I'm a bad DM part 2

[Obscure]

Only slightly . By round 3 all the PC were stunned and it looked like the MF could go from PC to PC eating brains (I rolled high for how low they were stunned). I suggested as the DM we reset the fight. The group agreed. So I count that as a TPK

The MF can't go from PC to PC automatically sucking out brains. See my post above. It takes 2-3 rounds to suck out each brain, assuming that the MF succeeds at the 2-3 grapple checks necessary --- which the PCs can resist even when they're stunned.

 

[Infiniti2000]

The MF can't go from PC to PC automatically sucking out brains. See my post above. It takes 2-3 rounds to suck out each brain, assuming that the MF succeeds at the 2-3 grapple checks necessary --- which the PCs can resist even when they're stunned.

Exactly.

Gundark, let us know exactly how the MF managed this TPK. It seems like it was a bad ruling on your part that caused it.

 

[DanFor]

So knowing your character will never die is fun?

Not necessarily. I think PC death can add a certain amount of drama to a game. TPKs, on the other hand, end the game altogether. If a DM goes through the trouble of creating a complicated campaign, why would she use a NPC (or other device) that totally derails the whole game? And, how could the DM keep a group of interested players together if they know that she allowed her campaigns to end in such a disappointing fashion -- just for the sake of "realism"?

It's not unreasonable for the bad guys to win from time to time. As long as the DM gives the players an option other than "Game Over".

 

[billd91]

Not necessarily. I think PC death can add a certain amount of drama to a game. TPKs, on the other hand, end the game altogether. If a DM goes through the trouble of creating a complicated campaign, why would she use a NPC (or other device) that totally derails the whole game? And, how could the DM keep a group of interested players together if they know that she allowed her campaigns to end in such a disappointing fashion -- just for the sake of "realism"?

It's not unreasonable for the bad guys to win from time to time. As long as the DM gives the players an option other than "Game Over".

Well, there is always make up some replacement PCs... friends of the dead ones who have some idea what they were up to. There are always other options than "game over" even with a TPK.
If the PCs really do blunder into a TPK, I don't think they should be protected from it at all, nor would it be the DM's fault. There should be challenges too tough for PCs under certain circumstances (they're too inexperienced, too injured, whatever). Every encounter shouldn't be designed to be defeatable by the PCs, that's not very fun.

I understand that there are plenty of different ways to play D&D and a certain amount of plot immunity is what you like to play with, then fine. But I don't think it's the way most people play. I think most players accept that there's a certain amount of risk involved (there are dice involved, after all) so I don't think it's fair to say that any time there's a TPK that it must be the DM's fault. It may be a bit of a buzzkill, but you get over it.

 

[billd91]

Having not read most of the thread before replying...

The problem that I have with this GMing style is that, but fudging and nerfing your players through the underlings, you are training them to act in a certain way and building certain expectations; along with building false confidence in their abilities and the way the game is played.

Then you completely change the rules for the climactic battle, which makes it considerably tougher than it would be if they had been forced to play a stronger and more tactical game all along the way.

I'm not so sure this is a problem. It just means the PCs have a certain amount of plot immunity from the mooks employed by the BBEG, a factor actually built into a number of other game systems.
Besides, mook-type minions tend not to be as tough, focused, nasty as their BBEG employers. That's why they're mooks and not BBEGs themselves. They shouldn't be played to the same degree of sophistication as much as realistically for what they are. They waver, they do things inefficiently, they lack coordination, they crumble.
Of course, some BBEG are more brawn than brain, more megalomaniacal than insightful, and can do things that are perhaps sub-optimal as well.

 

[Elf Witch]

Well, there is always make up some replacement PCs... friends of the dead ones who have some idea what they were up to. There are always other options than "game over" even with a TPK.
If the PCs really do blunder into a TPK, I don't think they should be protected from it at all, nor would it be the DM's fault. There should be challenges too tough for PCs under certain circumstances (they're too inexperienced, too injured, whatever). Every encounter shouldn't be designed to be defeatable by the PCs, that's not very fun.

