D&D 5E Help strangle this PC to death

[MechaPilot]

He has no intention of stopping. The entire town is terrified of this guy for good reason. In an earlier session they found a doll in Blinsky's toy shop that he was being forced to make for Izek in the likeness of this player. Blinsky confessed this because the players had been so nice to him. That player later asked Izek about the doll in public, which embarrassed him. For that, he burned down most of Blinsky's shop and toys, and killed his pet monkey named Piccolo. In spite of the player knowing all this, she decided to keep sleeping with him.

I'd probably question the player's decision. It sounds as if the player isn't putting herself in her character's shoes when making that decision.

 

[Xombiemike]

Oh, I question it... but I'm not going to control my player's actions. I just resolve the outcomes of their decisions.

 

[DrBlackLightning]

This seems like an opportunity for a 4e style Skill Challenge:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvOeqDpkBm8

 

[MechaPilot]

Oh, I question it... but I'm not going to control my player's actions. I just resolve the outcomes of their decisions.

I'm not saying control. I'm saying question, as in ask the player why her character is ignoring the threat, and whether she thinks that's in keeping with her character's personality.

Sometimes players have their characters act in ways that aren't representative of their characters. I think it's one of a DM's duties to point that out to a player, and ask if the player really wants to have her character act in the declared way.

Asking why a character is doing something apparently contradictory also gives the DM a better idea of the goals and motivations of the PC in question (assuming it survives whatever is being done), and helps you tailor plot hooks and subplots to keep that player engaged in the game.

 

[Xombiemike]

I'm not saying control. I'm saying question, as in ask the player why her character is ignoring the threat, and whether she thinks that's in keeping with her character's personality.

Sometimes players have their characters act in ways that aren't representative of their characters. I think it's one of a DM's duties to point that out to a player, and ask if the player really wants to have her character act in the declared way.

Asking why a character is doing something apparently contradictory also gives the DM a better idea of the goals and motivations of the PC in question (assuming it survives whatever is being done), and helps you tailor plot hooks and subplots to keep that player engaged in the game.

I've actually modified this Curse of Strahd campaign for Castlevania and the character making these horrible decisions is the Belmont. Her trusted butler can try and keep her in line, but she has certainly made terrible decisions consistently enough to where this sort of thing is exactly what her character would do. She's not worthy of the vampire killer whip, and as a horror campaign, I strive to corrupt the players rather than kill them off. Once they officially cross the line into evil, I will take control of them. This is a much more fitting end to a character rather than the not so permanent death in this game.

In going to DM the game the way we enjoy playing it. I'm just as astounded at this players decisions as you sound to be, but this is a good opportunity to show the players there are consequences for their bad decisions and have an exciting story telling moment. How many good D&D stories do you have that end I'm some players death? This has the opportunity to be one of those moments.

If she dies, since Death the Castlevania character is in Barovia, he will make it to where characters can be resurrected at the cost of another human life. I'm sure there are some evil Vistani, witches, Werewolf cursed villagers or someone else to use for this. There are also good insanity rolls for resurrecting someone in this game. In short, I'm rolling with it because we find it fun, and I have no reservations for killing off a character, even if they are the Belmont.

 

[MechaPilot]

In going to DM the game the way we enjoy playing it.

I'm certainly not suggesting you do otherwise. As long as the group consents to the content of the game, which I assume they have since you haven't said otherwise, and you're attempting to make the game fun for yourself and your players, I won't say you're doing it "wrong."

I'm just as astounded at this players decisions as you sound to be, but this is a good opportunity to show the players there are consequences for their bad decisions and have an exciting story telling moment.

Astounded may be a bit strong. People make bad decisions; lord knows I've made my share (thankfully, extremely few have been of the personally endangering variety, and I have learned from those). I'm just saying that it sounds like the player is making the decision more for the "thrill" of having a character engaged in sexy-time than she is considering things from her character's perspective.

How many good D&D stories do you have that end I'm some players death? This has the opportunity to be one of those moments.

Good stories? None, really. Sure, they can be funny. I have a story about my players letting their greed get the better of them and their PCs drowning in spheres of water when they let the water cultists from PotA enchant their weapons at bargain basement prices.

But, character death is really just a pain. Especially when the whole party goes like that. The entire night's plan goes out the window as everyone has to make new characters, and I have to figure out how to bring them into the story without basically starting it over again.

I'd much rather have the PCs stripped of their gear and left for dead, geased into performing a task to further their adversaries' plans, imprisoned and left to figure out their own escape, or just ransomed back to their patron than killed.

 

[S'mon]

I guess I'd do something like 2 consecutive grapple successes to establish a Pin, which then Incapacitates the target, allowing for critical hits & Sneak attack damage on subsequent rounds until the pin is broken by a
successful athletics or acrobatics check vs pinner's athletics. I think I would want to stick with the hit point mechanic here, though prob at least d4 base damage.

I take it there's no chance of other PCs bursting in for an heroic rescue?

 

[Xombiemike]

There certainly is a chance they could burst in at the last moment, but this player has made some really bad decisions. I mean... If you show the players at every opportunity that jumping into this deadly trap will certainly kill them, but they decide to let it happen or jump in themselves anyway, shouldn't you let them reap the consequence of this dumb decision?

If you really want the context, Id recommend watching us on YouTube. The link is in the OP. I'd be thrilled to hear your comments here on this thread after watching it. I'd recommend speeding up the video a little.

So far for the house rule on strangulation this is what I'm leaning to.

Strangulation is different than suffocating because the blood flow is cut off from the brain. Starting a strangulation must be a coupe de grace situation or allowed to happen by the target. It's considered a grapple with all normal grapple rules with the following addition. After two rounds of strangulation all other rounds increase in difficulty to save against passing out. This is a constitution save starting on round 3 at DC 15 and increasing by two each additional round.

In the case of this particular NPC he will be damaging the target with his fire ability that deals an average of 10 according to his stat block.

All that is subject to change based on what you all think. Also, I'd like advice for if his multi attack counts for that ability, and should I include an unarmed strike damage? Not sure how that works in 5e off the top of my head.

 

[MechaPilot]

Do you really need a rule for strangulation that differs from the one in the PHB (or pg 65 of the Printer Friendly Basic Players Rules)?

The rule states that a character can hold their breath for a matter of minutes, but that presumes the character has breath to hold. I have stated before that the listed time only makes sense in the context of preparing to hold one's breath. People just don't breathe as deeply all day long as they do before they intend to dive underwater or rush through a smoke (or gas) filled room, and thus they shouldn't have breath to hold without actually taking some time to breathe deeply and attempt to hold their breath.

 

[Xombiemike]

Yes. Thank you.