3.5 Rebuild Poll 21

[Sirperry]

Another vote for negative Con.

[vermithrx]

Essentially, yeah. That particular death mechanism is counterintuitive to many, though I dare say it's a fine optional rule. Just not as the default.

I suppose that depends on what role most people expect the mechanics to play. Combat is a tool for conflict resolution within the context of a story the players and GM are working together to create. Do we want it to adjudicate the outcome of a given conflict or who gets to decide that outcome?

[Pteryx]

-Con seems like too little, -50% too little in the short term (especially for wizards and the like, who need it most) and way too much later...  We may need both a flat and a scaling component here.  -- Pteryx

[vermithrx]

-Con seems like too little, -50% too little in the short term (especially for wizards and the like, who need it most) and way too much later...  We may need both a flat and a scaling component here.

Alternatively, give all level 1 characters and CR 1 creatures 4 hit die to start with, sort of like skill points are handled. Then we can use a scaling modifier without worrying. This also opens up the possibility of sending moderately sized groups of "-CR" creatures at low level characters to vary things up.

I can see it now... "Yes, you heard me right guys. The 15 irate orc toddlers and their bereaved mothers are trying to kill you."

[veekie]

-Con seems like too little, -50% too little in the short term (especially for wizards and the like, who need it most) and way too much later...  We may need both a flat and a scaling component here.

Alternatively, give all level 1 characters and CR 1 creatures 4 hit die to start with, sort of like skill points are handled. Then we can use a scaling modifier without worrying. This also opens up the possibility of sending moderately sized groups of "-CR" creatures at low level characters to vary things up.

I can see it now... "Yes, you heard me right guys. The 15 irate orc toddlers and their bereaved mothers are trying to kill you."

Yeah, I'm in agreement with that. Sorta.

[Johannixx]

We've always done a slight modification of the standard rule. Instead of dying at -10, you die after you reach -Con.  So a Barbarian with 18 Con would die at -19.

[Midnight_v]

We've always done a slight modification of the standard rule. Instead of dying at -10, you die after you reach -Con.  So a Barbarian with 18 Con would die at -19.

That doesn't seem too bad...