I understand that there are plenty of different ways to play D&D and a certain amount of plot immunity is what you like to play with, then fine. But I don't think it's the way most people play. I think most players accept that there's a certain amount of risk involved (there are dice involved, after all) so I don't think it's fair to say that any time there's a TPK that it must be the DM's fault. It may be a bit of a buzzkill, but you get over it.

I have played with some good DMs who sometimes had threats that we were supposed to run from. And sometimes we were smart enough to do so. And other times we almost had a TPK.

We had one TPK that just killed a campign and the DM admited that it was his fault. He was rolling out in the open and he got very lucky he rolled a lot of crits that added to the fact that he realized later that the encounter was way to powerful for us to handle even without is insane lucky rolls. He apoligized to us.

I don't think a TPK has to end a campaign but I think the DM should have some way of allowing the party to be raised if the players don't want to start completely over with new characters.

In one game I played in we were TPKed and we were very disappointed none of us were ready to give up these characters. The DM had a god raise us and put an onus on us that we had to serve him for one year we lost all our goodies because our bodies were remade by the god.

It was actually a very fun time we all looked different which led to some fun role play moments and sometimes we didn't always want to do what the god wanted so we would come up with ways to look like were doing what the god wanted. It reallly turned into one of the most fun games I ever played.

 

[DanFor]

Well, there is always make up some replacement PCs... friends of the dead ones who have some idea what they were up to. There are always other options than "game over" even with a TPK.
If the PCs really do blunder into a TPK, I don't think they should be protected from it at all, nor would it be the DM's fault. There should be challenges too tough for PCs under certain circumstances (they're too inexperienced, too injured, whatever). Every encounter shouldn't be designed to be defeatable by the PCs, that's not very fun.

I understand that there are plenty of different ways to play D&D and a certain amount of plot immunity is what you like to play with, then fine. But I don't think it's the way most people play. I think most players accept that there's a certain amount of risk involved (there are dice involved, after all) so I don't think it's fair to say that any time there's a TPK that it must be the DM's fault. It may be a bit of a buzzkill, but you get over it.

True enough. I consider myself lucky to belong to a group where the PCs play an integral role in the development of the campaign; I don't think I could play in a group that would re-roll an entire party just to see what was at the end of a dungeon.

 

[Gundark]

Exactly.

Gundark, let us know exactly how the MF managed this TPK. It seems like it was a bad ruling on your part that caused it.

Well I'll give the details. The first mind blast stunned half the group for 10 rounds (3d4), the next mind blast stunned the rest of the group for 9 rounds. Assuming that the MF was sucessful in his grapples he could kill about 2-3 ( it takes normally takes about 3 rounds for the mind flayer to eat a brain). This was a 4 man party. The mind flayer in question had quite a high grapple check. I would have gone after the Dragon Shaman first then the Scout. That would have left the bard and wizard remaining. Given the wizard and bard would have been unable to affect the MF with spells (SR of 32), and that the MF could draw upon a large number of spells and mind blast again it would have been over pretty quick.

Now as I said in a earlier post I explained this to the party after the 3rd round (they were all stunned) and gave them the option of reseting the fight which they took. While I go "all out" with the BBEG my goal isn't to kill the party but to provide a challenge to them (which IMHO doesn't happen unless I go all out).

So the party conceded and started over after round 3 which I know technically isn't a tpk (my apologies, it wasn't my intention to decieve) but it would have been that way as it was the direction it was going.

 

[Infiniti2000]

A dragon shaman, scout, bard, and wizard.

How do you not achieve a TPK on a regular basis?

 

[Chainsaw Mage]

If you have a real heavy role playing game with a lot of character development and world development death with no chance of raise dead can derail a campaign. A TPK can be the death blow to the campaign.

I don't know why some people feel the need to tell other people that because they play differently that they are not playing DnD.

Umm, because some people *aren't* playing DnD?

Read the Player's Handbook. If you take away the chance that PCs can die, you aren't playing DnD anymore. Which is fine. Just be honest about what you're doing.