Unique Attack Modifiers

[Surgo]

Resurrecting something from an old thread, I said:

In all seriousness though, I think some language on all the various once-per-round save-or-suck options could be worthwhile. There is such a proliferation at this point, and we really don't want people to be doing more than one at a time.

Basically, it seems a bit silly that your Barbarian can force the save vs stun, then through his greater magic weapon force the save vs death, and maybe from a feat (like the linked one) force a save vs nausea or whatever -- all with the exact same attack. That leads pretty quickly to a "you're going to fail one of these" scenario.

So, borrowing some language from a popular video game. I propose simply adding the phrase "This is a unique attack modifier" to these effects. The rule would work as follows:

* There can be only one! You can only use a single unique attack modifier per attack.
* A target only needs to save once per round at most against any individual unique attack modifier.
* If a target has successfully saved against one unique attack modifier, you are welcome to use a second on your next attack (if you have one). A save against the first does not confer immunity to the second.

I think this would do well with toning down some crazy 3+ saves-per-attack (if not necessarily 3 per round) shenanigans that can slow a combat round to a crawl, while not completely boning people who have multiple of these from various sources. Thoughts on the issue?

If people like it a lot, I'll go ahead and edit it into the various articles on the wiki. If not, just forget I ever said anything.

[OgreBattle]

Well, that makes my ninja who gets....

-a save-or-suck from his Mystic Ninja Art
-a save-or-suck from his weapon
-a save-or-suck from his Monk Fighting Style
-a save-or-suck from his Combat Feat

have to choose between them, and I'm just going to pick "stun the dude" over "nauseate the dude" any time.

[Surgo]

Why? Plenty of monsters are immune to stunning, and if they save against it you can just nauseate them with the next attack.

[...You Lost Me]

Why not spam one save effect?

This seems to hit diminishing returns quickly. I'm ok with that, but it's worth noting

[Red_Rob]

It depends on how you view the profileration of Save-on-hit effects. When Dungeonomicon was released they were just some funky thing the monk got. Races of War added Combat School and Great Blows, which still restricted most characters to one such effect. Then the Book of Gears suggested that pretty much every magic weapon should add one and suddenly people are popping 2 or 3 saves off with every hit.

On the one hand, I can see wanting to reign in the madness, if only to save time rolling during combat. On the other a Save or Suck is a pretty big thing and tends to be priced accordingly. This would effectively make picking up a second one massively less useful than the first, which would discourage people from trying it and lead people away from the current "stack as many as you can for ultimate powah" route. Personally I feel that Tome warriors are on the verge of being too powerful in combat when you combo everything together, so I think it sounds like a reasonable restriction. I'll run it past our group to see if they fancy trying it out over the next few sessions.

[Surgo]

Why not spam one save effect?

This seems to hit diminishing returns quickly. I'm ok with that, but it's worth noting

Err, did you read the proposed rules? One of them is an extension of a rule that's almost entirely in place already with all of these effects: if a creature saves, it doesn't need to make another save against the effect for the rest of the round.

[Dean]

Is that true for the Monk?

[Surgo]

All the monk's save-or-sucks say "This can only affect any single opponent once per round".