Should this have been a TPK?

[random user]

eh? rage grants a +2 morale bonus to will saves.


.

OK, so he's +1 for being a 5th level barbarian, +2 for raging, and -2 for being an orc (or does the initial orc save modifier not get taken into account? Under orc it lists: Saves: Fort +3, Ref +0, Will –2) So he's rolling at a +1. That's not that good of a modifier really. Even at +3 if the orc doesn't taken account, you're saving vs a probably DC16 (I would assume with an array like that the cleric would put the 18 in wis, though, it might be DC15). At best the orc has a 55% chance of being affected; at worst he has a 70% chance of being affected.

Chances are that one hold person, if not both, are going to land.

I DM in a campaign with high stat PCs (the exact same array actually) and it makes a TON of difference in what the party can handle.

edit: ok I forgot to take into account that the orcs might have high wis, so the %'s may be lower by 5% per bonus they get from the wis. My bad. Still, it's a very good chance to immobilize at least one, and turning a fight from 5 vs 4 to 5 vs 3 is still significant.

 

[The_lurkeR]

That encounter was too tough for your party. Surprise attack from monsters who were probably too tough to begin with?

Not to mention even if you had run, the Orc Barb's have a speed advantage and would have run you down anyways.

Now I can't say if this is "fair" or not. I believe in having encounters that are too tough for the party "out there", in order to maintain a level or realism in the world. So the question might be; Did the party know what they might find in there and go anyway?

 

[Darkness]

Five 3rd-level characters are about equal to a 4th-level party (i.e., of four characters). Further, their stats and equipment are very good. So I'd say the 'standard' EL to send against them (i.e., loss of 20-25% of their resources) would be around EL 6.

Four 5th-level orc barbarians are EL 9, maybe EL 10 if their gear and stats were really that good.

That's 3-4 ELs over what the standard I'd expect this party to handle. By the numbers, a TPK isn't too unlikely in this situation. With good tactics and average or better dice luck it's beatable with some casualties, though.

Looking at the party's actions, their tactics were insufficient for such a challenge. After the monk and ranger went down, the fight became very, very hard to win.
However, unless the players knew the level and stats of the orcs they were facing, they might not have been aware of the degree of danger they were confronted with until it was too late for at least a few of them.

In conclusion, tough encounter + insufficient tactics + not knowing when to retreat = TPK.

 

[scourger]

Yes and yes. Too tough and combined bad luck & poor choices for the PCs.

 

[Sejs]

How many hit points did the ranger and monk have?

Both are d8 classes. Assume 18 con - no more than 36 each, not counting possible toughness (which, frankly, nearly noone takes).

20 str orcs, raging so their str is 24/+6 wielding greataxes. 1d12+9, 20/x3. One gets a crit (3d12+27... so 30-63), the other rolls max damage (21).

Yeah, I can see why they went down easily. The one on the recieving end of the crit was practically dead without even rolling for damage.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

The party is equivalent to roughly a 4th level party in strength.

A full strength party should be able to handle a +0 to +2 EL encounter without problems.

A full strength party can "usually" handle a +3 EL encounter without problems, although bad luck or modest tactical errors sometimes lead to a death.

I have seen a fully buffed party handily defeat a +4 EL encounter. I have seen a fully buffed party suffer multiple deaths against a +4 EL encounter because of moderate tactical errors and/or bad luck.

The orcs were a +5 EL encounter. A death or three was very, very likely. A TPK is hardly surprising.

 

[MerricB]

I think a special "Darwin Award" should go to the wizard, who charged into the middle of a melee to administer healing potions.

There is a place for every PC, and the place for the wizard is as far from the melee as possible.

Cheers!

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I think a special "Darwin Award" should go to the wizard, who charged into the middle of a melee to administer healing potions.

There is a place for every PC, and the place for the wizard is as far from the melee as possible.

Cheers!

Hi MerricB,

By the way, I'm from Sydney so hello to you up the coast there.

There were a couple of additional issues that stopped the party from running. Of the three characters left standing after the initial foray, one was a LG Cleric of Tyr renowned for hating Orcs and a Half-Orc who loves him mum - and thus not Orcs. These guys did not even flinch before charging in.

My wizard took her chances before throwing her life away trying to get a Color Spray to slow them down - go that 15 foot cone for proximity. Unfortuantely, her spell selection was quite limited even though she could pump a few out. She was an arrogant bitch and so won't be remembered fondly. Unfortunately, no one will know of her somewhat capriciously "stoopid" act of heroism that finished her life.

In general, we like to play heroic characters so in most situations we're going to walk into something before running away. In such circumstances, deaths are always going to be on the cards. However, I feel that the major issue here was that the encounter was too tough.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Agemegos]

Was this too tough for five 3rd level characters? Were we the victims of poor rolling and decisions?

Five 3rd level characters are a little weaker than 4 fourth. Your 'elite' stats are partly balanced by the orcs' 'elite' stats, and I doubt your gear amounts to the equivalent of a whole level. So you weren't really as tough as a 5th-level party.

One of those orcs would have been a fair challenge, and would have used up 25% of your resources and hit points. Four one after the other would have run you into the ground. Four all at the same time is not an encounter that you should be expected to win: it is a tough encounter that you are quite likely to lose. And that is in a stand-up fight. So when your GM had those orcs attempt an ambush, he or she really ought to have figured that if the ambush came off your party would be defeated.

A defeat is not necessarily a TPK, of course. But you have to figure that monsters do not have their levels, stats, and hit-point totals printed on their foreheads. It is going to take a few turns for the players to realise that the orcs they face are too tough. And raging STR 20 orcs with greataxes stand a very good chance of of putting a couple of 3rd-level characters down in two or three turns.

Which means that that encounter was very likely to kill a couple of the PCs, and that if your GM didn't recognise that his judgement is drifting to starboard.

That is turned out to be a TPK is partly as result of bad rolls at crucial times and party a result of the fact that no battle-plan ever survives contact with the enemy. Which are also things that GMs have to learn to live with. I would not have used such an encouter as this without clearly marking to the party that they were getting into deep water. There are challenges in my worlds that PCs cannot take on, but I don't put them where weak parties are likely to trip over them.

 

[Tuzenbach]

The bottomline is the Monk never should have left the main group. There's a reason for scouting ahead and it isn't to ultimately doom the party, but to increase the party's chances of living.