Have I been a bad DM?

[LostSoul]

You are not a bad DM. You'll have to take a look at your player's criticisms, and maybe throw in some lower-EL encounters, but that's not that big a deal.

The leg of my campaign at the moment is unavoidably combat heavy - they are travelling through badlands where few mortals are brave enough to tread, and it is known to be overrun with all sorts of beasts. They knew those going in, but were hired to track down an item.

It's not unavoidably combat-heavy - it's only combat-heavy because you decided it would be. They could stumble on the hidden village of the Wonga-wonga people and have a non-combat session.

 

[irdeggman]

When adventures are combat heavy it is important to allow for adequate "down time" so that the PCs can recover. If you run encounter after encounter with no time to rest you might as well be writing the PCs obituaries.

I haven't gotten that from your post, but this is something to watch for.

Another thing is to ensure that the PCs have a chance against their opponent. In general the opponent's CR should be no more than 2 above the highest leveled PC. Even then you must look things over to ensure that the foe is not immune to anything the PCs could dish out - like say it requires a 4th level spell (or better) to hurt it and none of the PCs can cast higher than 3rd level spells.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Anyway, last week the party Transmuter was slain by a Dracotaur Barbarian, after a combination of letting himself get into danger, and a critical hit with a battleaxe. To give a better picture, though, the character is a pseudo NPC, as its player is overseas for some time, and other players have been running it.

In my old Age of Worms campaign, a player died during The Whispering Cairn. He came back as a really well-planned marshall/something else multiclass, and the character had a lot of great roleplay potential. During the first session this character played in, and before he landed a single blow in combat, he had his head taken clean off by Kullen the barbarian's magic greataxe. I think it did 58 points of damage on the critical hit. I rolled two natural 20s in a row on that one, so I guess it was meant to be. The player took it kind of hard.

 

[Piratecat]

Combat difficulty should have a rhythm to it; I try to have one easy fight that lets the PCs totally kick ass, and one very hard fight, for every two or three regular challenges. A game where every fight is a life or death struggle often loses the edge of excitement for me.

I also like to add social, roleplaying and political challenges into the mix. Difficult and meaningful decisions are often as much fun as combat.

 

[ZombieButch]

Have you been a bad GM?

Honestly, IMO, no one here can answer that, because we're only getting one side of the equation. The only people who know for sure are your players. Ask them. If they're having fun, and you're having fun, then it really doesn't make any difference how you run your game.

 

[Awakened]

Yes, you are a bad DM.

 

[SteveC]

Combat difficulty should have a rhythm to it; I try to have one easy fight that lets the PCs totally kick ass, and one very hard fight, for every two or three regular challenges. A game where every fight is a life or death struggle often loses the edge of excitement for me.

I also like to add social, roleplaying and political challenges into the mix. Difficult and meaningful decisions are often as much fun as combat.

Piratecat is right here, but this is a thought that escapes many people, including the writers of most D&D modules.

To me, conflicts should have a range in difficulty from "wow, our characters are able to take on all comers!" to "holy buckets! How are we going to survive that?"

A combat (or a conflict in general) doesn't always have to be a life or death struggle that hinges on each character doing everything exactly right or the game ends in a TPK. Those moments are interesting, but they should also be rare. If you look at Piratecat's story hour, you see the characters being very effective and dominating their opponents quite often. You also see them having to be extremely creative and sharp to get out of other combats. I would argue that having both types of conflicts in a game is what makes it a good one.

Having each and every conflict mean death if everyone isn't doing everything right typically means more death, and it also cheapens those deaths.

Just my $.02.

--Steve

 

[blargney the second]

I'd recommend increasing the numbers of monsters rather than CR. EL is generally a much more stable indicator of difficulty than a single creature's CR.

 

[Mallus]

No criticism, just an observation: if the players are complaining about 'too many fights' then cut down on the number of fights, make them more varied, and, if possible, up the stakes.

There's no need for grinding in D&D, it's not a computer game. Better options exist.

 

[Gentlegamer]

You've done nothing wrong.

Crit happens.