All PC dead, what to do?

[Engilbrand]

"we just give it a nudging with a little fudging to produce results that are acceptible."

Acceptable? To whom, I might ask? If the character dies, he dies. That's it. Things happen from there. As a number of other people have said, it cheapens the character and experience when you know that you shouldn't have survived. I don't trust the whole screen thing because you never know what's happening. The DM could be rolling 1s and calling them crits or 20s and calling them misses. It's EXACTLY like getting rid of the dice. I don't like the idea that I don't know what the DMs rolling. If I'm playing a game that's supposed to be random, I expect it to be random. I can't fudge rolls, why should the DM be able to? I don't think that I've ever kept rolls hidden. Do I always play things to the best of their abilities? No. Is that because I want things to be easier? Very rarely, yes. But you won't see me fudging rolls just so that someone lives. I don't fudge hit points, either, but that's technically what you're advocating. "Oh no! You have 15 hit points and take 26 damage. Ummm... Let's pretend that you have 20 hit points. Good. Now you're not dead. Yay!" Right. No thanks.

 

[DonTadow]

If this has already happened, I guess you're stuck rolling up new characters. No use in backtracking. I have a rule of no TPK at the table. If the other two had died then the third one makes the saves automatically or at least survives.

Also, when you run these types of things you have to think about whats outside of the module. I alter alot of modules and my party would be dead if i ran it the silly ways they are written sometimes. The scenario could have been prevented by thinking about the intangibles. One check was obviously not enough as they would receive a new check each round. Why wasn't there any screaming when people die? Is there anyone else in the inn. These are the types of questions you ask yourself that can increase player satisfaction and save a campaign.

 

[Kilroy]

So, when the 4th level bad-will-save NPC touches the intelligent weapons, fails the will save, and is forced to report to the swords favorite authority figure, confess to her crimes and implicate her boss, what happens?

 

[DonTadow]

Ah, a very well disguised DM fiat thread.

This is what I have learned from such threads.

The Game DM= Does not believe in fudging dice whatsover and believes that the dice fall where they may. If this results in a TPK that is fine that is the risks of the game. The campaign may or may not be over.

The story telling DM= Believes in fudging the dice to assist the story. If something would result in a TPK and it was a result of bad dice rolling or DM incompetence, things may be altered slightly. Suspension of disbelief is needed on occasion.

These two opposing forces hate each other with a passion and shall fight to the end of time as to whether dungeons and dragons is a story telling game or an action based game.

::Que Queen Highlander Music::

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Acceptable? To whom, I might ask? If the character dies, he dies. That's it. Things happen from there. As a number of other people have said, it cheapens the character and experience when you know that you shouldn't have survived. I don't trust the whole screen thing because you never know what's happening.

You seem to be under the misapprehension that fudging is always about avoiding a TPK...it isn't.

As I've pointed out, sometimes its about getting PCs to a certain locale, or making sure there is an outcome bad enough to put the PCs under pressure, as I pointed out in my second example.

If I had run that encounter in an obvious way (or just pocketed the dice) "...While making the return voyage, you are beset by raiders from another dimension...you fight valiantly for a while but you lose. You awaken, naked, in the ship's hold..." I could have saved about an hour of campaign time. They'd just have started off naked on a beach being chased by predators.

And nobody would have been having any fun.

Instead, even though the campaign required the PCs lose this initial encounter, they had the fun of casting spells to great effect, doing their little swashbuckling maneuvers, and generally "being tricksy" while racking up XP and shaking off the dust.

The difference is that while in both cases the outcome is predetermined, there is entertainment in one method and pure railroading in another. In the latter case, they are told they had a great battle, in the other-the way I ran it- they got to live it. They had tales to tell, and tactics to build off of.

 

[tensen]

Ya he could. Characters don't automatically wake up on a failed lock pick roll.

Aye, I'd say that taking 20 in that situation is fine. Although taking 20 means it took a lot longer than a round to complete, lots of listen checks.

Overall I'd say its probably a mistake it happened. As a DM I'd probably not have continued after the 1st PC was dead, but then again if I was the Player of that PC I'd probably be more annoyed that only my PC died and not any of the others, so as a DM it probably wouldn't have worked out better for me anyway.

 

[tensen]

Let's face it, if the party rogue had slit the throats of six sleeping orcs ... I doubt anyone would care.

​

Last time I did that as a PC, my DM didn't want to give me all the XP, because they weren't really a threat.

 

[Engilbrand]

I understand the comparison between just telling them that they arrive at a location after a battle and actually having them fight the battle. I would much rather fight the battle. That's not what I'm getting at. If you're in a random battle and things don't fall your way, you die. That's what I'm getting at. If the DM fudges, the battle is pointless. There's no real experience that should be gained because there is no REAL danger. "This isn't a plot point. Nobody can die." That is a ridiculous excuse. I will divert attention or specifically target different people, but once that die is thrown, their fate is sealed. I see nothing wrong with creating a major sea battle with demons if there's a specific goal in mind. It's a lot of fun. During the course of that, though, the DM needs to keep in mind that it's being played with the intention of getting people to a certain part in a certain way. The good DM won't TRY to kill the players. It's a battle for storytelling purposes. That's fine.

 

[DonTadow]

I understand the comparison between just telling them that they arrive at a location after a battle and actually having them fight the battle. I would much rather fight the battle. That's not what I'm getting at. If you're in a random battle and things don't fall your way, you die. That's what I'm getting at. If the DM fudges, the battle is pointless. There's no real experience that should be gained because there is no REAL danger. "This isn't a plot point. Nobody can die." That is a ridiculous excuse. I will divert attention or specifically target different people, but once that die is thrown, their fate is sealed. I see nothing wrong with creating a major sea battle with demons if there's a specific goal in mind. It's a lot of fun. During the course of that, though, the DM needs to keep in mind that it's being played with the intention of getting people to a certain part in a certain way. The good DM won't TRY to kill the players. It's a battle for storytelling purposes. That's fine.

the reason i dont include any random battles in my campaign world. Whats the point of them.

 

[gizmo33]

Ah, a very well disguised DM fiat thread.

Word.

What we need is a gamer alignment system so that someone can say something like "hey, I'm a Chaotic Storyteller and I just killed all of my PCs" and he can get advice from other Chaotic Storytellers rather than a bunch of Lawful Gamists tell him stuff that doesn't suit his style.

In fact, I could have predicted 90% of the posts on this thread, down to the "why bother to roll dice" questions (and I've made almost identical comments at times, like 5 minutes ago on another thread for example). Maybe WotC just needs to publish a "complete guide to gaming styles" so that I can just say stuff like "see page 23" rather than have to type it all out in various posts.

These two opposing forces hate each other with a passion and shall fight to the end of time as to whether dungeons and dragons is a story telling game or an action based game.

But I'm hoping if something like my alignment system is recognized, that everyone can take a deep breath and not feel threatened every time someone else states their position and makes it seem like the "one true way". Hopefullly there doesn't have to "be only one".