DMs, do you ever Coup de Grace your players?

[Wonton]

Party is gonna fight some ghouls, including a powerful Ghoul Cleric. There are spells like Death Knell (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/d/death-knell) and Enemy's Heart (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/e/enemy-s-heart), as well as the good old-fashioned Coup de Grace, which all seem perfect for the occasion - ghouls wouldn't take prisoners, they want to kill everyone and eat them (or let them rise as ghouls). But still, it just feels like too much of a **** move to coup de grace a PC (especially if I do it on a PC that has positive hit points but is paralyzed). It feels like killing a PC like that is not far from "rocks fall, everybody dies".

What do you think? Do you ever Coup de Grace players?

P.S. Some more info for context

For reference, my party is level 3, so no access to resurrection magic just yet. They just had a huge climactic battle with a tribe of cannibals that they all miraculously survived (it was a really hard battle, it really looked on the verge of a TPK at one point), so some easier fights for a little bit might be a good idea. On the other hand, the ghoul fight has also been foreshadowed for some time though - the Ghoul Cleric is an NPC whose name the PCs have known for a while, even if they don't know exactly what she is. Not quite a BBEG, but an important antagonist in the story. So, if they do die, it's not a meaningless death in a random encounter, but to a relatively important story NPC.

[Quertus]

DMs, do you ever Coup de Grace your players?

No, that would be murder. :smalltongue:


Party is gonna fight some ghouls, including a powerful Ghoul Cleric. There are spells like Death Knell (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/d/death-knell) and Enemy's Heart (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/e/enemy-s-heart) that seem perfect for the occasion - ghouls wouldn't take prisoners, they want to kill everyone and eat them (or let them rise as ghouls). But still, it just feels like too much of a **** move to coup de grace a PC (especially if I do it on a PC that has positive hit points but is paralyzed). It feels like killing a PC like that is not far from "rocks fall, everybody dies".

What do you think? Do you ever Coup de Grace players?

P.S. Some more info for context

For reference, my party is level 3, so no access to resurrection magic just yet. They just had a huge climactic battle with a tribe of cannibals that they all miraculously survived (it was a really hard battle, it really looked on the verge of a TPK at one point). The ghoul fight has also been foreshadowed for some time though - the Ghoul Cleric is an NPC whose name the PCs have known for a while, even if they don't know exactly what she is. Not quite a BBEG, but an important antagonist in the story.

Why bother killing the paralyzed ones? isn't that a waste of precious action economy? Doesn't ghoul paralysis last functionally forever?

[Herabec]

I do, but never 'just because'. I look at the creature's motives and the situation around the combat before I decide and if it's happening in the midst of a battle, I usually announce some sort of warning that it's about to happen.

For instance, using a pack of ghouls, one of the characters got separated and paralyzed by a ghoul. Ravenous and unconcerned with the rest of the party, who it felt was separated sufficiently from itself, I decided it would be in character for it to try a coup de grace. However, I announced it as something along the lines of 'the ghoul begins to rip and shred at the warrior's armor to get a clean shot at his vitals', to warn the party this was about to happen and give them a chance to prevent it... which they did.

Other times, though, it simply makes sense for whatever creature to finish off fallen foes. A necromancer who seeks the death of the party wouldn't even hesitate to use Death Knell on a fallen party member should he find himself in need of the extra temp hit points. Especially if they've shown themselves capable of getting injured party members back up. It's really not much different than the same necromancer casting Finger of Death, really.

[Wonton]

Other times, though, it simply makes sense for whatever creature to finish off fallen foes. A necromancer who seeks the death of the party wouldn't even hesitate to use Death Knell on a fallen party member should he find himself in need of the extra temp hit points. Especially if they've shown themselves capable of getting injured party members back up. It's really not much different than the same necromancer casting Finger of Death, really.

Yeah I'd have little issue using death effects and Coup de Grace at higher levels. There's more deaths at higher levels anyway because the 10-15 health buffer between unconsciousness and death matters less and less as monster damage goes up. The main issue here for me is that they're level 3. Dunno. Still torn about it. It would certainly be very memorable to have an NPC rip out a PC's heart and eat it, and memorable battles is what every DM wants.

[Andreaz]

There was this time a Mummy paralyzed my character, of the three characters fighting it (cr 10 against three level 9s).
It then proceeded to coup'de gracing me. Claw to the neck. Thrice. All three attempts failed, and it was destroyed before a fourth attempt.

Fun times.

[Talar]

It all depends on how you want the game to feel. Dark and gritty or just a way to pass the time with friends and have fun? Also depends on how you think the players will handle it.

[Zanos]

I don't have enemies CDG or otherwise attack neutralized targets unless the entire party is neutralized. As previously mentioned, using an entire action to eliminate a non-threat is not intelligent for creatures who plan to survive the combat.

[Sliver]

I don't go for CdG unless nothing else makes sense. I would actively look for reasons why the enemies might want to keep the party members alive, so that lost battles have consequences that don't require creating new characters.

