My players are going to hate me...

ThirdWizard said:
Save or die is a part of D&D. This doesn't mean you're not allowed to dislike it. Lots of people dislike it. I'm just sayin'. So, not having death effects are something that should be hashed out before the game begins, and if they arn't, they should be assumed to be in. KM's group doesn't seem to be one that dislikes the save or die effect, so I think your statement here isn't accurate.


Fair enough, and I have certainly failed my fair share of them and never been angry. I suppose it's not "save or die" that I don't like so much as the more or less out of the blue save or die that this seemed to be. However, as you say, the players seem okay with all of this and if they are having fun then the DM is doing his job.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Thanks for getting my back, guys. I do appreciate it. I mean, it's okay to not be a fan of out of the blue save-or-die, but obviously my group, including an assassin as it does, doesn't have much of a problem with it. I can guarantee that the Assassin has had his share of victims who didn't know he was coming, so it was definately an out-of-the-blue save-or-die by him a few times. :) And what's good for the party is good for the DM, ya? Specifically, I have two players who have the absolute best opinion (IMHO) for being players: "I like my character. I'd like them to live. But if they die, I've got a hundred and one other neat ideas I'd like to see."

Since it went down last night, I'll tell the tale. The naysayers did lead me to slightly pull punches, but the group was entirely content with it...

The party consists of a manic-depressive maenad wilder who plays the party's leader, a sneaky ninja/assassin with sticky fingers, a rather ditzy barbarian (the legendary king), and an egotistical Elan egoist who is doing research on the wilder for his orgainzation. There is also a young girl (one of the few healers) from the legendary king's homeland who has a major girl crush on him. During the night in the tavern, the ninja/assassin was off stealing things, the Elan was writing notes in the inn room, and the wilder, the barbarian, and the healer were celebrating in the tavern (the Elan was performing something dirge-like on stage, and bringing ogres to tears).

The barbarian and his romantic interest, the healer, were dancing with each other to the dark melodies, when he saw the bullethole appear in her head. Pretty typically, there were tears, there were shocked faces, there were Vader-screams ("NOOOOOOOOOOOO!"). They also did the whole "let's look around outside and find out what happened!" approach, and were suitably confused. However, they wrapped their heads around magic pretty quick. Specifically, the Elan (with Knowledge (arcana)) made the assumption that the assassin had teleported.

The assassin did, indeed, use knowledge of divine magic -- the tribe's healer was attacked and killed the next day, and the night after that, the ninja had an attempt on his life (that failed because of bystanders).

They determined a few things. Namely, that they had to get out of town before the ogre magi grew angry at them (since the assassin obviously had no qualms about killing those around the PC's, either). Also, that they were hunting something that used a lot of magic (silence, pass without trace, etc. were figured out pretty quickly).

Of course, they had their own approaches. When they left the town, the Elan used Metamorphosis to become "something that digs fast" (I quickly pulled a Dire Mole out of my bum, and had him dig at about 10 ft.). They dug underground, making a convinient home for themselves. They made a chimney ("now a regular-sized mole"), and they left their tent and their horses up top, as bait for the Assassin. Meanwhile, the Elans psycrystal was put up the chimney on the surface, to see what was happening from a place under the snow. They lit a fire under the ground, and grew comfy. Their strategy: lure it into close quarters. They knew it would only attack once a night. And they knew that it would only attack them if they were isolated.

The assassin fell for it. Through the psycrystal, they got a view of a half-giant (the assassin was using Alter Self) who killed the horses out of frustration, and then used the dead horses to plug the chimney (where he could see the smoke) and the entrance (which he saw when he killed the horses...which they put in the tent....for some reason...).

No complaints. No resurrection. Nobody accusing me of pulling DM rank and killing the innocent bystander just because I could. A dramatic burial scene in a berry patch, a great display of friendship, and a healthy fear of walking down dark alleys alone. In addition, I was able to harp on the "kill the healers" theme that I have had going. The party still can heal -- indeed, the two psions can heal more than a low-level Favored Soul could anyway. But the last retainers to the old religion have been destroyed, not just around them, but right in front of them.

