Me neither. But if the reason is really interesting or fun, I'd be okay with it. I guess there's a compromise: if the GM says in session zero that there's "always a chance" that the whole party dies, that would be fair warning without ruining a surprise.Yeesh, I dont like running stuff like this. If there is gonna be some "everybody died but the story continues..." contrivance id make that the beginning of the campaign and known. This isnt the type of surprise I like sprung on me. YMMV.
This is fun: rewards for TPK. The bigger you go out, the better your reward.A campaign titled "Raging to Valhalla"? Expect your fallen heros to be rewarded with feasting and recreational violence in their afterlife.
Cool idea. I guess there are a lot of possibilities, and like @payn said, there's also "enjoy the show." It's probably important just to have options, because enjoying the show depends a lot on the game. For example, I would not want to just watch a D&D battle while PCs slowly died off. It's hard enough watching a D&D battle while I'm still alive. Let me start rolling another character . . . that would keep me busy for a while.Having a PC 'ghost' that sticks around and can possess others can be fun. The player can leap from body to body and try to do things.
Agreed...its different for every group and every campaign....
Not all surprises are good.
Some people hate negative "surprises" like this.
In my opinion: a plotted TPK shouldn't be a surprise to the players. If there was no in game foreshadowing, I'm of the opinion that the plot is faulty. If there are no exit points for the characters along the way, it's a railroad to oblivion. If that's the genre, and the players like it, enjoy the ride.
...