DM's: Are you afraid to kill PC's because of how players might react?
- Thread starter Emirikol
- Start date
Agamon
Adventurer
Emirikol said:
No, not because of how they'd react, but I have had campaigns fizzle because of too many PC deaths. I prefer players keep the same PC for as long as possible. Therefore, I have rules that make them want to do that:
1. Raised PC's lose XP = 1000 x (level - 1) (before dying). New/replacement PCs start at the lowest xp needed to be 1 level lower than the lowest level PC in the party.
2. New/replacement PCs get gear equal to the chart in the DMG, but they can only pick one magic item worth up to 1/2 that amount, the rest is randomly generated
Personal PC items are lost with PCs that leave the party. The exception is 'party items' that benefit the whole party (stuff like cure wands, bags of holding, etc) get thrown back into party treasure.
So players can change PCs if they really want, but they sure aren't going to do it on a whim.
The_Warlock
Explorer
Mark CMG said:Most polls aren't usually this decisive.
But most GMs are!
the Jester
Legend
Emirikol said:
I am renowned for being a high-lethality dm. Obviously, then, I don't have any fear of killing the pcs.
As to replacement pcs, I haven't got any hard and fast rules, but depending on the game, I have more or less strict guidelines that I use when judging where new pcs come in, level-wise. (In general they will be 1 level lower than the character they are replacing, but that is a rule of thumb, not a strict rule; for example, I have a 'ceiling' of 18th level, so replacement pcs in my epic game are gonna be more than one level lower.)
The_Warlock
Explorer
An addendum which I forgot regarding switching out characters...
I completely allow it, and am actually more than happy to allow my players to have 1 semi-retired character who is indirectly involved in the plot-line, whether that's as a contact, knowledge resource when they are in the right area, or a stunt double when their primary character has enforced downtime (such as learning a new specialty/prestige feat or joining a prestige class which requires drawn out indoctrination, et al).
I have 3 players who have such "alts". They rarely enter the campaign, but do provide a sense of accomplishment to them as having taken a character as far as they conceived them and had some form of lasting impact on the game world, then being retired. Other players don't, and one actively avoids the concept since he believes that one should focus on a character and that having backups/alts detracts from such focus.
As for items, while most of the characters have personal items, the Company of adventurers has agreed as a whole that for the duration of them fighting against the scourge of the Dark God, any items they loot are effectively owned by the group and worn by whoever can make the best use of it at the time and given the total loadout of the party. When looted items are sold, a equal share is given to all members, and two shares to the party's group fund. Should a character retire, he takes with him a fair share of items to make his way in the world, trading coin or items with members who are staying with the party for other items, if said continuing members are willing.
It works really well, with rare friction with a couple of players who're former loot monkeys. They've been mostly broken of their "Mine! Mine!" habits by the common sensse of the group as a whole, though.
I completely allow it, and am actually more than happy to allow my players to have 1 semi-retired character who is indirectly involved in the plot-line, whether that's as a contact, knowledge resource when they are in the right area, or a stunt double when their primary character has enforced downtime (such as learning a new specialty/prestige feat or joining a prestige class which requires drawn out indoctrination, et al).
I have 3 players who have such "alts". They rarely enter the campaign, but do provide a sense of accomplishment to them as having taken a character as far as they conceived them and had some form of lasting impact on the game world, then being retired. Other players don't, and one actively avoids the concept since he believes that one should focus on a character and that having backups/alts detracts from such focus.
As for items, while most of the characters have personal items, the Company of adventurers has agreed as a whole that for the duration of them fighting against the scourge of the Dark God, any items they loot are effectively owned by the group and worn by whoever can make the best use of it at the time and given the total loadout of the party. When looted items are sold, a equal share is given to all members, and two shares to the party's group fund. Should a character retire, he takes with him a fair share of items to make his way in the world, trading coin or items with members who are staying with the party for other items, if said continuing members are willing.
It works really well, with rare friction with a couple of players who're former loot monkeys. They've been mostly broken of their "Mine! Mine!" habits by the common sensse of the group as a whole, though.
