Not necessarily. A character that has only a few hit points left in that example would only need a hit of Max HP + those few hit points. Any of the methods described earlier would do one in during that scenario.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
D&D 5E How do you kill a 10th level character?
- Thread starter Schmoe
- Start date
Not necessarily. A character that has only a few hit points left in that example would only need a hit of Max HP + those few hit points. Any of the methods described earlier would do one in during that scenario.
I'd say the most likely causes of death for 10th-level PCs are:
1. Being attacked by a monster while unconscious (either to prevent healing or because the monster is just spiteful).
2. Getting caught in the blast of an area attack while unconscious.
3. TPK.
Maybe your table prefers not to do it, and that's fine, you play however works for you. At other tables, however, the players want the DM to pull no punches, and in that case you absolutely should do it.
My own attitude--as a player and as a DM--is that the monsters should fight to win, using all the smarts and tactics available to them. Normally, monsters don't attack downed PCs for the same reason PCs don't attack downed monsters: In-combat healing is quite rare, so usually it's a waste of time to be slitting throats instead of concentrating on active threats. However, intelligent monsters who see clerical healing going on will take steps to prevent it. That includes a) targeting the cleric, and b) finishing off downed foes.
Of course, not all monsters are cool, rational tacticians. A monster of animal intelligence won't ever "figure out" healing magic; it'll ignore downed foes even if they have repeatedly bounced back up. Conversely, some monsters are just mean. They'll go for downed enemies even when it's not tactically advantageous, out of hunger or sheer spite. Ghouls and gnolls are good examples.
Fiinally, some monsters can't tell when foes drop unconscious, and will just keep noshing on 'em. A swarm is the most likely example. (Of course, it can't tell when the foe is dead, either. Putting your pack animals in front of you is a good way to distract swarms.)
1. Being attacked by a monster while unconscious (either to prevent healing or because the monster is just spiteful).
2. Getting caught in the blast of an area attack while unconscious.
3. TPK.
What, it's taboo because you say so?
Maybe your table prefers not to do it, and that's fine, you play however works for you. At other tables, however, the players want the DM to pull no punches, and in that case you absolutely should do it.
My own attitude--as a player and as a DM--is that the monsters should fight to win, using all the smarts and tactics available to them. Normally, monsters don't attack downed PCs for the same reason PCs don't attack downed monsters: In-combat healing is quite rare, so usually it's a waste of time to be slitting throats instead of concentrating on active threats. However, intelligent monsters who see clerical healing going on will take steps to prevent it. That includes a) targeting the cleric, and b) finishing off downed foes.
Of course, not all monsters are cool, rational tacticians. A monster of animal intelligence won't ever "figure out" healing magic; it'll ignore downed foes even if they have repeatedly bounced back up. Conversely, some monsters are just mean. They'll go for downed enemies even when it's not tactically advantageous, out of hunger or sheer spite. Ghouls and gnolls are good examples.
Fiinally, some monsters can't tell when foes drop unconscious, and will just keep noshing on 'em. A swarm is the most likely example. (Of course, it can't tell when the foe is dead, either. Putting your pack animals in front of you is a good way to distract swarms.)
Last edited:
Ahrimon
Bourbon and Dice
No we're talking about a play style that has been used and popular for over 30 years.
We get that you don't agree. But honestly, yours is not the one true way to play DnD. Feel free to tell people that you disagree and give advice on what you prefer. Just please stop trying to tell us that we've been playing it wrong all this time.
Henry
Autoexreginated
Actually, if he's entertaining his players as well as himself, I'd say he's doing just fine. Not all have the same style of game, and no one is obligated to accommodate all styles of play.
the Jester
Legend
Are you serious?
Because if you are, my answer is an unequivocal "NO". If you don't like reading my posts, there's an "Ignore User" button made just for you.
As for "ruining the game for some", if someone having a different perspective ruins the game for someone, I'd suggest that they ought to A. Not play in my game, B. Not read my posts, or C. Accept that there is no One True Way to D&D.
EDITED TO ADD: I'd equally like you to stop asserting- nay, insisting- that you're absolutely right and that there's only One True Way. I think that ruins more games for more people than acknowledging that people play D&D in different ways. Yet I'm not asking you to do so. I'm engaging you in discussion instead, acknowledging that your style is fine for groups that enjoy it, yet isn't the only playstyle on the table. Who's the reasonable one here really?
Last edited:
AmerginLiath
Adventurer
Should we include Quivering Palm (as a death effect) and Falling Damage (as a source of potential massive damage)?
"I should have memorized Feather Faaaaaaaaaall..."
"I should have memorized Feather Faaaaaaaaaall..."
Nebulous
Legend
Oh...what about drowning and suffocation?
For a group of level 10 characters a Roc is a very dangerous enemy, I don't know about the rest of you DM's but I have mine swoop down attack a single character and once one is grabbed fly up, very far up and then let them go. Dragons have been known to do the same thing from time to time.
Everyone at the table is there to have fun playing an adventure game. If it weren't dangerous it wouldn't be called an adventure. Being nice is expected, nerfing everything takes the adventure out of it.
The game is designed with the possibility of character death in it, thus adding the tension and suspense that generates excitement.
For the example of the gnolls being especially nasty, someone already mentioned cluing the players in through an NPC pointing that out, and there's no rule requiring the extra attack in all instances to be lethal. The gnolls could use it to grapple and then they could all begin carrying off the first downed PC, giving reason to rescue the prisoner, or pay a ransom.
As a DM, I don't design things to deliberately be deadly, though I do expect the players to know when it might be best to run, and I let players know ahead of time that some encounters might be very dangerous.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
Wow. OK I gotta ask - how long have you been playing D&D? And I guess which editions have you played? It sounds to me like you're not experienced with a wide variety of play tables and playstyles, but perhaps that's a mistaken impression.
Similar Threads
