Death in 4e

[MerricB]

Raven Crowking has come up with the startling (to me) suggestion that 4e has been designed so that characters won't die.

Hmm. Could have fooled a lot of characters who've met Irontooth.

I'll agree that 4e is designed so that characters tend not to die arbitrary, random deaths - "Ooh, a crit! Look ma! No head!" - whether from poison, spell or one bad roll.

However, the more I play the game, the more I realise that characters, especially those in the defender role, are just as likely to die heroically defending their companions in combat, stupidly running into a horde of orcs, or other deaths of that ilk.

Now, this might just be my "old-school" DMing at work. However, I don't think my DMing would really be that different from the designers of D&D. Character death will happen in 4e. There are consequences to your actions. And the system is designed that way.

Or have I misinterpreted the design and the intent of the designers?

Cheers!

 

[Spatula]

Everyone seemed to think death would be rare in 4e before the game was officially out, when WotC released the preview on the new death & dying rules (back in April?). I was then a bit surprised when KotS was actually being played and people were posting about characters dying (either to Irontooth or to the drakes at the dragon graveyard encounter). On paper the game looks less deadly. In practice, I think the greater numbers of actually dangerous foes that you're facing at once increases the probability of losing a PC to focus fire, if the DM's dice get hot.

 

[Crothian]

I have no idea on what the designers intent was. I don't like to guess what is going on in the heads of other people I have a hard enough time figuring it out for myself.

I like that the random deaths are a lot more rare. I do agree though that certain encounters look like they are designed hard and can result in a death or TPK starting with the Defenders. THe game has changed and that old school thinking can also lead to character death as players do need to alter their thinking some with the new edition.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I disagree somewhat. Its harder for anything to die in 4E not just characters. Its simply a result of the huge hit point bloat of this edition. Anything can be killed if you pile on enough damage, its the amount dealt vs whats required that is a bit out of whack.

 

[blargney the second]

My two dead PCs agree with you.

 

[Lancelot]

Plenty of dead PCs in my 4e campaigns, including two complete TPKs.

As previously mentioned, the big difference in 4e (from my experience) is that the players had a chance. Nearly every single death was a direct result of poor player choices or after many rounds of combat. Not one was the dreaded "Stupid orcs with x3-crit greataxes..." or "I failed my save against the basilisk...".

I'm keeping a record of race/class casualties from my campaigns. Out of 15 deaths so far, it's the defenders and melee strikers (rangers, rogues) who are most prone to being hacked up - as you would expect. The most unkillable character so far is a con-build warlock. Tons of healing surges, bloodcut armor, high hit points, running round with concealment at range... But even the warlock had been put into negative digits on occasion.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Its harder for anything to die in 4E not just characters.

Besides minions, you mean?

I'm with Merric, not Raven Crowking on this one. Individual attacks are less likely to kill someone, but combat is still dangerous. It's less swingy, but not less deadly.

 

[Halivar]

Combat is just as deadly as it ever was. Only difference is this time is isn't all "Ok, monster goes first... oh, look, a natural twenty, does 41 hit you? 67 points of damage! Roll your save! Oh... you rolled a one." This time, when you die, it's a fight all the way to the last hit point. As someone who prefers playing tanks (who typically die first), I have to say I love it. No more, stupid, random, chump deaths.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

From my play experience and reading of the mechanics, I feel that 4E is less deadly and less swingy than 3.x. By extending the -10 death mark to negative bloodied, there is less chance of a single hit killing a character outright. However, there is a compensation factor here for this in that the challenges as presented in the modules I've so far played seem slightly more difficult.
The factor I don't have experience of is higher level play. Negative bloodied is a long way away from a character at full hit points (and surges). This would seem to play itself into a character (defender?) goes down but the other characters combine to save the day (and the downed character) happening a lot. Is this the case or is there some factor here that makes that negative bloodied mark easier to reach at high levels?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Shroomy]

We've played two sessions so far in our first 4e campaign and none of our characters have died, so far. However, two of the PCs have come close, hovering at death's door several times (I believe our fighter and warlock were both down to their last death saving throw at least once). Combat is definitely less "swingy," but a lot of their survival came down to me keeping my healing powers in reserve and largely staying out of melee combat.