Those groups where no one ever dies
- Thread starter LazerPointer
- Start date
The risk of PC death is essential to the game for me. As a player and as a DM. I am unsatisfied when I play in a game in which nobody dies. It doesn't feel like there is any true risk. But, I think different players react differently to PC death. Some members of our group just leave the session when their character dies. Sometimes, they don't come back for a while. There are players who take risks and understand that sometimes adventuring is lethal, and there are overly-cautious players who want to exploit every possible advantage before proceeding. It is a difficult balance to strike.
I think the most important thing to do as a DM is to be fair in applying the rules. Some good advice I read recently in a 20-year old RPG is to give the player a chance, even a very small last chance. If you do that, the player will feel better about the outcome.
Here's a recent example from a D&D game I'm running. PC A died while PC B was trying to carry him away to safety. The combat continued, and the other PCs defeated the foe. After reading the rules for a few minutes, Player A thought that I applied his first stabilization roll too soon. I made him roll immediately because he fell on his turn after an attack of opportunity that he provoked resulted in a critical hit that put him in the negatives. Player A felt that he should have rolled his first stabilization on his next turn (which is what the PHB says) and therefore PC A should have 1 more hit point to his name--putting him at -9 instead of -10 and DEAD. I considered it on the spot and decided it was reasonable to allow PC B a chance to make a Heal check to try to re-stabilize PC A, and failing that to allow PC A one more stabilization roll. It didn't affect the story too much and gave PC A a slim chance of success. I did not allow any of the other PCs to break off combat retroactively to try to help as that would affect the way the story unfolded.
Player B had to roll a 16 or better on PC B's untrained & low-Wisdom Heal skill check to re-stabilize PC A. The d20 fell as Player A nervously prepared his percentile dice to try again to roll 10% or less. Player B made the check, and everyone was happy. I suspect that if both rolls had failed, Player A would have been accepting of the result and just made up a new character.
So, make the threat of PC death a possibility; but give the players every chance you can to avoid it. In the end, make it the fault of their dice if you possbily can. You can't blade a bad roll! (But you can sure blame a bad DM!)
I think the most important thing to do as a DM is to be fair in applying the rules. Some good advice I read recently in a 20-year old RPG is to give the player a chance, even a very small last chance. If you do that, the player will feel better about the outcome.
Here's a recent example from a D&D game I'm running. PC A died while PC B was trying to carry him away to safety. The combat continued, and the other PCs defeated the foe. After reading the rules for a few minutes, Player A thought that I applied his first stabilization roll too soon. I made him roll immediately because he fell on his turn after an attack of opportunity that he provoked resulted in a critical hit that put him in the negatives. Player A felt that he should have rolled his first stabilization on his next turn (which is what the PHB says) and therefore PC A should have 1 more hit point to his name--putting him at -9 instead of -10 and DEAD. I considered it on the spot and decided it was reasonable to allow PC B a chance to make a Heal check to try to re-stabilize PC A, and failing that to allow PC A one more stabilization roll. It didn't affect the story too much and gave PC A a slim chance of success. I did not allow any of the other PCs to break off combat retroactively to try to help as that would affect the way the story unfolded.
Player B had to roll a 16 or better on PC B's untrained & low-Wisdom Heal skill check to re-stabilize PC A. The d20 fell as Player A nervously prepared his percentile dice to try again to roll 10% or less. Player B made the check, and everyone was happy. I suspect that if both rolls had failed, Player A would have been accepting of the result and just made up a new character.
So, make the threat of PC death a possibility; but give the players every chance you can to avoid it. In the end, make it the fault of their dice if you possbily can. You can't blade a bad roll! (But you can sure blame a bad DM!)
Evilhalfling
Adventurer
As a player I perfer the risk of death, and have actually left a group after the second time we were saved from death by heavy handed manipulation.
(my PC was an atheist and was saved by divine intervention, with no strings)
playing in a new game @11th lvl raising the dead is easy, which is good in the first 3 games 3 deaths. The DM lowered the costs, otherwise we would be about 8k- in the red. We are playing City of Spider Queen, and I don't think we are playing badly, but not perfectly either. Hopefully he will tone down the modual.
As a DM deaths are occassional, 5 PC deaths in RL year, only one rasied.
no one seems to have a problem with this. In fact for a while I was too lienent and we now use a rule that mistakes can only be corrected if caught within 1 round. Although this normally came out to players benifit, it was suggested by a player, and we all prefer the new rule.
The best advice is to mention up front that death is possible, and let dice fall where they may.
(my PC was an atheist and was saved by divine intervention, with no strings)
playing in a new game @11th lvl raising the dead is easy, which is good in the first 3 games 3 deaths. The DM lowered the costs, otherwise we would be about 8k- in the red. We are playing City of Spider Queen, and I don't think we are playing badly, but not perfectly either. Hopefully he will tone down the modual.
As a DM deaths are occassional, 5 PC deaths in RL year, only one rasied.
no one seems to have a problem with this. In fact for a while I was too lienent and we now use a rule that mistakes can only be corrected if caught within 1 round. Although this normally came out to players benifit, it was suggested by a player, and we all prefer the new rule.
The best advice is to mention up front that death is possible, and let dice fall where they may.