I do believe the knowing grin from the player of the Elan told me that it was well-played. He enjoyed having a knowledgable foe to spar intelligently against, and enjoyed knowing that I wouldn't pull punches just to keep someone alive. After a few encounters slogging through the wild animals of the Ogrelands, they liked being brought back into the plot suddenly and forcefully. Characterization grew.

And now that we know what happened, we can get back to the idea that my style kills for my own amusement alone. :p
 

Kamikaze Midget said:
I do believe the knowing grin from the player of the Elan told me that it was well-played. He enjoyed having a knowledgable foe to spar intelligently against, and enjoyed knowing that I wouldn't pull punches just to keep someone alive. After a few encounters slogging through the wild animals of the Ogrelands, they liked being brought back into the plot suddenly and forcefully. Characterization grew.

Well done. Sounds like a good session. I'm sure your players hate you, but that's exactly what they want. :)
 

Agback said:
We can't guarantee that windows in the original poster's world are anything like mediaeval windows*, but if they were this trick would be hard to pull off.

Thanks for the excellent post. I'm always interested in this type of thing (attention to historical detail?), and it's great to see knowledgable people post on it. Thanks again.
 

DonTadow said:
I meant feat wise. You're talking about a single spell you can't get until you're at least 13th level. By then there are a dozen deadly save or die spells, so it really isn't overpowered. But there are no feats that allow it.

Then say what you mean. Saying that there is no way to perform a ranged death attack is false, as I have shown.

Plus, it can be taken at twelfth level (Rogue 2, Cleric 3, Assassin 7 with 18 Intelligence to get a bonus 4th level spell).

Even earlier with a wand or scroll.
 

Dr. Awkward said:
Histrionics, I tell you! What an amusingly slanderous characterization of someone you've never met before based on a bit of florid descriptive text. Seriously, where are you getting all this from?

I saw:
* DM sends careful NPC to end PCs' lives, based on good in-game reasons.
* DM follows rules (including well-known and PC-utilized house rules) to carry out plan
* No evidence of fudging or faking to manipulate or railroad PCs
* Dead PC, fair & square, leading party to be more friggin' careful next time

You saw:
* Snidely Whiplash-like DM snickering over his DMPC who was sent to ruin his players' lives for no good reason, because PC deaths are the work of sociopaths who become aroused at the thought of their players' wailing and gnashing of teeth
* DM sets rulebook on fire, tells player to do same to character sheet because character is dying right now no matter what!
* Forlorn player now turned off of characterization forever because characters are now disposable at whim of evil DM

I detect a subtle difference in the way we interpreted this situation. Perhaps you're reading too much into it?



Boy howdy, now you're badmouthing his group's house rules? Here's a bit of advice: house rules are sacrosanct. If a group decides they like their house rules, nobody has the right to suggest that their house rules are somehow wrong. To do so is to tell them that they're playing the game wrongly, and that they should stop playing it the way they want to and start playing it the way you want them to. Which, I believe goes without saying, is hubristic.



Or, perhaps they enjoy the status quo in their game and are now both ashamed of letting their guard down so carelessly and fired up for catching the bastard and writing their names in the snow with his entrails to avenge themselves upon him. There might actually be a possibility that KM knows his players better than you do.



Well, too bad for you, having such jaded, peevish players.

Perhaps we do interpret differently. THe tone of KM's post is filled with eagerness. I"m not sure how you're going about interpreting it but I"d love to know how you got that when someone begins their post with "My players are going to hate me" Then very proudly begins talkinga bout the scenerio. That sounds like pride and eagerness in my book and the remainder of the book is arrogance at its best.

You also claim he isn't railroading the player, yet he has the scenerio well written before it ever takes place. the only place in the scenerio he asks for a roll is the fortitude save. I'm not sure how you play your games but again, i dont get a kick out of using my overbearing DM knowledge to railroad and kill players to teach them lessons or move my story along. I'm a little more creative than that. I'd prefer my pcs kill themselves.

I'm not insulting KM, I"m insulting the scenerio and the dm style of killing pcs off with little interaction to move stories along and teach lessons. I play with grown people, I treat them as such.

