DM's Delema: To kill or not to kill

[MPA]

Tpk.

 

[Slife]

Here's one possible solution that is potentially cool and uses all the elements you've drummed up, as well as making good on PC decisions. Just throwing it out there for consideration.
-SNIP-

Perfect solution. Everything fits together, the PCs survive whatever they do and it looks like, to them, that they did the clever thing regardless of their choice.

 

[coyote6]

I like the "Inquisition-as-reinforcements" idea.

And, if you want, after the battle's done, the Inquisitors can call for the PCs surrender, to stand for inquisition into this whole sordid affair.

(But given D&D magic, it ought to be a pretty simple explanation -- find cleric of 7th+ level that the Inquisitors trust, surrender all items [to make sure nobody's wearing a doodad of nondetection or the like], have cleric cast discern lies on PC, PC purposefully fails save, and answers questions. End of misunderstanding.)

(Assuming the Inquisitors are trustworthy & the PCs innocent of wrongdoing, of course!)

 

[Argonel]

I would say this is a very tough call. I'm in at least three minds about this and which direction is best really depends a lot on the group dynamic. If you think the group would take it well, let the scenario play out as planned the PC's might get lucky and suprise you and survive. If it is the TPK that you expect you can gauge their response, apologize for the TPK and either retcon it so they do destroy the golem or start a fresh game. Option two would be to have the inquisition come in and take them prisioner (hold person, charm person, subdual damage, etc) and ttake responsibility for defending them until trial. The third option would be to tone down the opposition some to make them a little more resoanble in the current situation.

I preferr options one or two becasue on some level it leaves the DM as an impartial arbitrator or judge rather than the parties frined or foe, but I tend to lean towards a simulationist perspective of roleplaying.

 

[genshou]

Reading Percivellian's thoughts, can you find an MP3 or other recording of war or hunting horns? You know the type I'm talking about.

If the PCs end up engaging the shadowmen, play it every couple of rounds, slightly louder. Finally, blast it and have the Inquisition cavalry take the field in support of the PCs.

Ahem.

[in this thread]
Oooh!

Special effects!

 

[Baragos]

Remember that many powerful people are extremely arrogant. Thus they may underestimate the power of the PCs only sending some of the shadow-men to hunt them, instead of all of them. Make it a hard but survivable fight that foreshadows just how tough the final fight is gonna be...

 

[Agback]

Yeah, but it's the DM who got the players we're talking about into that situation in the first place, by making a mistake or two in a few places. So, it's the DM's responsibility to fix things, not to take the easy way out and just use a TPK.

But there are some things you can't fix, even if it is your fault they are broken. Just because it is the GM's responsibility doesn't necessarily mean that there is anything he can possibly do.

Bailing the party out with a deus ex machina, or by having a threat suddenly spring a leak and go all soft and floppy often doesn't work. It can ruin the credibility of your whole campaign, cause players to lose interest in future problems their characters face. If a GM does it often, it can suck all the sap out of his or her campaigns. And this loss of rigour is very, very hard to make good.

I'm not saying necessarily, but perhaps the best course might be to enforce the consistency and logic of the established game world, let the PCs die, and say "Sorry, guys, that was my fault. The golem was much too tough."

As an aside, the worst course would be to inflict the TPK and then explain the trick with the golem-crushing door.

 

[Agback]

Here's one possible solution that is potentially cool and uses all the elements you've drummed up, as well as making good on PC decisions.

It's a good plan. A pity that the PCs don't solve the problem with the Inquisition themselves. That will be a little unsatisfying to some players, even if they can't quite put their fingers on the problem. But as a recovery after dropping the ball it's very good. Far better than having the golem suddenly reset itself, or positing that the shadomen all rolled 1 on every hit die of their careeers.

 

[Wadash]

Since it seems the party is being hunted by two different groups (the shadow/sidhe and the inquisition) how about just running the encounters in opposite order?

The Inquisition locates the PC's, captures them and strips them of their weapons (let them keep armor though) - They are suspicious, but can't quite believe the PC's are responsible and want the PC's for questioning.
Have them be as fair as possible, so that the PC's will agree to surrender without a fight.

Then have the shadowmen attack (remember to use all their abilities), let the PC's see how dangerous they are, but unable to do anything (due to being unarmed and possible bound). when the fight starts to go against the inquisition, let the inquisition accept the help the PC's have probably been offering since the fight started.

The PC's may win this or they may not - either way you get some benefits from this solution:
1. The forces of good (inquisition) are as active as the forces of evil (shadowmen)
2. The PC's do not feel like they are being rescued!
3. The PC's feel like heroes - whether others agree is a different story, the inquisition might still hold a grudge for getting them in the mess in the first place.

 

[diaglo]

kill them all and take their stuff.