Zombie Plagues in your Campaign Setting

[Nifft]

Seriously, though: a disease is not like an invading army. Armies have leaders who can be reasoned with (maybe). Armies are made of people who tend to who die over time, and do not create more of themselves (exponentially) out of your peasants.

Diseases are not creatures. They have no mercy. When dealing with them, you must treat the disease as something which must be exterminated. Not contained, not appeased.

So, extreme tactics are warranted. Look at history: it was not uncommon to bolt the gates of a city and say "too bad" to whomever was trapped within. Quarantine isn't a bad idea when you value all of humanity over the life of one human. (It was finally the fire of London that killed off the black plague hanging around there, wasn't it?)

Zombies of this nature demand a similar response: wall off the affected area, and fireball it until nothing in the box is moving.

Cheers, -- N

 

[phindar]

I think you're looking at it from the wrong side Nifft. You can box up and fireball 40 zombies, or even 400. But what about 400,000?

Talking about Night of the Living Dead, its not just a few zombies or a disease that is passed from a few zombies, but a world-wide, instantaneous phenomenon. 400,000 to 1, thats the Day of the Dead estimate. The typical adventuring party will need to take out 1.6 million zombies to break even.

Higher level things, Wish and Miracle level magicks, can deal with things on this level, so I found it necessary to run my game lower level world where 10th level was the maximum. I did want to get to the higher level stuff, but I wanted it to be the pc's that did that, rather than DXM from ubernpcs.

Lastly, a note on DnD itself. The use of spells, abilities, loss of HP etc - parties resources are designed to support the "4 encounters of parties CR per day" idea. By unending waves of undead you are stretching the game beyond its fundamental design, so of course the PC's will struggle and then fail. You will have to be careful when designing a game like this as it will be overwhelming because you have escalated it beyond what the core system is designed to function with.

This is what I was talking about earlier, though I don't think its just the system that fails. The players have to realize that the D&D philosophy of "4 encounters of parties CR per day" goes right out the window. D&D philosophy isn't going to solve Survival Horror problems. That's something the GM and the players have to work out on their own.

But that's what I really like about a scenario like this. It requires the players to be creative just to survive. You have to bring your A game to Survival Horror, just to make it to the next session. That said, I'm not sure that D&D is the best system for this game, for the reasons Firedancer lists and for the preconceived notions players bring to the table. I know my players didn't grok it. Doesn't mean I wouldn't run it again, or that I wouldn't love to play in a game like this. I'm just saying it can be a tough sell.

 

[hong]

I think you're looking at it from the wrong side Nifft. You can box up and fireball 40 zombies, or even 400. But what about 400,000?

The context was a city that's still relatively intact. Not an entire planet.

Talking about Night of the Living Dead, its not just a few zombies or a disease that is passed from a few zombies, but a world-wide, instantaneous phenomenon. 400,000 to 1, thats the Day of the Dead estimate. The typical adventuring party will need to take out 1.6 million zombies to break even.

Cool! XP-rich environment!

 

[Nifft]

I think you're looking at it from the wrong side Nifft. You can box up and fireball 40 zombies, or even 400. But what about 400,000?

I'm looking at how a rational society would deal with (and indeed have dealt with) a plague. They'd try to seal off the infected and let them die without infecting anyone else. If the infected were mobile brain-hungry undead horrors, they'd not wait. They'd try to kill from as far away (and as safe) a location as possible.

Talking about Night of the Living Dead, its not just a few zombies or a disease that is passed from a few zombies, but a world-wide, instantaneous phenomenon.

World wide and instantaneous? So what's the point of discussing how to contain the problem? You're hand-waving away the issue to which my post was a response.

If there exist authorities that will dislike the firing of balls in their nice city, then we're not in a 400k:1 scenario... yet.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Any problem can however be solved by the proper application of enough celestial dire badgers. (At least, so claimed my halfing conjurer Nefarious Highhat.)