In combat, enemies have better things to do with their actions, usually, so that means that they would CdG only if they won the battle and have no reason to keep the PCs alive.

[Hurnn]

I did once, one party member was down but the fight was effectively over and the bad guys knew they were all dead so the took on to hell with them. I did have a plan for an cleric that was "helping" the party do it when he reveled his betrayal using death knell but he didn't live that long.

[TheCrowing1432]

My party was attacked by a group of territorial Thri Keen. One of them was bitten by one and failed the fort save and became paralyzed. I coup de grace'd him without any real thought.


I usually have the monsters act as they would act. The Thri Keen were coming to kill those who entered their territory. They saw the oppertunity to eliminate one of them and took it, they werent going to "leave it for later" the way other monsters/dm's might do.

My player understood this of course, because hey, dice fall where they may.

[ryu]

I don't have enemies CDG or otherwise attack neutralized targets unless the entire party is neutralized. As previously mentioned, using an entire action to eliminate a non-threat is not intelligent for creatures who plan to survive the combat.

There is no such thing as a non-threat in D&D. There are only potential threats, active threats, and temporarily deferred threats where just what temporary means is based on the means of the threat in question. Even at the lowest levels most anything you can do to someone short of death can be mitigated if not outright cured in a single action. You can heal people into at least being able to move under their own power, most status effects have readily available fixes, and once you reach mid to high level death itself is a formality that I have seen resolved WITHIN the span of a single fight. Never hold back a strike from an opponent in D&D. No matter what you think they're still plenty dangerous.

[Wonton]

There is no such thing as a non-threat in D&D. There are only potential threats, active threats, and temporarily deferred threats where just what temporary means is based on the means of the threat in question. Even at the lowest levels most anything you can do to someone short of death can be mitigated if not outright cured in a single action. You can heal people into at least being able to move under their own power, most status effects have readily available fixes, and once you reach mid to high level death itself is a formality that I have seen resolved WITHIN the span of a single fight. Never hold back a strike from an opponent in D&D. No matter what you think they're still plenty dangerous.

Yeah, anything with an Intelligence over 8 probably knows that the guy with the armor, mace, and holy symbol is a Cleric, and can bring a downed ally back up easily. From the monsters' point of view, CdG makes perfect sense in many situations. The issue is, still - I'd feel like a **** doing that to a player. But, then again, the Red Wedding is the most iconic scene in Game of Thrones, so a well-timed murder/execution can really have a big impact and be memorable.

[Zanos]

There is no such thing as a non-threat in D&D. There are only potential threats, active threats, and temporarily deferred threats where just what temporary means is based on the means of the threat in question. Even at the lowest levels most anything you can do to someone short of death can be mitigated if not outright cured in a single action. You can heal people into at least being able to move under their own power, most status effects have readily available fixes, and once you reach mid to high level death itself is a formality that I have seen resolved WITHIN the span of a single fight. Never hold back a strike from an opponent in D&D. No matter what you think they're still plenty dangerous.
Making someone waste their turn healing is still good value. The high level death thing is irrelevant, since CDGs inflict death, typically.

Do you CDG every enemy you down as a player when there are more active threats? I only CDG if I have nothing better to do with my actions, which is rare. To put it in a less extreme circumstance, if there's, say, slowed enemies and "fresh" enemies, I'm going to try to drop the fresh enemies first if I am a damage dealer, because the slowed guys are less of a threat to my safety. High value targets should be destroyed first.



Yeah, anything with an Intelligence over 8 probably knows that the guy with the armor, mace, and holy symbol is a Cleric, and can bring a downed ally back up easily. From the monsters' point of view, CdG makes perfect sense in many situations. The issue is, still - I'd feel like a **** doing that to a player. But, then again, the Red Wedding is the most iconic scene in Game of Thrones, so a well-timed murder/execution can really have a big impact and be memorable.
Except team monster could instead attack the cleric to prevent him from helping his team at all, rather than taking time to finish guys off that can't fight back anymore. CDGing for certainty wouldn't be as big of a deal if 3.5 combats typically lasted longer than 5 rounds, but they don't. Using even a single action in combat to CDG is a large commitment, and damage and healing are such that you're going to put out way more damage than a cleric can usually heal.

[Knaight]

I tend to use it in specific situations. Hit and run tactics are the big one; sufficiently smart and determined enemies (so, usually people the PCs have pissed off personally) might take up a strategy of surprise attacks, focus fire, coup de grace, and vacating the scene, trying to repeat it until the party is down. Most of the time, it's not going to see use until the party as a whole is down, at which point it's basically a formality anyways. The other big case is the use of it as a threat to try and get the rest of the party to surrender, usually done by enemies who are losing and unable to get away. If the PCs try to call the bluff, then they find out whether or not it was a bluff. Sometimes it isn't, particularly if there are still other hostages.

[Geeky Monkey]

I've done it once.

The players, who were newish but it was our 6 or 7th session, had been tasked with killing a local bandit leader.

