The ettin jumps up and down on your corpses before throwing them into the pot to make some soup. Guys? Did you even think about running away?
My players are well aware of my character-killing tendencies. They discovered them in the very first session I ran of the first 3E campaign (back in mid 2000). In that session, the Player Known as Gofa lost his character to a giant spider. It was Gofa's first session.
If the players are introduced to the ground rules of a campaign early on, it helps set the tone for the rest of the game. Obviously, in my games, you have to be careful or your character will suffer an unfortunate fate. No fudging of the dice rolls here!
We charge the trolls!
That isn't strictly true, however. I "fudge" dice rolls and situations quite a bit. If I didn't, the PCs would die even more than they do currently. Why are they acting so foolishly?
One of the important tasks of the DM is to communicate the fantasy world to the players. If a player character sees a troll, and the troll is a danger to the PC, it should be incumbent on the DM to let the player know about it. This is something that I find difficult.
Is it that my players aren't listening, or is it because I'm not being clear enough? Saying "your character feels frightened" impinges on their ability to dictate their character's reactions (as opposed to magical fear effects).
There must be players that can pick up a DM's signals better than others, and say to the others, "Hey, people - I think that the trolls will be too tough for us!" And indeed, I believe that some of that breed of player has indeed played in my campaign from time to time...
Where are the dice? I need to roll up another character!
Conversely, you have the player whose character has a death wish. Either because they're bored, or they've come up with a better character concept, or because they didn't listen (again!) to what you were saying; you have a player whose characters die again, and again, and again.
Perhaps they'll grow out of it. Perhaps they'll continue in there ways. I just have to remember to not pin any important plot points on their characters, because it won't survive their latest attack of stupidity.
Bodaks are that tough? Sorry guys. Well, at that point you wake up...
There is always DM error, of course. When you send a group of first level characters up against a Great Wyrm Red, with no way of escaping it, and you don't quite realise until you have a TPK...
It has almost happened on a couple of occasions, when I was just that little bit late in realising what I'd done. Luckily, one or two of the PCs always managed to survive, and they were high enough level for certain deities to owe them favours. Or to need a favour done for them, close enough!
Still, it's an uncomfortable feeling, to know that the last year of campaigning has almost been destroyed because of one "tiny little error".
You walked straight into a disintegration field, then failed your save. Did it ever occur to you to search the area?
One of the oddities of the past four years is the number of PC deaths I've actually racked up - I think it's past 60 now - when I compare it to my pre-3E days. Back in the "good old days", I didn't kill PCs. They just didn't die.
Does this mean that 3E rots the brains of the players and that they are more prone to stupid behaviour?
I doubt it. I think there are system related issues here, but they are more reliant on my perception of the system, not theirs.
Back in my 1E/2E days, a character in the game would never get raised. It just wasn't an option. In 3E, it's a lot more friendlier to such a style of play - although I've also been reading a lot more of Steven Brust's Vlad Taltos books.
Then too, the rapid progression of a character through the levels means I'm not so reluctant to start a new PC at 1st level, even when the other characters are at 7th level - they'll catch up. Even though, rationally, I know now that I could do that under the 1E system as well, I didn't.
Did you even think about how you were going to get out of here?
There is one feature (suggestion?) of 1E that I retain, and that I've just referred to: starting new characters at 1st level. In fact, I'm not dogmatic about it; I've often allowed the players to begin at above first level. However, my preference is for a new character to begin the game at 1st level, with all the development and experiences that implies for the future.
It is, however, a feature of 1E that I believe is at odds at how we play the game today. My impression is that during the development of 1E, Gary and his friends were playing every day! Thus, if a character had to start anew, it was less of a problem for them than it is for us, who player once a week or once a fortnight.
So then, starting characters at higher levels, and a much easier job of raising characters from the dead. Both developments that, I think, are more a reaction to the fact that we don't play as often, rather than a lack of skill on the part of the players.
Xanetia scans over your faces... "But where is Starlin?" she asks.
If there's anything at odds with me being a Killer DM, it's my love of ongoing stories. Killing off a PC can really wreck the story I'm creating with my players. Especially when that story involves a bunch of secrets that would have been revealed if the PC had lived.
The way I DM, I tend to begin with few ideas about the PCs and their backstories, and then develop more and more as the campaign progresses. So, early in a campaign I can kill them off and not worry about it. Later on, it becomes more problematic. Hmm. However, I don't want to abandon the sense of dread that the players might feel against a dangerous foe.
Raise dead is great, but isn't always possible. So, the fudging of the rolls and situations comes back - mostly. There comes a time when the stupidity of a player is just too much, and I notch another dead character up to my Killer DM-hood.
There are balancing acts required in all D&D games. In mine, one of the main ones is that between keeping the PCs alive and keeping the game interesting.
Anyway, I hope you've enjoyed these musings - and feel free to debate the ramifications of Character Death and how it has changed in 3E all you like!
Cheers!
