What to do with a party that keeps dying?

[Rothe]

I'd say no and actually would like the challenge of such a deadly campaign. Near death is (to me) where the real fun is, getting by by the skin of your teeth as it were. As long as it is not TPK, teamwork and sidequests can be used to bring back your "stoned" comrades. Your player's should feel proud that this is not a cake walk, that their accomplishments mean something.

From some other the other posts, it seems this adventure path is heavy on tactician play. If your player are not into this style of play you may need to tweak the encounters. or it may be your players really do enjoy tactician paly and they are just frustrated with not doing well at it. If it is the latter, the challenge (to this tactician) is facing an encounter which is almost a sure fire TPK if you just walk in. It is only by innovative tactical thinking and team work that you even survive, and a little luck to survive unscathed. Tactician play, IME, to be effective requires scouting out the enemy and getting them to fight on your ground (e.g., ambushes) prepared areas with things-even mundane ones- that maximize effectiveness.

If, (and it is an if as some players could care less about tactician style play), you think your player's are interested in the tactician aspect and they are just unfamiliar with how to go about it and the rules that support it; here are a couple of suggestions. One, if they have some appropriatate skill you might provide that character with hints, as in this looks like a good place to set up an ambush. You might also provide hints to characters who would know the reaction of opponents and their standard tactics. Along the lines of "a typical x normally reacts this way to intruders."

Another way is to provide and NPC who can give tactical advice, maybe an old retired adventurer who is physically unable to help in combat much (low ST due to old age, etc.) but still has enough HP and decent saves to survive. This NPC could provide tactical advice, as in I remember when... or we did X in a similar situation, but let the party execute the plan. This NPC may also have a bit of healing magic to help in the back row. Sprinkle the NPC's advice in with a few questions about what the character's think and hopefully they will learn some tactics. After a time, the NPC goes back to his ordinary life, or maybe meets a tragic death and asks the PCs to carry on.

 

[Wik]

You may also want to consider letting someone try the Dragon Shaman class from the PHB 2 if you have that book available. It has a healing aura that can heal every party member in a set radius. With that kind of thing active, it should compensate for your clerics not being all too eager to case cure spells.

Of course, the Dragon Shaman player would need to actually use that Aura.

END COMMUNICATION

Especially at lower levels. That aura is always active, even if the DS is out cold. Meaning that it's an automatic stabilize for anyone knocked below 0 - which eliminates more than a few of your casualties, right there (even at 8th level, that aura saves the hides of our group - it even saved the life of an NPC last night).

Beyond that - why not just let the group learn through the school of hard knocks? Really, with two clerics in the group, they should have NO problem with healing.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

No-one else has mentioned it so I thought I'd better. The Shacked City AP is designed for 6 PC's, not 4 like the other 2 AP's. If you are only playing with 4 or 5 players and are playing it as written then the players are going to have a difficult time, regardless of how experienced they are.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Slife]

level them up a couple of times on sidequests, then do the rest of the module.

 

[William_2]

I’m not posting just to say this, but I did not read the other thread, and yours does not give a lot of detail to help with the question.
Primarily, if you are the DM, then I would suggest that you have enough to do without taking on the task of creating a group that is strategically savvy. That is up to the players. If they are concerned about dying all the time, they will do something about it. As long as the DM makes it clear that dying is definitely on the table, and leaves room for characters to flee, then the game is being DMed well. It may not be being played well, but the DM can’t do both things.

If you are a player, then the way to improve teamwork is sit down and talk about teamwork. Do it out of game if you like, or do it in game; next time you are resting for 8 or 10 hours, start by gathering around the campfire or what have you, and having an in-character discussion about tactics in battle. Either way will work the same, I think.

The players have every right to say that their characters are going to chat for an hour. Go over likely scenarios, and how your group will handle them. Are you going to concentrate fire on the first opponent attacked? Are you always going to focus on suspiciously wizardly looking types? Who has healing ability, and how are they going to use it? If someone is toe-to-toe with the enemy, being cut up, and they call out for healing, are they going to get it?

Here is the salient point, I think; who is going to keep going into deadly situations with people they can’t handle them with effectively?! Some character should simply role-play themselves out of the group: “Look, every time we go for lunch, I almost get killed while you tumble around looking for flanks, and I have made 100 gp out of it- I’m packing it in!”

Characters who are facing death together have to function well together-otherwise they would quickly part company.

The truth is, as players you are pretending to be capable warriors- but, in fact, you may have no relevant knowledge of any kind. So, attempting to cobble some together is paramount to survival, really. While there is “knowledge, planes”, there is no “knowledge, strategy” to help.

Cheers

 

[hong]

The truth is, as players you are pretending to be capable warriors

We are?

 

[William_2]

OK, looked at other thread. Most telling info from it was this from a player:

“As a group we do not fight together and that is why Xini is trying to make a character who can stand alone and not fall. I hope to be able to use his character as a pin which holds the group together in combat.”

And Ellie IS the DM. Based on both of the threads, let me say that you seem to be doing a really nice job as a DM. The high death rate is a result of that, not the opposite. The game is no fun at all if the DM does not remain neutral and allow death to be a serious and present danger. Rolling openly as you do only enhances that.

The quote above makes it clear what is going wrong with the game. Sure, it gets the DM down along with the players when they keep dying, but if the game is altered to prevent them dying at all costs…well, there is really little left to it. Keep on DMing as you are. You have done enough by encouraging the players to think about maybe…ah, playing with care. Hopefully, you are all having fun anyway-character death is hardly game destroying.

Again, if the players want to do better, they will sit down and talk about it. The DM is already doing a good job of supplying a fair challenge.

You could, possibly, add an NPC or two for the duration of the particular module. Probably there is some in-game reason why you could subtly insist on the presence of some useful characters. It really depends on what you want to get out of games; you are doing the bulk of the work, so you should be accommodated a bit.

If you want to halt the slaughter, lower the encounter levels. If you want your players to learn how to work as a team, don’t.

Best of luck

 

[William_2]

We are?

Well, possibly. In this case, it seems like.

 

[hong]

Sure, it gets the DM down along with the players when they keep dying, but if the game is altered to prevent them dying at all costs…well, there is really little left to it.

Yeah, we may as well just pretend to be elves.

If you want your players to learn

What is this "learn" bullsheet?

 

[William_2]

It’s right there in the question- how to improve. I’m thinking by learning. Still, in retrospect I can see I’m all over the place here. Er…it’s the thought that counts?