Body Counts?

[megamania]

Early level deaths for our group are rare, except through stupidity.

Mid level deaths are usually decided by fate, with great DM rolls and poor player ones.

At High level, its no holds barred DM vs Player mayhem with deaths every week, though never TPK's.

This is what I find to be my experience also except for many of my players are rash so there tend to be MANY deaths at level 1 and 2
Mid level, failed saves vs deadly poisons suck. High level I have GMed rarely but found they can take the first hit then run. Level one, people die from a standard kobold for Pelor's sake!

 

[JoeBlank]

In the campaign I have been playing and co-DMing since 3.0, I just counted our Record of Those Who Have Gone Before and was surprised to find 11 PC deaths. We have had one PC raised, and that was in extraordinary circumstances and beyond the players' control.

I played in Olgar's recently-ended campaign for the last 8 months or so, with only one PC death, she was reincarnated. But there was always the fear of death, and a near-TPK happened not long before I joined.

My preference is for some real threat of death, but I understand others who want a limited threat for their PCs. I have heard of games where death without being raised is guaranteed not to occur, and I don't think I would like that.

 

[StalkingBlue]

In a monthly game I started running when 3e first came out, I've had one TPK when the PCs, heavily STR-drained, waded into the fight with the BBEG. (Shrug.) After that, roughly two years without a single character death.
Partly that's due to the style of the game - that particular group loves roleplaying and tends to get carried away with it, I don't think we've ever fit in more than one combat per session. Another reason is that it's a fairly large group with 6 PCs, three of whom have cure spells available. Plus they stand in for each other in admirable ways. I have never seen any of them put their own PC's survival first when they could jump in to try and help save someone.
Too bad I moved away and we're down to playing very occasionally when I go back to Hamburg.

In a weekly game with rotating GMs we had character deaths every other month or so. I tended to kill more characters than any of the others because my character (who'd be absent when it was my turn to run a game) was the only cleric and indeed the only healer of any description in the group.

In my brand new Midnight game, which started out with three splinter groups that have now joined up, both PCs in the first group died not long into their first session. No one else has died yet (though the single PC in the second splinter "group" might have died if I'd confirmed a threat I rolled against her, and the three in the third splinter group would almost certainly have died in the second encounter of the night if they hadn't taken care to save their wounded and unconscious healer/mage from some orcs earlier).
It's fiddly work keeping first-level characters alive, especially when groups are small.

 

[Blue_Kryptonite]

I'm curious - of the people who don't like character death, do you do use the full combat system, or cut it down somehow? If I were forced to sit around rolling dice for an hour in a combat I knew couldn't kill me, I'd get bored.

I think I'd have to say I cut it down. We don't use miniatures, most of our actions are too cinematic to even be represented by miniatures (in my opinion, anyway), and most combats are fairly brief. If there are epic battles going on, the group usually ends up being the group that sneaks around to the small encounter with the really important party.

In the future, if I can ever get my oldest teenager to let loose his grip on his Half-Fiendish Dire Sacred Were-Cows of D&D, I'll most likely be using Mutants & Materminds for every game I run in whatever genre.

 

[StalkingBlue]

I think the first thing I'd do as a GM if I wanted to cut back on bad-luck PC kills is make combat rolls behind a screen. I don't, the groups I've GMed for appear to prefer it that way - and there go some characters.

Some other techniques I've witnessed being used, with varying success, include:
- fudging enemy stats in combat (ie monsters mysteriously drained of part of their remaining hp at some point);
- enemies suddenly fleeing, with or without good reason to do so (which doesn't mean that every withdrawal from combat is fudging of course, not evryone likes to fight to their deaths as a routine action);
- NPCs riding to the rescue out of nowhere, horns blowing (shudder);
- crit rules suddenly forgotten or remaining mysteriously un-applied when they'd have gone against a PC instead of in their favour.

As a player, I'm generally frustrated when I notice things like that going on. I don't rely on a high PC death rate to enjoy a game (whether I play in it or run it), but if I feel that my PC is in some sort of "god mode" I feel cheated out of half the fun. And I say that after recently having lost three PCs in three consecutive sessions, at least one of which I'd invested a great deal of background and RP effort in.


One of the safer ways to minimise PC deaths is, of course, to tone down challenges. Again, if you have players out for some tactical challenge, you may find you're providing a rather luke-warm game.