Lord Pendragon
First Post
Just as a small note so you know what you're getting into: as a player this kind of game would cause me to consider leaving a group. A large part of the fun I have is playing a single character over the long haul. Seeing what happens with him. If I'm told that the game won't allow me to do that, but instead will be a succession of "Tomb of Horrors" games, I'd probably lose interest.Whimsical said:
Not to say that I'm completely against PC death. As a player, my current game has had 2 deaths so far. But those PCs have been raised, so the players can continue to develop the same characters, and the game moves on. So a degree of danger can be a plus. But high lethality, where one can expect a death a session, is not my kind of game.
Be aware that it might not agree with some or all of your current players, as well. I suggest you discuss it with your players, and see how they feel about it. They might be more willing to give it a try if you end the current campaign (retiring the current characters that were created under the expectation that they'd have a decent lifespan) and started up a new Tomb-of-Horrors game after that. Not killing off the PCs they've developed up to this point could make a big difference in avoiding bitterness and allowing the players to try it your way with an open mind.
Ogrork the Mighty
Explorer
I agree 100%. Why bother putting much effort into your character when you know he'll be dead within a few weeks? The fun is seeing your character advance, potentially from 1st-20th level. Rolling up a new character every level or so isn't fun; it's monotonous and boring. If I was joining a new campaign and the DM told me to roll up 4 characters in case of death, I wouldn't even bother to show up; it would be obvious to me that the DM isn't setting up the encounters properly.
I think the real issue behind this topic is TPKs and stupid ways that parties have been "saved" by the whims of the DM. I know my players get upset when there's a silly, "the party is saved by X" solution. It's better to prepare fallback scenarios for TPK events. Necromancer Games has a book called "Raising the Dead" (IIRC) that provides interesting ways to return the dead to life.
If characters are getting killed because of stupid things the players do, the DM needs to try and account for this by having weaker encounters until the party learns from their mistakes. Simply killing someone's character and saying "Well, now you know, and knowing is half the battle!" will only earn you nasty glares and additional empty seats at your next game.
I think the real issue behind this topic is TPKs and stupid ways that parties have been "saved" by the whims of the DM. I know my players get upset when there's a silly, "the party is saved by X" solution. It's better to prepare fallback scenarios for TPK events. Necromancer Games has a book called "Raising the Dead" (IIRC) that provides interesting ways to return the dead to life.
If characters are getting killed because of stupid things the players do, the DM needs to try and account for this by having weaker encounters until the party learns from their mistakes. Simply killing someone's character and saying "Well, now you know, and knowing is half the battle!" will only earn you nasty glares and additional empty seats at your next game.
If you feel that you want to kill PCs then you are approuching GMing improperly and should not be GMing.
If you over power your campaign and PCs die then your not a very good GM or the Players arn't focusing on the campaign and tactics.
If a PC dies because he did something stupid or your dice are just rolling really well then oh, well- sh- um, stuff happens, PCs die and campaigns continue on or move on or whatever.
I tend not to have a lot of deaths in my campaigns because of smart players and because I want continious characters in the campaign- rotating characters does not interest me.
If you over power your campaign and PCs die then your not a very good GM or the Players arn't focusing on the campaign and tactics.
If a PC dies because he did something stupid or your dice are just rolling really well then oh, well- sh- um, stuff happens, PCs die and campaigns continue on or move on or whatever.
I tend not to have a lot of deaths in my campaigns because of smart players and because I want continious characters in the campaign- rotating characters does not interest me.
Blue_Kryptonite
First Post
I'll have to chime in with the minority viewpoint here. If I started having large numbers of character deaths, we wouldn't play anymore. All but one player would find something else to do.
As a player, I'd be gone. I can play video games to the same effect.
As a DM, my campaigns are structured like TV shows. You don't kill off the heroes, because either the show ends, or the new heroes come in with no one having any real reason to carry on (ala X-Files).
Just be aware, it can be done. In three decades of gaming, I've had perhaps a dozen deaths. All of which were dramatically appropriate and the player already had a new character in mind (Doyle on Angel), or to get rid of a departing player's character (Tahsa Yar).
Just to reiterate: Be prepared to either lose players or have them stop caring about the game as anything more than an amusing board game. It might not happen, but there's certainly a good possibility.
As a player, I'd be gone. I can play video games to the same effect.
As a DM, my campaigns are structured like TV shows. You don't kill off the heroes, because either the show ends, or the new heroes come in with no one having any real reason to carry on (ala X-Files).
Just be aware, it can be done. In three decades of gaming, I've had perhaps a dozen deaths. All of which were dramatically appropriate and the player already had a new character in mind (Doyle on Angel), or to get rid of a departing player's character (Tahsa Yar).
Just to reiterate: Be prepared to either lose players or have them stop caring about the game as anything more than an amusing board game. It might not happen, but there's certainly a good possibility.
ivocaliban
Explorer
Well, you did say that you "wanna kill PCs." So if you've got it in mind that they're going to die then they might have reason to be concerned. On the other hand, if you're just allowing for the possibility of PC death then just let the know and go with it.
tarchon
First Post
I'm not clear as to whether you're saying PCs never die or that they do die and get magically revived. Using the standard rules, unrevivable deaths are pretty rare, and so I don't see any way to make that a high risk without having it come off as contrived. I think the most you should do is limit access to magical resurrection from 3rd parties, and refrain from pulling punches. Actually trying to kill PCs doesn't lead anywhere good for a long-term campaign. In our last campaign, we didn't have any permanent PC deaths, but only one PC of five made it through without dying once. The resurrections were always fairly hard to come by and expensive in terms of money and obligations incurred with the casters.
Similar Threads
