TPKs

[Quasqueton]

Scenario:

The PCs are about to enter a room from which the DM is pretty sure they won't be coming out of (for whatever reason). It is either a trap they haven't the means to escape, an enemy they haven't the power to overcome, or some other probable TPK situation. The DM didn't expect the PCs to reach this point so quickly, or didn't expect them to rush headlong into the situation so blindly.

Maybe the DM misjudged the challenge they are about the face, and now realizes his mistake. Maybe the PCs have behaved absolutely foolishly all the way to this point, and the DM knows they won't wise up before charging further forward. Maybe no one is really to blame, but things have just gone crazy for a minute (like they lost the magic widget they need to overcome the challenge, in a fluke accident, in the previous challenge).

Whatever the situation, and however the PCs arrived at it, the DM sees a TPK coming.

Question:

Should the DM alter (weaken or remove) the challenge in the room? Should the DM just flat out stop the Players/PCs from going further? Should the DM just let them act on their own, and let the TPK occur "naturally"?

Does your answer vary depending on someone being "at fault" for the coming disaster?

Are TPKs "wrong" things that should not happen in D&D, ever?

Are TPKs "natural" things that just sometimes happen. (Sometimes you get the bear. Sometimes the bear gets you.)

Quasqueton

 

[JimAde]

I don't think this question has a single answer. Some groups insist that the GM let the dice fall where they may, and feel cheated if the GM protects them. My own group would be very disappointed and/or upset if I allowed a TPK. They want to continue developing their characters' stories, which is hard to do when you're dead.

So the answer is: It depends!

 

[diaglo]

every PC for themselves.

no, TPKs ain't wrong.

the playas should know when to run. if they don't it ain't the referee who was the fool. it was the player who wasn't paying attention. it was the player who should've had their PC react accordingly.

referee should be impartial.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

For me it would depend upon whether I felt I as DM had dropped the ball. If I felt I played a significant part in screwing it up, I would adjust things to make it more survivable (three of the BBEGs henchmen left to get lunch or something like that). If the players were just foolish or stupid, let things stand and then try and allow a reasonable chance for them to retreat if they realize that would be the best thing to do.

 

[Funeris]

LOL. I'm preparing for just this scenario tomorrow. Its been nearly 3 months since our last session and I grew a bit rusty in that time. As such, when I planned out tomorrow's game, I planned it for higher level characters. This is definitely my fault. However, I'm not going to modify the scenario tonight or tomorrow. It'll play out as they make it play out.

My players are pretty much unstoppable anyway. Not because they min-max. Not because they work well as a group (although that don't hurt). Its because they're blessed with an unnatural amount of luck when we play. So, I assume they'll make it through tomorrow just fine.

TPK's are completely natural. I warn them every session that my only goal is to slaughter their entire party. Its not true, but it helps to keep them on their toes.

 

[BlackMoria]

Fudging the encounter is one solution but the bigger question is - If the DM saves the party from themselves, who benefits. The party? They don't know the encounter was fudged so they will go on their merry blissfully ignorant way and probably straight into another TPK at some point.

In short, if the DM saves them, unless he points out the problems which lead to the circumstance he is saving them from, they are not going to change and play their characters with more thought.

Noone likes TPKs, least of all the DM. But a TPK can be a real slap in the face of a wake up call to the players, allowing them to internally analyse their performance leading up to the TPK and allow them to (hopefully) learn from their mistakes, and realize that the campaign can have real consequences for 'inept' play.

If I was the DM, I would allow the TPK to unfold, neither hindering or helping the characters in any fashion and they live or die based on their choices. And if it happens, hopefully they learn from their mistakes.

 

[Seeten]

Challenging, but not Overwhelming. Thats my motto.

 

[rushlight]

Scenario:

The PCs are about to enter a room from which the DM is pretty sure they won't be coming out of (for whatever reason). It is either a trap they haven't the means to escape, an enemy they haven't the power to overcome, or some other probable TPK situation.

Such as a puzzle?

Whatever the situation, and however the PCs arrived at it, the DM sees a TPK coming.