BTW, I'm not sure what avoiding the use of a battle grid has to do with minimising PC deaths. In my experience with DnD, it's the other way round: visual representation of a combat situation helps minimise misunderstandings - if you take care how you position yourself, you're less likely to get killed through not understanding what is where.

 

[S'mon]

I think the first thing I'd do as a GM if I wanted to cut back on bad-luck PC kills is make combat rolls behind a screen. I don't, the groups I've GMed for appear to prefer it that way - and there go some characters.

Indeed.

D&D's heart lies in its wargame roots and for me it's definitely best played with real risk of death. Indeed all the games I've ever run or enjoyed playing have had at least a theoretical risk of PC death. Some games might be set in a genre that makes this extremely unlikely - eg a time-travel non-violent exploration game set in 1912 - but I like the idea that it's an 'objective' universe where PCs face the same risks that all people in the real world contend with. I enjoy creative writing exercises also, but I like Round Robins more than 'sims' where each writer has their own pet protagonist who only they can do harm to.

Last Sunday I had the slightly odd experience of being almost more downspirited by the 3 PC deaths than most of the players were - getting congratulated on playing the BBEG (Harecules) so well almost made it worse. It's different when the players have clearly screwed up (like the week before that), but this time you were simply outclassed and outfought by a superior foe - getting congratulated for playing him so well was kinda strange but nice.

I can see ways you _could_ have won, you certainly made some mistakes, but not really of the magnitude that would normally justify 3 deaths. I think that's the curse and blessing of an 'environment' approach to scenario design - ie the setting exists because that's the way it naturally should be rather than to give the PCs a balanced encounter, and of course you knew you were going after a CR20 BBEG who you'd fought before many times. I guess the result is a more realistic, often more exciting, but sometimes frustrating campaign and world.

 

[S'mon]

"Some other techniques I've witnessed being used, with varying success, include:
- fudging enemy stats in combat (ie monsters mysteriously drained of part of their remaining hp at some point)"

Never done this that I can recall. I think it's ok for DMs to do this if it's a new, not previously encountered NPC or monster. But after an epic battle and narrow victor, don't tell the players afterwards (as a DM of mine once did) "Of course that Yuan-Ti actually had 48hp, I reduced it to 28hp so you wouldn't die"

"- enemies suddenly fleeing, with or without good reason to do so (which doesn't mean that every withdrawal from combat is fudging of course, not evryone likes to fight to their deaths as a routine action);"

It needs to be reasonable in-game. When PCs IMC first encountered Harecules, he didn't treat them seriously and didn't pursue when they fled. Over the years he's come to take threats much more seriously. I'd say NPCs retreating in the face of a rugged defense is almost always plausible if they would probably win eventually but with very heavy losses. Usually however if the PCs are losing, I expect them to know when to run away or die fighting.

"- NPCs riding to the rescue out of nowhere, horns blowing (shudder);"

Early IMC two NPCs ('Red' Ivy & Bear the Barbarian) rescued the group from some Gaxmoor gargoyles - the group had no magic weapons. I think I had the whole encounter pre-planned though, including the NPC intervention. I think this is fine if done in moderation and in plausible circumstances.

"- crit rules suddenly forgotten or remaining mysteriously un-applied when they'd have gone against a PC instead of in their favour."

Never done this. I don't see misapplying the rules as within the DM's prerogative, whereas deciding NPC actions certainly is.

"As a player, I'm generally frustrated when I notice things like that going on. I don't rely on a high PC death rate to enjoy a game (whether I play in it or run it), but if I feel that my PC is in some sort of "god mode" I feel cheated out of half the fun."

Me too. For D&D, maybe 3/4 the fun. I'd be more accepting in Feng Shui or the Buffy RPG. D&D is dependent on risk more than theatrics IMO, other games emphasise theatrics more and have resolution mechanisms to support this.

"And I say that after recently having lost three PCs in three consecutive sessions, at least one of which I'd invested a great deal of background and RP effort in."

Er, yeah, sorry about that...

"One of the safer ways to minimise PC deaths is, of course, to tone down challenges. Again, if you have players out for some tactical challenge, you may find you're providing a rather luke-warm game. "

Giving players what they want, inasmuch as it coincides with what the GM desires, is always good.

