PDA

View Full Version : In 3.5e poison can't kill you, no matter your condition.



nonsi
2016-10-07, 08:56 AM
.

Well, that's true for roughly 95% of all poisons.
I was considering a way to make all poisons more threatening w/o inventing new poison types.
I thought about some HP damage formula that could be based upon poison price, DC, required ingredients and the specific poison's primary/secondary effect in some way, but nothing fully formulates in my mind so far.

Can anyone think of a formula that would make sense?

Aergoth
2016-10-07, 10:09 AM
The poison system in d20 and its derivatives tends to be lackluster and mostly a threat to lower level characters (some exceptions) and if you're doing this, you'd really need to overhaul the whole system for it to matter.

Your proposed structure for the formula is a little over-complex, which is what you want to avoid when working with d20 systems in my experience.
That said, if it was pathfinder I'd treat this as a type of bleed damage (though not as actual bleed, since that's cureable by any magical healing). Call it toxic. If the poison affects physical scores give it one damage die (let's say d6 of toxic) if it affects mental scores, give it another (d4 works). If it doesn't affect abilities, it does a single point of toxic per failed save. Then you set up how many dice of damage the toxic is. Say the minimum is the number of dice of ability damage the poison does. For each failed save, increase the number of toxic dice by one, to a maximum. And the easiest way to peg the maximum is the size of the dice being used.

So digging up a list of poisons from my resources here I found a decent contact poison.
Black Lotus Extract; Contact; DC 20; 3d6 Con/3d6 Con/3d6 Toxic.

Deepbluediver
2016-10-07, 06:51 PM
Does poison have to directly be deadly? I mean, real-world poisons can end in death but they actually kill you in a variety of ways, and most poisonous animal-bites are actually quite survivable if you get quick medical attention. Maybe a strength-draining poison won't kill you itself, but if you can't move then you're easy prey for a crawling ooze or even just a pack of rats, etc.
It would be helpful to know what exactly you are trying to accomplish. I mean, you could go the video-game route and just make "poisoned" a condition that saps your health with all the existing kind of poison collapsed down in to just a single type if you want to, but I have a feeling lots of people wouldn't like that.

Personally I think the 3.5 rules were sort-of trying to make a non-lethal way to disable enemies (or your players if you wanted to). But like everything else in 3.5 that wasn't magic, they ended up to expensive (in gold, in feats, in ease of use, etc) to be worth it most of the time. I've got some ideas but I don't want to start pushing them until I've got some idea of how open you are to change or what is it that you're going for here. For example, a poison that you would want to use in-combat to take down a dragon should probably have very different rules than the poison the grand vizier is using to slowly kill the sultan so he can seize the throne and marry the sultan's beautiful daughter, etc. If you want one set of rules for both, it's gonna start to get very complicated very quickly.

nonsi
2016-10-08, 08:16 AM
Does poison have to directly be deadly?


That's an interesting point you raise.






I mean, real-world poisons can end in death but they actually kill you in a variety of ways, and most poisonous animal-bites are actually quite survivable if you get quick medical attention.


I wouldn't take medical attention into account, given that I don't consider medical attention part of a poison's nature.





Maybe a strength-draining poison won't kill you itself, but if you can't move then you're easy prey for a crawling ooze or even just a pack of rats, etc.


Paralyzing poison is definitely on the table.
Intoxication is also on the table, but far less pressing to me, because I already have rules for getting drunk (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18777380&postcount=5).
I was aiming for a quick fix here, but in the aftermath I'm always more interested in as complete as possible a picture. I always wished WotC had done a far more throughout job when it comes to poisons.





It would be helpful to know what exactly you are trying to accomplish. I mean, you could go the video-game route and just make "poisoned" a condition that saps your health with all the existing kind of poison collapsed down in to just a single type if you want to, but I have a feeling lots of people wouldn't like that.


For poisons that deal damage, I'd say that it would be most appropriate if they did HP burn - and that after the secondary effect, you keep taking damage until you make the save (or die).





Personally I think the 3.5 rules were sort-of trying to make a non-lethal way to disable enemies (or your players if you wanted to). But like everything else in 3.5 that wasn't magic, they ended up to expensive (in gold, in feats, in ease of use, etc) to be worth it most of the time.


Which is why poison doesn't see a lot of use in 3e in general. The effort is not really worth it if most all of them are useful only during straight combat and serve to lower an opponent's statistics for a quicker takedown.





