D&D 5E "Once an encounter begins, I will make changes to it for balance, fun, or rules reasons." (a poll)

[Helldritch]

But what if you realize, after the encounter begins, that you (the DM) inadvertently conveyed incorrect information to the party or otherwise made a major mistake on the actual encounter? That the group would have acted very differently if they had been conveyed the correct information.

Such that, and encounter you telegraphed as, and intended to be, easy (and that the group engaged on based on the information provided) is actually deadly (for example)?

If you saw the mistake only after the group engaged, would you change anything?

1) IF an encounter is deadly, players will definitely know in advance.
2) IF I ever do such a mistake, I will start playing the foe(s) with over confidence and describe the damage that the players are doing as insignificant. This is the clue that characters should flee ASAP. If they don't, well, it would not be my first TPK. And all players know that whenever I do this, it means flee or die.
3) If the fight is deadlier because of a streak of real bad luck on the players and incredible good luck on my side, I will simply make tactical errors with the foe(s). If this is not enough, fleeing is always an option. If they don't, well, it would not be my first TPK either...

But TPK are relatively rare. And so far, usually because the group decided to do the "Do or die" stuff even if it was not mandatory...

 

[Reynard]

I get people adjusting because they feel like they messed up the encounter design (even if I would respond similarly) but I totally don't understand GMs "saving" PCs because of bad players die rolls and/or good GM die rolls. I mean, that's why we use dice, to see what happens.

 

[GrahamWills]

I get people adjusting because they feel like they messed up the encounter design (even if I would respond similarly) but I totally don't understand GMs "saving" PCs because of bad players die rolls and/or good GM die rolls. I mean, that's why we use dice, to see what happens.

a counter point would be to say that you don’t understand why you let dice ruin stories and eliminate fun characters when it makes everyone feel bad. I mean, that’s why we have GMs, to adjudicate what happens.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think there's a pretty big disconnect here. I'm talking about the player characters losing a battle, possibly dying, and it sounds like you're talking about never being able to play with those characters ever again.

Honestly confused at this point.

Original post said 'entertain and keep characters alive no matter what', next one said 'losing/dying often', and historically, losing in this game is death because people don't believe in any other stakes.

 

[Maxperson]

That is the job, yes.

I find it weird that this is an affront on par with 'keep your characters alive no matter what'.

The job is actually to make sure everyone, including the DM, has fun. It's not to entertain the players.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The job is actually to make sure everyone, including the DM, has fun. It's not to entertain the players.

The DM is a player, so 'entertain the players' still holds.

 

[Maxperson]

The DM is a player, so 'entertain the players' still holds.

There is a division of responsibilities and titles. The DM is a player, but not a Player, and it's typically the latter people are talking about when they say, "entertain the players."

 

[Hussar]

I went with false, although, honestly, there are probably times I have done changes and not remembered. But, generally, no, if combat starts, initiative is rolled and I'm not going to futz about too much one the mechanical side of things. Adjusting difficulty is typically easier just by making tactically poor decisions for the monsters, or things like that. Hell, with my current party, simply giving them a chance to surrender usually works.

But frankly, I'm usually too busy trying to run the encounter to start eyeballing numbers and since I roll 100% in the open, changing dice can't happen.

So, yup, last session I used a beholder (Curious Tale of Wisteria Vale from Candlekeep Mysteries). The group was arranged in such a way that the beholder's anti-magic eye ray covered everyone except one PC who failed a save vs the Paralyzation ray, and then get smacked with two death rays (all 100% randomly generated) which outright killed the PC - autofail saves when paralyzed is brutal.

 

[Vaalingrade]

There is a division of responsibilities and titles. The DM is a player, but not a Player, and it's typically the latter people are talking about when they say, "entertain the players."

Nah. Just a player. At least where I am there are no kings at our tables.

 

[MichaelSomething]

How many TPKs did you have??

Nope, once the encounter begins, the players are at the mercy of the dice and the battlefield conditions. We play online via Roll20, so fudging dice rolls is nearly impossible, and making adjustments to the math is very difficult (and almost impossible to do discreetly.)

My players know the risks involved. When everyone rolled up their characters, we discussed the style of game that we would be playing, and made sure that everyone is on the same page. They know I'm not going to protect them with plot armor, and actually prefer it that way. "Victories don't taste nearly as sweet, if we know we were probably going to win anyway," I was told.