They snuck into his HQ, killed a load of minions, but he wasn't there (which they knew - he'd been spotted raiding a days ride away) so they decided to wait for him to return.

They decided to sleep to refresh their spells despite me warning both IC and OC that this was a bad idea. And they didn't even post a guard.

Needless to say several failed spot checks later none of them woke up.

[BWR]

Yes, but not always. It depends on the situation. For most encounters, no matter what you meet, if something goes down or is paralyzed it's out of the picture so you are better served focusing on the ones still active. The guy trying to stick a sword in your guts is a more immediate threat than the one standing frozen in fear. If the entire party is helpless, sure, unless the enemy has other plans for them.
Intelligent and experienced enemies may very well stick a knife in downed enemies or take out paralyzed ones just to make it harder for them to make a comeback.

[Nibbens]

1) They're only a few levels away from resurrection magic - and not all things in the world are the same level as them. They can find a town with a 9th level cleric, I'm certain. If they don't have enough gold - quest time! :D

2) I feel the best way to go about CdGing a player would be to do this. We know that CdG is a full round action that provokes attacks of opportunity. Sooo turn 1 - paralyze the pc. Turn 2 - describe a different ghoul posturing for a killing blow (the ghoul that paralyzed has run forward to different and still alive targets, while a different ghoul moves in for the kill - make it dramatic (this is important), him lowering himself above the PC in question, distending his jaws, drool running from his lolling tongue onto the PCs paralyzed face and into his open, frightened eyes, the ghoul rearing his head back for the plunge (which will happen next turn), etc. Turn 3, go for the CdG in all the gory graphic detail you can. If by the end of turn two start of turn three, you don't have a PC stop fighting and make a break for the ghoul that you described in great detail, then your PCs don't care if the others die or not - and they possibly deserve the killing.

This way, the PCs have 3 turns to react and possibly stop and kill the ghoul from CdGing the PC. It's fair, frightening, and when the players succeed (maybe fudge the HP of the ghoul when an adjacent PC hits on his AoO if you need to) they feel like the fight was harder than it was and feel accomplished in that fact.

3) You might still be a ****, but at least you're fair and give your PCs a challenge (and hopefully a fight that they remember for awhile).

[tadkins]

Probably wouldn't do it to PCs at low levels. It's when they got higher and their opponents got more and more challenging that I'd consider it.

I mean, a high level warrior NPC has probably seen enough battle to know that leaving an opponent unfinished, even on the ground, could come back to bite her in the ass. So a Coup de Grace would probably be a pretty smart and reasonable choice.

[Troacctid]

Situations where a coup de gras would be tactically advantageous are few and far between. Once you paralyze one guy, you generally move on and try to paralyze the next, because that's your best shot at winning the fight. If an enemy is stopping to finish off a character who's already out of the fight while three other characters are still up and kicking, then probably it's either stupid or has a death wish or both.

The time to use a coup de gras is when EVERYONE is incapacitated. Then it's game over, white out, wake up in the Pokémon Center with half your money missing.

[tadkins]

Situations where a coup de gras would be tactically advantageous are few and far between. Once you paralyze one guy, you generally move on and try to paralyze the next, because that's your best shot at winning the fight. If an enemy is stopping to finish off a character who's already out of the fight while three other characters are still up and kicking, then probably it's either stupid or has a death wish or both.



What if the NPC in question has been in enough battles to know that healing and recovery are things, and that just because someone's down doesn't necessarily mean they are out?

Assuming that the NPC has a free moment during the battle (and isn't currently breathing down the neck of other melee combatants), wouldn't it be smart for that person to finish her opponent off?

[Mystral]

I try not to do it. Only when the PCs are no longer a threat and the enemies are willing to kill, or when the PCs have shown a knack of returning downed characters to the fight via healing spells.

Most humans don't want to kill other humans that pose no more threat to them, and most animals and monsters would deal with any threats before thinking about killing the dying.

[Quertus]

I've done it once.

The players, who were newish but it was our 6 or 7th session, had been tasked with killing a local bandit leader.

They snuck into his HQ, killed a load of minions, but he wasn't there (which they knew - he'd been spotted raiding a days ride away) so they decided to wait for him to return.

They decided to sleep to refresh their spells despite me warning both IC and OC that this was a bad idea. And they didn't even post a guard.

Needless to say several failed spot checks later none of them woke up.

What is the spot DC to see someone through a solid object like, say, your own eye lids? Just how epic level were they that this was even a roll? :smallamused:

[Mystral]

I've done it once.

The players, who were newish but it was our 6 or 7th session, had been tasked with killing a local bandit leader.

They snuck into his HQ, killed a load of minions, but he wasn't there (which they knew - he'd been spotted raiding a days ride away) so they decided to wait for him to return.

They decided to sleep to refresh their spells despite me warning both IC and OC that this was a bad idea. And they didn't even post a guard.

Needless to say several failed spot checks later none of them woke up.

In my game, they would have woken up either with a sword against their throat, or with tied up. But not with a cut throat.