I've got some ideas but I don't want to start pushing them until I've got some idea of how open you are to change or what is it that you're going for here.


As open as you could bring yourself to imagine... and then some.





For example, a poison that you would want to use in-combat to take down a dragon should probably have very different rules than the poison the grand vizier is using to slowly kill the sultan so he can seize the throne and marry the sultan's beautiful daughter, etc. If you want one set of rules for both, it's gonna start to get very complicated very quickly.


Slow-acting poisons, gradual effect poisons, long term exposure poisons and composite poisons (e.g. one that's introduced into one's system as a combination of food, drink and candle smoke - and then kills you in your sleep) are all on the table.
Poisons that cause hallucinations or cause you to go mad (alignment drift, reckless behavior etc) are also acceptable.
Basically, poisons from monster attacks should have more direct effects (i.e no need to change monsters) while manufactured poisons could be far more versatile.

Deepbluediver
2016-10-08, 11:09 AM
Alright, I'll give this a shot.


The issue that I see with the SRD poisons (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#poison) only last for 2 ticks- initial damage and secondary damage. If you want to make them more lethal or more dangerous, you can draw out (extend) the effect, and if you want to make them more variable you change how rapidly they act (when characters need to make saves).

In the interest of standardization, I usually keep the speed of my poisons to rounds, minutes, hours, and days, and the duration to 5, 10, or 20 units. If you're feeling fluffy, refer to those as potency and toxicity instead :P
Each time the prescribed time period passed, the character needs to make another save or they take more damage or continue to suffer the effects.

So the normal rules for becoming poisoned are the same, but you need to go through the list and reassign other values, deciding what you want the purpose of each poison to be, and adjusting damage or the effects as necessary. For a combat-related poison, make the duration in rounds so stuff happens quickly. For a slower acting poison, use hours or days.
You can also have none-damage related effects. For example, with a poison like knockout drops the target would fall unconscious on s failed save, and might stay that until the duration expires or they make 2 saves in a row- you can come up with whatever you want.


Just as a brief example, something like this.

POISONS


Poison
Type
Potency
Toxicity
Save DC
Effect
Cost


Black Lotus Extract
Contact
Rounds
5
16
2d4 Con damage
2,000 gp


Drow Poison
Injury
Hours
10
12
Become Unconscious
50 gp


Small Centipede Poison
Injury
Minutes
20
14
1 Str & 1 Dex
120 gp


Insanity Mist
Inhalation
Rounds
5
19
Become Confused
300 gp


Lich Dust
Ingestion
Days
10
21
1d6 Cha, if a person reaches 0 Cha while under the effects of this poison they become a Vampire
3,000 gp




At this point you're only limited by your imagination- and how appealing you want to make poisons to players. If you make it to good and/or to affordable, the danger is that your players start poisoning everything, leaving a trail behind them like some kind of hellish slug. I tend to control that by saying instead of being super-expensive, it's just illegal in most places and therefor really hard to obtain, but that's up to you.

nonsi
2016-10-11, 09:17 AM
Alright, I'll give this a shot.

*Snip*



Ok, I see where this is going and I like the general direction.

2 questions and a note:
1. How do you extrapolate costs from all the preceding columns? (I mean, Toxicity 20 for something that costs 120gp seems like a lot).
2. How would you associate magical poisons with spells?
3. Lich dust has a decent shot of turning a low level character into a vampire. 3000gp definitely seems low.

wumpus
2016-10-11, 02:02 PM
Does poison have to directly be deadly?

I think it really comes down to how much you enjoy the old-school "roll at least n on d20 or die" mechanic from [A]D&D. If you want to really show that the character is in mortal peril, go this way (and make sure that any raises involve slow ritual magic back in town or similar).

I think 3.x is that way due to player revolt. The whole concept of character heroism, survival, and gameplay shouldn't amount to simply rolling a high number. With 3.x poison, you at least have a means to deal with the real problem, and have the means to survive the poison assuming you survive the encounter.

This isn't to say it is the only mechanic. Repeated damage [say nd6 per round] (and possibly requiring two [or more] saves in a row to stop the damage). Note that 5e players might see saves going from "unlikely" to "impossible", so there are likely better mechanics for ending damage over time (possibly just fixed, unless you really want the elf rogue in mortal peril while the dwarf shrugs off multiple poisonings.

Deepbluediver
2016-10-11, 05:16 PM
Ok, I see where this is going and I like the general direction.

