Surrender or Die!

[Ed_Laprade]

I voted some, because there wasn't a 'need more info' choice. I've seen every variation on this theme there is, I think. (And I'm usually one of those who would rather fight to the death, and only very grudgingly go along with a group surrender. But I'm not the one who starts a fight to instigate a TPK, although I'll happily join in once ones started.)

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I voted they'd all fight to the death.

We're too used to 3e, where losing your gear was basically a permanent depower.

But it varies depending on the rules. PCs have often surrendered in my d20 Modern campaigns (generally to the police) since they (probably) won't be killed by the cops, and might even get most of their gear back.

And getting guns in Modern is easy. Kill a bad guy. Steal his gun. Repeat.

 

[White Wizard]

I am generally in the fight and die camp. A 3 year long campaign saw one of my favorite characters die this way. We were around level 16 or 17 when it happened. We ended up being trapped in the mouth if a cave and a wall of force. At the entrance to the mouth of the cave was a dracolitch and a small army of liches (I think it was 12) the rest of the party was able to escape past the wall of force before it was put up so me and another player were cut off in a surrender or die situation. Funny thing is me and the other player had our occasional disagreements (as in all the time. Our play styles didn't mesh) but we both agreed and went down swinging.

In another campaign with another dm we are constantly faced with flee or surrender. Or no matter what we do we cannot win. I have to say it's very disheartening. You feel like a failure when you should be a hero and I have to agree with not putting your players in that spot.

 

[blargney the second]

You wish to surrender to me? Very well, I accept.

 

[cignus_pfaccari]

That depends on if the surrender will be honored or not.

They may well be angling for an easier time slaughtering the party.

If that appears to be the case, no reason to let them have an easy time.

Brad

 

[Ourph]

Based on my previous experience, some players will be OK with surrendering. At least one other player will declare that he will never surrender. That player will attack the enemies on his turn, deciding the issue for everyone. That player will then blame the TPK on the DM for creating an encounter that was "too tough".

 

[Nifft]

You wish to surrender to me? Very well, I accept.

I must spread XP around.

 

[Saeviomagy]

As a defacto D&D standard, every combat is winnable somehow and being captured by bad guys is a one-way ticket to losing all your cool loot.

Given that, the answer entirely depends on the campaign to date. I chose "few would surrender" assuming that this was the first encounter of a campaign.

I would expect that many D&D campaigns (or rather, most D&D DMs) would need to have encounters prior to this establish that:

a) There isn't going to be any DXM saving the PCs if they choose to fight (ie - previously the characters have gone up against unbeatable forces and lost, and it has cost them)

b) When you surrender to a foe, it furthers the game (ie - there have previously been incidences of capture where the rescue/escape have been fun experiences)

in order to coerce a willing surrender, no matter what the odds against the party, or the trustworthiness of the captor-to-be.

 

[pogre]

TPK. Then lots of complaining about the unfair encounter I set up.

 

[blargney the second]

I must spread XP around.

The thought definitely counts.