Death due to stat loss.

[Lela]

Shadows have a special ability -- their Strength damage kills.

Ah, I was unaware. Thanks.

 

[Silveras]

Yes, 100% right on how it applies.

And, yes, it is important to use such sparingly in the low levels.

 

[the Jester]

You're all clear- you ruled correctly.

Critical hits that deal ability damage are rough (same with energy drain)- they can escalate to one-hit-kills if you aren't lucky (critted and killed a 2nd-level pc with a wight like that a while back).

 

[Jcosby]

[/QUOTE]

How old is your son?





I'm reminded of a vaguely similar story involving a younger player. The party opens a door and is confronted by what appears to be a human/squid crossbreed. The player, a BBN, decides these guys can't be so tough, doesn't listen to the other players around him, and winds up food.



It happens. Hopefully this will help him develop risk assessment in a fantasy world rather than out with his friends.[/QUOTE]



My son is only 9 years old but he is very sharp. In reconsidering my wording during the encounter I feel a bit like I lead him into the trap. After the combat I asked the party to let me know what they were doing in the room. I like to have a good idea what players are doing when there are unresolved "issues" in an area such as this room.



One player did state that he was going to prod the water with a large pole that he was carrying. This wouldn't cause him any damage as he wouldn't be anywhere near the water. (The ol' 10' pole rule ) It was the way that I worded the response to his probing that triggered my son to investigate further.



When a player searches something and doesn’t find anything I don't give direct answers. An example to this is a thief checking a door for traps. If there is a trap and they do succeed then the answer is direct. “Yes, there is a trap” etc. If there is no trap or they fail the roll I like to use the response "Looks clean to you."



My son using in game information (A journal entry) and his own hunch that something might be hidden in the pool went to investigate closer. His two mistakes I believe were; 1. Not discussing this with the party. He doesn’t have too, but at his experience level (player not character) it would be wise to get valuable insight from the more experienced. 2. He didn't get healed before he attempted this. I believe if he would have done the first it would have lead to the second, or just getting healed first would have solved the problem.



I don't fault him; he was honestly playing his character. I find that my son at 9 years old plays his character with much more honesty to the game and his character then most of the older more experienced players. He doesn’t even know what Meta-gaming really is yet... He truly goes off instinct and what he thinks his character would do in that situation based on what he knows in game. He doesn’t let outside information dictate his moves, like most experienced players do, it's hard to avoid sometimes it is after all human nature.



So in the end, I'm happy (game mechanic wise) with what happened. I don't like to kill characters usually (Ok, the annoying ones. ) and I hate to see him get killed in a semi-cheap fashion, but I hope he takes this as a learning experience.



Thanks for all the responses everyone.



Jcosby

 

[Lela]

When a player searches something and doesn’t find anything I don't give direct answers. An example to this is a thief checking a door for traps. If there is a trap and they do succeed then the answer is direct. “Yes, there is a trap” etc. If there is no trap or they fail the roll I like to use the response "Looks clean to you."

I used to do that but I got tired of the players knowing something was up by the way I said it--and, as you said, human instinct is to meta-game. So now I lie straight out--"It's clean" rather than "Looks clean to you"--causing the players to always question what I say. Which happens to be exactly what I want them to do.

 

[Jcosby]

Lying...

I used to do that but I got tired of the players knowing something was up by the way I said it--and, as you said, human instinct is to meta-game. So now I lie straight out--"It's clean" rather than "Looks clean to you"--causing the players to always question what I say. Which happens to be exactly what I want them to do.

Well, I say "Looks Clean to you" if they missed something or there just isn't anything there. So they don't know if anything is "Up" either way. Its all about giving the same answer in the same tone all the time. That way they stay paranoid.. I feel it's my job to make all my players a little bit paranoid esp in dangerous places.

Jc

 

[Ovinomancer]

Yep, I tend to chortle and smile alot when giving out search results. Sometimes I am completely serious. Other times I'm bored and disinterested in the exercise. Whether or not there's a trap has no bearing on how I respond.

 

[Krelios]

Jcosby, I think you handled the situation perfectly, and it's always tough killing characters, especially when they're played by family members. Chances are though, at 9 years old he's not agonizing over it--so you shouldn't either.

(Oh, and please don't use white font, a lot of folks use the "Shadow" style to view the site and it's impossible to read without pasting it into a text file or at least highlighting it.)

 

[Jarrod]

Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil.

And from what I remember of that mega-module, your son will only be the first. We had a *nice* GM, and there were ~6 character deaths. And we got lucky, and were overstrength, and...

I think it sets a nice tone for the module. It's supposed to be creepy and arbitrary.

Though.... if you wanted to be Really Evil (tm), Big T (you know who I mean) might contact the rogue and promise him life in return for... considerations...

 

[Jcosby]

Jcosby, I think you handled the situation perfectly, and it's always tough killing characters, especially when they're played by family members. Chances are though, at 9 years old he's not agonizing over it--so you shouldn't either.

(Oh, and please don't use white font, a lot of folks use the "Shadow" style to view the site and it's impossible to read without pasting it into a text file or at least highlighting it.)

Yea the more I have thought about it the more I believe I ruled correctly. In the future I may consider different encounters while running this module and base the partys experience and over all strength and modify an encounter if I think it's needed. Although I allowed this party to grow to 7 players (Usually there is one missing... not everyone shows up every week, so I'd say an average of 6 players per week) mostly to help out with the fact that we have two players that didn't even know what the players handbook was before we started running this game. Also when I started to really read R:ToEE I was that it was infact a fairly dangerous module I wanted them to be a bit stronger. Although they don't really have a lot in the way of magic so I wouldn't say they are over powered. They have 50% more characters in the party then the "normal" number for 3.5 rules, but they have two large handicaps as well so I think it works out pretty well. And as for how he is taking it, he pretty much shruged it off, he's not nearly as competitive as I was at that age so he's all about just having fun (The way it should be..)

Sorry about the white text, the options for me don't work on this page so I actually have to type up the post in Word, then cut and paste it here. It's actually black text, I have to change to white then copy and paste it here... other wise my terrible typing and spelling comes through...as you can see here.

Thanks again
JC