2 questions and a note:
1. How do you extrapolate costs from all the preceding columns? (I mean, Toxicity 20 for something that costs 120gp seems like a lot).
2. How would you associate magical poisons with spells?
3. Lich dust has a decent shot of turning a low level character into a vampire. 3000gp definitely seems low.
Regarding cost- I didn't have a formula for that, because the effects can be so diverse. I just sorta eyeballed it. The other issue is that WBL table is kinda bjorked at most levels- I'd prefer if the cost was less consequential and the bigger issue was getting the stuff (because it's illegal) or holding on to it (because it might spoil or goes abd and explodes or whatever). IMO attempting to use the price in gold to balance an item is an exercise in futility.

Regarding Liches- I guess that depends on what your world is like and/or how much you want to be a vampire. Some PCs would take one look at the stat bonuses and be chugging this stuff by the end of the first session I'm sure.

Regarding magic- if they fail their initial save against the spell, what ever that is, they are poisoned; subsequent saves work normally if you want, or abnormally if you don't (cause hey, it's magic). Make it harder or impossible to cure by mundane means if you want, or don't. Magic is all about subverting the normal (expected) rules anyway, so long as you keep the same basic format (i.e. an effect every X time, for Y periods, etc) I don't have a problem with you doing whatever you want with it.


I threw that table together in about 5 minutes BTW, as an example. It shouldn't really be considered balanced or definitive by any means.



I think it really comes down to how much you enjoy the old-school "roll at least n on d20 or die" mechanic from [A]D&D. If you want to really show that the character is in mortal peril, go this way (and make sure that any raises involve slow ritual magic back in town or similar).

I think 3.x is that way due to player revolt. The whole concept of character heroism, survival, and gameplay shouldn't amount to simply rolling a high number. With 3.x poison, you at least have a means to deal with the real problem, and have the means to survive the poison assuming you survive the encounter.
Everyone has their own preference and I think a lot of it depends on how much control the players feels they had getting themselves into their own predicament. Failing (or failing to prepare) when reasonable is less annoying then failing because the GM or the module-writer decided to just be a total **** that day. For example, drowning during a ship-based adventure because you didn't want to take your heavy armor off, that's fine. Having your entire party drown in an inescapable water-trap you stumbled into while exploring a DESERT temple that you totally would have survived if you'd prepared 5 copies of Water Breathing that morning is bull-excrement.

That logic applied to poison means there should be some way to have a possibility of survival for a character that gets poisoned- maybe a generic "all purpose de-toxicant" that gives you a +5 to saves against poison for 24 hours.
Or fair warning that there is a Chimera with a POISONOUS tail attacking a village.
It only get unfun IMO when stuff really starts coming out of nowhere that you couldn't possibly have prepared for without being psychic (and I mean the player is psychic, not their character).


This isn't to say it is the only mechanic. Repeated damage [say nd6 per round] (and possibly requiring two [or more] saves in a row to stop the damage). Note that 5e players might see saves going from "unlikely" to "impossible", so there are likely better mechanics for ending damage over time (possibly just fixed, unless you really want the elf rogue in mortal peril while the dwarf shrugs off multiple poisonings.
Well, yeah, part of the issue is that a poison can range from mildly annoying to death-in-a-bottle depending on who gets hit with it. So long as it's not tied to something immutable, like the bite of a specific animal, I'd be totally down with having the assassin drop poison on his dagger, then keeping several different sets of notes for use depending on who he actually manages to stab.

Although percentages don't get a lot of use in D&D because the numbers are harder to calculate on the fly and the system doesn't handle fractions well, you could could do something like "10% if your maximum HP as damage every time you fail a save", which would make the poison more equitable between the wizard and the barbarian.

The other alternative, is that rather than having poisons hit you with ability damage they just have specific effects- for example a poison that gives you a penalty to attack rolls so long as you're affected, or a poison that paralyzes you.

Bohandas
2016-10-20, 09:28 AM
Why not have it that if you're reduced to zero in an ability score any extra ability damage to that score from poison instead goes to constitution

Deepbluediver
2016-10-20, 11:42 AM
Why not have it that if you're reduced to zero in an ability score any extra ability damage to that score from poison instead goes to constitution
That's creative, though I'll be honest here and say that I'm not a fan of the idea that Constitution damage is the only type of ability-damage that can kill you in the first place. I'd rather make a rule that ANY ability score being reduced to zero (or less than zero if you prefer) means death.

