Designing Adventures with Lethality in Mind (Kobayashi Maru)- the Poll!

[practicalm]

I generally do not shy away from creating set encounters or using random encounters that can TPK.

It just is really hard to kill characters in 5th edition. It can be done but my players work well together and usually can squeak by pretty well. And they are able to plan to disengage if things go pear shaped.

 

[77IM]

I voted "No," because I take issue with the word "likely." If a random roll of the dice produces an outcome that is genuinely "likely" to be a TPK, that's not very interesting for most people.

Now, an encounter that "might possibly become a TPK if the players are boneheads who don't know when to quit" could be very interesting. I mean, the PCs are not omnipotent, so it stands to reason that there exist a lot of foes who would curb-stomp them in a fight. Exposure to those foes isn't a problem, as long as the alternative (flee, surrender, parley, etc.) is viable. And it must be viable AFTER the party has learned the true strength of the enemy. I'm pretty sure there are adventures out there where a seemingly-easy encounter turns into an inescapable bloodbath. And, honestly, even if the alternative is viable, there needs to be some kind of point to the encounter. In D&D, running from a fight often takes more play time than winning one, and most people find an evening of "fight bad monster and then run away bloodied and broken" to be kinda frustrating and boring.

So, yeah, if you can avoid all those pitfalls (telegraph the monster's power before the encounter; make it obvious that there are alternatives to combat; make those alternatives somewhat attractive and not feel like a pointless loss) then I think overpowered enemies are a fine idea.

 

[Li Shenron]

Yes.

Even tho I generally have some adventure come to the PCs, in which case it will be appropriate to their level, the fantasy world around exists independently from them, and that means unbeatable encounters are possible.

It's not a Kobayashi Maru / Deathtrap situation if the PC group have the means to avoid or escape the encounter.

The key idea is that if killing/beating the foe is not necessary always the purpose of an encounter, i.e. it's also not the definition of "winning", then surviving the encounter is winning, even if you can't kill the foe.

 

[Imaculata]

I voted "no". I tend to design encounters so that they 'may' be lethal, with monsters that have a challenge rating that sometimes is slightly above the appropriate level of the party. The word "slightly" is important here. I don't design encounters where defeat is assured, but I do design encounters where victory is always a possibility.

 

[Azzy]

No, there's no reason that I would design an encounter that would TPK a party. Challenging is great, dealy is fine, but specifically designed to TKP? No thanks.

 

[Harzel]

I don't really design them with the thought in mind "Hah! This should kill them." I'm more apt to think "It should be interesting to see how they deal with this."

Me (looking at a challenging encounter, hoping the party makes it to the next cool piece of content): "It should be interesting to see how they deal with this."

Me (looking at the same encounter, thinking about something annoyingly cheesy that the PCs did): "Hah! This should kill them."

 

[Harzel]

If the party is walking along a peaceful country and suddenly an ancient red dragon appears, why haven't there been rumors?

Never leave a live witness.

 

[Schmoe]

I voted Other. I believe it is completely fair to have random encounters that would likely result in a TPK if they resulted in combat, as long as there are reasonable non-combat solutions to the encounter (e.g. an easy option to retreat or avoid, some ability to negotiate a cost to not be eaten, etc.).

Edit to add: This was a timely question. Just last night I was working up a random encounter chart that includes a CR 14 dragon. The party will average lvl 4 when they get there. Now, most likely the dragon will just want to eat one of them so that it can spread its fearsome reputation (dead men tell no tales), but it could maybe be bribed with some of that sweet, sweet loot they are carrying. However, if the party really wants to throw down, it probably won't end well.

 

[Quickleaf]

But, as usual, I was wondering about how other DMs handle this when they are designing adventures today. Specifically, do you put in encounters based entirely on the PC's abilities (easy, hard, difficult)? Or do you have monsters and encounters that, theoretically, would stomp all over the PCs and would require immediate retreat and/or seriously creative solutions?

If this is a little too abstract, the genesis of the idea is this:

Would you have an adventure with random encounters, with said random encounters possibly containing monsters that would likely TPK the party if engaged?

It's different for story-centric encounters vs. random encounters. A random encounter can absolutely be highly over-leveled because there's no need to engage in combat – the party might parlay, avoid, flee, trick, or any number of other options.

However, when the encounter is essential to the story and it's pretty much unavoidable that the encounter will be a fight (often there are ways to make a fight avoidable) then my answers is "no", with exceptions for unusual situations (such as Tomb of Annihilation where the ~11th level PCs face a CR 23 lich, relying on possessing trickster spirits to hold their own).

 

[Shadowdweller00]

I regularly include monsters or encounters that are highly lethal if not unwinnable. I feel that this enhances backstory, immersion, drama, and range of challenges. My general rule of design is as follows:

1) Information that the PCs are outmatched should be reasonably available (i.e. clues in description or from PCs investigating the matter; I don't directly spoonfeed statements such as "this dragon is too tough for you".)
2) There must be some alternate way of avoiding death - be it from negotiation, running away, using available tools, etc.

If I fail to include either of these, I've failed my players.