D&D 5E How often do characters die in your campaigns?

[p_johnston]

I don't like killing individual characters. Whenever I'm running a campaign I try to give each character a lot of ties to the story and the overall plot. I work with the players in session 0 to tie each of the characters together with their backgrounds. In short I try my best to make everything an interconnected web so that players feel their characters are connected to the world. Whenever just one or two characters die thought it just kinda slices that web to pieces. Now I have some new character/s to introduce who have no ties to the party or plot and all the old threads tied to the dead character/s are usually just left dangling. While I can (and have) made it work I just find having any individual character die just messes with the plot and usually creates a less satisfying story.

On the other hand I don't mind TPKs at all. I think I've had two campaigns where the characters succeed against about 4 or 5 where the party died. I run hard games in general and sometimes the party gets in over their heads. Often TPKs create stories that are as interesting as succeeding (though in a different way).

How do you guys run your campaigns and death?

 

[Lanefan]

Over the years I've killed a huge number of individual characters (some of them several times each!) but I've only ever had one TPK.

I long ago learned that tying the plot around one character - particularly at low levels where revival isn't really in play yet - is generally doomed to failure as inevitably that'll be the character who dies at the first opportunity. So instead, if I'm going to tie it around anything I'll try to make it the party as a whole, as parties - as opposed to individual characters - are extremely resilient things that are very hard to kill off.

 

[Charlaquin]

The number of individual deaths really depends on the length of the campaign, but I went for “a few” over “a lot”. TPKs are pretty rare for me - I have had one, with a group of brand new players in the LMoP goblin cave.

 

[iserith]

I don't like killing individual characters. Whenever I'm running a campaign I try to give each character a lot of ties to the story and the overall plot. I work with the players in session 0 to tie each of the characters together with their backgrounds. In short I try my best to make everything an interconnected web so that players feel their characters are connected to the world. Whenever just one or two characters die thought it just kinda slices that web to pieces. Now I have some new character/s to introduce who have no ties to the party or plot and all the old threads tied to the dead character/s are usually just left dangling. While I can (and have) made it work I just find having any individual character die just messes with the plot and usually creates a less satisfying story.

On the other hand I don't mind TPKs at all. I think I've had two campaigns where the characters succeed against about 4 or 5 where the party died. I run hard games in general and sometimes the party gets in over their heads. Often TPKs create stories that are as interesting as succeeding (though in a different way).

How do you guys run your campaigns and death?

In my campaigns, either death is on the table or it isn't.

For those rare times when it isn't, it's because the characters dying would go against what I'm trying to accomplish, typically as it relates to theme or plot. It makes no sense to do as you do above, in my view, and leave death on the table unless you're ready to have that break your planned plot or leave things unresolved. So, death is not possible and we focus on stakes or outcomes other than life or death.

But generally speaking, I really dislike running games with a prepared plot in favor of just presenting adventure locations for the PCs to do with as they please. To that end, I leave death on the table because I have no plot to wreck or backstories to worry about resolving. I have about a 10% death rate in these sorts of campaigns.

 

[Shiroiken]

It really depend on the type and length of a campaign. My first campaign was an epic that spanned from level 1 to level 18, and we had about a dozen deaths more or less, but only 1 was permanent (the cleric, of course). The rest were fixed with either revivify, raise dead, or wish. My next campaign was a West Marches style, which multiple low level characters. That one had dozens of deaths, all permanent, as less than half survived to level 3. My current campaign, levels 1-7, has had only one death, and that was due to both poor decision making and bad luck (ambushed by a hobgoblin at level 1). In general death becomes less common as you level, but it also becomes less problematic after level 5.

 

[Laurefindel]

None of my players' characters died so far (not since my 2e AD&D days at any case), but they brush ever so close to death frequently enough to keep things exiting and the feeling of danger really high. Actually, that's what I like best; seeing characters survive despite the odds that I've set strongly against them.

 

[TheVirtualDM]

I am lucky enough to play with people who invest a lot of thought into their character's build, backstory, goals, ETC. There are no Bob II characters in our campaigns. I reward this investment by having a table rule that nobody dies, BUT... there are consequences for poor decisions that would have killed the character. For example, if a player's decisions have their character receive an "Instant Death", they will lose a limb or lose an eye or be left with a limp or something similar. If a player's decisions have their character "dropped" and fail their "Death Saves", they will receive exhaustion or some other effect that impeds them for a time. These consequences can all be reversed with appropriate spells, time, and money. I am sure this type of approach is not for every table, but it has worked well for my campaigns.

 

[loverdrive]

Most of the time I just treat "death" as being taken out of current conflict.

 

[Oofta]

Death is rare, but it's always on the table.

I have had TPKs, but that was long ago in a previous edition when the players all decided that a group of all wizards was a good idea. Note: it was a really bad idea.

 

[Zardnaar]

Probably 10% or so.