"teachable moments"?

[Torgairon]

a few hours ago I started DM'ing a short session of my ongoing homebrew campaign, in which the PCs are wading through a yuan-ti infestation in ruins that the party needs to excavate to continue tracking the BBEG. last session involved a brutal fight in a passageway against some yuan-ti with PC class levels, in which the party barely eked out a draw and lost the party rogue to death saves; today, beaten down and fleeing from the rest of the yuan-ti, the session begins with them accepting help from a friendly NPC in the area and taking shelter at his small keep.

OOC, the party is down a member today due to holiday work shifts going long, so we fruitlessly wait an hour to see if the player pops in and then decide to play with 3 players while the 4th's character is in a healing coma from the previous fight, in which he got downed twice. it is mentioned OOC that this should be a session of recon, as I don't plan on NPC'ing the absent player's character and it's well established that the party is easily matched by the yuan-ti, even just having hit level 5 as a group.

what I didn't anticipate was that my IRL friend who lost his rogue last week was really itching to play his new paladin, which got introduced as soon as the party arrived at the keep. the next day, the yuan-ti have set a hobgoblin town they control on fire; when the party gets within the town limits, they see the yuan-ti sacrificing their hobgoblin slaves in preparation to step up their game and start summoning demons. unsurprisingly (?) the paladin immediately attacks from range, setting the entirety of the yuan-ti forces on the party.

the party (level 5): oath of devotion paladin, moon druid, new beast master ranger
the enemies: a yuan-ti abomination, two malisons, six purebloods (one of which has superiority dice to use trip attack, one of which is a sorcerer with 3rd-level spell slots). bumping the CR of the sorc to 2 gives the encounter a multiplied XP value of 14,375 vs. the 3300 of three 5th-level players, making it a 4x deadly encounter.

so...are there teachable moments here, and who are they for?

me (the DM): I almost certainly should not have made the sacrifice of innocent lives the first thing a new paladin player sees, and then had it be buffered by the whole of an overwhelming enemy force. despite saying OOC alongside our more experienced player that with 3 players stealth should be the watchword, this was a terrible idea by a not-very-experienced DM.

my friend (the pally): this seems like the definition of lawful stupid or just suicidal play. we're a pretty combat-heavy table, and despite last session being insanely close to a party wipe, due to some last-minute spell slot fudging that led to some really tense and good combat the day was saved. the problem is, of course, that I don't know if my friend really understands that not every fight is meant to be pursued. I suspect he's trying his best to roleplay what his character would do, but...

the actual combat starts, halfway through pally friend needs to leave early and we're picking back up in an hour or two to finish the combat. both the druid and paladin both have most of their resources left, but the ranger's pet is unconscious and the ranger herself contributes almost nothing damage-wise. enemy-wise, the abomination went to pursue some dire wolves the druid conjured up, but they're gone and the abomination is closing in with 125 HP as well as one of the malisons and some of the purebloods.

I know the party is planning to run, but I'm honestly tired of fudging when the yuan-ti have a myriad of ways to stop that from happening, from hold person to suggestion. I don't think it has to be a guaranteed TPK; specifically, if they're captured and take their places on the sacrificial block the abomination might not sacrifice them due to the good-aligned party members' souls being able to mess with the entire point of killing the hobs in the first place, i.e. summoning demons. kind of a handwave, but no more handwavey than letting them just flee from an encounter this dominating.

sorry this turned into a blog post, I really am interested in where any blame lies and if anyone has any opinions on what I should do when the battle resumes.

[Sigreid]

I think you need to let the hammer fall. Have the yaun-ti choose to capture them. And tell the party that escape isn't possible but it's all on them. Assuming the yaun-ti have enough slaves for sacrifice now, you can give them a little time to try to figure something out before they are killed.

[MrStabby]

If they are on the run then have hold person thrown at the guy next to the paladin.

Firstly this shows that there are tools that stop parties who are suicidal. If an encounter is too tough, you are in serious danger.

Secondly if your paladin player is RPing a Paladin, hence the encounter, they are not likely to let that PC stand paralysed and be left behind. They want to RP a dutiful good guy - give them an opportunity to swing them over their shoulders and run onward. A paladin probably has the carrying capacity as well.