"BTW, I'm not sure what avoiding the use of a battle grid has to do with minimising PC deaths. In my experience with DnD, it's the other way round: visual representation of a combat situation helps minimise misunderstandings - if you take care how you position yourself, you're less likely to get killed through not understanding what is where."

I agree - the battle grid definitely cuts down on casual or accidental PC deaths. It seems to give weaker PCs much more opportunity to contribute through good tactical play.

 

[StalkingBlue]

I've had 6 dead PCs and 1 dead cohort in the last 3 sessions, an above average death rate for my game (current campaign has been running nearly 2 years). All permanently dead but one PC who was raised minus all their gear, PC left game. Party level is 11th-13th.

Seven PCs actually. I believe you are forgetting my druid. Again. Sigh ...

In the first session, I was running Necropolis and party was attacked by 4 CR 14 Hippodilemons who dragged 2 PCs into the water and shook them until they died.

Killed by lemons??? Well, if that isn't adding insult to injury. I thought they must have been crocodiles, at least.

In the second & third session, PCs were going up against a CR 20 BBEG who consistently outsmarted and outfought them.

Survivors are now licking their wounds.

Ha, we'll be back! Er, I mean ... they will be back. All in good time.
And next time I shall be with them and we shall win! Ahem.

 

[StalkingBlue]

[...]Last Sunday I had the slightly odd experience of being almost more downspirited by the 3 PC deaths than most of the players were - getting congratulated on playing the BBEG (Harecules) so well almost made it worse. It's different when the players have clearly screwed up (like the week before that), but this time you were simply outclassed and outfought by a superior foe - getting congratulated for playing him so well was kinda strange but nice.

Heh. You're welcome.

I can see ways you _could_ have won, you certainly made some mistakes, but not really of the magnitude that would normally justify 3 deaths. I think that's the curse and blessing of an 'environment' approach to scenario design - ie the setting exists because that's the way it naturally should be rather than to give the PCs a balanced encounter, and of course you knew you were going after a CR20 BBEG who you'd fought before many times. I guess the result is a more realistic, often more exciting, but sometimes frustrating campaign and world.

Oh we knew all right. My character didn't, of course, not until it was too late. (There was a reason behind the name I gave him ... )

 

[StalkingBlue]

"Some other techniques I've witnessed being used, with varying success, include:
- fudging enemy stats in combat (ie monsters mysteriously drained of part of their remaining hp at some point)"

Never done this that I can recall. I think it's ok for DMs to do this if it's a new, not previously encountered NPC or monster. But after an epic battle and narrow victor, don't tell the players afterwards (as a DM of mine once did) "Of course that Yuan-Ti actually had 48hp, I reduced it to 28hp so you wouldn't die"

"- enemies suddenly fleeing, with or without good reason to do so (which doesn't mean that every withdrawal from combat is fudging of course, not evryone likes to fight to their deaths as a routine action);"

It needs to be reasonable in-game. When PCs IMC first encountered Harecules, he didn't treat them seriously and didn't pursue when they fled. Over the years he's come to take threats much more seriously. I'd say NPCs retreating in the face of a rugged defense is almost always plausible if they would probably win eventually but with very heavy losses. Usually however if the PCs are losing, I expect them to know when to run away or die fighting.

"- NPCs riding to the rescue out of nowhere, horns blowing (shudder);"

Early IMC two NPCs ('Red' Ivy & Bear the Barbarian) rescued the group from some Gaxmoor gargoyles - the group had no magic weapons. I think I had the whole encounter pre-planned though, including the NPC intervention. I think this is fine if done in moderation and in plausible circumstances.

Agreed.

"- crit rules suddenly forgotten or remaining mysteriously un-applied when they'd have gone against a PC instead of in their favour."

Never done this. I don't see misapplying the rules as within the DM's prerogative, whereas deciding NPC actions certainly is.

Yeah. The GMs in that particular game also forbade players from reading the rulebooks for the game. Any rulebook at all, including the rules governing your own character. And then they were appalled when you dared figure out some of the rules by the way they usually ran combat.

"And I say that after recently having lost three PCs in three consecutive sessions, at least one of which I'd invested a great deal of background and RP effort in."

Er, yeah, sorry about that...