Those groups where no one ever dies

[IronWolf]

Out of curiosity, how do the players recognize those fights they're supposed to run from, without using metagame knowledge? i.e. a 12th-level party that's never seen a giant before encounters two of them for the first time. How is the party supposed to know that the Hill Giant will be a walkover, and the Mountain Giant will be a TPK?

Spatula put this better than I probably could...

Just curious. I've seen many DMs post on these boards over the years that they intentionally create encounters that will crush the party if engaged. I'm wondering how the party actually figures out they aren't supposed to engage, other than jumping in and letting the body count be their guide.

A couple of cases in point, one from the DM perspective and the other from the player perspective.

Recently a group I DM for was traveling with wagons loaded with supplies and loot after having raided a farm. A small band of orcs managed to get the jump on them in a remote area and the surprise round nearly decimated an already partially wounded party. No one died in the initial round or went negative, but another round or two of hits from the orcs and someone would most probably have died. The party, seeing the battle having taken a very poor start for them did the smart thing. Spur the wagons forward, while two members slowed the orcs down a bit to allow the other members of the group more time to flee. Their plan worked great, no one died and the party managed to get away with their belongings and live to fight another day.

As a player, I was in a party of six. We were in an underground cave complex looking for someone. At one point we found a hidden room that had three (or four) women with veils, a small chest sat inside the room. Our charismatic bard began talking to them while the rest of us stood just outside, ready to react. We ended up asking the women if they knew of the person we were looking for. Eventually we received vague directions due to the diplomatic negotiations. We left the women be, passing up a chance to see what was in the chest and continued on in search of the person we were looking for. We ended up finding who we were looking for and in the after game discussion it turned out the women we had passed had been medusas. A case where we as players managed to obtain our goal *without* fighting everything along the way.

Those are just two examples of what I mean when I say some encounters are not meant to be fought. Had either the characters in the DM scenario above or us as players in the second scenario not thought we could have died we would have just charged in swords drawn killing everything in sight. I personally have more fun feeling like I escaped death than knowing the DM will save me if my character does something stupid or foolhardy.

 

[Spatula]

I disagree. A reward for work/effort is rewarding, even if there is no risk. If you spend time fleshing out a character, time contributing to the campaign, making it fun for all, then why should that not be rewarded, even if you don't risk your character?

Personally, I don't consider those things to be work. YMMV.

 

[ptolemy18]

Personally, I don't consider those things to be work. YMMV.

Yeah, me too.

Jason

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Those are just two examples of what I mean when I say some encounters are not meant to be fought. Had either the characters in the DM scenario above or us as players in the second scenario not thought we could have died we would have just charged in swords drawn killing everything in sight. I personally have more fun feeling like I escaped death than knowing the DM will save me if my character does something stupid or foolhardy.

First of all, there is a distinction between a campaign where death is thwarted by the DM, and a campaign where most of the challenges the PCs encounter can be overcome by the PCs. I am not advocating a campaign in which the DM "saves" the PCs. I've never played in such a game, and would find such a game hard to suspend disbelief for.

But what I do expect is that there is a way for the party to prevail that doesn't involve running away immediately. Now don't get me wrong. I am not saying that PCs should never run away. But I prefer it to be something of a last resort. Luck is against you and you take several critical hits in the first round of combat, sure you might run. But I do not feel that an encounter created to be unwinnable from the outset is a good encounter. Either the players metagame and realize they're overmatched in the first round and run immediately, or they don't, and get killed.

Let's consider those medusas in your second example. What would have happened had your party attacked them? Would they have stood any kind of chance? Or would they have been immediately decimated?

If they'd have been killed, then I find that encounter problematic. It requires the PCs to take one specific action (negotiate, in this case), or die. And if there's anything I've learned in my time DMing, it's that you can never predict how the players are going to react to a situation.

 

[Acid_crash]

But what I do expect is that there is a way for the party to prevail that doesn't involve running away immediately. Now don't get me wrong. I am not saying that PCs should never run away. But I prefer it to be something of a last resort.

If they'd have been killed, then I find that encounter problematic. It requires the PCs to take one specific action (negotiate, in this case), or die. And if there's anything I've learned in my time DMing, it's that you can never predict how the players are going to react to a situation.

I disagree. If your players know this, then they will expect each encounter you give them a possible chance to win via combat, then more times than not they will run in hacking away...and if the only times they run is when the 'dice' roll bad, then that's metagaming (IMHO).