Thirdly it will make the paladin really appreciate the value of their next level


Generally I am a fan of being brutal if the PCs are stupid but that is only in groups who know and understand this type of campaign. You have had one player death and and teaching them that the enemies will be ruthless. You can give them a lot of chances to get lucky - you should be sending some signals not to be stupid. Giving them a chance isn't the worst thing ever.

As for what you did "wrong" don't feel bad. Second guessing your players isn't always useful and they are unpredictable - in fact that is ideal. If they were predictable you wouldn't have given them meaningful choices. Look on the bright side - you put the Paladin in a position they cared about. There is more upside than downside here.

I may not be picturing the full circumstances here but that fight should have been exceptionally deadly, but the party ideally should be given an opportunity to find a way for it to not be deadly. Ideally in a way that is in character for their enemies. For example who pursues them? Who guards the prisoners after they retreat - the PCs attack seems to bear a lot of the hallmarks of a diversionary attack to draw the defenders away from the prisoners so they can be rescued by someone else lurking on the other side. The PCs know it isn't but do the Yuan Ti? How would smart Yuan Ti react to the tactical situation presented to them? What proportion of their forces would they commit?

[Torgairon]

I may not be picturing the full circumstances here but that fight should have been exceptionally deadly, but the party ideally should be given an opportunity to find a way for it to not be deadly. Ideally in a way that is in character for their enemies. For example who pursues them? Who guards the prisoners after they retreat - the PCs attack seems to bear a lot of the hallmarks of a diversionary attack to draw the defenders away from the prisoners so they can be rescued by someone else lurking on the other side. The PCs know it isn't but do the Yuan Ti? How would smart Yuan Ti react to the tactical situation presented to them? What proportion of their forces would they commit?

the bolded is what I'm kind of unhappy about because I know that I didn't do this, not really. I had some vague notions about the party dividing and conquering after the ritual was done and the abomination takes his newly trapped souls back to an inner sanctum while leaving behind a contingent of followers, but given where I chose to start the scene when the party arrived at the burning town, they would have had to sit through the slaughter of innocents. ultimately it was a setpiece more than something that really had a chance to be a balanced encounter, and it didn't have to be that way.

we should be starting any time now, still not sure what I want to go with in the end. I'm leaning towards having an NPC escaped hobgoblin slave (one that the party have likely forgot they met)
and some hobgoblins from the nearest settlement lead a sortie in and drive the yuan-ti back to the temple. I'll give an update after.

[Laserlight]

I'm not above saying "This is a cutscene, not an encounter."

Any time a player does something stupid...well, okay, any time a player does something suicidally stupid, I say "Are you sure you want to do that?" and explain why it's obviously a bad idea and suggest a survivable alternative. In this case, I'd say "Look, you're paladining so hard, I get it, but your character can see that you're both outnumbered and outclassed--if you fight, you'll lose. Your oath does not compel you to fight against those odds, so you don't have to worry about being a fallen paladin. So, now that you know the situation, do you want to fight, or sit back and wait for a better opportunity, or do you have any questions? Take a minute and talk it over with the other guys, I'm going to get a Coke."
If the player decides to confirm the suicidally stupid thing--and trust me, there will be plenty of times that they will--then you can massacre them with a clear conscience.

I like the idea of Holding the guy next to the pally, the "sling him over my shoulder and keep running" part.

You could also say that the yuan-ti casters had already expended a few spell slots earlier in the day--putting down uncooperative hobgoblins, for instance.

[Sabeta]

snip

My Paladin wrote down as his Flaw "I'm not going to run away from a fight, it is the height of cowardice. I would rather die."
He's also done things like pick up enemy weapons and return it to them in the middle of a battle. Honestly I love his character, but I'll need to be careful not to kill him.

[Sigreid]

I'm not above saying "This is a cutscene, not an encounter."

Any time a player does something stupid...well, okay, any time a player does something suicidally stupid, I say "Are you sure you want to do that?" and explain why it's obviously a bad idea and suggest a survivable alternative. In this case, I'd say "Look, you're paladining so hard, I get it, but your character can see that you're both outnumbered and outclassed--if you fight, you'll lose. Your oath does not compel you to fight against those odds, so you don't have to worry about being a fallen paladin. So, now that you know the situation, do you want to fight, or sit back and wait for a better opportunity, or do you have any questions? Take a minute and talk it over with the other guys, I'm going to get a Coke."
If the player decides to confirm the suicidally stupid thing--and trust me, there will be plenty of times that they will--then you can massacre them with a clear conscience.

