Vindictive, fair DMing, or is 3.5 too Lethal ??

[fusangite]

With respect, if he'd wanted sympathy, he might have asked for sympathy. He asked people to judge whether it was fair that his character died, and whether the DM was being vindictive for killing him, and whether 3.5 is more lethal than previous editions. Now he knows.

And now we can stop. I'm not saying that the first two pages were not a valuable exercise; I'm just saying enough is enough.

 

[Mark]

fusangite - It might be more practical advice to make sure sumi knows that as the starter of the thread he need only post and/or contact a moderator and mention that he has all of the input he desires and to please now close the thread. Unless or until he asks, as long as no one is getting out of line, the thread will likely remain open. There's no shame in his requesting the thread be closed if he has all of the advice he wishes to receive on the matter.

 

[Desdichado]

And now we can stop. I'm not saying that the first two pages were not a valuable exercise; I'm just saying enough is enough.

I'm sure this will sound snarky, so let me just disclaim up front that it's not my intention to be snarky. But how is this:

• Your call to make
• Any of your business

?

 

[Mark]

I'm sure this will sound snarky, so let me just disclaim up front that it's not my intention to be snarky. But how is this:

• Your call to make
• Any of your business

?

2005 will be the Year of Compassion, or hadn't you heard, JD?

 

[Arnwyn]

Where was the frost giant(s) during this particular encounter?

 

[3catcircus]

AWith the 16th-level wizard facing you, the EL rises to 17. That's too difficult. Although I have an issue with the "average" party level being 10-12 when one party member is ECL 14.

Maybe you should have talked, but that's not an excuse for using an overly powerful encounter. Mind you, with the power your character had (ECL 14, I believe) I suspect the rest of the party were also using optional rules making them more powerful than they should be. DMs commonly top up encounters by 1-3 or more points if their party seems too powerful. It could just be a miscalculation (and that's a valid excuse).

Springing a boss encounter on the players without some kind of warning is unfair, IMO.

Yes. It's called tactics. That's why enemies often target the wizard first, wall up the cleric with wall of x to keep him from healing the party, "focus fire" on a single party member, etc. It's fair if the encounter is something the party can actually deal with.

That's not vindictive (picking on the same character... that's smart tactics), assuming this was balanced by a saving throw with a reasonable save DC to avoid the Con damage. However, you shouldn't have to face an uber-hard boss encounter after another difficult encounter.

Yes, although that encounter was over-the-top.

A typical encounter is supposed to be easy. Bosses are supposed to be better, however.

Anyway, the DM is supposed to do that. Lure you into overconfidence, watch your defensive strategy, and then shatter it.

There's such a thing as a game that's too hard. I see this frequently in low-level campaigns.

I would beg to differ with the majority of your comments - the game *shouldn't* be run such that the PCs can stroll through encounters. *Every* encounter should carry the risk of things going wrong and PCs being killed, maimed, or disabled - goblins could get a lucky shot and score a critical on the wizard, they could trip the rest of the party, disarm them, use nets instead of fighting them directly, etc. Read the article "Tucker's Kobolds" for how to deal with jaded players who think that they are tough enough to wade through most encounters with ease.

Additionally, where is the law of D&D that states that you should not have two difficult fights in a row? If the party is dumb enough to attack when they should parley or run, they deserve all the misery they get.

 

[Piratecat]

If Sumi wants the thread closed, the easiest thing for him to do is to report the thread (small triangle icon, bottom left corner of every post) and request that it be closed. A moderator will do so with alacrity; we'll almost always close a thread based on the original poster's request. Until then, there's no call to close it -- although Fusangite's request not to be overly harsh on a fellow member is a good one.

 

[fusangite]

I'm sure this will sound snarky, so let me just disclaim up front that it's not my intention to be snarky. But how is this:

• Your call to make
• Any of your business

?

It's not my call to make. I'm not telling PirateCat to close the thread; I'm just suggesting that there is little point in continuing to tell sumi that he sucks. I am no way attacking your absolute right, as a member of EN World, to keep telling him that, if that's what mows your lawn.

My business? Hey I'm just a poster on this thread who, like everyone else, is just expressing an opinion about what others are saying.

 

[Kilroy]

Sounds like your DM is playing a little fast and lose with the rules, and with the story.

How can a wand do a d6 con, at range, no save? Poison spell is range touch, allows a save, and is 4th level. Wands can't be higher than 4th level, so wands can't do that.

How can multiple 10' creatures bullrush you through the same 10' door? You can't move diagonally through a doorway.

Why did you have to make multiple saves for the wall? The effects are resolved in order, and the first one Plane Shifted you. You would only be affected by the others if you made the Plane Shift save, which you didn't.

Why would the DM run an unchanged +lots CR encounter for you, missing 1/3 of the party, when you had no way to know that the encounter was way over your level without serious metagaming? If you're in the sort of game where the DM kills characters because other players don't show up, rather than change the game, it's time to leave.

Blocking the door sounds like just about the best place to be, otherwise the whole party would get flooded by golems.

Why would a DM hand a (presumably) LG party an encounter with a (known, however) CE wizard where the only viable option is for them to run errands for the wizard, without giving much indication that that was the case?

As for character death & creation, the game I've been in for the last few years is very death light. It happens, a few times a year, but it's usually fixable (Resurgence is a great spell.) If I was in the sort of game where characters died often for stupid reasons, I'd revert to my old rule of spending half the time on character creation than the DM did on character destruction. Hello, Knuckles the Seventh.

 

[Piratecat]

How can a wand do a d6 con, at range, no save? Poison spell is range touch, allows a save, and is 4th level. Wands can't be higher than 4th level, so wands can't do that.

My guess is enervation. It's a d4, though.