[Deophaun]

I ran a session where CDG was an environmental hazard. Basically, when something dropped to 0, a d6 of ethereal creatures would manifest to feed on the victim, CDGing if not stopped. Made things a bit interesting, plus it was easy to telegraph the rule by just having a lopsided battle right away and showing what happened to the poor mook.

Party was level 2.

[Elkad]

Yes.

My parties all are terrified of anything with paralyze, because they know what is coming next.

And I've used Death Knell on a PC once. Prepared adventure, Boss mob already had it. I considered changing it, but powering up by stealing the last breath from one of your underlings is a great "yes I'm really evil" move to show my mostly-new players, and I had lots of mooks for the boss to stand behind and get an opportunity to use it.

Then my wife's toon did something reckless and ended up unconscious behind the main line in round 2.
/evil grin

That might have been the closest fight I've ever put a party through.
8 players (4th level), plus 2 familiars and an animal companion.
At the end 2 players, 2 familiars and the animal companion were dead.
5 players were in negatives and unconscious.
The druid was in negatives (on diehard) and delivered the winning blow with a critical from her sling of all things.

[Necroticplague]

Not in the middle of combat. People you can CdG aren't threats anymore, so there's no reason for a foe to give them any thought. However, if the party loses or flees and leaves them, then they do, assuming the enemy is one that would actually want them dead as a goal.

[ekarney]

It very much depends on the campaign, in the one I'm running right now which is a mash up of detective work, political intrigue, religion, and crime (and apparently barreling down a canyon in mad max style cannonwagons - I don't know how that happened) copping CDG is pretty unlikely since the campaign's pretty story driven, even dying is unlikely.

However if I were to run a more traditional style game complete with horrible cliches, you can bet I'll be doing it every chance I get, in a rather blown out over the top fashion where it would take two full round actions to do it.

If I run Mechaspirit: 2041 where you can CDG as part of a full attack or as a standard action then it'll happen if the combat's dragging on, or if the enemies are defending somewhere (If you're bunkered down in a trench you don't want people standing back up to shoot at you) basically if it would be tactically advantageous for the enemy to complete remove a player from combat.

[Elkad]

To clarify on ghouls a bit.

My ghouls are the epitome of pure hunger. It overrides everything except a direct threat. (They are also Int:6, not 13). An ambush is in their skillset. Battle tactics are not.
Ghasts keep their int and are the real terrors.

So if a player goes down paralyzed and another player is threatening the ghoul, it will keep fighting.
But if a player goes down and the ghoul attacking it is unthreatened, even if it's ghoul buddies are still fighting on the other side of the room, it's going to feed immediately.

[Eldariel]

Players can die in a fight. Players can fail a save on a save-or-die. Players in a position to be coup de graced can certainly have that happen to them - they're already functionally dead if someone gets the chance anyways. And CdG can actually be survived.

[Wonton]

I dunno, I still don't agree that using a CdG is always a waste of action economy. From a purely tactical perspective, a monster using a CdG (or just attacking a downed enemy, or using Death Knell, etc) makes sense in many situations to me. Let me put it another way. If you had an enemy at -1, but they had a level 9 Cleric on their side, you sure as hell would finish that enemy off before they got a Heal thrown on them, undoing 90 points of damage. Yeah, killing/engaging the Cleric is also an option, but it's not guaranteed.

Would an animal do it? No.
Would a low-intelligence creature that doesn't understand magical healing do it? No.
Would an NPC that wants to capture/interrogate PCs instead of killing do it? No.
Would an enemy that was surrounded and had bigger threats to focus on do it? No.

But there are situations where an enemy would do it, and I think a Ghoul Cleric that wants to kill the PCs so they come back as ghouls is one of them.

In any case, the question I wanted answered wasn't "does this make sense tactically", because the answer to that ranges from "100% No" to "100% Yes" depending on the specifics of the combat. I can probably figure that part out myself. The question I wanted answered was "does it make sense from a storytelling perspective", i.e, can this possibly lead to more fun at the table, or would it just be a bummer.

[Eldariel]

The question I wanted answered was "does it make sense from a storytelling perspective", i.e, can this possibly lead to more fun at the table, or would it just be a bummer.

The simulation of a real world, the PCs' fate in their own hands instead of being guaranteed victory, the thrill of mortal combat, there are many reasons to make sure the PCs can die. I personally wouldn't play a system with rules if I didn't expect PCs to live or die by said rules. The rules are a neutral arbiter between the player characters and the gameworld. Part of the reason to have rules is that things not expected or intended by either the GM or the players can occur - the game can take new, interesting turns if some rolls come out unexpectedly. To that end, CdG is no more special a case than any other; whatever essentially killed them already happened and the CdG is just a formality.

[Herabec]

I dunno, I still don't agree that using a CdG is always a waste of action economy. From a purely tactical perspective, a monster using a CdG (or just attacking a downed enemy, or using Death Knell, etc) makes sense in many situations to me. Let me put it another way. If you had an enemy at -1, but they had a level 9 Cleric on their side, you sure as hell would finish that enemy off before they got a Heal or Cure Critical Wounds thrown on them. Yeah, killing/engaging the Cleric is also an option, but it's not guaranteed.