I like the idea of Holding the guy next to the pally, the "sling him over my shoulder and keep running" part.

You could also say that the yuan-ti casters had already expended a few spell slots earlier in the day--putting down uncooperative hobgoblins, for instance.

I let them make their own decisions but I'm not above "Really? O.K. Wow." And seeing if another member of the party will try to stop him.

[ad_hoc]

TPKs aren't bad things. They're part of the story. The final part of the story, but still part of it.

If they can't happen then that takes a lot away from the game. It not only eliminates a lot of risk but also invalidates many choices.

[djreynolds]

Players often pick classes based on everyone else's choices. So you have well-oiled machine.

Tell them if they leave, the game either stops where it is, or their buddies are doubling down on those PC's characters. They should know how at least to use the druid and paladin... as they already have read the monster manual and PHB a dozen times.

That's how it goes, I tell friends if I'm not there to play.... here are the keys... try to not to kill my character.

[Arial Black]

Let the dice fall where they may. If Lawful Stupid behaviour gets them killed then this is Darwinian evolution working in front of your very eyes. A 'teachable moment' indeed.

Suggest a Vengeance paladin next time.

Paladin: THESE COLOURS DON'T RUN!
*1000 yuan-ti appear*
Paladin: ...however, these colours do tactically re-deploy to attain superior positioning...!

[agnos]

Two things: First, I second the notion that the PC's attack feels like a diversion. Yuanti aren't stupid; send a TPK squad but not 8 TPK squads. Give the party a 10-25% chance in your estimation and don't fudge. Make sure that the Yuanti spread to look for the "real" attack. Yuanti should make a moderate attempt to capture with intention of advanced interrogation techniques. However second, let character deaths happen. They're part of the story; hell maybe let the paladin sacrifice himself so some of the cowards (other PCs) can get away. Back to back deaths stink, but you can't expect to poke the bear and not get bitten. My characters haven't permanently died often, but when they have it's almost always a better story than those that lived forever.

[JakOfAllTirades]

One thing I'm wondering about: after the Yuan-ti are distracted fighting the PC's, can the Hobgoblin slaves do anything to help? Given any chance to avoid being sacrificed (unless the PCs are too late) I don't see them just sitting there waiting to see who wins the fight. They're hobgoblins; if there's any way they can fight they Yuan-ti, they'll do it!

[Torgairon]

One thing I'm wondering about: after the Yuan-ti are distracted fighting the PC's, can the Hobgoblin slaves do anything to help? Given any chance to avoid being sacrificed (unless the PCs are too late) I don't see them just sitting there waiting to see who wins the fight. They're hobgoblins; if there's any way they can fight they Yuan-ti, they'll do it!

this is pretty close to what I ended up going with; after the combat resumed, I rolled in a five-man hobgoblin squad captained by the wife of the former village chief that the party had met two sessions ago and completely forgotten about after helping her. the distraction gave the party two rounds to regroup and heal up, and they chased the abomination out of the village in short order. now the party is going at the yuan-ti temple again, hopefully a bit more cautiously, trying to catch the abomination before he can use all the souls he managed to gather to summon some demonic assistance and strike back.

I talked to my friend at length after the session and it turns out that some...substance-related...comprehension obstacles may have been in play when he was told about how many yuan-ti were in the middle of the village. the big lesson for me, then, seems to be that it's a poor idea to assume that it's somehow bad form or a weakness to just ask if the party needs an outside perspective on how a battle might go, even if it's just the "are you sure"? method.

[LordVonDerp]

the next day, the yuan-ti have set a hobgoblin town they control on fire; when the party gets within the town limits, they see the yuan-ti sacrificing their hobgoblin slaves in preparation to step up their game and start summoning demons. unsurprisingly (?) the paladin immediately attacks from range, setting the entirety of the yuan-ti forces on the party.


so...are there teachable moments here, and who are they for?

me (the DM): I almost certainly should not have made the sacrifice of innocent lives the first thing a new paladin player sees,

I don't know if my friend really understands that not every fight is meant to be pursued. I suspect he's trying his best to roleplay what his character would do, but...


sorry this turned into a blog post, I really am interested in where any blame lies and if anyone has any opinions on what I should do when the battle resumes.

