Varianor Abroad
Explorer
D&D PCs rarely retreat. I suspect that's why TPKs are a common topic for discussion.
Retreating *is* an option!
Chimera
First Post
Varianor Abroad said:
QFT
I don't think MerricB did anything wrong or guilt-worthy. His players kept pressing when they should have backed off. Not surprising that it took one of them getting killed to give them the message - it usually takes a larger part of the party to do that!
JRRNeiklot
First Post
Chimera said:QFT
I don't think MerricB did anything wrong or guilt-worthy. His players kept pressing when they should have backed off. Not surprising that it took one of them getting killed to give them the message - it usually takes a larger part of the party to do that!
In the old days, if we fought something we couldn't beat, we retreated, went elsewhere for adventure, then came back a couple of levels later. "Hey, remember that lich we couldn't kill at level 8? I bet we can handle him now! Let's go back to the temple of spontaneous combustion!"
Rl'Halsinor
Explorer
JRRNeiklot said:
Same here; if it got too difficult we retreated. All the DM can do is present a situation. The players have options with said encounter. Actually you were being very kind because there are those DMs who would not give a clue.
Nomad4life
First Post
The first question that comes to my mind when reading this example is: How is EXP awarded in your campaign?
In other words, if the PCs only get XP for slain enemies, this type of stupid stunt may have been worth the risk in their minds.
If the PCs get XP by “surviving” the encounter, they could have hidden behind some rocks and gotten the same amount of XP in the end.
If the PCs get XP through some mode of story goal awards (kill/capture Hew Argech) they could have completed the objective and then taken off knowing that the mount would offer no additional EXP anyway.
One big reason I prefer True20 over 3.X is the free form advancement- The players are free to predefine “success” any way they want to, and then let the characters pursue it.
It gets a bit trickier in 3.X, but making sure that the players understand how they are awarded experience might help in future encounters?
In other words, if the PCs only get XP for slain enemies, this type of stupid stunt may have been worth the risk in their minds.
If the PCs get XP by “surviving” the encounter, they could have hidden behind some rocks and gotten the same amount of XP in the end.
If the PCs get XP through some mode of story goal awards (kill/capture Hew Argech) they could have completed the objective and then taken off knowing that the mount would offer no additional EXP anyway.
One big reason I prefer True20 over 3.X is the free form advancement- The players are free to predefine “success” any way they want to, and then let the characters pursue it.
It gets a bit trickier in 3.X, but making sure that the players understand how they are awarded experience might help in future encounters?
Hunter In Darkness
First Post
good point there ....it was worth a try anyhow .yeah i've had a few groups who would have died to the man before leaveing
Baron Opal
First Post
Nomad4life said:
For what it's worth, in my campaign the party levels at pretty much my whim. I don't use xp anymore. They have enough experience with my running style, I think, that they get an idea when they are about to level up. Even so, there is a strong resistance to running away. Sometimes it is from "the DM won't throw anything at us we can't ultimately handle" syndrome, which I've disabused by players of. Other times it is simply ego, or for some reason they never even consider the option. Even now, sometimes the characters never run away.
Unless, of course, they're playing a magician out of spells.