My players are well aware of my character-killing tendencies. They discovered them in the very first session I ran of the first 3E campaign (back in mid 2000). In that session, the Player Known as Gofa lost his character to a giant spider. It was Gofa's first session.
If the players are introduced to the ground rules of a campaign early on, it helps set the tone for the rest of the game. Obviously, in my games, you have to be careful or your character will suffer an unfortunate fate. No fudging of the dice rolls here!
We charge the trolls!
That isn't strictly true, however. I "fudge" dice rolls and situations quite a bit. If I didn't, the PCs would die even more than they do currently. Why are they acting so foolishly?
One of the important tasks of the DM is to communicate the fantasy world to the players. If a player character sees a troll, and the troll is a danger to the PC, it should be incumbent on the DM to let the player know about it. This is something that I find difficult.
Is it that my players aren't listening, or is it because I'm not being clear enough? Saying "your character feels frightened" impinges on their ability to dictate their character's reactions (as opposed to magical fear effects).
There must be players that can pick up a DM's signals better than others, and say to the others, "Hey, people - I think that the trolls will be too tough for us!" And indeed, I believe that some of that breed of player has indeed played in my campaign from time to time...
Where are the dice? I need to roll up another character!
Conversely, you have the player whose character has a death wish. Either because they're bored, or they've come up with a better character concept, or because they didn't listen (again!) to what you were saying; you have a player whose characters die again, and again, and again.
Perhaps they'll grow out of it. Perhaps they'll continue in there ways. I just have to remember to not pin any important plot points on their characters, because it won't survive their latest attack of stupidity.
Bodaks are that tough? Sorry guys. Well, at that point you wake up...
There is always DM error, of course. When you send a group of first level characters up against a Great Wyrm Red, with no way of escaping it, and you don't quite realise until you have a TPK...
It has almost happened on a couple of occasions, when I was just that little bit late in realising what I'd done. Luckily, one or two of the PCs always managed to survive, and they were high enough level for certain deities to owe them favours. Or to need a favour done for them, close enough!
Still, it's an uncomfortable feeling, to know that the last year of campaigning has almost been destroyed because of one "tiny little error".
You walked straight into a disintegration field, then failed your save. Did it ever occur to you to search the area?
One of the oddities of the past four years is the number of PC deaths I've actually racked up - I think it's past 60 now - when I compare it to my pre-3E days. Back in the "good old days", I didn't kill PCs. They just didn't die.
Does this mean that 3E rots the brains of the players and that they are more prone to stupid behaviour?
I doubt it. I think there are system related issues here, but they are more reliant on my perception of the system, not theirs.
Back in my 1E/2E days, a character in the game would never get raised. It just wasn't an option. In 3E, it's a lot more friendlier to such a style of play - although I've also been reading a lot more of Steven Brust's Vlad Taltos books.
Then too, the rapid progression of a character through the levels means I'm not so reluctant to start a new PC at 1st level, even when the other characters are at 7th level - they'll catch up. Even though, rationally, I know now that I could do that under the 1E system as well, I didn't.
Did you even think about how you were going to get out of here?
There is one feature (suggestion?) of 1E that I retain, and that I've just referred to: starting new characters at 1st level. In fact, I'm not dogmatic about it; I've often allowed the players to begin at above first level. However, my preference is for a new character to begin the game at 1st level, with all the development and experiences that implies for the future.
It is, however, a feature of 1E that I believe is at odds at how we play the game today. My impression is that during the development of 1E, Gary and his friends were playing every day! Thus, if a character had to start anew, it was less of a problem for them than it is for us, who player once a week or once a fortnight.
So then, starting characters at higher levels, and a much easier job of raising characters from the dead. Both developments that, I think, are more a reaction to the fact that we don't play as often, rather than a lack of skill on the part of the players.
Xanetia scans over your faces... "But where is Starlin?" she asks.
If there's anything at odds with me being a Killer DM, it's my love of ongoing stories. Killing off a PC can really wreck the story I'm creating with my players. Especially when that story involves a bunch of secrets that would have been revealed if the PC had lived.
The way I DM, I tend to begin with few ideas about the PCs and their backstories, and then develop more and more as the campaign progresses. So, early in a campaign I can kill them off and not worry about it. Later on, it becomes more problematic. Hmm. However, I don't want to abandon the sense of dread that the players might feel against a dangerous foe.
Raise dead is great, but isn't always possible. So, the fudging of the rolls and situations comes back - mostly. There comes a time when the stupidity of a player is just too much, and I notch another dead character up to my Killer DM-hood.
There are balancing acts required in all D&D games. In mine, one of the main ones is that between keeping the PCs alive and keeping the game interesting.
Anyway, I hope you've enjoyed these musings - and feel free to debate the ramifications of Character Death and how it has changed in 3E all you like!
Cheers!
Last edited:
)...you know, situations where failure doesn't mean the character dies, it just means something really horrible happens and then the character has to react to that. I'm not the only player in our group who actually gets more tense about those things than about dying in combat, so it helps replace some of the tension that remorselessly lethal games have.