For example, rather than simply being paralyzed having zero strength means your chest no longer has the ability to squeeze your lungs. Having zero dexterity means you're body can't regulate it's nervous system and you suffer seizures until you break apart. Having a zero in any mental ability score means your body can't regulate some vital involuntary function (regulating internal temperature, controlling heartbeats, maintaining saline or glucose levels, preventing dehydration, etc).

Deepbluediver
2016-10-20, 11:52 AM
On the main subject of poisons- what do people think about poisons affecting different creature types? Obviously it's never brought up for the most part for the sake of simplicity except that some creature-types are entirely immune, but in the real world one species' poison is another species' delicacy.

Something like caffeine, for example, is deadly to many creatures but freuquently consumed by humans. Actually it CAN be poisonous to humans to, but we can deal with much higher doses of it than most other animals. Many things can be deadly if you ingest to much of them, including normal essential ingredients for life, like salt and water. If you want to buff up poison but are worried that it will end up being to attractive to players, you could institute some kind of restriction that makes specific poisons only work on certain types of creatures, or have bonuses to resisting damage for certain creature types.

nonsi
2016-10-20, 10:03 PM
On the main subject of poisons- what do people think about poisons affecting different creature types? Obviously it's never brought up for the most part for the sake of simplicity except that some creature-types are entirely immune, but in the real world one species' poison is another species' delicacy.


This is absolutely true.





Something like caffeine, for example, is deadly to many creatures but freuquently consumed by humans. Actually it CAN be poisonous to humans to, but we can deal with much higher doses of it than most other animals. Many things can be deadly if you ingest to much of them, including normal essential ingredients for life, like salt and water. If you want to buff up poison but are worried that it will end up being to attractive to players, you could institute some kind of restriction that makes specific poisons only work on certain types of creatures, or have bonuses to resisting damage for certain creature types.


It might have a negative gameflow impact on all situations involving poisons - unless a poison either works or not, and each poison came with a list of potential victims.
Moreover, while I'd be curious to see such complete system for 3.5, I strongly doubt it if anyone on these boards is up to the task........ unless several brewers joined forces for a community project on poisons.

Bohandas
2016-10-20, 10:07 PM
That's creative, though I'll be honest here and say that I'm not a fan of the idea that Constitution damage is the only type of ability-damage that can kill you in the first place. I'd rather make a rule that ANY ability score being reduced to zero (or less than zero if you prefer) means death.

For example, rather than simply being paralyzed having zero strength means your chest no longer has the ability to squeeze your lungs. Having zero dexterity means you're body can't regulate it's nervous system and you suffer seizures until you break apart. Having a zero in any mental ability score means your body can't regulate some vital involuntary function (regulating internal temperature, controlling heartbeats, maintaining saline or glucose levels, preventing dehydration, etc).

I'm not sure what vital brain function charisma might map to though. I would think that, given that the game incorporates fantasy martial arts, most of those functions would tie to the wisdom score.

Deepbluediver
2016-10-20, 10:48 PM
Moreover, while I'd be curious to see such complete system for 3.5, I strongly doubt it if anyone on these boards is up to the task........ unless several brewers joined forces for a community project on poisons.
I'm not up to that at the moment, but one concept I've touched on in other threads before is a new classification, generally called "supertype". The opposite of a subtype, a supertype groups several similar (for an subjective definition of the term anyway) types of creatures together so that you can have a compromise between "effects everything" and "effects only one very narrow group".

I think the groupings I eventually settled on were:

Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoids, Giants
Dragons, Magical Beasts
Elementals, Plants
Fey, Outsiders
Animals, Vermin
Aberrations, Oozes
Constructs, Undead


You could probably cut that down even further with some effort, or everyone can just make their own list for what they think is best for their game, but that might be a place to start.



I'm not sure what vital brain function charisma might map to though. I would think that, given that the game incorporates fantasy martial arts, most of those functions would tie to the wisdom score.
Yeah, that's probably the toughest one- I don't think you have to be specific about the exact effect though. I'd be happy with a rule that was something like: at exactly 0 for any ability score you are unconscious until that ability score is restored to 1 or greater, or you die of starvation/dehydration/a random monster feasting on your helpless flesh, etc. Anything less than zero (including constitution) means you are unconscious and will die within 10 minutes (or some other limited amount of time). Which makes ability damage useful I think, but gives a player's team enough time to try and save them (hopefully).

