrote:The only question is if people want to apply it immediately when someone drops to bleeding, or only if they bounce off the -6 floor, either seem fine to me.
<paazin>: internet relationships are really a great idea
User avatar
Ithildur
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3548
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Best pizza town in the universe
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Ithildur »

So we have one houserule (-6 cap/no instadeath) which various folks find dubious to begin with; we were discussing further houseruling that houserule (more serious setbacks if the floor/cap is triggered) to make the first houserule somewhat more palatable, and now... we're also considering adding a third houserule (more serious setbacks merely for dropping to negative HPs)... because... it's in the spirit of things? :)

Seems like overkill to me honestly. There's nothing inherently broken about 3.5e's DnD's bleeding system as an abstraction/simplification. Plenty of other things to gripe at perhaps, but I've rarely heard people express complaint about the bleeding rules not being 'realistic'. It makes about as much sense as adding systematic rules for 'you've been hit with a crit, roll 1d6 to see which arm or leg or finger that attack lopped off' to our game.

Might be nice to houserule in certain kinds of games though if players enjoy them, sure. But here? I can support 1 (which is already in place) - with reservation after seeing it's downside in certain situations over the years - and 2 (mostly because 1 can get really silly and 2 helps 1 be less silly), but 3 has nothing to do with 1; it's just a fun idea to throw out there when we get carried away with 'make things more gritty' but probably a bad design choice.




3 makes clerics/divine casters even more attractive btw, inflicting stuff that requires restoration and such just for dropping to -1 HPs. It also makes the game exponentially more difficult/deadly at low lvls, especially at 1-2 when access to lesser restoration is not going to be a viable option at all - you're effectively making virtually every encounter akin to fighting things that have a chance to drain stats (yes, challenging combat at low lvls should regularly drop someone to negative HPs imo); not a good design choice for ALFA.
Formerly: Aglaril Shaelara, Faerun's unlikeliest Bladesinger
Current main: Ky - something

It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
Twin Axes
Dungeon Master
Posts: 1327
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:43 am
Location: The Frozen North
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Twin Axes »

Ithildur wrote:So we have one houserule (-6 cap/no instadeath) which various folks find dubious to begin with; we were discussing further houseruling that houserule (more serious setbacks if the floor/cap is triggered) to make the first houserule somewhat more palatable, and now... we're also considering adding a third houserule (more serious setbacks merely for dropping to negative HPs)... because... it's in the spirit of things? :)

Seems like overkill to me honestly. There's nothing inherently broken about 3.5e's DnD's bleeding system as an abstraction/simplification. Plenty of other things to gripe at perhaps, but I've rarely heard people express complaint about the bleeding rules not being 'realistic'. It makes about as much sense as adding systematic rules for 'you've been hit with a crit, roll 1d6 to see which arm or leg or finger that attack lopped off' to our game.

Might be nice to houserule in certain kinds of games though if players enjoy them, sure. But here? I can support 1 (which is already in place) - with reservation after seeing it's downside in certain situations over the years - and 2 (mostly because 1 can get really silly and 2 helps 1 be less silly), but 3 has nothing to do with 1; it's just a fun idea to throw out there when we get carried away with 'make things more gritty' but probably a bad design choice.




3 makes clerics/divine casters even more attractive btw, inflicting stuff that requires restoration and such just for dropping to -1 HPs. It also makes the game exponentially more difficult/deadly at low lvls, especially at 1-2 when access to lesser restoration is not going to be a viable option at all - you're effectively making virtually every encounter akin to fighting things that have a chance to drain stats (yes, challenging combat at low lvls should regularly drop someone to negative HPs imo); not a good design choice for ALFA.
Houseruling has always been in the spirit of D&D, in order to make it more fun to play.

With regard to low level PCs, the stat drain could for example be healed with a successful rest, so not so terrible. And by the way, IMO low level PCs should ideally not engage in the type of combat that repeatedly drops them below zero, because being low level they have less access to reserves of healing to bring them back.
"[T]he dwarvern people, are machine-like, and it is impossible to reason with a machine." - Susana
User avatar
Brokenbone
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 5771
Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:07 am
Location: London, Ontario, Canada

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Brokenbone »

*gets KO'd alone*

*wakes up in tavern with -10% XP/GP* Whoa what happened? Well I'll RP something.

