D&D 5E What to do when Pc's die? What then for that player?

[Joe Liker]

Personally I'd start the new pc at the current party level.

Always at level 1 will become super harsh when the rest of the party is at, say, level 10.

Many DMs don't use "party level." Such a thing has not been encouraged in the rules so far, and the rules for building encounters go out of their way to tell you how to deal with a party where the PCs are different levels.

As mentioned by others, bounded accuracy makes this OK. It really isn't super harsh. A level 1 character really can contribute meaningfully even if his friends are level 10.

It takes 21,000 XP to rise from level 10 to level 11. With the same amount of XP, a level 1 character will become level 6 -- very nearly level 7.

Then it's another 15,000 XP to get to 12. (Yes, D&D has a hell level, and level 10 is it!) This would put the lower-level character at 36,000 = level 8. He may never truly catch up, but he's closing the gap rather quickly!

Having party members of varying levels is built into the XP table. Making a dead guy start over at level 1 is a perfectly reasonable penalty for getting killed.

 

[fba827]

Many DMs don't use "party level."

(Snip) He may never truly catch up, but he's closing the gap rather quickly!
(Snip)

Having party members of varying levels is built into the XP table. Making a dead guy start over at level 1 is a perfectly reasonable penalty for getting killed.

I meant average party level, but yes I understand your point. I also understand your reasoning about eventually catching up.

But I still disagree that it's reasonable based on my experiences at public play tables where first levels are in a session along side 4th levels. The first level players made comments about feeling sidelined and lacking the ability to contribute much because after one hit they were either unconscious or dangerously close to it and scared to get hit so had to hang back while the fourth levels just didn't give it a second thought. Sure that makes sense in the context of less vs more experience but as a player experience I find that non optimal if I'm sitting with friends and want us all to enjoy as much as possible.

For that reason, personally, I disagree.
But sure, your mileage may vary

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I don't have a problem as a player or DM if not every PC is perfectly balanced against each other, or if for a few sessions a player has to rely on his wits and clever play rather than just toe to toe combat. Play styles and expectations vary of course.

 

[Joe Liker]

The first level players made comments about feeling sidelined and lacking the ability to contribute much because after one hit they were either unconscious or dangerously close to it and scared to get hit so had to hang back while the fourth levels just didn't give it a second thought.

Everyone feels that way at 1st level, whether they are with higher level friends or not. But it's only going to last one session.

Don't get me wrong -- the other options you gave were also quite reasonable. It all depends on the campaign, and perhaps even the circumstances of the character's death. A particularly heroic or entertaining death might warrant a bit of a karmic level-bump, certainly.

 

[Cernor]

I have a list of 100 achievements I change from campaign to campaign.

Do you mean you have one list of 100 achievements, or do you make 100 per campaign? I'd love to see (one of) the list(s) though, it seems like a really cool idea.

 

[pemerton]

I would simply impose SOME kind of penalty for a "do over/next/restart" character and would definitely NOT let them re-enter the game at a level higher than they were. Otherwise, there's really no threat in the game. There is no impetus to not get killed.

Isn't losing your PC a consequence? It's likely a disappointment, and possibly a setback.

The players are playing smart because they don't want to die. Their PCs are tied into the story of the campaign, so they aren't throw-away bags of hp that can be replaced by Bob the Fighter IV. They have a vested interest to stay alive, and play like it.

I agree with Agamon. In my experience, the impetus not to get killed is the fact that the player likes playing this PC, as part of the unfolding campaign and the story that is built up as part of that.

The idea that there is no consequence unless the player's PC becomes mechanically weaker seems to imply that PCs are interchangeable in all non-mechanical respects. I feel that, for me, if that was true then there would be bigger issues for me as a GM then just working out how to handle PC death.

 

[The Hitcher]

I don't believe in killing PCs unless it makes the story more interesting. If they "die", something else bad happens instead. When a TPK happened in a random encounter recently, the PCs were all captured, lost all of their money, and the town of Phandelver was attacked, killing a random NPC (I made the players draw a card to determine who died - it turned out to be the halfling's aunt).

 

[Evenglare]

I had a PC die last session. Actually had 2 die but one was at the very end, he messed with a beholder and took a death ray. The other however "died" in the middle of the session by a medusa. Technically just stone but for all intensive purposes (my purposes are very intensive) he was dead. So instead of making him sit there, I let him run the monsters for the rest of the session. It's probably the most fiendish thing I could have done to the party at that point. It was great.

 

[Agamon]

I just want to note that a lot of folks keep referring to starting at lower level than the rest of the party as a "penalty". I prefer to think of starting a new pc above 1st level as giving them unearned benefits.

Unearned by whom? The player has played in the game for however many sessions it has been played. Being unfortunate enough to lose your PC due to the variance of die rolling doesn't change that.

I don't think the PC cares one way or the other what it gets, seeing as it's an imaginary thing.

 

[Agamon]

I had a PC die last session. Actually had 2 die but one was at the very end, he messed with a beholder and took a death ray. The other however "died" in the middle of the session by a medusa. Technically just stone but for all intensive purposes (my purposes are very intensive) he was dead. So instead of making him sit there, I let him run the monsters for the rest of the session. It's probably the most fiendish thing I could have done to the party at that point. It was great.

I was going to say, it's "intents and purposes," but if your purposes are intensive, then by all means...