Killer DMs

[jedavis]

(I found plenty of these sort of threads here, but most of them seemed old)

Do you consider yourself as a killer-DM (or GM)? Are you in a group that has one? What are your experiences with them?

I'm still trying to calculate the exact numbers but I think that the following is at least 95% accurate:
August 2011. PCs were at 7th to 9th level. I had a guest player join the game and he made a 7th-level character. He only played a couple sessions due to distance problems.
Now I'm hoping to have him back. Then it suddenly struck me; I don't have to increase his PC's levels at all. I'm still holding the same campaign and all the PCs are at 7th to 8th level. I still have the same players as I did back then.

During this time (August 2011 to May 2012) we've played 20+ sessions (I guess 21). After all this time the APL has mainly receded. However it seems that players are content. I'm ok with this also (I love my campaign) but not 100% content. I'd like to advance the game to a higher level but instead I just get near-TPKs. It should be noted that I have never, ever had a TPK.

I don't know what to do. I'm not really willing to change my ways, but it's not impossible. Let's see after 20 sessions my player are still below 10th level!

Dude... if you're playing 3.x, then you've accidentally created a harder-core version of E8. You've stabilized the power level of your game in the sweet spot, and your players are digging it. Don't destroy this thing of emergent beauty! Lord knows I've played enough 3.x games that started at like 4th, were great through 8, and then started grinding at 10+ until we had to quit at 12-13ish because the DM just couldn't deal with it (and we were bored with long combats and ubercasters and so forth). Kudos to you, and keep up the good work! Also if you have any tips on creating almost-but-not-quite TPKs, please share them.

 

[fireinthedust]

I'm a failure at being a Killer GM. I've tried and tried, but my combats aren't tough enough and my players are just too lucky. Maybe I'm just not clever enough, I don't know... but I keep trying just a little harder every time. Almost got 'em!

Thing is, if I'm telling a story with info that's revealed over the adventure: don't be killer.

If it's just a dungeon: killer doesn't eradicate my work. There's no story in that case.


As well: if it's my fault the PCs are in trouble (ie: I added too many monsters where there shouldn't be that many, or built a challenge that needed a spell they aren't high enough level to use, etc.), I don't mind fudging. If it's their fault (ie: they attack the Invincible Overlord and his beholder as 3rd level PCs, with no plan or preparation), let the dice fall as they may.


But yeah, I have no idea how to make a reasonable adventure that will outright TPK heroes. So far, at any rate.

 

[the Jester]

I know you're right but still... If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

Yep. I'm a high-lethality (wouldn't quite say "killer") dm, but I pretty much always have a waiting list of people who want to get into my game. It's all about playstyle preference. Some groups like a high rate of new character generation.

think my game has already been established as deadly. Everyone knows it. When my players come at my place, they know that their PCs can easily get killed. Of course I can talk about it with them and sure we can talk about many details regarding the campaign. But usually I try to avoid democracy in games and I just try to do things in my own way, to tell the story in my words. In RPGs the role of the DM is not an easy one, but the word "Master" is there for a reason. Personally I don't like DMs who ask a lot of off-game questions. It kind of spoils the mystery of the game.

A good DM is fair but confident with his gaming style. He asks questions if he sees that something isn't right. A bad DM makes the game a democracy, asking questions about what should happen next. But this is just my opinion.

I strongly suspect that our playstyles are very compatible. If you're ever in Northern California near Redding/the Mt. Lassen area and you're looking for a game, let me know.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

If your playrs are digging it, don't change it. Some day they will level, maybe. But ask them, if they miss leveling. However, it might as well be, they like it that way.

I personally prefer games where death is possibility and where I can indeed die on purpose, when I want to change character. I don't do that often. But like one time I ended up being only non-corrupt, still cood character in party and getting real tired of half-on-half-off-game-jerkiness. Or like in another case where it turned out campaing was all about magic-twinks and I was playing fighter. Very boring. In first example I didn't die, since dm let my character just walk away to do some personal stuff. In another game death was rarish (since it was more social and less combat game) and dm didn't want people to change character. So I went for suicidical stupidity.

Those both game kinda suffered from too much character based story. I like bit more change in character panel. And I find existance of different dangers, not just death, something that makes game more interesting and me more invested in characters.

I kinda like creepy-immortality games too. Ones where there is actually some (not innocent) reason why pc:s won't die. Where they kinda do die, but wake up later (naked and in some bit different place). Or many variations serving the same purpose. I've played couple of games like this. Highly interesting games. I could loose horrible, plus friends could die. But those are kinda related to certain background games and only work well for some dm:s. Though I saw one that I least expect it pull this kinda game.

 

[Jon_Dahl]

[MENTION=40398]Tequila Sunrise[/MENTION]
[MENTION=66434]ExploderWizard[/MENTION]

It's hard to argue with your views but quite frankly I don't ask anything if the game is progressing alright, everyone is happy and I don't see any warning signals.

If the players are acting like everything is just fine but their real feelings are quite the opposite then I think it's their fault and not mine. If they give me (easily readable) signs that they are not enjoying themselves, I try address that. But to be honest, off-game problem management isn't one of my strong points.

Asking the players' input is something I don't like to do. I'm afraid if I ask something like "are your PCs dying to often?" it might create certain unrealistic or annoying expectations. It feels like I'm transferring my responsibilities to the players and letting go of the DM's seat. It's simply too humble for my taste. That being said, I still do it. Sometimes I open up a voting for a house-rule etc. I always try to make them crystal-clear with multiple choice questions.