;)
ALFA NWN2 PCs: Rhaggot of the Bruised-Eye, and Bamshogbo
ALFA NWN1 PC: Jacobim Foxmantle
ALFA NWN1 Dead PC: Jon Shieldjack

DMA Staff
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Zelknolf »

Ithildur wrote:Or does someone actually have problems with how the 3.5e negative HP system works?
I do! (not in principle: just because it's a pain in the ass)


I might make a lateral step and ask if anyone is attached to the -6 hp marker, specifically, as our method of reconciling lethality with advancement, and if anyone is specifically opposed to the idea of applying an extra penalty to people who would have been dead according to the SRD but we opt to not kill here? If there's not contention on those points, that's enough to at least propose a design.
User avatar
Ithildur
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3548
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Best pizza town in the universe
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Ithildur »

Twin Axes wrote: Houseruling has always been in the spirit of D&D, in order to make it more fun to play.
There's houseruling for a campaign of 7 people, then there's houseruling core elements of gameplay that can potentially cause more headache than fun when forced upon a 'shared campaign' of dozens of players and DMs. The latter is not something to do on a whim. :) If you or Ronan wish to hit folks with stat drains just for hitting negative HPS when DMing that's great, but I've little interest in being forced into such a houserule when I DM. I have, however, earlier proposed consequences/drains for triggering the floor before in the DM forums (interestingly enough the general response then was not favorable).
And by the way, IMO low level PCs should ideally not engage in the type of combat that repeatedly drops them below zero, because being low level they have less access to reserves of healing to bring them back
Let's clarify... at least 4 different scenerios have all kind of been tossed around now:

1. being saved from death by the floor even once 2. being repeatedly saved by the floor in the same encounter i.e. 'bouncing' from would-be death 3. simply dropping to negative hps (without triggering floor) 4. dropping to negative hps multiple times i.e. 'repeatedly' (without triggering floor)

We went from the topic being 1 - 2 (thoughts of death), then 3 (mere bleeding unconscious) was mentioned, and now it sounds like someone's saying 4 (lots of bleeding unconscious) but not 3....? :?

With regard to low level PCs, the stat drain could for example be healed with a successful rest, so not so terrible.
Healed with successful rest from something like this, under ALFA's current rules iirc, is no different from poison and other stat dmg/drain effects. You're still talking about making everyday combat potentially equivalent to dealing with poison/stat draining foes, and dealing with our funky 'you can't rest until tomorrow' rule sans DM. Gritty? Yes. Fun for all? Debatable. Well balanced for our game? Probably not.
Last edited by Ithildur on Fri Feb 14, 2014 4:27 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Formerly: Aglaril Shaelara, Faerun's unlikeliest Bladesinger
Current main: Ky - something

It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
HEEGZ
Dungeon Master
Posts: 7085
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:17 pm
Location: US CST

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by HEEGZ »

Zelknolf wrote:I might make a lateral step and ask if anyone is attached to the -6 hp marker, specifically, as our method of reconciling lethality with advancement, and if anyone is specifically opposed to the idea of applying an extra penalty to people who would have been dead according to the SRD but we opt to not kill here? If there's not contention on those points, that's enough to at least propose a design.
I am not attached to the -6 hp marker, if by that you mean removing the -6 floor?

I am specifically opposed to applying any extra penalties. I would prefer to simply remove the -6 floor as opposed to come up with some new thing, which I believe was the original point of this thread.
Twin Axes
Dungeon Master
Posts: 1327
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:43 am
Location: The Frozen North
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Twin Axes »

Ithildur wrote:
Twin Axes wrote: Houseruling has always been in the spirit of D&D, in order to make it more fun to play.
There's houseruling for a campaign of 7 people, then there's houseruling core elements of gameplay that can potentially cause more headache than fun when forced upon a 'shared campaign' of dozens of players and DMs. The latter is not something to do on a whim. :) If you or Ronan wish to hit folks with stat drains just for hitting negative HPS when DMing that's great, but I've little interest in being forced into such a houserule when I DM. I have, however, earlier proposed consequences/drains for triggering the floor before in the DM forums (interestingly enough the general response then was not favorable).
And by the way, IMO low level PCs should ideally not engage in the type of combat that repeatedly drops them below zero, because being low level they have less access to reserves of healing to bring them back
Let's clarify... at least 4 different scenerios have all kind of been tossed around now:

1. being saved from death by the floor even once 2. being repeatedly saved by the floor in the same encounter i.e. 'bouncing' from would-be death 3. simply dropping to negative hps (without triggering floor) 4. dropping to negative hps multiple times i.e. 'repeatedly' (without triggering floor)

We went from the topic being 1 - 2 (thoughts of death), then 3 (mere bleeding unconscious) was mentioned, and now it sounds like someone's saying 4 (lots of bleeding unconscious) but not 3....? :?

