How to "capture" players using 4E rules?

[Daniel D. Fox]

My players are all around level 8-10. We're at the end of a huge storyarc, and in short (without going too much into the story or exposition) they're going to be able to follow two choices - one of which will lead to joining their foe, and another which will lead to their capture.

While I want to build an encounter that is fair, it needs to be balanced to where the odds aren't so great that they could evade and kill their potential captors. What mechanisms can I use for 4E foes to restrain players, knock them out, something that jives within the game rules to initiate a capture mechanic that results in them being restrained that doesn't stink of railroading?


Thanks in advance,
Daniel

 

[MatthewJHanson]

Given that PCs can now knock enemies unconcios by declaring they do so for the final blow, I'd let NPCs do the same thing.

Let the players know as soon as the first one falls. "You're unconcious, but not dieing. You don't need to make any saves."

 

[hexgrid]

My players are all around level 8-10. We're at the end of a huge storyarc, and in short (without going too much into the story or exposition) they're going to be able to follow two choices - one of which will lead to joining their foe, and another which will lead to their capture.

While I want to build an encounter that is fair, it needs to be balanced to where the odds aren't so great that they could evade and kill their potential captors. What mechanisms can I use for 4E foes to restrain players, knock them out, something that jives within the game rules to initiate a capture mechanic that results in them being restrained that doesn't stink of railroading?

I'd be very careful with this. You say that you don't want it to be railroading, but the fact that you've already decided the encounter's outcome ahead of time means that it is. Players tend to react badly having characters captured, especially if they feel like the deck was purposely stacked against them (I speak from experience.)

If you really want the campaign story-arc to involve the players being captured, I'd suggest getting player buy-in on the idea, and not use game mechanics at all.

 

[Dausuul]

I'd be very careful with this. You say that you don't want it to be railroading, but the fact that you've already decided the encounter's outcome ahead of time means that it is. Players tend to react badly having characters captured, especially if they feel like the deck was purposely stacked against them (I speak from experience.)

Agreed. The way I would go about this is to make the encounter really hard but potentially beatable. (For my group, I'd make it about level + 4; that's the top end of what I think they could handle. YMMV.) Then plan the arc to allow for either capture or PC victory. As a player, I have found that capture as punishment for losing a battle is much more tolerable than capture by DM fiat.

As far as mechanics go, the suggestion that monsters as well as PCs can declare their attacks to be "knockout" attacks rather than kills makes sense to me. Alternatively, throw in some monsters with a high Heal skill whose primary job is to stabilize potential prisoners.

 

[hopeless]

Just a thought

I'd be very careful with this. You say that you don't want it to be railroading, but the fact that you've already decided the encounter's outcome ahead of time means that it is. Players tend to react badly having characters captured, especially if they feel like the deck was purposely stacked against them (I speak from experience.)
If you really want the campaign story-arc to involve the players being captured, I'd suggest getting player buy-in on the idea, and not use game mechanics at all.

In your description perhaps they're caught helping someone escape say if a caravan or town attacked and they hold off the attackers but are inevitably overwhelmed or are actually betrayed and left for dead giving them a reason to want to escape.

Rather than railroad them simply give them the options and let them figure it out for themselves it could mean they'll find another path and surprise you or your planning will come in handy, just don't limit them when it looks like they've found a loophole part of the fun is seeing what we cando that we normally can't after all!

 

[ExploderWizard]

Given that PCs can now knock enemies unconcios by declaring they do so for the final blow, I'd let NPCs do the same thing.

Let the players know as soon as the first one falls. "You're unconcious, but not dieing. You don't need to make any saves."

Just do this and run a fair combat. You will simply have a knocked out party instead of a TPK. If the party is forced into an unwinnable fight to begin with, then you are planning a railroad.

 

[Cerebral Paladin]

I'd be very careful with this. You say that you don't want it to be railroading, but the fact that you've already decided the encounter's outcome ahead of time means that it is.

I agree with this. Your initial question runs the risk of degenerating into "how do I railroad my players without railroading them?"

