Should the DM "kill" a character?

[Herremann the Wise]

Just curious on a few opinions on a tricky matter that developed.

It is a skirmish with a band of Orcs attacking the party. The Orcs are attacking from either flank in two groups. You have several powerful Orcs on one flank who have smashed down the party's Cleric deep into the negatives but not to the point of fatality.
What happens next shocks the party.

The DM plays the Orcs to their alignment and one of them simply kills the fallen cleric with a blow. The players are just simply not use to this though. There was a general state of shock as a character that had been developed over many many sessions was "taken out of the game".

While it was well within the bounds for the DM to do this, was it fair considering previous experiences and "unwritten rules"? The Cleric had a lot of nice looking gear on - sword/shield etc. Should they have perhaps taken these rather than killing the unconscious Cleric? Should they have attacked other party members who were more of a threat? Has this circumstance arisen in your game?

I can see both sides of the argument. I suppose it just comes down to the DM taking off the gloves and saying that the "unwritten rule" has been deleted.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Vrecknidj]

It depends upon the degree of maturity of the players. If the players can handle the roughness of the game, then the orcs should be governed as they'd be. I can't imagine that a race as brutal as orcs would contemplate the issue. Items can be recovered later.

On the other hand, if the players are relatively new to the game, or aren't really mature enough to handle the roughness of the game, I'd let it slide.

Dave

 

[Thanee]

I usually don't do this to PCs (altho it is mostly just being inconsequent), but if the situation is like there is no real important action to take otherwise (i.e. standing opponents nearby... this action would just delay fighting and offer no direct gain), then it certainly seems acceptable.

I think it happened once in our campaign, that a character was dropped below 0 and the attacker (full attack) had one attack left, so used it to finish the opponent off.

Hey, there's always raise dead...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Mythmere]

Just curious on a few opinions on a tricky matter that developed.

It is a skirmish with a band of Orcs attacking the party. The Orcs are attacking from either flank in two groups. You have several powerful Orcs on one flank who have smashed down the party's Cleric deep into the negatives but not to the point of fatality.
What happens next shocks the party.

The DM plays the Orcs to their alignment and one of them simply kills the fallen cleric with a blow. The players are just simply not use to this though. There was a general state of shock as a character that had been developed over many many sessions was "taken out of the game".

While it was well within the bounds for the DM to do this, was it fair considering previous experiences and "unwritten rules"? The Cleric had a lot of nice looking gear on - sword/shield etc. Should they have perhaps taken these rather than killing the unconscious Cleric? Should they have attacked other party members who were more of a threat? Has this circumstance arisen in your game?

I can see both sides of the argument. I suppose it just comes down to the DM taking off the gloves and saying that the "unwritten rule" has been deleted.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

Players will generally wait to kill downed monsters until they take out the ones that are still fighting. But not always. Killing a character, when it makes sense for the monsters to do so, is actually vital to the game. Without risk, there is no drama to the game. I'd say orcs would be very likely to do this, and almost certain to do it if one of the orcs had no target and could get to the downed player.

 

[Umbran]

More important, I think, to do away with "unwritten rules".

Communication between DM and players is important. If the DM had simply made it clear that PC death was a real possibility, there'd have been much less problem.

 

[Ibram]

it doesnt make a lot of sense to waste a whole action killing someone who had already gone down (and may or may not already be dead) as there are plenty of other foes to fight.

in the heat of combat the Orc would have had less then 10 seconds to determine if the cleric was still alive, then stoop down and kill him.

 

[Squire James]

Sometimes the party needs to be shocked. Sometimes it needs to be emphasized that the Orcs are not there to borrow a cup of sugar. I think the DM is doing the players a dis-service if he doesn't play the monsters at least as blood-thirsty as, say, the PC's.

 

[Gizzard]

Should they have perhaps taken these rather than killing the unconscious Cleric? Should they have attacked other party members who were more of a threat?

Flipping the situation on it's head; would the party have CDG'd a fallen Orc Cleric while combat was still going?

My party wouldn't except in very narrow circumstances; they'd expect to win and then CDG everyone afterwards. So they'd continue attacking other standing Orcs. This is the "baseline" then; the action that the party considers is reasonable.

So, the players in your example may feel that they were not treated equally: that the DM had the Orcs kill the Cleric simply to spite them instead of having them take more sensible actions like fleeing or fighting standing foes.

(This gives me the idea of a tribe of insane, suicidal Orcs who pick a single foe at the beginning of combat and gain glory by kamikaze'ing that foe. How Chaotic Evil. )

 

[Faerl'Elghinn]

It all depends on whether or not there were other combatants still standing. In the heat of battle, is it really realistic for a combatant to continue to batter an already defeated opponent? Of course not. If you chop halfway through someone's torso with an axe and he keels over, you don't have time to find out whether or not he's actually dead. You just move on to the next guy who's trying to stick you with a sword.

In spite of the common misconception that it's unrealistic for monsters to leave unconscious PCs alive, it is technically more realistic for them to move on to more threatening opponents as the situation dictates.

 

[KenM]

It also depends on how long the game had been running, how well the DM and players knew they're playing styles, ect..