With regard to low level PCs, the stat drain could for example be healed with a successful rest, so not so terrible.
Healed with successful rest from something like this, under ALFA's current rules iirc, is no different from poison and other stat dmg/drain effects. You're still talking about making everyday combat potentially equivalent to dealing with poison/stat draining foes, and dealing with our funky 'you can't rest until tomorrow' rule sans DM. Gritty? Yes. Fun for all? Debatable. Well balanced for our game? Probably not.
When I posted my idea I thought some would agree, some wouldn't. Actually, I expected to be shouted down more vociferously than was the case, and I'm heartened that there are some that agree with me. Clearly there are others who share a similar sense of things.

My idea concerned being penalised for hitting negative HP, the way it functions in Dragon Age, which I find entertaining. And the gameplay is quite similar now that the chances of surviving when in a group are almost guaranteed by the floor and pause function. Obviously this reference is lost on those who haven't played DA. I'm not sure about the 1,2,3,4 thing, in either scenario you'd receive some kind of disability. Maybe you could only have one disability at a time, so bouncing repeatedly wouldn't add up to something ridiculous. Anyway. I didn't propose this to fix some kind of 'problem', I don't feel that there is one really. It was more about adding flavour. So thanks for debating, this is part of what keeps me interested in ALFA. We are geeks, we like tweaks!

By the way, out of curiosity do DMs have the option of houseruling within ALFA at their discretion?
"[T]he dwarvern people, are machine-like, and it is impossible to reason with a machine." - Susana
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Zelknolf »

HEEGZ wrote:I am specifically opposed to applying any extra penalties. I would prefer to simply remove the -6 floor as opposed to come up with some new thing, which I believe was the original point of this thread.
The original point of the thread was extra penalties. See first post.
Twin Axes wrote:But, since we seem to have a lot of house rules, here's another one: make it even more like DA and let people who get knocked below zero HP aquire some sort of wound. It could be a status effect, a minus to attributes or skill rolls, something like that. This wound might be healed by a successful heal check plus resting, for example. This would make "dying" something more than the minor inconvenience it is now.
My counteroffer is to replace the -6 floor with something else that's easier to manage and attempts to answer the primary criticisms of the current system. Removing it entirely is the dead horse you'd already referenced.
HEEGZ
Dungeon Master
Posts: 7085
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:17 pm
Location: US CST

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by HEEGZ »

Hmm, I should have worded that better. My meaning was that a new thing was the OP idea, ie. extra penalties.

If the proposal is to remove the -6 floor and replace it with something else I'd be curious to know some examples.
User avatar
Ithildur
Dungeon Master
Posts: 3548
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 7:46 am
Location: Best pizza town in the universe
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Ithildur »

Let's try to clear this up...
But, since we seem to have a lot of house rules, here's another one: make it even more like DA and let people who get knocked below zero HP aquire some sort of wound. It could be a status effect, a minus to attributes or skill rolls, something like that. This wound might be healed by a successful heal check plus resting, for example. This would make "dying" something more than the minor inconvenience it is now.
You're blurring the lines between 'knocked below zero HP' and ' "dying" being more than a minor inconvenience'. Making falling into negatives translate into aquring a 'wound'/being hit with minus attributes has ZERO impact on death/floor trivializing death.

I agree, 'dying' being more than a minor inconvenience, i.e. being repeatedly saved from what would've been full on death, by the -6 floor, is rather problematic. But that's a completely separate issue from 'make being knocked below zero HP acquire some sort of wound/hit with negative attributes/skills/etc' (unless you meant to say 'below zero HP when you get saved by the floor from what should've been death').

If folks don't like the bleeding system that's fine, but say that then, don't mix it in as if somehow houseruling bleeding will result in the floor getting less silly; blurring these two entirely separate elements and lumping them together like that isn't helpful.
Formerly: Aglaril Shaelara, Faerun's unlikeliest Bladesinger
Current main: Ky - something

It’s not the critic who counts...The credit belongs to the man who actually is in the arena, who strives violently, who errs and comes up short again and again...who if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement, but who if he fails, fails while daring greatly.-T. Roosevelt
Zelknolf
Chosen of Forumamus, God of Forums
Posts: 6139
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 7:04 pm

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Zelknolf »

HEEGZ wrote:Hmm, I should have worded that better. My meaning was that a new thing was the OP idea, ie. extra penalties.

If the proposal is to remove the -6 floor and replace it with something else I'd be curious to know some examples.
I dunno-- I'm still trying to muck through the math and prod at logs. Then was somewhat derailed when attacked by a dire github yesterday, also StephenUmpf wanted some help in an event he was running, and I had to remind pirates that they're supposed to wear pants in public-- but they're pirates so they were like "Yarr! Me mateys can see me mateys if they please!". Anyhow, I don't have anything concrete to propose right now on account.