Teachable Moments
1) explain situations better.
2) make sure the paladin understands discretion BEFORE starting the session.
3) make sure the players understand whether or not the slaves will help them in that situation.

[Sigreid]

Teachable Moments
1) explain situations better.
2) make sure the paladin understands discretion BEFORE starting the session.
3) make sure the players understand whether or not the slaves will help them in that situation.

I think 3 needs to be a gamble unless the party takes the risk of reaching out to the slaves ahead of the potential revolt.

And 2 is not at all the DM's responsibility.

[Vogonjeltz]

me (the DM): I almost certainly should not have made the sacrifice of innocent lives the first thing a new paladin player sees, and then had it be buffered by the whole of an overwhelming enemy force. despite saying OOC alongside our more experienced player that with 3 players stealth should be the watchword, this was a terrible idea by a not-very-experienced DM.

my friend (the pally): this seems like the definition of lawful stupid or just suicidal play. we're a pretty combat-heavy table, and despite last session being insanely close to a party wipe, due to some last-minute spell slot fudging that led to some really tense and good combat the day was saved. the problem is, of course, that I don't know if my friend really understands that not every fight is meant to be pursued. I suspect he's trying his best to roleplay what his character would do, but...

the actual combat starts, halfway through pally friend needs to leave early and we're picking back up in an hour or two to finish the combat. both the druid and paladin both have most of their resources left, but the ranger's pet is unconscious and the ranger herself contributes almost nothing damage-wise. enemy-wise, the abomination went to pursue some dire wolves the druid conjured up, but they're gone and the abomination is closing in with 125 HP as well as one of the malisons and some of the purebloods.

I know the party is planning to run, but I'm honestly tired of fudging when the yuan-ti have a myriad of ways to stop that from happening, from hold person to suggestion. I don't think it has to be a guaranteed TPK; specifically, if they're captured and take their places on the sacrificial block the abomination might not sacrifice them due to the good-aligned party members' souls being able to mess with the entire point of killing the hobs in the first place, i.e. summoning demons. kind of a handwave, but no more handwavey than letting them just flee from an encounter this dominating.

sorry this turned into a blog post, I really am interested in where any blame lies and if anyone has any opinions on what I should do when the battle resumes.

I think the problem (if you can call it that) is that your friend's character is a brave hero, unwilling to simply stand by while innocents are sacrificed.

If you don't want it to be a tpk, don't put overwhelming odds in place and expect the heroes to, instead, be cowards. (I'm using coward in strictly the definitional sense: a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.)

Most adventurers are cowards in games, but it's a lot less fun than playing a character who is totally willing to fight possibly overwhelming odds and maybe actually die in the process, trying to do something good.

[Laserlight]

I let them make their own decisions but I'm not above "Really? O.K. Wow." And seeing if another member of the party will try to stop him.

I've found that sometimes they're not trying to be suicidal, they just don't understand the situation although their character would. In that case, it works better to go ahead and explain why what they're doing is a bad idea, rather than just "Are you sure you want to do that?"

There will be plenty of times when they decide "Yes, I really do want to jump off the 100ft tower onto the pavement, step across the magic circle, gaze into the Deeps Beyond The Sky, try to irritate a Lord of Death, singlehandedly tackle a skinwalker, or headbutt a dragon."

[JakOfAllTirades]

this is pretty close to what I ended up going with; after the combat resumed, I rolled in a five-man hobgoblin squad captained by the wife of the former village chief that the party had met two sessions ago and completely forgotten about after helping her. the distraction gave the party two rounds to regroup and heal up, and they chased the abomination out of the village in short order. now the party is going at the yuan-ti temple again, hopefully a bit more cautiously, trying to catch the abomination before he can use all the souls he managed to gather to summon some demonic assistance and strike back.

