TPK - Therapy session.

[Dwimmerlied]

1e AD&D talks about throwing down food or treasure in order to get away. The idea is that the pursuing monster will stop to pick up the goodies. I'm not sure how viable this would actually be, it would surely be extremely difficult to get items out of a backpack when a monster is after you, but the game text seems to consider it to be smart play.

By 3.5ed rules, a move action iirc. I guess its no guarantee, but a good idea none-the-less. I agree that tactically, retreat is often very difficult.

 

[delericho]

The 5% overwhelming guideline thing is a good idea, it teaches characters that they sometimes need to run. Hell, even Conan, and his conquering sword was no less heroic for fleeing (in fact, it simply highlighted he was not only strong, but wise). But when they use this device in published stuff eg. forge of fury, a good deal of space and explanation goes into warning the DM about considering this very carefully. Blatant "metagame" hints are actually suggested iirc.

Aye. If I recall correctly, "Forge of Fury" is also pretty much the last published adventure to include such an 'overwhelming' encounter. After it was published and used, and the "Roper encounter" had become infamous, there was a huge backlash from players at such an 'unfair' encounter being in print. And WotC, learning their lesson from this, never did it again.

Shame it was the wrong lesson they learned, but oh well...

As a player, I agree with a lot of what you guys are saying. I'd run. I'd actually find that more interesting and believable. As a DM, I'd make certain the characters knew for a fact that in my games, TPKs are a possibility, and suggest they play carefully.

I do the same at the start of a campaign, and will also insert in-game warnings where they are appropriate in the setting. (If everyone knows the Lord of Blades is a badass, and the PCs decide to go after him, then of course they should hear the warning!)

I also have a policy that if the PCs decide to retreat, most opponents won't go all-out to stop them. As Doug McCrea notes in his post, it's a problem in 3e that most parties have at least one member with a move of 20 and most monsters are considerably faster. So, if they choose to run then I'll generally let them get away.

But...

What I don't agree with is the notion that the DM must always telegraph that the upcoming encounter is particularly tough. Sometimes, it's just not appropriate - indeed, some monsters and most traps base their lethality precisely on their ability to hide their danger. I'm not out to screw over my players (in fact, a TPK probably hurts me more than it does any one of them, since all my prep work has just gone up in smoke), but their PCs are generally operating against dangerous foes and on deadly ground - they need to have their wits about them, and if they don't... well, that's on them.

 

[ImperatorK]

happens. Maybe next time your group will pay at least a little more attention.

 

[delericho]

By 3.5ed rules, a move action iirc. I guess its no guarantee, but a good idea none-the-less. I agree that tactically, retreat is often very difficult.

The SRD seems to agree with you. Determining the sanity, or lack thereof, of that rule is left as an exercise to the reader.

 

[Ragmon]

As a player, I agree with a lot of what you guys are saying. I'd run. I'd actually find that more interesting and believable. As a DM, I'd make certain the characters knew for a fact that in my games, TPKs are a possibility, and suggest they play carefully. If my games were, over many sessions, incorporating only CR-equal encounters, I'd then preferentially try in-game device to warn the characters of the toughness of the encounter. If it wasn't enough, i would not hesitate to then say, once off, after the first round; "this encounter is tough. Are you sure?" If they continued then? Roll the dice in the open.

I have my preferred playstyle and expectations, but its a good idea, IMO to know my players. If I know, in advance that they are likely to do this or that thing, and it is likely to cause a TPK, then I have to think carefully before I go ahead with it. Because this is going to suck for everyone in the end. I'd design encounters that are likely to be tough with a few outs, at the very least. If I had a party that engaged a strategy I didn't like, or for the purpose of telling a story, decided that the characters need to learn to run sometimes, I'd make sure they understood.

From what I've read, I don't think the DM did enough. I don't agree that the mephit was a good way to do this. Its no less meta-game than a brief OOC warning, and less precise anyhow;- what we as readers might infer, knowing nothing else about the game world is that in fact, the possessor of a mephit familiar is actually quite defeatable by such a party, perhaps, with a few lucky shots, even within 1 round.