You also take away the chance encounter of something that does live in the world, the same world as the characters, and if the characters are dumb enough to go in thinking they can kill everything the DM puts in front of them, and not take a step back and think on it, then their death is on them.

Just because they are tougher doesn't mean that they shouldn't be encountered. If a group of characters goes into the hills, and in the distance sees some kind of Giant, and decides to rush in and attack them, that is their choice. If they rush in, thinking that "The DM won't put in anything to tough for us because we are player characters," then that is faulty game playing (IMHO).

Sometimes I give them very tough encounters, and sometimes I give them very easy encounters. I mix it up, and the players know that. And just cuz you see a bunch of kobolds running at you don't mean they are wimps. Nothing surprises a group of PC's more when a kobold casts a Fireball spell at the PC group.

 

[hong]

metagaming.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

 

[Fenes]

I disagree. If your players know this, then they will expect each encounter you give them a possible chance to win via combat, then more times than not they will run in hacking away...and if the only times they run is when the 'dice' roll bad, then that's metagaming (IMHO).

Just because they are tougher doesn't mean that they shouldn't be encountered. If a group of characters goes into the hills, and in the distance sees some kind of Giant, and decides to rush in and attack them, that is their choice. If they rush in, thinking that "The DM won't put in anything to tough for us because we are player characters," then that is faulty game playing (IMHO).

I expect from any of my players that they separate ooc and ic knowledge, and do not base their characters' actions upon ooc knowledge. People who can't roleplay a character fearing death without actually risking their characters are not people I want to play with.

Myself, I don't want to fear for my character when I play, worrying is not my idea of a fun hobby.

Edit: I have played with people who need the risk of character death to not play as if in godmode, and it did not turn out good for either side. Those different playstyles do not mix well.

 

[IronWolf]

First of all, there is a distinction between a campaign where death is thwarted by the DM, and a campaign where most of the challenges the PCs encounter can be overcome by the PCs. I am not advocating a campaign in which the DM "saves" the PCs. I've never played in such a game, and would find such a game hard to suspend disbelief for.

I think you do bring up a subtle distinction here and a valid one. I am against death being thwarted by the DM and where the DM is constantly saving the PCs.

With that being said I do like to throw the occasional very difficult encounter at a party, more to give the group a sense that they do not live in a vacuum than to have some sort of "power" over the players. I find that often times the party can surprise me with some very creative thinking and get out of a sticky situation. I have usually attributed this creative thinking a result of them knowing simply charging in swords drawn, fireballs blazing is probably not going to lead to a positive resolution.

::shrug:: I try to be a very fair DM. I think my reputation within the group I game with is as a tough, but fair DM. Perhaps my style of playing just works well for the group I am in and hence I am only seeing this from one side.

Let's consider those medusas in your second example. What would have happened had your party attacked them? Would they have stood any kind of chance? Or would they have been immediately decimated?

I am not actually sure what would have happened in that encounter. We didn't even learn they were medusa's until after the adventure completed (it was a one-shot, goal oriented adventure). Judging from the make-up of the group and what we had already been through I would have expected perhaps one to two characters being turned to stone, possibly a PC death. Difficult to say though.

But, because we knew PC death was definitely possible we as characters attempting to accomplish a specific goal decided it was not worth battling them regardless of what they were as they didn't seem to be related to the goal we were after other than being able to provide us with some directions. Instead of rushing in to do battle where we could have lost a member or two (either to death or pertrification) we chose to play out the encounter in a more peaceful manner.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Removed

 

[Henry]

In regard to players not using metagame knowledge to run from tough encounters, remember that there are subtle means that one can use in the game to pass information on an encounter's difficulty. Knowledge checks are one example; the new Knowledge (Dungeoneering) skill, as well as Knowledge (Nature) and Knowledge (Undead) and (The Planes) can give someone many clues to a creature's lethality. Also, context clues from observation can help - if said giant is twice your size and picking his teeth with a longsword, and knocking over oaks with a single blow, then alarm bells should ring in one's head. Furthermore, second-hand information is invaluable; if the town's militia tells the PCs when they leave, "beware the remorhazes - their backs can get so hot they can melt steel! Plus the things have the hide like plate, and can snap a man in half!" then they should know not to charge in swinging the second they see one.

Finally, caution should become a watchword in ANY situation these days! You can't depend on any little weak kobold to be a 4 hit point pansy like in the old days - these days JoJo the Kobold could be a freaking 12 th level sorcerer!