Help a DM stop killing his players

[Rechan]

So, some advice.

First of all, ensure everyone understands how Second Wind works, and that a Heal check from an adjacent buddy can help someone who's in negative HP.

Second, tactics are fairly significant here. If your Fighter isn't using his mark, and locking very potent enemies down with his Combat Superiority/Challenge feature, then he's doing a bad job. If your Paladin isn't marking potent foes, and making it a hassle to attack the paladin and a hassle to Not attack the paladin, he's not doing a good job as a defender.

All the PCs rushing towards the monsters instead of thinking about their positioning a little can kill. Particularly for the strikers.

Choke points can kill.

Never mix two encounters worth of monsters together; that is deadly.

Not helping the rogue set up combat advantage-friendly circumstances doesn't help.

Third, since your parties seem to be strapped for leaders (in general), then I would say fewer, farther spaced apart encounters, with safe places to short rest.

If this sort of lethality persists, you might wish to reduce the number of monsters in an encounter, or reduce their levels.

 

[Rechan]

as whether it's a good idea to use certain ability or not (Dailies, for instance)

...just rely on At-Wills

Yeah, what he said.

Or not really grasping the importance of At-Wills, and thus just using basic attacks. Or blowing Encounter powers early on against weaker targets.

I often ask "Wait, you want to use your daily on that guy?"

Oh, here's another: Forgetting about your magical item daily powers.

 

[malraux]

Yeah, what he said.

Or not really grasping the importance of At-Wills, and thus just using basic attacks. Or blowing Encounter powers early on against weaker targets.

I often ask "Wait, you want to use your daily on that guy?"

Oh, here's another: Forgetting about your magical item daily powers.

For all the complaints about how 4e removed resource management from the game, there's an awful large amount of resource management to 4e, its just different from earlier games.

 

[bh2]

Good points all around. So, it sounds like I need to give them more advice on tactics/party composition rather than assuming they'll just get it. Secondly, if they aren't getting it I need to recognize that and scale back the encounters until they start getting it.

 

[LightPhoenix]

As has been said, Irontooth is an encounter that has caused problems. If all of your kills have been in this encounter, I wouldn't start to worry just yet. Though as someone suggested, maybe instead of being dead, they wake up being sent somewhere for slavery (I recommend (spoiler)

Spoiler

Thunderspire Labyrinth, due to the second adventure

).

 

[Shroomy]

I think that you will also want to clearly communicate meta-game information like which creatures are "minions" and which creatures are "bloodied" to your players, while making sure to do so with some flair and narration to keep it interesting. Nothing sucks more than spending a daily on a minion, and its hard for the players of a tactically minded game to make these types of decisions without the necessary information, especially when they are getting used to the system.

 

[malraux]

Good points all around. So, it sounds like I need to give them more advice on tactics/party composition rather than assuming they'll just get it. Secondly, if they aren't getting it I need to recognize that and scale back the encounters until they start getting it.

Yeah, I think that the tactical aspect of 4e takes a little while to "get". Also, I think that in 4e, a larger number of combats feel harder than a similar number in 3e. Almost every fight will have at least on character below 0, one monster that gets a lucky crit, etc. It takes awhile to notice that 0 is scary, but not terrifying.

 

[Cryptos]

1) How many PCs do you have?
2) What is the role/class makeup of your party?
3) Are the PCs using their abilities to aid one another/in a tactical manner?
4) Do they have a strong grasp of 4e rules?

Or #5: Your players are as stubborn as their DM. Whereas you don't like to deviate from things as written, they may feel that they also have to "stick to the script" and if the script says 'fight', they fight until all the pieces on one side or the other are down.

Not every encounter in every published adventure is meant to be tackled head-on by every group by running into the 'room' swords drawn. Not every encounter in a published adventure is meant to be survivable if the PCs don't withdraw (not only running away, but also possibly regrouping.)

It sounds like on one side, you've got a DM that likes a very clear and straight road ahead, and on the other side you've got a group of players that keep going down the road in front of them no matter what.

I don't think it's party numbers or composition. Any group should be able to face the challenges in front of them. But the DM has to provide the options and opportunities, and the players have to recognize and take them. Not providing options or tailoring situations in a tactical game leaves it to the law of averages - one side or the other is going to die, and it depends on who lands the blows, and eventually it will be the monsters landing the blows. Ergo, a TPK is inevitable in that style of play. You're all 'in the box', and like a lot of boxes there isn't a lot of room for a variety of outcomes. This is 'boxing ring' roleplaying... two enter, one leaves. Eventually, that's not going to go well for the PCs.

Somebody, preferably multiple somebodies, needs to step outside of that box.

 

[howandwhy99]

I must have a massive nerd gene to wonder why no one has said "CALL 911!" yet...

Help stopping a DM from killing his players right??

 

[diaglo]

I must have a massive nerd gene to wonder why no one has said "CALL 911!" yet...

Help stopping a DM from killing his players right??

i thought the same thing reading the thread title.