That all depends on the situation. I've had games before when I could have killed off every player, but didn't. Usually, I'll try to find a solution that makes sense. In the end though, if a TPK isn't possible, then the combat system has lost it's purpose.

An example:

I had a group of 23rd level PCs. They ventured into a cavern from which they knew they could not teleport out of. They knew that inside were 9 powerful dragons, and whatever army they were building.

They managed to kill one dragon. Then they found the army. A room of iron golems. Hundereds of them - guarded by a mithril golem. They got whooped, but figured out the danger quick, and made their focus escape.

Later in the same dungeon, they encountered a green dragon, with guardians. Foolishly, they split up - and the dragon managed to get the drop on the party. Before long, three of the five were dead - and the other two were far into the cavern, while the dragon was at the only exit.

At this point, I had to make a decision. The dragon could easily have decided to kill the other two, and done so with ease. However, that would have been a TPK, and likely the end of the campaign. To make my decision, I based it on the actions of the players in previous situations. If the players had an attitude of "we're players, so everything works out for us" I'd have just killed them. They didn't feel that way though - they knew they were in danger, and were being very cautious. It was just a small tactical mistake that lead to their downfall. At the same time, I didn't want them to escape from their predicament unharmed, or without learning a lession.

So, since 3 of the 5 had already fallen, the dragon decided to make an offer. I reasoned that a dragon is very intelligent - and knows when it has the advantage. He decided to use this situation to his advantage, and agreed to let the last two leave on the condition that they not return, and that they reveal to him the location of a very valuable artifact. Had they refused, he would have killed them - but I gave my players an "out".

In the end, they took it, although the price was high. Not only did they need to resurrect three friends - they were not allowed to take the bodies with them from the cavern, or any of the possesions the dead had. Also, they had to leave behind their weapons. This set the party back an immense fortune - and also led to more stories involving the artifact, and keeping it away from the dragon. To me it was a win-win situation, and much more preferable to "well, it kills you all. Roll some stats."

Basically, I'd say that the DM should look for alternate paths out of a TPK situation where at all possible. Capture, forced service, monitary loss, or deaths of some PCs are all acceptable alternatives to a TPK - as long as your players aren't of the mind that they "deserve" to win. Plus, those alternatives can lead to more storylines. But if your players believe that they should conquer all because they're the players - then I say kill 'um!

 

[PapersAndPaychecks]

Superior players scout ahead, figure out what they're getting into, and come up with a plan before acting. If you never put in encounters that the players can't handle with sword and fireball, then the superior players never get a chance to shine. Tough combat encounters are a chance for evolution to take its course, don't be shy about putting them in.

This assumes that a route exists whereby an intelligently-played character could avoid the encounter or negotiate past it. If no such route exists, the monsters can see invisible or otherwise detect the party, etc., then the DM is probably at fault.

Traps are a bit different. If you're dealing with high level players - ones who can reasonably expect to find the trap if they bother to look for it, and who can raise characters who are killed by it - then almost any trap is appropriate. They'll soon learn to search for traps before the whole party walks into the room.

If you're dealing with low-level players, who might miss the trap even though they've searched for it, then the onus is upon the DM to tone down the traps a bit; no trap should be that lethal.

 

[rogueattorney]

I've had plenty of TPK's, and even more near TPK's. In every case, the party did some very questionable things, these things generally are...
1. One-more room syndrome. The absolute main cause of TPK's. A depleted party that's completed a significant part of the adventure decides to try one more room, when they should rest and re-fuel.
2. Bullets left in the chamber. The party leaves their most powerful spells, magic items, etc. for more powerful encounters, and ends up getting picked off one by one by fairly minor encounters until they're all dead. Those Sleep and Magic Missile spells aren't going to do anyone much good against the BBEG if you never make it to him in the first place (assuming there even is a BBEG...).
3. "The DM would never let us lose." Failing to just run away when things are going bad.
4. Outright stupidity. "Well, then I tell Orcus that he's fat, his breath smells bad, and that our fighter can kick his behind up and down all 666 levels of the Abyss." or "What do you mean, am I SURE? Yes, I stick the dagger up the sleeping dragon's butt." or "100 to 1, I like those odds!!!" You get the picture.

R.A.