D&D General Kobayashi Maru: Should the fate of the character always be in the player's hands? POLL

[Puddles]

I think you had an overall thoughtful post, but I wanted to single this particular section out for a reason.

Most people, myself included, often fall into the trap of assuming that everyone agrees with me- most likely because I am smart, witty, articulate, and correct. That said, there are people that for whatever reason (most likely due to defects of their upbringing, such as being dropped on the head by their Uncle Goober and/or showing an unfortunate appreciation of Bards) do not agree with me.

The actual existence, and continued popularity, of games that involve mechanics that either are, or resemble, save v. death (whether people are continuing to play "old school" editions, or clones, or whatever) would seem to belie your statement that everyone agrees that those mechanics are terrible in play. I would even say that those mechanics are the quintessential (or, from your P.O.V., worst) example of an event that the player has no control over, that can result in death.

This doesn't mean that the player can't prepare, can't make plans, can't have contingencies, can't avoid combats, can't play safely, but sometimes, you just roll a 1.

I don't think that these mechanics qua mechanics are good or bad necessarily, and I do think that there are sound reasons for a lot of games to move away from those types of "unfun" mechanics, but I think that you have seen credible reasons in this thread why there are those who still enjoy playing that way- sort of a rule utilitarianism; while the instant event (failed death save, character death) is unfun, the overall experience of the game that has it, for those people, is more fun.

So I think that people might have different reactions to your overall post; on the one hand, players might appreciate that you put in "loads of hooks and levers for my players to draw upon when things start getting desperate" to change the conditions; on the other hand, I know that if I were playing, I might feel insulted that there were these obvious hooks and levers to bail me out of a situation; it would remove my sense of agency and triumph were I to succeed because it would feel too much like DM ex machina. That doesn't make your approach wrong- it sounds like a lot of fun! But different people have fun in different ways. Heck, did you realize that there are people that actually enjoy playing elves? Dead-eyed soulless automatons. Harumph.

Fair point indeed. I shouldn't presume that all players dislike Save vs Death mechanics!

With regards to my "hook and levers", I don't make any of them as obvious get-out-clauses, nor do I have any intention or idea on how the players can use any of them to their advantage. I just find the more stuff I put in an encounter environment, the more harebrained schemes the players can concoct when things go south.

When a battle is being fought in a plain stone corridor of a dungeon, you are basically saying "the only avenue to success is for the players to roll above average", and inviting the chance of bad-luck to ruin their time, whereas once you start filling that corridor with things that can be interacted with, you promote many more avenues that the DM or players would never consider until the heat of the moment. It doesn't mean the players can't fail. Everything must be reasonable, and has dice rolls attached to it. It just puts more dice rolls between the player and death and makes it more likely that bad-luck will not prevail right to the very end.

The classics are a chandelier to swing on, or a cart to knock over whilst fleeing. It would be DM ex machina if the DM suddenly announced their presence mid-battle, but not if they have been there right from the start. So I make sure I put lots of work into the terrain and the dressing of encounters as they give the players the tools I am talking about.

Other levers I like to use are one-off magical items given far in advance. For example, I have just given a player 1 crossbow bolt which detonates with the effect of a Fireball. I don't know when or how, they are going to need this, but having it in their back pocket means that one encounter down the line that might take a turn for the worse might instead be overcome.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Fair point indeed. I shouldn't presume that all players dislike Save vs Death mechanics!

With regards to my "hook and levers", I don't make any of them as obvious get-out-clauses, nor do I have any intention or idea on how the players can use any of them to their advantage. I just find the more stuff I put in an encounter environment, the more harebrained schemes the players can concoct when things go south.

When a battle is being fought in a plain stone corridor of a dungeon, you are basically saying "the only avenue to success is for the players to roll above average", whereas once you start filling that corridor with things that can be interacted with, you promote many more avenues that the DM or players would never consider until the heat of the moment.