Would an animal do it? No.
Would a low-intelligence creature that doesn't understand magical healing do it? No.
Would an NPC that wants to capture/interrogate PCs instead of killing do it? No.
Would an enemy that was surrounded and had bigger threats to focus on do it? No.

But there are situations where an enemy would do it, and I think a Ghoul Cleric that wants to kill the PCs so they come back as ghouls is one of them.

The question I wanted answered wasn't "does this make sense tactically", because the answer to that ranges from "100% No" to "100% Yes" depending on the specifics of the combat. I can probably figure that part out myself. The question I wanted answered was "does it make sense from a storytelling perspective", i.e, can this possibly lead to more fun at the table, or would it just be a bummer.

If your players are mature and can understand *why* it happened and that you weren't just being an ass, if it will make the story better by showing that no - the heroes are not invincible, then by all means. It makes perfect sense.

If your players are just wanting to hang out, have some laughs while they roflstomp some bad guys, you might want to steer clear of killing off downed PCs.

(Though I'm still of the opinion that a spellcasting ghoul that prepared a spell specifically to kill downed enemies would use it.)

[Deophaun]

I dunno, I still don't agree that using a CdG is always a waste of action economy. From a purely tactical perspective, a monster using a CdG (or just attacking a downed enemy, or using Death Knell, etc) makes sense in many situations to me. Let me put it another way. If you had an enemy at -1, but they had a level 9 Cleric on their side, you sure as hell would finish that enemy off before they got a Heal thrown on them, undoing 90 points of damage. Yeah, killing/engaging the Cleric is also an option, but it's not guaranteed.
Eh. It's a full round action, and at that cost I can probably drop another of the Cleric's buddies, if not the Cleric himself. Or I can lay down some BFC. Or bail out one of my own allies. Every one of those is a better option in 99.9% of circumstances. Even if done via death knell, it's a comparative waste of an action in battle (of course, if my imp familiar happens to have a wand of death knell...).

But that's me, the Big Damn Hero, not random Kobold Mook #73. Kobold Mook #73 is going to do it because that really is all he can reasonably do that doesn't result in Kobold Mook #73's internal organs immediately being Jackson Pollocked all over the hatchery walls.

[Ualaa]

I try to play the mobs/bad guys to their level of intelligence, not mine.

Something like an almost mindless ooze goes after the most recent thing to attack it, unless something else gets close.
Something a little smarter, might go after whoever has hit it hardest or the most; but still isn't going to run after a faster opponent, while it's friend pokes the chasing bear in the back.
An wise, but not intelligent opponent, will take advantage of their environment more, but still doesn't really develop tactics, although pack animals will use teamwork because that is how they should act.
The intelligent adversary is nasty, in that it will use tactics and try to get the best advantage.

I generally don't pull punches, and do let the dice fall where they will.
Everyone fudges a little; it is kind of anti-climactic to wipe out the party on a trap as they exit the citadel having rescued the Princess and slain the villain.
But while they're fighting the villain, if I happen to roll four natural 20s in a row, confirming them all in plain view (apparently I'm not supposed to use the yellow & black dice anymore)... which did happen to one of our players in the current campaign, the dice gods have spoken.

The party is at a point where Black Ghouls aren't as much of an issue.
But for a very long time (three or four character levels), they were the bane of the party's existence.
Intelligent, fast, agile (all touch ac/dodge based), with high accuracy and moderate damage.
And they were in groups of between 4 and 30 (the group didn't have to engage the 30, but for some reason thought it was a good idea at the time...).

We've had 64 deaths, through 61 sessions of play.
The 'Dungeon of Graves' can be unforgiving at times.

[PsyBomb]

In over a decade of DMing, I've Couped only twice (oddly it was the same player both times, and he's still my friend). HOWEVER my base philosophy is that I play enemies how they would act.

Bandit King recruiting? Downed PCs might wake in confinement but with a chance at life.

Ravaging warlord desires the end of the kingdom? PC doesn't get to wake up.

[Fizban]

If it makes sense for the situation, then sure. The real question is how to set up a situation where you can do so without actually killing a PC. It makes sense for an assassin to coup de grace you in your sleep and you will almost certainly die, but that's why we don't send assassins after parties who will fail to detect them.

First, there's the fact that it's a full round action. If you're using ghouls, as long as there's only one adjacent to each party member then they can paralyze on one turn and still be forced to wait until next turn to use the coup. Second, it provokes an AoO: ghouls aren't all that tough so if they've already taken a hit or two that AoO can bring them down. Between these two facts, the party's reaction should be quite simple: if one of the PCs gets paralyzed, the rest all rush the foe who's standing next to that member. That foe eats a couple standard action attacks and a pile of AoOs if they decide to try the coup anyway.