That said, I'd lean more toward "scrap the concept of a minimum number of hit points you can drop to in a hit; when you hit a death event by any means (e.g. death spell, dropping to -10 hit points, some script calls you dead), we apply a random penalty (maybe you're dazed, maybe you're -10 to balance, maybe your saves suck for a little bit, maybe you're fatigued or exhausted, maybe it's negative levels-- the important thing is that it's not predictable, so it's difficult to just drop something on the action queue that instantly brings our should-be-dead guy back into the fight at full usefulness), increment a counter which makes it more likely that you die the next time you hit a death event, and kick you back to very-nearly dead again and bleeding. Each new time is a greater chance of getting killed, until some quantity of visits to -10 hit points within a given (potentially-long) span of time is too much for our sensibilities and you're just dead" -- if we get the kicking-back position, the death probability increase per increment, and the penalty tables right, we can probably get an elegant sort of solution where playing whack-a-mole eventually kills you, where being spared from death comes with some meaninful but ultimately-temporary penalty, where being "near death" is the same as SRD, and where the system is easily described as "you dropped to -10 hit points, and there was thus some probability that you die." (without the need to try to puzzle out timing of things if you get shot with magic missiles or lots of archers or if you were actually standing or actually dead or such).

The big questions I need to answer for myself before writing down any numbers have to do with what sort of people get spared from death in our current system and how often. The stuff above could be a number of different systems, if we didn't build out the details based on the actual reality of deaths in ALFA, and most of them would suck.
User avatar
oldgrayrogue
Retired
Posts: 3284
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 7:09 am
Location: New York
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by oldgrayrogue »

Keep the floor to level 3 then scrap it after that. No penalties, no nothing, if you die you die.

This makes ALFA less lethal for PC's just starting out (desirable) and keeps permadeath more of a reality as levels increase (desirable).

Leave the rest of the stuff to individual RP. I have RP'd being dazed after being KO'd and healed -- or even being scared shitless to return to the fight. But this depends on the specific character and encounter. Going back to above zero HP restores you to full capabilities. Even if your scared or dazed, you might jump back into a fight if it looks like your friends are about to die, or for some other valid RP reason. There is no need to "code" people's RP. If you want to make ALFA more lethal then it is then do that -- i.e. let death happen when it happens, not dream up a bunch of watered down substitutes. We are supposed to be a hardcore PW with permadeath. I am in favor of less lethality when your PC is just starting out (because it sucks to lose a new concept before it has a chance to develop), but after that it becomes a joke.
Twin Axes
Dungeon Master
Posts: 1327
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:43 am
Location: The Frozen North
Contact:

Re: Thoughts of death (Where is thy sting?)

Post by Twin Axes »

Ithildur wrote:Let's try to clear this up...
But, since we seem to have a lot of house rules, here's another one: make it even more like DA and let people who get knocked below zero HP aquire some sort of wound. It could be a status effect, a minus to attributes or skill rolls, something like that. This wound might be healed by a successful heal check plus resting, for example. This would make "dying" something more than the minor inconvenience it is now.
You're blurring the lines between 'knocked below zero HP' and ' "dying" being more than a minor inconvenience'. Making falling into negatives translate into aquring a 'wound'/being hit with minus attributes has ZERO impact on death/floor trivializing death.

I agree, 'dying' being more than a minor inconvenience, i.e. being repeatedly saved from what would've been full on death, by the -6 floor, is rather problematic. But that's a completely separate issue from 'make being knocked below zero HP acquire some sort of wound/hit with negative attributes/skills/etc' (unless you meant to say 'below zero HP when you get saved by the floor from what should've been death').

If folks don't like the bleeding system that's fine, but say that then, don't mix it in as if somehow houseruling bleeding will result in the floor getting less silly; blurring these two entirely separate elements and lumping them together like that isn't helpful.
Hm, I feel like this is turning into some kind of duel over wording. I'm however going to attempt to clarify what I meant.

Once you fall below zero HP, you start to bleed to death. That is what I mean by dying. The assumption is that it is a critical wound of some sort that has put you in that condition. The idea I had revolved around symbolising this physical trauma by having a penalty remain as a result of this wound, even after your bleeding has been stopped and some bodily tissue repaired by a cure spell or potion. Maybe a cure serious or critical wound spell would be powerful enough to repair the damage entirely, and thus remove the penalty. As an example.

I don't have an issue with the -6 floor per se. That has been added to this topic by other posters. It is related, but it is not the direct issue here for me. So please keep those two separate in the future in terms of this discussion.
"[T]he dwarvern people, are machine-like, and it is impossible to reason with a machine." - Susana
Locked