As for the rule, its broken, thus the reason its not in the Core rules nor any other book. The only mention of something similiar is a 13th level spell. I have no problem with people who love houserules changingt hings up for the campaign. But do understand that once you start doing things and the main basis of that action is a house rule, you are still cheating, the group just accepted to accept the cheating action. Also there are house rules you can incorporate that incredibly change the game. No real penality for death, easy and cheap ressurection, anyone can kill anyone at anytime, its a fun game jjust not the essence of dungeons and dragons.
 

I'm not insulting KM, I"m insulting the scenerio and the dm style of killing pcs off with little interaction to move stories along and teach lessons. I play with grown people, I treat them as such.

Well, it came off as eager because in that first post I described an ideal scenario for the villain (which, actually, wound up occuring pretty nicely), and I was reveling in the possibility of spurring the players into heroic action by presenting them with a challenge that would be more difficult to overcome than "you walk into the room and there's an orc there, and he has a pie." The more I can make the PC's stradle the line between life and death, the more intesne the action, and the more they feel the pressure of being hunted by a powerful evil empire.

The death isn't part of any endemic style on my part. I don't kill PC's to move the story along or teach lessons. I kill the PC's when it makes sense for an NPC to kill them and the NPC has a motive. As it did in this case. And I got excited, as any DM might, because it would be a dramatic point in the story, cleverly achieved by a villain who is a minor twist on an enduring archetype.

***
As for the ranged death attack...heck, I'd make it a 12th level feat. The *reason* it doesn't exist yet is, I think, because it's extraordinarily specialized. Why waste paper on a feat that is only going to be used by some of one prestige class that is mostly of the DM kind of PrC anyway? What does it "add to the game"? Not much.

It's not too powerful. Definately not. Ranged touch attacks at 13th cause instant death. A normal ranged attack at 12th that you have to charge for 3 rounds isn't overpowered.

Now, at 9th, where my PC's are, sure, it's more potent than it should be. But my homebrew isn't held to the same standards as a professional release, so it doesn't really matter as long as no one at my table hasn't a problem.

Ranged death attacks are something that any high-mid party can do. I've got no problems allowing an assassin (someone who, by definition, is rather specialized in death attacks) to get that power by 12th level.
 
Last edited:

Pitting a 1st level PC against a Balor is against the RAW...pitting a 10th level Assassin against a group of 9th level PCs is perfectly reasonable. I also don't think that the ranged death attack feat is overpowered (nor does it matter since the players agreed to include the feat).

What makes you think that the PC would have had a chance to hear the glass breaking? Bullets travel faster than sound, and even if the bullet slowed as it pierced the window, there's still no way a PC would have time to react. You don't get a reflex save versus an arrow, you shouldn't get one versus a bullet. It's a straight attack roll.

Killing the healer was a smart move, and will really hurt the PC's in the long run. It also makes a good deal of sense on the part of the Evil Empire...I'm thinking they hate good clerics more than anything.

Play your NPC's to the best of their ability. To do otherwise is to disrespect your players. :D
 


dungeon blaster said:
Pitting a 1st level PC against a Balor is against the RAW...pitting a 10th level Assassin against a group of 9th level PCs is perfectly reasonable. I also don't think that the ranged death attack feat is overpowered (nor does it matter since the players agreed to include the feat).

What makes you think that the PC would have had a chance to hear the glass breaking? Bullets travel faster than sound, and even if the bullet slowed as it pierced the window, there's still no way a PC would have time to react. You don't get a reflex save versus an arrow, you shouldn't get one versus a bullet. It's a straight attack roll.

Killing the healer was a smart move, and will really hurt the PC's in the long run. It also makes a good deal of sense on the part of the Evil Empire...I'm thinking they hate good clerics more than anything.

Play your NPC's to the best of their ability. To do otherwise is to disrespect your players. :D
Eh setting up an encounter to kill a pc without any interaction from them doesn't sound reasonable. I hear some dms saying they applaud KM's decision. I wonder if the players in your campaign are as happy as you think they are. I guess I didn't realize that the PC vs. DM mentality was so rampant.
 

Remove ads

Top