There's also the fact that coup de grace is not always instantly lethal. The save DC is based on the damage, and low damage foes vs high fort save party members (especially with some luck dice) can easily fail to get the kill. The ghouls can make a foolish tactical blunder where they decide it's best to gang up on the biggest threat-the tank, who even if paralyzed on a bad roll could very well survive the subsequent coup de grace.

If you plan to use great gobs of ghouls then you can't rely on those simple limitations. But for a 3rd level party you shouldn't be using gobs of ghouls in the first place, so I think the natural limits on coup de grace are fine.

Now as for Death Knell, that's a bit more problematic. As a touch spell it can actually be cast from out of range, followed by a move action to close the gap and then a free touch delivery (see Rules Compendium) without provoking at all. It's arguably less lethal than just hitting them for the last few hp with a weapon, but as a will save it might still be more likely to work than hitting AC on armored person even if they're down. Personally I've always seen Death Knell as a waste of a slot in terms of combat purposes: it's used to either to execute people via [death] effect to prevent Raise Dead/Reincarnate, or as an Evil way to buff yourself by killing someone (it does give three benefits in one spell, pretty okay for 2nd).

[Necromancy]

Realistically a monster doesn't know a player isn't completely dead yet. The problem isn't whether the monsters should finish off players below 0, but that the players below 0 tend to metagame

"I'm only at -4, heal me up quick"

"I'm gonna die next round if I don't get a heal"

Etc

[Zanos]

I dunno, I still don't agree that using a CdG is always a waste of action economy. From a purely tactical perspective, a monster using a CdG (or just attacking a downed enemy, or using Death Knell, etc) makes sense in many situations to me. Let me put it another way. If you had an enemy at -1, but they had a level 9 Cleric on their side, you sure as hell would finish that enemy off before they got a Heal thrown on them, undoing 90 points of damage. Yeah, killing/engaging the Cleric is also an option, but it's not guaranteed.

Fair, but that requires some foreknowledge on the monsters behalf that the PCs make frequent use of powerful healing magic. I also think that by the time something as powerful as Heal is on the table, PCs are unlikely to be incapacitated by direct damage without being straight up killed, as the buffer between dying and dead does not scale.



Would an animal do it? No.
Would a low-intelligence creature that doesn't understand magical healing do it? No.
Would an NPC that wants to capture/interrogate PCs instead of killing do it? No.
Would an enemy that was surrounded and had bigger threats to focus on do it? No.

But there are situations where an enemy would do it, and I think a Ghoul Cleric that wants to kill the PCs so they come back as ghouls is one of them.

In any case, the question I wanted answered wasn't "does this make sense tactically", because the answer to that ranges from "100% No" to "100% Yes" depending on the specifics of the combat. I can probably figure that part out myself. The question I wanted answered was "does it make sense from a storytelling perspective", i.e, can this possibly lead to more fun at the table, or would it just be a bummer.

It makes sense from a storytelling perspective for a ghoul to CDG someone, yes. However, I don't think CDG will actually make more ghouls, they have to die to Ghoul Fever(via Con damage) to actually come back as ghouls, otherwise they're just dead. So the Ghoul would have to paralyze someone, infect them, and then wait several days for the disease to kill them. That could be potentially interesting if the PCs have to save one of their party members from the Ghouls lair, although probably a bit boring for the guy who gets incapacitated.

[ryu]

Realistically a monster doesn't know a player isn't completely dead yet. The problem isn't whether the monsters should finish off players below 0, but that the players below 0 tend to metagame

"I'm only at -4, heal me up quick"

"I'm gonna die next round if I don't get a heal"

Etc

While having an exact turn counter to bleeding out reported while your character can't speak due to unconsciousness isn't exactly kosher, having the general knowledge to attempt to heal people who fall over in combat is fully realizable within the world. You can test how much punishment someone can take and learn of likely effects safely. Hell There's even a system explicitly common knowledge about non-lethal damage that literally anyone can make use of to some degree from level one.

[SorenKnight]

I do have used Coup de Grace on my players, but its important to know your players before you do something like that. Some like the challenge of fighting intelligent, dangerous enemies, others may see it as unfair, and neither type is wrong.

[Flickerdart]

I do have used Coup de Grace on my players, but its important to know your players before you do something like that. Some like the challenge of fighting intelligent, dangerous enemies, others may see it as unfair, and neither type is wrong.

On the other hand, "spend an entire round attacking someone who's already out of the fight" is rarely an intelligent tactic, especially when the monster has no idea if the guy on the ground is at -5 or -10.

If the enemy happens to have a cleric (which is by no means a sure thing, or even that common) then the cleric needs to walk over to the target, use up a valuable spell slot (provoking AoO, hopefully), and then the target needs to stand up. At which point they provoke too, you hit them again for free, and they fall right down.

At the point when clerics start whipping out heal, they've had revivify for a long time.