Anyway, the underlying point is a good one. A world full of living dead is not a problem D&D characters can power through. Its not even one they can make a dent in. As I have long said, Night of the Living dead is a case study in asymmetrical warfare.

And that's a tough sell in D&D. It can be a hard nut for the players to get their heads around.

Personally, I'd say that once the PCs reach a certain level - 7th at the latest - the zombies cease to be a threat to them personally. They can kill most zombies that approach them unless it is a really massive horde, and even then they probably have some way of getting away from them to a reasonably safe area.

Unfortunately, they are still a threat to most other people - the commoners and other low-level NPCs. And thus good PCs will likely agonize about how to save as many people as possible - and even neutral PCs will have to figure out what to do now that all all the institutions and conveniences of life they have taken for granted are gone.


Such a plague doesn't follow the traditional "find a Big Baddie and beat him up" style of D&D adventures. Instead, it presents the PCs with a large-scale threat which, while it isn't neccessarily a threat to them personally, still has to be dealt with in some fashion.

"The World as you know it is being swallowed up by an undead horde. What do you do?"

This problem has no single "right" solution - but there are still plenty of things they can do. They can establish safe zones, escort refugees, and try to kill as many zombies as possible. They aren't ordered around by a powerful NPC, but are entirely on their own - and thus free to develop their own plans. They are not motivated by mere piles of cash or magic items, but saving as much of the world as they can.

And I think this is a powerful premise for a campaign. It gives the PCs complete freedom in their activities - and the opportunities to become living legends among the survivors.

 

[Firedancer]

It is an interesting scenario.
It does mean the characters can think in new, creative ways for their spells and items (as suggested by use of plant growth, what items come priceless).
It will require quite a creative DM as fighting yet more low cr zombies will get boring.

Clearly from phindar's experience the standard DnD party mindset and mechanics is not the most suitable. Not sure how you started it phindar, but Jurgen seems to suggest starting at the outbreak, so you can witness escalation and get used to the rising undead and perhaps that will alter the perceptions of players for this instance?

As mentioned several times spells, turns etc, all run out. They run out because encounters per day is intrinsic to the system. You scrap that then you need to follow the cascade of knock-on and see what else needs altering; so perhaps another system is more suitable.

That's not to say it can't be done in DnD, nor that you shouldn't try, but there are several things to consider whilst doing so.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

Seriously, though: a disease is not like an invading army. Armies have leaders who can be reasoned with (maybe). Armies are made of people who tend to who die over time, and do not create more of themselves (exponentially) out of your peasants.

Diseases are not creatures. They have no mercy. When dealing with them, you must treat the disease as something which must be exterminated. Not contained, not appeased.

So, extreme tactics are warranted. Look at history: it was not uncommon to bolt the gates of a city and say "too bad" to whomever was trapped within. Quarantine isn't a bad idea when you value all of humanity over the life of one human. (It was finally the fire of London that killed off the black plague hanging around there, wasn't it?)

Zombies of this nature demand a similar response: wall off the affected area, and fireball it until nothing in the box is moving.

Cheers, -- N

A completely understandable response - and in fact, it might be the only one that might work. Still, I expect some agonizing from good-aligned PCs - after all, they are killing lots of innocent people with this, which must weigh heavy on their conscience. And this would make for some great role-playing opportunities...

 

[hong]

And I think this is a powerful premise for a campaign. It gives the PCs complete freedom in their activities

... assuming the players want to fight nothing but undead.

 

[Firedancer]

Jurgen,

It is a good premise for a campaign arc.
It will offer a very different game for several levels, and really make the PCs the centre of the game.
It should provoke clever play as well as a few agonising plans.

You know your players best and will know how much prep they will need, and if they're willing to be as ruthless as is required.

you would perhaps best avoid an existing world as the setting otherwise there'd be a greater chore explaining how this came to be. Looking the original post again, in my current campaign setting, this wouldn't happen. Creating a campaign setting specifically for this, that's understandable.

 

[Darklone]

I think warlocks would rock.