Deepbluediver
2016-10-20, 11:23 PM
To expand on what I said above, there are 5 types of creatures that are flat-out immune to poison, and it's almost the exact same list as those that are immune to mind control



Immune to Poison
Immune to Mind-Affecting


Construct
Construct


Elemental
-


Ooze
Ooze


Plant
Plant


Undead
Undead


-
Vermin



I don't like blanket immunities in the first place, and I'm not any happier about the poison-thing than I was about enchantments (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?283563-Should-Intelligent-Undead-(or-Plants)-be-Immune-to-Mind-affecting-Effects).

I can sort-of understand why they did it. An undead has no circulatory, respiratory, or digestive systems (unless you're talking about Vampires maybe) so poisons won't spread through their body. At best it would have a very localized effect and then it might as well just be acid. And a plant likely isn't going to be affected by the same things as a human- in fact plants produce many poisonous compounds. But a plant DOES have something like a circulatory system (for sap, containing water and nutrients, much like blood), and a plant-creature probably even more so. So are you telling me that it is absolutely impossible for my character to concoct the D&D version of Round-upŠ and go hunting Shambling Mounds or something like that?

Edit: And what about Oozes? They're basically one giant cell- if I can get the biochemistry right to affect them at all, they shouldn't even get saving throws!

Hanuman
2016-10-21, 04:15 AM
Ok here's an idea, give attribute damage an equivalent to untyped lethal damage, make poisons really strong, then give players control over whether they want to take attribute damage or HP damage.
Doesn't have to be all or nothing, could be a bit of this and that.

Or just make poisons really strong and have them do both HP and attribute damage, but balance that with the damage the creature would otherwise be able to deal.

My 2c anyway

Zombimode
2016-10-21, 05:07 AM
And what about Oozes? They're basically one giant cell

Uhm, no? Where are you getting this from?

Deepbluediver
2016-10-21, 08:42 AM
Uhm, no? Where are you getting this from?
My interpretation was that they had a lot fewer internal membranes- but what do you see them as? In particular, what do you understand about them that makes them immune to any kind of poison whatsoever?

Bohandas
2016-10-22, 02:11 AM
Alright, I'll give this a shot.


The issue that I see with the SRD poisons (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#poison) only last for 2 ticks- initial damage and secondary damage. If you want to make them more lethal or more dangerous, you can draw out (extend) the effect, and if you want to make them more variable you change how rapidly they act (when characters need to make saves).

In the interest of standardization, I usually keep the speed of my poisons to rounds, minutes, hours, and days, and the duration to 5, 10, or 20 units. If you're feeling fluffy, refer to those as potency and toxicity instead :P
Each time the prescribed time period passed, the character needs to make another save or they take more damage or continue to suffer the effects.

So the normal rules for becoming poisoned are the same, but you need to go through the list and reassign other values, deciding what you want the purpose of each poison to be, and adjusting damage or the effects as necessary. For a combat-related poison, make the duration in rounds so stuff happens quickly. For a slower acting poison, use hours or days.
You can also have none-damage related effects. For example, with a poison like knockout drops the target would fall unconscious on s failed save, and might stay that until the duration expires or they make 2 saves in a row- you can come up with whatever you want.


Just as a brief example, something like this.

POISONS


Poison
Type
Potency
Toxicity
Save DC
Effect
Cost


Black Lotus Extract
Contact
Rounds
5
16
2d4 Con damage
2,000 gp


Drow Poison
Injury
Hours
10
12
Become Unconscious
50 gp


Small Centipede Poison
Injury
Minutes
20
14
1 Str & 1 Dex
120 gp


Insanity Mist
Inhalation
Rounds
5
19
Become Confused
300 gp


Lich Dust
Ingestion
Days
10
21
1d6 Cha, if a person reaches 0 Cha while under the effects of this poison they become a Vampire
3,000 gp




At this point you're only limited by your imagination- and how appealing you want to make poisons to players. If you make it to good and/or to affordable, the danger is that your players start poisoning everything, leaving a trail behind them like some kind of hellish slug. I tend to control that by saying instead of being super-expensive, it's just illegal in most places and therefor really hard to obtain, but that's up to you.

I really like this (although it needs to have two tick and one tick poisons as well).

Any ideas on how to improve the similarly dull and uniform disease mechanics?


On the main subject of poisons- what do people think about poisons affecting different creature types? Obviously it's never brought up for the most part for the sake of simplicity except that some creature-types are entirely immune, but in the real world one species' poison is another species' delicacy.

