Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
House rule for in combat healing and yoyo at 0 HP
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 9197128" data-attributes="member: 72555"><p>Sure, like I said, you as a DM can make 0 HP have next to no consequences. Which makes yo-yo healing optimal.</p><p></p><p>This is your choice, as a DM, to not use the already existing in black and white mechanics in the game to make 0 HP a really, really bad idea for PCs to hit.</p><p></p><p>It remains amusing that a DM who has decided to make 0 HP have no consequences then goes "I hate how PCs hitting 0 HP has no consequences and heals at 0 HP are super-good, how can I give it consequences?"</p><p></p><p>In fact, it seems to me that what is actually going on is that they don't like how harsh the consequences are of hitting 0 HP, and want something between what the actual rules give as consequences and what they are currently dealing out.</p><p></p><p>And yes, as the world the DM creates is completely and utterly within the control of the DM, I include whatever in-world rationalizations the DM does for why the DM doesn't impose the already existing in-game consequences for 0 HP on PCs to be a decision taken by the DM that removes said consequences. "My guy" syndrome applies to DMs as well; it is you, the DM, making a decision.</p><p></p><p>"I don't like how my world's assumption that magical healing is nearly completely unexpected makes my monsters assume 0 HP PCs are dead (or at least eliminated from combat), hence making magical healing on 0 HP PCs more effective than I like; I want to validate the assumptions of my monsters and make 0 HP PCs be more out of combat than healing magic rules imply, but not too harsh like 'magical healing on 0 HP targets only stabalizes them', or 'magical healing doesn't work on 0 HP targets'. Instead, something like 'the creature gains a level of exhaustion' or 'the creature is slowed for 24 hours', something that punishes without real danger."</p><p></p><p>I doubt this actually reflects anyone's full position - it is intentionally more than a bit of a straw man, so don't take it as putting words in your mouth - but this is what it <em>looks like</em>, and why it is amusing to me.</p><p></p><p>...</p><p></p><p>One idea I have played with is making being hit while down <strong>less harsh</strong>. This makes attacking downed targets less of a "DM is mean" and makes it more expected.</p><p></p><p>When a creature takes damage while at 0 HP, instead of an automatic failed death saving throw they <strong>make a death saving throw</strong>. On 1, they get 2 failures; on a failure, they get 1, and on a success they don't work towards being stable (but they don't interrupt becoming stable). On a 20+ they would regain 1 HP (be shocked awake by the damage), just for the drama of it.</p><p></p><p>Critial hits cause 2 death saving throws (instead of failures).</p><p></p><p>The goal here being that landing coup blows becomes a standard thing for foes to do.</p><p></p><p>You could push it a bit harder and <strong>not tell the other players how many failures have accumulated</strong>, or even <strong>not tell the PC</strong> (but the last one is cruel and removes dice rolling from an already downed PC). That makes not healing them far riskier.</p><p></p><p>By softening the harshness of "coup" attacks, we make making them more standard without being a "mean DM". And if you imagine that most NPCs/monsters have a penalty to death saving throws, doing a finishing blow againts non-heroic targets makes sense (it forces 2 checks, and within 6 seconds the creature is probably bled out on the 3rd check).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 9197128, member: 72555"] Sure, like I said, you as a DM can make 0 HP have next to no consequences. Which makes yo-yo healing optimal. This is your choice, as a DM, to not use the already existing in black and white mechanics in the game to make 0 HP a really, really bad idea for PCs to hit. It remains amusing that a DM who has decided to make 0 HP have no consequences then goes "I hate how PCs hitting 0 HP has no consequences and heals at 0 HP are super-good, how can I give it consequences?" In fact, it seems to me that what is actually going on is that they don't like how harsh the consequences are of hitting 0 HP, and want something between what the actual rules give as consequences and what they are currently dealing out. And yes, as the world the DM creates is completely and utterly within the control of the DM, I include whatever in-world rationalizations the DM does for why the DM doesn't impose the already existing in-game consequences for 0 HP on PCs to be a decision taken by the DM that removes said consequences. "My guy" syndrome applies to DMs as well; it is you, the DM, making a decision. "I don't like how my world's assumption that magical healing is nearly completely unexpected makes my monsters assume 0 HP PCs are dead (or at least eliminated from combat), hence making magical healing on 0 HP PCs more effective than I like; I want to validate the assumptions of my monsters and make 0 HP PCs be more out of combat than healing magic rules imply, but not too harsh like 'magical healing on 0 HP targets only stabalizes them', or 'magical healing doesn't work on 0 HP targets'. Instead, something like 'the creature gains a level of exhaustion' or 'the creature is slowed for 24 hours', something that punishes without real danger." I doubt this actually reflects anyone's full position - it is intentionally more than a bit of a straw man, so don't take it as putting words in your mouth - but this is what it [I]looks like[/I], and why it is amusing to me. ... One idea I have played with is making being hit while down [b]less harsh[/b]. This makes attacking downed targets less of a "DM is mean" and makes it more expected. When a creature takes damage while at 0 HP, instead of an automatic failed death saving throw they [b]make a death saving throw[/b]. On 1, they get 2 failures; on a failure, they get 1, and on a success they don't work towards being stable (but they don't interrupt becoming stable). On a 20+ they would regain 1 HP (be shocked awake by the damage), just for the drama of it. Critial hits cause 2 death saving throws (instead of failures). The goal here being that landing coup blows becomes a standard thing for foes to do. You could push it a bit harder and [b]not tell the other players how many failures have accumulated[/b], or even [b]not tell the PC[/b] (but the last one is cruel and removes dice rolling from an already downed PC). That makes not healing them far riskier. By softening the harshness of "coup" attacks, we make making them more standard without being a "mean DM". And if you imagine that most NPCs/monsters have a penalty to death saving throws, doing a finishing blow againts non-heroic targets makes sense (it forces 2 checks, and within 6 seconds the creature is probably bled out on the 3rd check). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
House rule for in combat healing and yoyo at 0 HP
Top