Surprise or tactics

[Bullgrit]

Through the years and editions, there have been various monsters that explode in some way when they are killed. (I have some examples in mind, but without my books at hand, I can’t check to be sure I’m mentioning the correct creatures. So I’ll leave naming these monsters to someone with a more sure memory or with the books open.) Some of these last attacks are pretty deadly.

My question is, are these last attack tricks better/more fun when they take the PCs by surprise (potentially killing one or more) or when the PCs know to expect them, and have to use tactics in battle to avoid the effects (potentially negating the direct effect)?

Bullgrit
Total Bullgrit

 

[weem]

My question is, are these last attack tricks better/more fun when they take the PCs by surprise (potentially killing one or more)...

I'm not sure how well my players would appreciate learning about these explosions when the cost is one or more of their lives.

I do think it's fun when it's by surprise, but I think it should then give them the knowledge that they didn't like it and want to avoid it at all costs. How? Well, the first thing I think of is that an exploding effect on death does not have to do damage or be deadly. Take a look at the list of Conditions (Dazed, Blinded, etc) and use one of those for example... a creature could explode with a loud explosion of air (and liquid of course) that Daze's them until the end of their next turn (for example). Maybe they are knocked prone as well.

Maybe the creatures use fire in some way... but when they explode, they spray a flammable substance out onto nearby players making them more susceptible to the fire damage (there is a term for taking more damage from a damage type as opposed to being resistant but it's totally lost to me at the moment).

 

[el-remmen]

The surprise is fun and then once the knowledge is gained "the hard way" trying to avoid it is also fun. . . This was the case when I ran one of the adventures from the Savage Tide AP - Smuggler's Gambit.

 

[Janx]

some of those monsters come from Gary's Gallery of Gimpy Gaffs To Gack Gamers

Things like Piercers, Cloakers, Mimics, and all the other ones are meant to look like a normal scene, but sneak a monster into the player's midst.

An exploding on death monster (particularly if there's some delay) is intended to trick the players into finishing the fight, and get blown up while searching the bodies (since a real booby trap would have gone off/failed during the fighting, a "monster biology" reason lets you bypass any caution the player may take).

A monster that explodes immediately on death, is also intended to screw the PCs, since every player knows when a monster attacks you, you kill it, they will therefore do so, and get themselves killed.

A good GM would give clues about the nature of the beast. A bad GM is eagerly awaiting the PC that gets nailed by it.

It's that simple.

 

[roguerouge]

I dislike these creatures, as I doubt that there's much evolutionary advantage to the kind of biology necessary for such explosions. My first question would be: so why didn't sticking a sword into it make it blow up? Why doesn't freezing them with cold avoid this?

I mean, sure, if it's a mad scientist/alchemist thing, okay, but otherwise... feh. Lame.

 

[weem]

so why didn't sticking a sword into it make it blow up? Why doesn't freezing them with cold avoid this?

You could make it work that way, no? In fact, that could provide a good challenge... a "don't use your blades!" kind of thing.

---edit---

nm, I mis-read that. But, you could present creatures that immediately release (for example) a toxin when sliced so the group needs to use other methods, etc.

---/edit---

Also, you could provide terrain that helps deal with this (if the players use it effectively). For example, pits would work for kicking bodies into - especially if there is a delay of a round. Even without a delay, they could resort to pushing creatures into pits to avoid the explosions they just suffered through.

 

[Bullgrit]

I recently ran an encounter with 10 monsters that explode into an evil, damaging, nauseating mist when killed. They are individually CR 1 or 2 (so ten = ~EL8-9), and the PC party is level 6.

The death "explosion" does 1d6 damage to all within 5 feet, and causes the nauseated condition for 1 round unless a Fort save 15 (I think). The mist fades almost immediately -- is not a lingering effect. And the creatures are immune to the effects of their brethren dying -- so no domino effect.

The PCs had never encountered these creatures before, so they charged right into the midst of the horde coming at them. When the fight was over, they had taken more damage from the kills than from the living beasts. Some PCs had lost a couple rounds from nausea, too.

Fortunately, this surprise death attack was not deadly to the PCs -- the damage was low compared to 6th-level characters -- but they were very annoyed. It was especially annoying/funny when the fighter killed three in one round (two attacks plus a cleave).

I'm looking forward to seeing how they choose to take these kinds of creatures on the next time they see them coming.

Bullgrit

 

[gizmo33]

I dislike these creatures, as I doubt that there's much evolutionary advantage to the kind of biology necessary for such explosions.

It is an advantage for social creatures. As a monster, your relatives (who also carry your genes) would technically stand a greater chance of surviving since the PCs would be killed in the explosion.

I'm not a biologist but I would think there are plenty of examples of creatures who sacrifice themselves for the good of the group (bees?) IMO it's important not to misunderstand evolution as always advocating "selfish" behavior. Humans themselves are probably a good example of this - surviving past child-bearing years and other bits of social behavior may not benefit you directly, but might benefit your siblings, children, their children, etc.

Of course some of these monsters have nothing to do with biology - undead, for example. If I were an evil necromancer I might want some of my minions (the ones that stay far away) to explode on death. I'd want that to happen for the same reason that the PCs don't. Self-destruction of constructs and undead makes sense to me too (if it's viable in the overall cost-benefit analysis).

How much adversity a DM thinks his players can handle without becoming weepy is a judgement call - YMMV as they say.

 

[el-remmen]

I doubt that there's much evolutionary advantage to the kind of biology necessary for such explosions.

I think assuming Darwinian evolution to D&D monsters is a mistake. I prefer to think of creatures created by gods, and then maybe transformed by mad wizards or curses.

 

[el-remmen]

A good GM would give clues about the nature of the beast. A bad GM is eagerly awaiting the PC that gets nailed by it.

It's that simple.

I guess I'm a bad DM then because I consider firsthand experience enough of a clue.

Then again, if the situation in which they are encountered is the kind in which there is a possibility of a clue then I would give one (perhaps someone recently came through and killed some of these monsters and the remains are smeared outlines of their ashes or something - but then again, the PCs might just as easily assume that has to do with the way the creatures were killed).