The classics are a chandelier to swing on, or a cart to knock over whilst fleeing. It would be DM ex machina if the DM suddenly announced their presence mid-battle, but not if they have been there right from the start. So I make sure I put lots of work into the terrain and the dressing of encounters as they give the players the tools I am talking about.

Other levers I like to use are one-off magical items given far in advance. For example, I have just given a player 1 crossbow bolt which detonates with the effect of a Fireball. I don't know when or how, they are going to need this, but having it in their back pocket means that one encounter down the line that might take a turn for the worse might instead be overcome.

I suppose I was confused with the hooks and levers comment!

I don't think we disagree there. Very little surprises me more than the ingenuity of players- whether it's new ways of using their spells, their items, their magic items, their class abilities, or interacting with the environment. That's why, decades in, DMing continues to be such a joy.

When it comes to player ingenuity, I'm very much of the Mills Lane school .... I'll allow it!

 

[Reynard]

On the subject of the no win scenario: I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with a world that doesn't scale with the PCs, and that means there are going to exist scenarios in which the PCs find themselves that they cannot win. That's okay, although I generally feel like the DM is responsible for providing the players with the information that would reasonably be available to their PCs so they have some inkling this might be the case.

That said, I don't believe in a "no escape" scenario. Players are clever and there are any number of ways they might survive a fight with a dragon or lich because they realized there was no way to win and chose a different tact. In a world that operates by D&D rules those big bads would know the value of having the PCs owe them a favor -- one they are likely to call in once the PCs are more powerful.

 

[TheSword]

Or, you know, you could, um, write your own thread starters. Make your own polls. Write your own titles. Then I will tell you how to make your titles.

Hmmm. Sounds like you could do with taking the Kobayashi Maru test yourself.

My question was a genuine one. Rolling a natural 1 on a save or taking a crit is not entirely random chance. Party tactics, make up, character builds and most of all DM encounter design have a greater impact on success or failure than rolling dice does in my opinion.

 

[Istbor]

Somewhat dealing with this currently.

It isn't a TPK, but a character inhaled some pretty rough spores. In combat, all they really did was cause them to lose a turn if they failed a con save.

Then came an out of combat roll. As described, if they fail this, a plant grows in their lungs, and without addressing this 'disease' the creature dies as the growing flora blocks air passage in a matter of days. (a rolled 1d4 days and in our case 2)

They failed. Rolled like a 3.

The group is several days away from anywhere one could find help, and they currently lack the ability to deal with a disease. Now... I could be lenient, especially since dying like this could mean a pretty inglorious death. However, by my own session zero, I can't pull punches.

Now, the player is already aware of this somewhat. What I plan, is to tell that player to essentially play his barbarian as if it was his last days on Earth. Hopefully, that will mean a more meaningful and glorious death.

Not sure if this explains my point well or not, but... I feel that once you are in that situation, where you cannot win, what you do matters. Do you go out swinging, or do you beg whatever distant Gods/Goddesses you believe in for mercy? I know this doesn't reflect the sentiment of the question 100% as this player gets to know he is doomed. Where often, bad luck or poor decisions maybe give a round or two of reflection and action before the long sleep comes.

 

[Reynard]

Somewhat dealing with this currently.

It isn't a TPK, but a character inhaled some pretty rough spores. In combat, all they really did was cause them to lose a turn if they failed a con save.

Then came an out of combat roll. As described, if they fail this, a plant grows in their lungs, and without addressing this 'disease' the creature dies as the growing flora blocks air passage in a matter of days. (a rolled 1d4 days and in our case 2)

They failed. Rolled like a 3.

The group is several days away from anywhere one could find help, and they currently lack the ability to deal with a disease. Now... I could be lenient, especially since dying like this could mean a pretty inglorious death. However, by my own session zero, I can't pull punches.

Now, the player is already aware of this somewhat. What I plan, is to tell that player to essentially play his barbarian as if it was his last days on Earth. Hopefully, that will mean a more meaningful and glorious death.