Slife
First Post
Ye's I am afraid of killing any of my PC's becau'se I am afraid of po's'sible negative reaction's. They might make pa's'sive-aggre's'sive forum po'st's highlighting my mi'stake's via hyperbole.
EDIT: By thi's, of cour'se, I mean that the "'" in "PC's" 'should be removed. Thank you for your time.
EDIT: By thi's, of cour'se, I mean that the "'" in "PC's" 'should be removed. Thank you for your time.
Last edited:
Orryn Emrys
Explorer
PC death tends to be rare in my games.
There was a time, more than a decade past, when my players somehow managed to figure out that I was so loathe to allow their characters to die that I would go to great lengths to avoid doing so. I carried on like this for quite some time, but kept up an image that suggested otherwise. I consistently made near misses seem very much an accident of fate. Then, I had a couple of very enterprising players teach me the absolute folly of my convictions. They did this by playing characters who blatantly took advantage of my unconventional mercy.
They were both very surprised the day that one of them died.
I have, in the years since, been more inclined to allow the dice and circumstances to determine the fate of my PCs. I do try to avoid any truly meaningless death, since my players are very roleplaying-oriented and tend to become very attached to their characters, who often have incredibly complex ties to the world they live in by the mid-point of their careers. They seem more satisfied when a death has consequence, when it's heroic or noble in some fashion or simply seemed inescapable.
There have been occasions in the past few years when players have lost a character they'd been playing for more than a hundred sessions. On such occasions, the table tends to get somber... the players silently trying to offer each other emotional support whilst one of them says their final farewells to an expired friend and alter ego. It's never easy... and sometimes makes the rest of the combat, and even the session, less fun. But they try to put a good face on it and move on.... Mortality is part of the game, or it wouldn't be an equitable challenge and there'd be little point in fighting for survival.
There was a time, more than a decade past, when my players somehow managed to figure out that I was so loathe to allow their characters to die that I would go to great lengths to avoid doing so. I carried on like this for quite some time, but kept up an image that suggested otherwise. I consistently made near misses seem very much an accident of fate. Then, I had a couple of very enterprising players teach me the absolute folly of my convictions. They did this by playing characters who blatantly took advantage of my unconventional mercy.
They were both very surprised the day that one of them died.
I have, in the years since, been more inclined to allow the dice and circumstances to determine the fate of my PCs. I do try to avoid any truly meaningless death, since my players are very roleplaying-oriented and tend to become very attached to their characters, who often have incredibly complex ties to the world they live in by the mid-point of their careers. They seem more satisfied when a death has consequence, when it's heroic or noble in some fashion or simply seemed inescapable.
There have been occasions in the past few years when players have lost a character they'd been playing for more than a hundred sessions. On such occasions, the table tends to get somber... the players silently trying to offer each other emotional support whilst one of them says their final farewells to an expired friend and alter ego. It's never easy... and sometimes makes the rest of the combat, and even the session, less fun. But they try to put a good face on it and move on.... Mortality is part of the game, or it wouldn't be an equitable challenge and there'd be little point in fighting for survival.
BlueBlackRed
Explorer
Heck no.
I used to fudge to prevent a little bit, long ago.
But longer!
You make a bad decision, you pay the price.
If the dice go against you, sorry but those are the risks you take by living the life of the adventurer.
I used to fudge to prevent a little bit, long ago.
But longer!
You make a bad decision, you pay the price.
If the dice go against you, sorry but those are the risks you take by living the life of the adventurer.
howandwhy99
Adventurer
I'm trying hard to find the right level of lethality, but we're still in the beginning of a campaign. PC death isn't wrong, but I am still working out how best to present challenges.
IIRC, This issue almost disappears after 10th level or so. High level characters are like liches... they just won't stay dead.
IIRC, This issue almost disappears after 10th level or so. High level characters are like liches... they just won't stay dead.
The_Warlock
Explorer
howandwhy99 said:
Eh, there are ways, creature abilities, spells, what have you that can put a crimp in the resurrection cha-cha - like the BBEG stealing the PCs body after death while fleeing, and animating him as undead...foils that bringing them back every time, and makes for horror filled quests where the PCs are attacked by their former comrades in a horrid undead state.
Not that I've ever done that... (whistles innocently)
Similar Threads
- Poll
