Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="silentounce" data-source="post: 4275611" data-attributes="member: 67099">It doesn't take any suspension of disbelief to have the undead army win, now does it?Are DMs not allowed to kill PCs anymore?  Is that what heroic means?  My character will no longer die.Hell, that gives that fighter the perfect opportunity to go down in a blaze of glory.  Maybe they'll be able to beat the necromancer, maybe not.  Hell, there are so many ways to deal with that situation that won't kill off that character anyway or hurt disbelief.And in my world, the evil cultists won't wait.  Doesn't anybody else play with consequences for PC failure?  Is this what D&D has become?I am by no means a kill them all DM.  DM vs. players TPK kind of guy.  But my players know that it is a distinct possibility.  It's not a given that they will win.  Honestly, when running, I fudge it in their favor more than they ever suspect.  But that's the key, they don't even realize it.  Giving this instant cure with rest thing takes some of that ability out of the DMs hands.  I'd rather my players believe they are in desperate straits and do their great deeds in spite of it.I don't agree with your novel/movie example either.  Plenty of movies have main characters die.  Or people going into battle despite being grievously injured.  Hell, since HP are an abstraction, right?  Maybe the fighter in your example wasn't really "wounded".  It didn't appear that way in the book, but he could have been low on abstract HP.I'm also not afraid of the "lot of work" that you mentioned.  A good, experienced DM should be able to adjust things on the fly.  And, honestly, it usually doesn't require tons of work. Not changing due to situation amounts to railroading.  I guess 4e comes with railroading built in.  Also, I know you're just giving an example, but your statement that "no one will believe" about the army is also railroading.  Heck, maybe the PCs would rather come up with some kind of elaborate plan to convince the populace.  Maybe they'd rather spend time on that.  Sure, a combat confrontation will eventually happen.  But wouldn't that situation also throw a wrench into the DMs plans?  In my opinion it's a poor DM who will simply say something cannot be done no matter what the PCs do, at least let them try.  PCs do that kind of stuff all the time, things that you don't expect, haven't planned for, or want them to do.  I don't think I've ever run something that's gone exactly the way I planned it.  That's part of the fun of being a DM for me.Someone please tell me I'm not the only one that runs campaigns this way.EDIT: And as for your last paragraph (it's not in the quote, but in your original post), how do you know that 4e is any better in this regard?  I'm not saying it isn't, but there are very few of us that have played it enough to be able to answer that question.</blockquote>

Verification