And further, my guess might be that the DM didn't intend this to happen; and if that's the case, thats just poor planning. I don't agree that that's incompetence tho, even the most magnificent DMs here, I'm sure, have made this easy-to-make mistake from time to time

IMO the DM had and idea and he didn't want to back-down. Hints are nice, but depends if you give them in-game or directly to the players.

I may be missing a whole heap of hidden messages an inuendo, but I will say that doesn't seem fair, the respect thing anyhow. I didn't read any edition war, I think he was just giving his opinion.

Anyway, just my 2c. peace!

No, I did not mean he wanted to start one, I mean that since I mentioned it (cause I'm very bias against 4e), that we don't change the subject to Editions and which is better.

I read his post don't worry, my bark is worse then my bite.

But...

What I don't agree with is the notion that the DM must always telegraph that the upcoming encounter is particularly tough. Sometimes, it's just not appropriate - indeed, some monsters and most traps base their lethality precisely on their ability to hide their danger. I'm not out to screw over my players (in fact, a TPK probably hurts me more than it does any one of them, since all my prep work has just gone up in smoke), but their PCs are generally operating against dangerous foes and on deadly ground - they need to have their wits about them, and if they don't... well, that's on them.

IMO its up to the players to figure out the power level of their enemies. This was the first ever situation where the enemy was so tough it killed the 3 of us in 3 rounds. There were situation where a PC was one shot, like weretiger pounce at a level 4 rogue I think.

Wits were there we buffed up nicely and the giant wasp took the wizard out of combat. The the fighter started attacking...and we were done.

happens. Maybe next time your group will pay at least a little more attention.

The players payed attantion, we knew mostly what was coming, high level wizard, constructs, maybe even a "joker" NPC, but alas we got killed by a fighter with 3 attacks and +12 to damage, not missing an attack during the whole 3 round fight.
Our characters wont stop and start rolling listens and spots as soon as the DM picks up the MM.
Now the characters had no idea of the power of the enemy, even the 11d6+ was shrugged off by 2 of us, the wizards was taken out of commission.

Where did we not pay enough attention?

 

[Grogg of the North]

[MENTION=99604]Ragmon[/MENTION]

Having been in this scenario before I might as well throw in my 2 coppers.

The first thing I would do is find out if the other players feel the same way. It sounds like everyone was a little angry at the end of the session but now that time has past, you might as well see if they've cooled off any. If the rest of the players feel the same way, then before next session everyone needs to sit down with the DM and talk about what happened in the castle. Be sure to use phrases like "I think" and "I feel". This won't put the DM on the defensive and he'll be more open to listening. Make sure everyone gets a chance to talk but only one person at a time. Using something silly like a stuffed bear as a "speaking stick" works well there.

Could it be that the DM intended for you guys to be captured all along? It's a bit heavy handed but it could be interesting.

During the combat that led to the TPK, was there a lot of role playing (You drive your weapon home, finding a weak spot in the warrior's armor. Despite your powerful blow, he laughs and knocks your weapon aside and presses your feeble defenses)? Or was it what I would consider D&D Bingo (Everyone shouting numbers and getting very excited about those numbers)? The first one would probably lend itself to a warning more than the second since it gives you more information to work with.

I'm not sure how your group runs, but did the DM ever drop a "Are you sure?" on you? Groups I've been in / ran usually take that to mean "You're about to do something stupid/suicidal. You might want to reconsider".

I think it's a bit easy for the rest of us with 20-20 hindsight to look at the combat log and say "You should have run". But that's a bit unfair. Yea, the fighter gets dropped in one round. But he could have been crit'd or the DM just rolled well. It's easy for us to say "You should run" when we don't what would have happened. Would the wizard have followed you? What about your dead comrades? Sometimes when the players feel trapped they're more likely to gear up for a doomed last stand, blindly ignoring an escape route. Communication between the DM and the players are key for scenarios like this one.

 

[ImperatorK]

Where did we not pay enough attention?

At the part where you all got killed.

 

[Marshall Gatten]

Ragmon, you have have clearly already made up your mind. You came here not for advice, but for grousing. The person you need to bring this up with is your DM. You are clearly unable to get over the fact that you played the encounter badly, so you need to ask your DM to handhold more and to never throw anything threatening at your party. Just about everybody here is telling you that your DM acted appropriately. When the whole world is wrong, it may be time to look inward.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Unfortunately, the trope of the powerful villain talking to the heroes works far better in a movie or book than a game. Powerful villains are less likely to be surprised, and are probably smart enough to eliminate the threat while they're standing there with open jaws. (Meanwhile, PCs are frequently too aggressive to actually listen.)