[fishyfishyfishy]

Like others here have stated, I will kill off characters if it makes sense for the enemy to do so. Not every combat scenario is a fight to the death. Sometimes enemies want to take prisoners, and sometimes it's an animal looking for food that will attempt to kill one and flee with its prize. It all depends on circumstances and I try my best to be logical and not arbitrary.

[Necroticplague]

I can't really see a reason for CdG'ing someone in the middle of combat. Intelligent enemies understand this is a waste of time,unintelligent enemies instinctually avoid it (leaving the CdGs for after the rest of the party has fled/been incapacitated). While enemies with paralystic/sleep causing abilities are very likely to use CdGs, they're not likely to do it mid-combat, instead dragging the party member off elsewhere (ending combat or avoiding it) to eat them in pieces peace.

[Barstro]

I agree with the reasoning and conclusion of Necroticplague.

Frankly, I've never really understood in-combat CdG for those reasons cited. I think it really came about because some whiny player with a Rogue was upset that he could only do d6 damage to the sleeping guard when he could logically kill him outright in the real world. But, said move is not an in-combat thing, it is a sneaking around without anything else going on sort of thing.

[Larsen]

With the pathfinder version of hold person, the CdG can be a very useful tool : a quasi garanted downed enemy who could just have succeded his next save.

[SorenKnight]

On the other hand, "spend an entire round attacking someone who's already out of the fight" is rarely an intelligent tactic, especially when the monster has no idea if the guy on the ground is at -5 or -10.

Yes, but negative hp isn't the only way to be vulnerable to a coup de grace. In this specific case it was because of a sleep hex and if he hadn't been coup de grace'd he would have just gotten up the next turn.


I can't really see a reason for CdG'ing someone in the middle of combat. Intelligent enemies understand this is a waste of time,unintelligent enemies instinctually avoid it (leaving the CdGs for after the rest of the party has fled/been incapacitated). While enemies with paralystic/sleep causing abilities are very likely to use CdGs, they're not likely to do it mid-combat, instead dragging the party member off elsewhere (ending combat or avoiding it) to eat them in pieces peace.

Most of the time CdG probably is a waste, but if someone has been temporarily made vulnerable by something like hold person or the sleep hex then taking out an enemy who would have otherwise returned to full functionality soon might very well be the best use of your actions.

[Zanos]

Most of the time CdG probably is a waste, but if someone has been temporarily made vulnerable by something like hold person or the sleep hex then taking out an enemy who would have otherwise returned to full functionality soon might very well be the best use of your actions.
Yeah, if the effect disabling a creature is save ends, I'd CDG.

[SorenKnight]

Yeah, if the effect disabling a creature is save ends, I'd CDG.

Exactly, CDG can be a good tactical decision depending on circumstances. The real question is whether or not its a jerk move to CDG your players, which depends, like so much of DMing, on what your specific group of players enjoys.

[ryu]

Exactly, CDG can be a good tactical decision depending on circumstances. The real question is whether or not its a jerk move to CDG your players, which depends, like so much of DMing, on what your specific group of players enjoys.

And personally I go for it. As a matter of fact I'm so far out of the norm that I actively get taken out of the experience if I see an obvious shot to win the fight my enemy didn't take. I get visibly offended if I'm held back on. The wolf at the door is only an engaging threat if it has teeth.

[Illven]

It makes sense from a storytelling perspective for a ghoul to CDG someone, yes. However, I don't think CDG will actually make more ghouls, they have to die to Ghoul Fever(via Con damage) to actually come back as ghouls, otherwise they're just dead. So the Ghoul would have to paralyze someone, infect them, and then wait several days for the disease to kill them. That could be potentially interesting if the PCs have to save one of their party members from the Ghouls lair, although probably a bit boring for the guy who gets incapacitated.

From what I remember from Libris Mortis, I think just dying to the ghoul with ghoul fever active is enough.

[Someguy231]

What do you think? Do you ever Coup de Grace players?

Yes, all the time, yes. They deserve to die.

[killem2]

Yes I would I have and I would do it again. Depending on the enemy I've also had them strike down people who are bleeding.

[Pugwampy]

I once abused my DM powers .

A lil 13 year old snot nosed kiddie player swore in my face at the table . I laughed at him and reminded him of my "awesome powers" . He begged for mercy , I gave none .

I morphed into chess mode . I played tactically and chose my target instead of asking the dice . My two orcs ganked his barbarian brought him down to negative HP . Next round one Orc chopped off his head then both played soccer with it . The player,s demoralized face at what i did was most satisfying.

:smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin::smallbiggrin:

[trikkydik]

Don't one shot your PC's like that, WTF's wrong with you.

...
..
.

Do it lol, cut his head clean off...

let him get resurrected, (perfectly.)

Its the perfect richard move.

[Milo v3]

Not only do I Coupe de Grace PC's, my players sometimes say "shouldn't this guy be Coup de Grace'ing me?" :smalltongue:

[RedMage125]

Some very good points on this thread. I'm especially in favor of not attacking downed PCs*, namely because most creatures, even animals, will deal with current active threats before trying to feed.