In this particular case I'd rather ask for a third-party opinion (Enworld), especially since I think the problem is only with me and my experience with the game. Talking about this with my players seems like trying to bring problems to the table. It feels like poisoning the well. In this case I'm much happier in asking Enworlders' opinions than asking it from my players. They might overreact and start to doubt if I'm even interested in DMing. I don't want that. And besides you guys are smart. I like to hear your views.

 

[Jon_Dahl]

Dude... if you're playing 3.x, then you've accidentally created a harder-core version of E8. You've stabilized the power level of your game in the sweet spot, and your players are digging it. Don't destroy this thing of emergent beauty! Lord knows I've played enough 3.x games that started at like 4th, were great through 8, and then started grinding at 10+ until we had to quit at 12-13ish because the DM just couldn't deal with it (and we were bored with long combats and ubercasters and so forth). Kudos to you, and keep up the good work! Also if you have any tips on creating almost-but-not-quite TPKs, please share them.

Thank you Hollowleg! I think you have a point there but at some point I'd like to try the high-level gaming. I think I could handle the ubercasters and all that nasty stuff (maybe not). I have some ideas. But it's encouraging to think that I'm keeping the game in a "sweet spot". Maybe mid-levels really are the best levels, when you're powerful enough but not too much.

I really don't have any good tips about near-TPKs. I simply try to write the deadlier encounters so that they don't necessarily end up in full TPKs; either by giving the enemy a motivation not to finish the job or by providing an escape-route to the surviving PCs.

Yep. I'm a high-lethality (wouldn't quite say "killer") dm, but I pretty much always have a waiting list of people who want to get into my game. It's all about playstyle preference. Some groups like a high rate of new character generation.

I strongly suspect that our playstyles are very compatible. If you're ever in Northern California near Redding/the Mt. Lassen area and you're looking for a game, let me know.

Thank you sir, I'm honored. I don't think I'm able to take you up on that offer but if you ever decide to go a European tour (pre-2015) or visit Brazil (post-2015) you're more than welcomed to roll dice with me and my friends.

 

[Jhaelen]

Dude... if you're playing 3.x, then you've accidentally created a harder-core version of E8. You've stabilized the power level of your game in the sweet spot, and your players are digging it.

There is definitely some truth to this. Basically, I realized as early as on my first reading of the Monster Manual that things would start to get tricky once the party would start to encounter CR13 creatures.
And indeed once the average party level hit about 10, we had a dead pc almost every session.

I see three types of DMs:

1. DMs who won't kill PCs, no matter what.
2. DMs who occasionally kill PCs who screw up badly.
3. DMs who regularly kill PCs who screw up badly, and occasionally kill PCs who are just unlucky.

Mhm, I think I'm type 2.5: I occasionally kill PCs.

I'm not sure I'm actually killing PCs who screw up more often than PCs who're just unlucky...

I've similarly mellowed with time, so I tend to give more warning signs to discourage 'stupid' actions and generally don't attacked downed pcs unless it's something the npcs/monsters prefer doing (which is very rare, imho).

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

It's hard to argue with your views but quite frankly I don't ask anything if the game is progressing alright, everyone is happy and I don't see any warning signals.

If the players are acting like everything is just fine but their real feelings are quite the opposite then I think it's their fault and not mine. If they give me (easily readable) signs that they are not enjoying themselves, I try address that. But to be honest, off-game problem management isn't one of my strong points.

Fair enough. I think you may be selling yourself short, but you know yourself and your players better than I do.

In this particular case I'd rather ask for a third-party opinion (Enworld), especially since I think the problem is only with me and my experience with the game. Talking about this with my players seems like trying to bring problems to the table. It feels like poisoning the well. In this case I'm much happier in asking Enworlders' opinions than asking it from my players. They might overreact and start to doubt if I'm even interested in DMing. I don't want that. And besides you guys are smart. I like to hear your views.

I must warn you, Jon Dahl, I am susceptible to flattery.

Well the only thing I have to say that I haven't already is: Do your players have a full Xmas tree of items to protect them, or are you frugal with loot and cash?

 

[pauljathome]

I'm NOT trying to tell you how to run your game (presumably you and your players enjoy it) but I find that death rate extremely high. Far, far higher than I or most of the people that I play with would tolerate.

As a side note, of course you are. You just did. There is no reason to be apologetic about it. ... But you don't need to pretend that you aren't trying in some fashion or at some level to persuade people over to your opinion. .

You're obviously partly right. At some level I want to explain to him (and to others) why I personally find that gaming style to be less fun and perhaps to convince him that he might consider trying something else.

Partly I used that preamble for politeness. Politeness DOES matter. Hopefully phrasing it that way will make it more likely for others to consider what I say rather than to just immediately get defensive as they would were I to phrase things rudely.

But, primarily, I really DO believe that a lot of people have very different tastes from me and my friends. I have no desire whatsoever to convince other people that I'm right and they're wrong. I know that there is NO right way or wrong way.

 

[SLupo]

I was a lot more cruel back in the AD&D days - I made good use of the "save or die" effects.

By now I tend to let my players live, although there has to maintain a feel of danger. My players know that if they screw up really bad or try some exceptional stupid stuff, they will die.