There were other ways of getting that info to the PCs, and it's something I hope the DM deals with in a better way next time.

Of course, even with their slow speed, hopefully the PCs will consider running (or surrendering) the next time they run into something that's whupping their behinds.

What I don't agree with is the notion that the DM must always telegraph that the upcoming encounter is particularly tough. Sometimes, it's just not appropriate - indeed, some monsters and most traps base their lethality precisely on their ability to hide their danger. I'm not out to screw over my players (in fact, a TPK probably hurts me more than it does any one of them, since all my prep work has just gone up in smoke), but their PCs are generally operating against dangerous foes and on deadly ground - they need to have their wits about them, and if they don't... well, that's on them.

I think these should be telegraphed, unless the PCs are being particularly stupid.

It's a game, and just randomly dropping an OP encounter isn't fun. However, if PCs come up with a stupid plan, bite off more than they can chew, get arrogant, etc, then a nasty encounter can easily become punishment or a "wakeup call".

 

[Ragmon]

@Ragmon

Having been in this scenario before I might as well throw in my 2 coppers.

The first thing I would do is find out if the other players feel the same way. It sounds like everyone was a little angry at the end of the session but now that time has past, you might as well see if they've cooled off any. If the rest of the players feel the same way, then before next session everyone needs to sit down with the DM and talk about what happened in the castle. Be sure to use phrases like "I think" and "I feel". This won't put the DM on the defensive and he'll be more open to listening. Make sure everyone gets a chance to talk but only one person at a time. Using something silly like a stuffed bear as a "speaking stick" works well there.

Could it be that the DM intended for you guys to be captured all along? It's a bit heavy handed but it could be interesting.

During the combat that led to the TPK, was there a lot of role playing (You drive your weapon home, finding a weak spot in the warrior's armor. Despite your powerful blow, he laughs and knocks your weapon aside and presses your feeble defenses)? Or was it what I would consider D&D Bingo (Everyone shouting numbers and getting very excited about those numbers)? The first one would probably lend itself to a warning more than the second since it gives you more information to work with.

I'm not sure how your group runs, but did the DM ever drop a "Are you sure?" on you? Groups I've been in / ran usually take that to mean "You're about to do something stupid/suicidal. You might want to reconsider".

I think it's a bit easy for the rest of us with 20-20 hindsight to look at the combat log and say "You should have run". But that's a bit unfair. Yea, the fighter gets dropped in one round. But he could have been crit'd or the DM just rolled well. It's easy for us to say "You should run" when we don't what would have happened. Would the wizard have followed you? What about your dead comrades? Sometimes when the players feel trapped they're more likely to gear up for a doomed last stand, blindly ignoring an escape route. Communication between the DM and the players are key for scenarios like this one.

I myself don't like recieving compliments, maybe I do but I just don't know it, I don't know if you like em or not but:
Best post I have ever read....EVER. I mean its so well worded, and so neutral and so helpful to the situation... just beautiful.

We are not prone to talking about...stuff, cause at some point it will upset some one and the whole talking session will turn into an argument... its very stupid how delicate of a balance we have to maintain sometimes, this will probably be swept under the rug and be forgotten. Sad but true. (playing with other groups is not an option around here).
But I'm the brave type when it comes to awkward conversations, so it just might be tried.

I don't think capture was part of the plan, I think "the PCs go in listen to the exposition and go back to town and report".

Nah once combat start its all number, only when we are in a tight spot do we start to start getting inventive and rope-play in combat. (Mentioned in one of the replies, but combat feels like a mini-game in our session, its there to change up the pace).
Pure numbers all the way, from the DM and the players.

There were no out-right warnings.

"Yea, the fighter gets dropped in one round. But he could have been crit'd or the DM just rolled well."

Ah no, the Favored Soul got dropped first by the enemy fighter. And the damage was regular damage, nothing special.

For us the players it was like a normal boss fight situation, there in the big room, we were all buffed up, they were not expecting us. A nice surprise attack on the boss with his pants down. But we got auto-attacked by a fighter... XD