I talked to my friend at length after the session and it turns out that some...substance-related...comprehension obstacles may have been in play when he was told about how many yuan-ti were in the middle of the village. the big lesson for me, then, seems to be that it's a poor idea to assume that it's somehow bad form or a weakness to just ask if the party needs an outside perspective on how a battle might go, even if it's just the "are you sure"? method.

Okay... "substance-related" could mean a number of different things. I've seen some horrendous game sessions due to players being "under the influence." At least we can laugh about it now....

[Sigreid]

I've found that sometimes they're not trying to be suicidal, they just don't understand the situation although their character would. In that case, it works better to go ahead and explain why what they're doing is a bad idea, rather than just "Are you sure you want to do that?"

There will be plenty of times when they decide "Yes, I really do want to jump off the 100ft tower onto the pavement, step across the magic circle, gaze into the Deeps Beyond The Sky, try to irritate a Lord of Death, singlehandedly tackle a skinwalker, or headbutt a dragon."

That's funny because it's a common trope that if your DM asks you if you really want to do something, it's a bad idea.

[Torgairon]

I think the problem (if you can call it that) is that your friend's character is a brave hero, unwilling to simply stand by while innocents are sacrificed.

If you don't want it to be a tpk, don't put overwhelming odds in place and expect the heroes to, instead, be cowards. (I'm using coward in strictly the definitional sense: a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.)

Most adventurers are cowards in games, but it's a lot less fun than playing a character who is totally willing to fight possibly overwhelming odds and maybe actually die in the process, trying to do something good.

I totally agree with this, it was a really lame scenario - especially with them being down a player - that sprung from questionable motives, e.g. the desire to up the ante after the party's previous loss and to exhibit the strength of the foes they were dealing with. I didn't have any planned ways for it to truly be interactive without resorting to combat...maybe some more subtle ways to disrupt the proceedings existed that I wouldn't have thought of where my other players would have, but none came up at the time. this is ultimately why I decided to provide outside NPC help instead of killing them because, as the consensus seems to suggest, this was my poor scenario construction rather than a player issue.


Okay... "substance-related" could mean a number of different things. I've seen some horrendous game sessions due to players being "under the influence." At least we can laugh about it now....

nothing too racy or dangerous was involved, but I suspect that this story will become a cautionary tale around my table when certain enhancing elements are brought to the session. :smallwink:

[furby076]

That's funny because it's a common trope that if your DM asks you if you really want to do something, it's a bad idea.

Yea, i had to ban alcohol from my gaming table. Had a friend, who i knew for years and was a fun DM, join a new group i started with. He asked to drink, i said sure, he got beligerant and rude...the game got called early. The DM took him home (had spare bedroom and live close to me). They slept together. My long term friend never returned my calls or emails :( (presumably embarassed)....and now, no more booze around the table

[Vogonjeltz]

I totally agree with this, it was a really lame scenario - especially with them being down a player - that sprung from questionable motives, e.g. the desire to up the ante after the party's previous loss and to exhibit the strength of the foes they were dealing with. I didn't have any planned ways for it to truly be interactive without resorting to combat...maybe some more subtle ways to disrupt the proceedings existed that I wouldn't have thought of where my other players would have, but none came up at the time. this is ultimately why I decided to provide outside NPC help instead of killing them because, as the consensus seems to suggest, this was my poor scenario construction rather than a player issue.

What you could do, in a similar situation, is have the players come across the ritual sacrifice from a vantage point where they can't reach the participants (Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom has such a moment), but that does offer some mechanical means of disrupting the proceedings. (i.e. They could cut a tapestry, or push a brazier down on the high priest, or trigger a rockslide from the ceiling/a high point.

That gives them methods for dealing with what might have been overwhelming odds. And depending on choke points it's entirely plausible that the players could cause a disruption, drawing the enemy back to a doorway and fighting them there.

[Laserlight]

That's funny because it's a common trope that if your DM asks you if you really want to do something, it's a bad idea.

Some people will get an idea stuck in their head and a little speedbump like "are you sure?" isn't enough to get them to stop and think. (I once had a customer who didn't realize that his 14ft tall piece of equipment wouldn't fit in a 10ft high room, and it took me nineteen minutes of explaining to him before he could grasp the problem. He wasn't stupid, just...stuck).