Yes, plant poison immunity troubles me. Have they not heard of Agent Orange?

Deepbluediver
2016-10-22, 05:05 PM
I really like this (although it needs to have two tick and one tick poisons as well).
By all means- go ahead. You could even give every single poison it's own number of ticks; I just stick with 5, 10, and 20 (or whatever it was) for the sake of simplicity.


Any ideas on how to improve the similarly dull and uniform disease mechanics?
Not off the top of my head- I've never sat down and give it much thought, the way I had for poison even before I saw this thread.


Yes, plant poison immunity troubles me. Have they not heard of Agent Orange?
If you really want to make yourself nuts you'd have various resistances for every creature for each type of poison, but I think that's overkill. The simplest way to do it I think would just be to add a few more columns to the chart labeled "Resistant", "Immune", and "Only affects...". Then you can just add creatures types where relevant. For example- if you listed "Fey, Plants" in the "Only affects" (or is it effects?) column, it's understand that everything else is immune. That way you don't have to list a dozen creatures under "immune" for a poison that custom-made to take down one type of enemy.


Edit: The more I think about it, the more I dislike that ability-damage is the end-all and be-all for both poisons and diseases; I feel like there is a missed opportunity here. There's something like 6 poisons that deal Strength damage and 4 that deal Dexterity damage, and for the most part they're both going to affect similar groups of melee combatants- why not just have a poison that gives you a penalty to attack and damage rolls until it's cured instead? Or something like that.

nonsi
2016-10-23, 03:17 AM
Edit: The more I think about it, the more I dislike that ability-damage is the end-all and be-all for both poisons and diseases; I feel like there is a missed opportunity here. There's something like 6 poisons that deal Strength damage and 4 that deal Dexterity damage, and for the most part they're both going to affect similar groups of melee combatants- why not just have a poison that gives you a penalty to attack and damage rolls until it's cured instead? Or something like that.

On that notion, I'd go for conditions rather than arbitrary penalties.

Deepbluediver
2016-10-23, 11:05 AM
On that notion, I'd go for conditions rather than arbitrary penalties.
I think there's room for both, but yeah I'm totally on board with that.
Since I was looking at the disease-table yesterday after Bohandas mentioned it, there's one at the top of the list called Blinding Fever (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#disease). Does it make you Blind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#blinded)? Nope- Strength damage. Explain that one to me!

Starbuck_II
2016-10-23, 05:47 PM
I think there's room for both, but yeah I'm totally on board with that.
Since I was looking at the disease-table yesterday after Bohandas mentioned it, there's one at the top of the list called Blinding Fever (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#disease). Does it make you Blind (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/conditionSummary.htm#blinded)? Nope- Strength damage. Explain that one to me!

Um, Blinding fever does both. Look at the asterisk.
1. Each time the victim takes 2 or more damage from the disease, he must make another Fortitude save or be permanently blinded.

Bohandas
2016-10-23, 08:08 PM
I'm more worried that none of these sicknesses make you sickened

Deepbluediver
2016-10-24, 01:30 AM
Um, Blinding fever does both. Look at the asterisk.
1. Each time the victim takes 2 or more damage from the disease, he must make another Fortitude save or be permanently blinded.
I missed that part- my bad. I'm still not sure where the Strength Damage comes in though; the two effects seem really unrelated.



I'm more worried that none of these sicknesses make you sickened
Hahaha- good point. That's kind of what I'm getting at though; there's a whole list of various conditions and/or effects, and the creators never thought to use any of them in either of these mechanics? I mean, I'm big on standarization- I get that feeling of wanting things to be relatively simply and straightforward. It's just that it's a sentiment that shows up NOWHERE ELSE in 3.5, and really misses an opportunity here.


Edit: Hey, quick question- what sort of poisons and/or diseases show up elsewhere in the 3.5 supplemental material? I know BoED has these "acts just like a poison but we're calling it a different name so Good characters can use them" things, but I don't recall their effects or know about anything else that might have shown up in a splatbook.

Bohandas
2016-10-25, 12:46 AM
Edit: Hey, quick question- what sort of poisons and/or diseases show up elsewhere in the 3.5 supplemental material? I know BoED has these "acts just like a poison but we're calling it a different name so good character can use them" things, but I don't recall their effects or know about anything else that might have shown up in a splatbook.

There were a whole bunch of regular poisons in Book of Vile Darkness, as well as special "Psychic Poisons" that poison anyome trying to affect them with divination