Not sure if this explains my point well or not, but... I feel that once you are in that situation, where you cannot win, what you do matters. Do you go out swinging, or do you beg whatever distant Gods/Goddesses you believe in for mercy? I know this doesn't reflect the sentiment of the question 100% as this player gets to know he is doomed. Where often, bad luck or poor decisions maybe give a round or two of reflection and action before the long sleep comes.

Sounds like a perfect opportunity for a devil to show up with a contract.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Writers can write events that are random and pointless in-universe. 90% of comic event deaths for example.

Sigh.

Every thread about death in the game. I'm very tired of this argument.

Look, just because you don't die from random dumb crap in the game doesn't mean everything else is a foregone conclusion. I respectfully ask that people stop using this fallacy.

Of course there are other consequences than death; the story would be boring as all get out if there weren't. But if death is off the table except by player choice, IMO the whole story feels false. This assumes that the game puts people in situations where a character could reasonably die, naturally.

 

[Alzrius]

Sounds like a perfect opportunity for a devil to show up with a contract.

I'm reminded of an artifact called The Observer, from Quirin Mythology #2: A Handful of Artifacts (affiliate link). A sentient crystal ball with several magic powers related to observation and detection, as well as sufficient resources to cast wish, one of the plot hooks for using it is that it's been following the PCs' adventures, and after a TPK it brings them back to life in exchange for them going on a quest for it: to hunt down and dispatch a wizard it knows who's capable of casting mordenkainen's disjunction (one of the few things it fears, since that spell can potentially destroy it).

 

[Mannahnin]

Other levers I like to use are one-off magical items given far in advance. For example, I have just given a player 1 crossbow bolt which detonates with the effect of a Fireball. I don't know when or how, they are going to need this, but having it in their back pocket means that one encounter down the line that might take a turn for the worse might instead be overcome.

Yuuuup.

Fair point indeed. I shouldn't presume that all players dislike Save vs Death mechanics!

Danke; I liked your post quite a bit other than that part.

With regards to my "hook and levers", I don't make any of them as obvious get-out-clauses, nor do I have any intention or idea on how the players can use any of them to their advantage. I just find the more stuff I put in an encounter environment, the more harebrained schemes the players can concoct when things go south.

When a battle is being fought in a plain stone corridor of a dungeon, you are basically saying "the only avenue to success is for the players to roll above average", and inviting the chance of bad-luck to ruin their time, whereas once you start filling that corridor with things that can be interacted with, you promote many more avenues that the DM or players would never consider until the heat of the moment. It doesn't mean the players can't fail. Everything must be reasonable, and has dice rolls attached to it. It just puts more dice rolls between the player and death and makes it more likely that bad-luck will not prevail right to the very end.

The classics are a chandelier to swing on, or a cart to knock over whilst fleeing. It would be DM ex machina if the DM suddenly announced their presence mid-battle, but not if they have been there right from the start. So I make sure I put lots of work into the terrain and the dressing of encounters as they give the players the tools I am talking about.

I will note that even in a bare dungeon corridor, the only avenue for success rarely is just to roll above average. The corridor itself narrows the front you have to fight on and partially negates an enemy's advantage of numbers, for example. And it implies that you can retreat to a choke point or door and improve that tactical situation still further. But overall, absolutely I agree that having the dressing is great and important I gives the players more options. Thumbs up!

 

[Laurefindel]

...or change the title to something that represents the poll. Nice duck though

Do you honestly think die rolls are something that the players don’t have any control over?

Depends what you consider being "control over dice rolls".

Players never have control over the result (unless you cheat like Jim Kirk)
Usually, the players can evaluate the odds of those results to establish risks.
Usually, the players can weight risks vs consequences of failure (danger)
Usually, the players can weight consequences of failure vs consequences of not attempting.

The Kobayashi Maru is an unwinnable scenario, but not an inescapable death; the commanding officer can still choose to ignore the Maru and remain in Federation space. It that regard, cadets did have control over the Kobayashi Maru's scenario.

Same for dice rolls. One doesn't have control over the result. One often has control over whether the roll is attempted, and whether it is worth the risks or not.