Coup de Grace vs. Players -- Mean DM or Fair Play?

Boarstorm

First Post
I noticed recently while listening to (and watching, in one instance) the podcasts WotC has put out in recent months, and something caught my ear -- one of the DMs was characterized as being a "killer" because he commonly had his monsters coup de grace fallen PCs.

Now, in past games I've had no problem finishing off a downed PC, but with the advent of 4E and the swingy-ness of combat at lower levels (Hobgoblin soldiers reliably do 2d6+4 damage per hit, enough to take down an equal level defender in 3 or 4 average hits, for example), I've been presented with a LOT of opportunities to have the NPC warlord yell "Finish him" and squash some brains.

... but I've refrained, having them move on to engage active PCs and give the party healers a chance to save their buddy's bacon.

Partly, I've done this because this particular group was dragged kicking and screaming into the game from 1&2E, and while they seem to be enjoying 4E, I don't want them to get frustrated and I'd much rather save character death for a dramatically appropriate moment.

But darn, is it tempting!

Is a DM who regularly takes those opportunities that present themselves to squish fallen PCs being mean? Is he falling into a me-versus-them mindset?

Or is that just the way the world works? Monsters are nasty evil critters who dish out death to the champions of light, after all. This isn't a Bond villain, it's a cutthroat who wants you dead, end of story. Or is it?

So what do you guys think?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

IMHO executing a CdG on a PC is both fair and mean.

I typically don't do it, but occasionally an NPC will have reason to hate a specific PC enough to warrant such malign attention.

Cheers, -- N
 

I generally don't do it, but I say it could be fair game. If I ever run a Song of Ice and Fire game though I'm sure it will be different. So I guess you can say it depends on the flavor your world is using.
 




I don't see it as a me vs. them mindset. If it makes sense for the monster to finish off a downed PC, then they do it. I've never had an issue with it (as a DM or as a player). Just how the world works.
 

[FONT=&quot]In my games, opponents go for coup de grace whenever this appears as a reasonable option, and I don't think I'm being mean on doing so. It's a PC's job to stay between the opponent and the fallen comrade to avoid this, and any monster who happens to begin a round unthreatened and near a fallen PC will try to kill him, if that seems as a good roleplaying of the monster's interests.[/FONT]



Cheers,
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
 

I agree with Nifft. It depends on the circumstances-- routinely CDGing PCs, especially when there is no in-game reason that the monsters would, is poor form. But if the monsters have been sent to kill a specific PC, or have been enraged because a PC desecrated their altar or killed their young or whathaveyou, a CDG is par for the course. If the NPCs are smart and tactically sound and PCs have been yo-yoing up and down throughout the fight, CDGing them to keep them down (or targeting the cleric for the same reason) is simply sensible tactics. Also, I'm okay with some (not very bright) monsters stopping to eat a downed foe, or other similar things that might be represented by a CDG.

But in a routine fight without a specific reason to do so, most monsters in most campaigns shouldn't whip out CDGs. (Also, as always, expectations matter. If the players know that unconsciousness is disproportionately likely to result in death because of enemy CDGs, that is a different situation from one where a DM stuns the table by CDG someone the first time they drop.)
 

I suppose it's fair, but it would definitely run contrary to the social contract I've got with my players (i.e. no charcater death without player's consent).

Luckily, 4e make it simple to knock 'em out and take 'em prisoner to my heart's content.
 

Remove ads

Top