D&D General How Often Should a PC Die in D&D 5e?

[Lanefan]

See, this comes across to me as a pretty degenerate methodology. You want to encourage people to listen at doors, that is a major part of play to prevent players from being ambushed by monsters behind doors. And the solution to ear seekers was... getting a listening horn, to listen at the doors with. And then you "got complacent" doing the very thing that the game wants to encourage you to do!

I'm not exactly an easy-on-the-characters DM but even given that I've always thought Ear Seekers were a dumb idea. If I've ever DMed any it was so long ago that I've forgotten doing so, and it's very highly doubtful I'll ever DM any in the future (though I've learned to never say never ).

That said, in moderation I love throwing in the occasional Trapper, Cloaker, or Lurker Above as, in effect, a living trap.

 

[Lanefan]

My reason for wanting character death is simply that sometimes people die.

Particularly when they repeatedly engage in dangerous activities such as exploring trapped places and fighting scary monsters.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I'm not exactly an easy-on-the-characters DM but even given that I've always thought Ear Seekers were a dumb idea. If I've ever DMed any it was so long ago that I've forgotten doing so, and it's very highly doubtful I'll ever DM any in the future (though I've learned to never say never ).

That said, in moderation I love throwing in the occasional Trapper, Cloaker, or Lurker Above as, in effect, a living trap.

And, let me guess, if the players don’t say that their characters looked up: too bad, so sad!

 

[Lanefan]

But I'm not talking about rules questions and I'm not talking about "when a check is required" because those are both very different things than "what classes are allowed in the game" or "is this backstory acceptable". I'll add "what homebrew rules are we using" to the second list, so there can be some overlap but these are different conversations at their core.

When pretty much the whole game system is homebrew, as is the case in my game, the overlap ratio is near-unity.

 

[Lanefan]

And, let me guess, if the players don’t say that their characters looked up: too bad, so sad!

If they don't look up they're likely to get hit (same with Piercers, which I run much more often). If they do look up there's still a chance they won't notice it, as it blends in with the ceiling.

That said, looking at my long-term stats of character death causes in our campaigns, out of a total of over 1300 character deaths (and petrifications) I find a total of 5 were due to these creatures: 2 from Trappers, 2 from Lurkers, and 1 from a Cloaker. This puts them each a very long way down the list of death-bringers; with Giants (110+) and Dragons (75+) at the top of the list for monsters and "Other Adventurers" and "Own Party"* at the top of the list overall.

And while 1300 deaths might sound like a hell of a lot, when you consider that's over 43 years and close to 5000 sessions and also consider it includes adventuring NPCs and henches etc., it's not quite as hairy as it looks. I don't have stats on how many of those deaths/petrifications were later undone by revival or stone-to-flesh but my rough guess would be at least half and maybe even 2/3.

* - "Other Adventurers" includes everything NPC of a playable species, from bandits to evil wizards to knights-errant to opposing adventuring groups. "Own Party" includes accidental friendly fire, fumbles, intentional CvC killing, fatal wild magic surges or explosions, character suicide (or, in one memorable case, intentional self-petrification), etc.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes. I think sometimes not dying happens rather frequently in games which allow the possibility of death. Like at least in my games characters are alive overwhelming majority of the time. (Games of Vampire the Masquerade being an exception.)

True, but if our reason for including death is "sometimes people die", well... the bad guys dying also count. And if the POV characters happen to live, because sometimes people live when you would expect them to die, then that is equally realistic. So I don't find "sometimes people die" to be any sort of argument or statement of preference.

 

[Chaosmancer]

But it's never people never die, unless they want to. Not in my game.

Dying of old age is still dying. Plenty of soldiers on battlegrounds where millions of soldiers died met there fate from old age and illness decades later.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yep. Hence my "Another case". Because there are many types of decisions that a DM makes

I made my decisions a long time ago that are fundamental to the design of my campaign world. If I created a new world every time we started a campaign I would discuss it. I don't so there is no need to.

Oh, there are things you refuse to discuss? Like I keep saying? Like you keep claiming are false accusations, groundless and baseless?

I never automatically accept someone else's answers, not even Sage Advice. I may read other people's opinions, I certainly listen to my players but I still make the final decision. If you want to abdicate decision making to someone else, that's fine. It's just not how I do it.

Okay then. So, someone can hold the title of DM and NOT be the final authority on all things Dungeons and Dragons. We agree then. I'm not arguing what you Oofta do, I'm arguing what is definitionally possible. It is possible for the DM to not be the final authority on a rules decision, because someone else is who they listen to.

Which you just admitted is a possibility but is not how the game has been described in the books for the last half century. So we have two possible ways to do it. One where the DM is the Final Authority, and one where they are not.

I covered 3 basic topics. Interpreting rules is one. Rulings for when checks are required and the target DC if it's not an opposed roll, which could include advantage/disadvantage or many other adjustments. World building and similar restrictions, such as allowed races or "no evil". In all cases I make the final decision, even if that decision includes asking for input.

Right but I've never been discussing whether or not a roll has advantage or what number a DC is. That has never been the character of the rules discussion I've engaged in. So of your three categories, it seems I've been discussing one of them.

And, to make another point, since we agree that a 3rd party can be the Final Authority of a rules decision is a DM obeys their rule decisions, then in regards to world building it is very possible for the author of a book to be the final authority on a setting. Yes, you Oofta run a homebrew world over which you demand final authority status over, but the role of a DM does not inherently require that, when a DM can reference various setting books and authors as the final authority of the world they are running.

So while being the Final Authority may be a factor of how YOU run games, it is not an inherent truism for all DMs at all tables for all time.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Dying of old age is still dying. Plenty of soldiers on battlegrounds where millions of soldiers died met there fate from old age and illness decades later.

But if such individuals always include the PCs among their number, that is unrealistic to me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Oh, there are things you refuse to discuss? Like I keep saying? Like you keep claiming are false accusations, groundless and baseless?




Okay then. So, someone can hold the title of DM and NOT be the final authority on all things Dungeons and Dragons. We agree then. I'm not arguing what you Oofta do, I'm arguing what is definitionally possible. It is possible for the DM to not be the final authority on a rules decision, because someone else is who they listen to.

Which you just admitted is a possibility but is not how the game has been described in the books for the last half century. So we have two possible ways to do it. One where the DM is the Final Authority, and one where they are not.



Right but I've never been discussing whether or not a roll has advantage or what number a DC is. That has never been the character of the rules discussion I've engaged in. So of your three categories, it seems I've been discussing one of them.

And, to make another point, since we agree that a 3rd party can be the Final Authority of a rules decision is a DM obeys their rule decisions, then in regards to world building it is very possible for the author of a book to be the final authority on a setting. Yes, you Oofta run a homebrew world over which you demand final authority status over, but the role of a DM does not inherently require that, when a DM can reference various setting books and authors as the final authority of the world they are running.

So while being the Final Authority may be a factor of how YOU run games, it is not an inherent truism for all DMs at all tables for all time.

Has @Oofta at any point said they were speaking for anyone beyond themselves and their table?