If you think that your players will end up being happy with the capture plot, I would either: A) set up a fight (using the knockout rules others have suggested) where the PCs can accomplish something; B) set up the capture such that the PCs clearly can't fight their way out of it (such as having the entire area they're in surrounded by an army, so the capture is not so much a single fight as a part of the overall story); or C) set up a tough but winnable fight, and then let the dice fall where they may. C is my preference, since it avoids the railroad altogether, but A can work. B is difficult to pull off well.

For A, you might have things like how many of the enemy do they kill before they fall if the players are likely to care, can they help some NPCs (perhaps vulnerable characters or characters that the PCs care about) escape at the cost of their own capture, or can they accomplish some goal (stop/perform the big ritual, prevent a disaster, etc.) during the combat which makes them okay with the fact that they "lost" the fight. The feeling you want there is "we didn't lose-- we won, but at the cost of getting captured." The problem is that you need player buy-in or this goes back to the worst "and now I pound on you using my GM powers until you climb on the railroad and go to the next station."

 

[RodneyThompson]

When we were captured in Chris Perkins' game a while back, he did it by basically having the bad guys present it as an option for us when we were in a dire situation. Basically, we'd stumbled into an encounter and lost our fighter and ranger quickly, and then things looked very, very grim. Once the cleric went down, the bad guys' leader grabbed him and threatened to coup de grace him if the rest of us didn't surrender. We did, and were captured, then eventually broke out (some sessions later, after some adventures in jail).

Anyhoo, long story short, I think it worked because of three things. One, we were clearly outgunned, and knew it. Two, they were threatening one of us that had gone down with death, and three he gave us an out. He let us choose captivity, rather than trying to bludgeon us into it. I think that worked, and made us feel not so bad about it.

 

[Rechan]

I personally see nothing wrong with throwing too-tough enemies, as long as there is potential for success (See: defenses you can hit, vs. no chance of hitting).

If your players are agreeable sorts, you might say ahead of time "For the purposes of the plot, I'd like to capture you guys". If that would instead upset your players, don't do it.

Another option is to assemble a team of monsters that make enemies unconscious. Oni Night Hunters/Night Hags/Chasme/Assassin imps.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

When we were captured in Chris Perkins' game a while back, he did it by basically having the bad guys present it as an option for us when we were in a dire situation. Basically, we'd stumbled into an encounter and lost our fighter and ranger quickly, and then things looked very, very grim. Once the cleric went down, the bad guys' leader grabbed him and threatened to coup de grace him if the rest of us didn't surrender. We did, and were captured, then eventually broke out (some sessions later, after some adventures in jail).

Anyhoo, long story short, I think it worked because of three things. One, we were clearly outgunned, and knew it. Two, they were threatening one of us that had gone down with death, and three he gave us an out. He let us choose captivity, rather than trying to bludgeon us into it. I think that worked, and made us feel not so bad about it.

More or less, this is supposed to be a battle they clearly cannot win (as their foes are clearly stronger than they are), but are prepared to engage in it anyhow in order to further the storyarc. I have a strong feeling they're going to put up a fight, as opposed to simply parlaying with the foes - thus the question as to handle capture as to outright assbeating using the game rules. The story up to this point seems to be pointing in that direction, especially whenever they find out one of their allies is in cahootz with the enemy. I know what the outcome will likely, be, and I want the foe to capture them or offer for the players to join them in their plot - both of which are viable choices, given the dark and gritty nature of the story.

I like how it was handled in Moridin's above example.

So, what it seems like is that the foes need to "express their ire" against a single opponent, take him or her down quickly and threaten to kill him outright if they don't surrender. Alternatively, I could engage the players to initiate an out of character capture scenario, but I feel that would detract from the "feel" of the game. Yet, I need to keep in mind that there should be some faint chance they could win, by building the encounter to be hard, but achievable if they tactically attempt to overcome their enemies.

Thanks to everyone for the excellent suggestions.