*Some monsters are specific exceptions. A grick, for example, thinks only of feeding, and will grapple an unconscious PC and attempt to drag them back to the nest to eat them. But even that isn't a CDG.

As to the OP's situation...
Ghouls eat human flesh, yes, but they are also evil and enjoy their target's suffering. Using Death Knell would deprive them of the joy of eating their target alive. You want to make the scenario believable, but fair to the players? Have the ghoul's tactics consist of:
1)attempt to paralyze the whole party
2)arrange the paralyzed victims so they are all facing each other, so they can watch each other be eaten.
3)start eating them alive

This has the added mechanical benefit of giving the party a chance to throw off the paralysis and take out the ghoul, assuming of course, the worst case scenario of everyone getting paralyzed.

This way, you still portray your ghoul as a sick, twisted and evil creature that will eat them, while "behind the screen", you have created an extra chance for them to survive.

Besides, ghouls have humanlike intelligence, what intelligent creature would waste an attack on a downed foe when there are still immediate threats to its person?

[Deadline]

Generally no, I don't, but it depends on the situation. Unless driven to madness (or contractually obligated to kill a given PC), no foe will try it mid-battle, because it's hilariously stupid to try and "finish off" that downed enemy when another one is trying to actively stab you in the face. But after the battle? Quite possibly, especially if the foe has no need to keep said PC alive and the rest of the party had to retreat.

It also depends on the type of game I'm running. If it's a classic dungeon crawl style game, CDG's are far more likely to happen. If it's a more story oriented game, then generally PCs have death protection (PCs don't die from HP damage unless the enemy specifically finishes them off, and there's plenty of dramatic options to use instead of death to carry the story on) until the finale sessions of the campaign (I'll specify at the start of a session that death is now an open possibility).

[Wonton]

Some very good points on this thread. I'm especially in favor of not attacking downed PCs*, namely because most creatures, even animals, will deal with current active threats before trying to feed.

*Some monsters are specific exceptions. A grick, for example, thinks only of feeding, and will grapple an unconscious PC and attempt to drag them back to the nest to eat them. But even that isn't a CDG.

As to the OP's situation...
Ghouls eat human flesh, yes, but they are also evil and enjoy their target's suffering. Using Death Knell would deprive them of the joy of eating their target alive. You want to make the scenario believable, but fair to the players? Have the ghoul's tactics consist of:
1)attempt to paralyze the whole party
2)arrange the paralyzed victims so they are all facing each other, so they can watch each other be eaten.
3)start eating them alive

This has the added mechanical benefit of giving the party a chance to throw off the paralysis and take out the ghoul, assuming of course, the worst case scenario of everyone getting paralyzed.

This way, you still portray your ghoul as a sick, twisted and evil creature that will eat them, while "behind the screen", you have created an extra chance for them to survive.

Besides, ghouls have humanlike intelligence, what intelligent creature would waste an attack on a downed foe when there are still immediate threats to its person?

This is very clever, wish you'd posted this before I ran the encounter. :P

I ended up running it sans-CDG, because the encounter almost killed them without it, lol. Turns out 4 ghouls + a ghoul Cleric in an area of Darkness and Desecrate is nasty. :smallwink: Party would have died if I didn't fudge some of my damage rolls.

It achieved the desired result of being a terrifying encounter though, even though there were no deaths.

[Malimar]

As others have said, my NPCs and monsters will coup de grace PCs if and only if it makes sense IC -- I don't consider it too mean a tactic to ever use on PCs, though it's nice when I have a reason for the NPCs to want the PCs alive. In my mind, there are roughly two situations where that will happen: if the NPCs are intelligent and a coup de grace is tactically sound (they know a healer's about, or they want to use animate dead on the body, or something like that), or if they're not intelligent but are hungry enough not to care that the battle is still going on.

[AnimeTheCat]

There have been a few times that I've CDGed characters. One such time was when a player I had was moving away and he wanted to either A) give a fun plot hook, or B) go out like a badass. After talking with him we decided on A. We edited his backstory slightly so that he was a descendent of royalty from a distant kingdom. The party encountered a powerful outsider that after teleporting in and his minions surrounding the party systematically paralyzed or otherwise incapacitated the rest of the party leaving just the one character standing. He dominated him, had him fall prostrate to him, and the decapitated him, grabbed his head and left the rest of the party to die. when the party gathered the corpse and prepared him for burial they found an amulet that was faintly magical but had symbols that none of them recognized. This was the next plot hook to get them to go save the kingdom from falling in to the depths of the abyss.

The only other time I've done it was again for story reasons. I had a player that was tired of playing his character and decided that he wanted to start a new one. No big deal, I asked him how he wanted to go out. He told me that he still liked this character but he wanted to try something new. My solution was that a devil would CDG him, steal his soul, preserve his body and use it as a vessel while torturing his soul for eternity. About a year later he asked me if the new group I started playing with could be convinced to go save his poor character and if I would use him. I liked the idea so that became a plot hook for a group that played in the same game world but at a different time.