D&D 5E My New Players Have Quit 5th Edition

[Ruin Explorer]

I had something like that happen to me during the playtest, I nearly TPK a group consisting of 3 new players to the hobby, I used this to illustrate that D&D is not a computer game and that you should be more alert, when the group recuperated they started playing more smart and less expecting to just have combat encounters handed to them on a platter (the rest of the players came from 4e).

The trouble is, this situation - i.e. TPK or near-TPK at L1/2 isn't IME a product of not "being alert", nor can it necessarily be mitigated by being alert or smart, or whatever.

I've seen this situation happen plenty of times in 2E to well-prepared groups who approached an apparently normal encounter in a reasonable manner. For example - a 1st level group, seven PCs, against a similar number of goblins. PCs approach in a smart tactical fashion, but they get bad rolls, and the Goblins get 4 natural 20s (I still remember the fourth die hitting the table...) and I don't think any of them missed (despite some serious ACs on the PCs). Good damage rolls on those crits ensured that more than half the party was down in round 1, including all the frontline combatants.

That's the tip of the iceberg.

Blaming the players and suggesting that they "inattentive" or "computer game players" or whatever is totally unhelpful, imo. This is simply a natural consequence low HP compared to damage at L1, combined with an extremely swing-y system (which is the natural consequence of using d20s as opposed to multi-dice rolls).

It's fair enough to say something like "Yeah, this is D&D, this happens at L1 sometimes, it's by design.". It's not fair to say "Oh well it's the fault of the players, they're bad!" (unless you were there and can explain the mistakes they made).

The solution is pretty simple, and one we implemented in 2E and 3E, which is to do something like give the PCs +10 HP at L1. That doesn't eliminate the "issue" (whether it's a "problem" is in the eye of the beholder), but it minimizes it so much that it's unlikely to actually occur.

The only thing that's really confusing is why ren1999 didn't feel like he could just add 5 or 10 or however many HP to the characters!

(Also, just as an aside, the idea that "computer games" "hand you encounters on a platter" is a really truly bizarre one in this day and age, where games like Dark Souls 2, XCOM and Indie Roguelikes are very popular. If anything, D&D, of any edition, is vastly less demanding in terms of tactics, planning, or ability to think on one's feet than many CRPGs. It's just a lot more random/swing-y than most computer games, where, when you lose, it's generally because you actually screwed up, not got a few unlucky rolls.)

 

[SigmaOne]

About page 8 is when this thread gets gouda.

 

[Nebulous]

What happens if you're at 1 hp, and a goblin hits you for 3 damage...you're not -2, you're 0. But there are other gobins attacking you at the same time, technically they all attack at once and you're stabbed simultaneously 3 times for a full total of 15 damage. Does this count toward the "instant death rule" of being equal to or higher than your max hit points, or does it have to be from one attack. And then there is the inevitable complaint by the player "Hey that first attack dropped me, the goblins would go fight someone else!"

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What happens if you're at 1 hp, and a goblin hits you for 3 damage...you're not -2, you're 0. But there are other gobins attacking you at the same time, technically they all attack at once and you're stabbed simultaneously 3 times for a full total of 15 damage. Does this count toward the "instant death rule" of being equal to or higher than your max hit points, or does it have to be from one attack. And then there is the inevitable complaint by the player "Hey that first attack dropped me, the goblins would go fight someone else!"

I can't speak for you, but normally I resolve attacks sequentially if there's a serious risk of a PC being downed (I don't even do it consciously, it's subconscious!). Fr'ex - some goblins attacking a level 6 PC, no chance of them doing enough HP to down him, I'd roll all their attacks at once. Some goblins attacking a level 1 PC? I'd roll each attack sequentially, in fact, take each goblin action sequentially (it doesn't really take much longer).

With the specific case, I don't believe you'd normally combine damage from multiple hits, even if they were technically "simultaneous", for the instant-death rule. I'd compare each separately.

 

[Thaumaturge]

What happens if you're at 1 hp, and a goblin hits you for 3 damage...you're not -2, you're 0.

Correct.

But there are other gobins attacking you at the same time,

If you want them to. Now that the PC is down, they might choose to go on to another target.

technically they all attack at once and you're stabbed simultaneously 3 times for a full total of 15 damage.

For certain definitions of "technically". In the fiction, it all happens nigh-simultaneously. In the game, each actor in combat does his full turn of actions and then someone else goes. It's not possible, by the rules, for 2 actors to go simultaneously.

Does this count toward the "instant death rule" of being equal to or higher than your max hit points, or does it have to be from one attack.

From one attack. Each subsequent attack on a downed character results in a failed death save. So the goblins would kill a downed PC after 3 hits regardless.

And then there is the inevitable complaint by the player "Hey that first attack dropped me, the goblins would go fight someone else!"

Yeah. And that's just a playstyle thing. Some tables enjoy villains who kill downed heroes and some don't.

Thaumaturge.

 

[ren1999]

The simplest fix is to allow 2HD at 1st level IMO (1 maxed, 1 rolled). Shouldn't unbalance higher levels, gives you 2HD to spend as healing but gives you enough hp to survive an average one-shot. 1e rangers got 2 HD and it made a huge difference to their playability.

That is a good suggestion.

 

[Nebulous]

From one attack. Each subsequent attack on a downed character results in a failed death save. So the goblins would kill a downed PC after 3 hits regardless.

Thaumaturge.

Oh, now this part is big, i hadn't even thought of this. Is that in the rules clearly or sort of between the lines, or just a logical extrapolation? Taking the example above, the first goblin downs the PCs, the second and third hits result in 2 failed death saves, but no rolled damage. On the "downed" PCs very next round, he has a good chance of dying from one more failed death save.

Unless, as noted, the two goblins elect to bother someone else, but yes that's a playstyle thing and in the realm of DM fiat, being mean or not as mean

 

[Thaumaturge]

Oh, now this part is big, i hadn't even thought of this. Is that in the rules clearly or sort of between the lines, or just a logical extrapolation?

Damage at 0 Hit Points. If you take any damage while
you have 0 hit points, you suffer a death saving throw
failure. If the damage is from a critical hit, you suffer
two failures instead. If the damage equals or exceeds
your hit point maximum, you suffer instant death.

Taking the example above, the first goblin downs the PCs, the second and third hits result in 2 failed death saves, but no rolled damage. On the "downed" PCs very next round, he has a good chance of dying from one more failed death save.

Correct.

Thaumaturge.

 

[ren1999]

the new players characters below 0 and it seems that you misunderstood the dying rules so you out right killed them...

I did not understand the negative hit points but I got the death saving throws correct. The first player playing the Cleric failed the death saves. The other one was rolling death saves and they both stopped playing.

 

[ren1999]

I didn't add hit points because we all agreed to try to play the game according to the starter set rules without me putting in a ton of house rules yet. Just to see what would happen. I had a pretty good idea from the pre-gen character's low hit points that there would be a few deaths.