How do you handle tpk

[Doomwhispo]

Just had a discussion about this recently with my co-dm. What do most DM's do in case of a tpk?
Do you allow the character to continue the adventure with new characters? Isn't that a bit weird story wise? If 5 new adventure suddenly pick up where the others left?
Do you restart the adventure though the players might find it boring to replay the same scenario even if you change a lot of stuff.
Or do you simply start a new adventure?
Or do something else?

Pls give me your motivation as well

[Waazraath]

The only TPK I can remember as a DM, I continued the next session, but from a different angle. So different party, different motivation for the adventure, different starting situation, but after 1 session, it could continue where the late party ended. I did it this way because it was a nice clean break (no 'new party' that was exactly the same as the old one but in name), but also allowed me to continue the campaign and not throw away all my prepared stuff.

[hymer]

It depends on the situation, and I usually involve my players in the decision. Generally speaking, though, a TPK should have consequences. Even if some of the PCs' allies bring them (or most of them) back to life to continue, there should be an effect. Maybe one of those allies was permanently killed reviving the PCs. Maybe the delay causes complications. Maybe some people think the returned PCs are frauds, as everyone knows they fell bravely. Etc.

Mostly, though, a TPK marks the end of that story. Another group of PCs may well start up in the same world, and may by degrees come to take over the old plot threads, but that will take a while (a long while if the PCs were high level), and the story will change considerably as a consequence.

[Toofey]

When I DM campaigns, I typically work from the enemies motivations. So if there's a TPK and I and the players are both interested in the campaign, I typically start the new party as a group of people who came together 'organically' (because they're the player characters) in the next situation being caused by the bad guy.

[The Shadowdove]

By containing my pure sense of satisfaction and supremacy until I can get out of maniacal laughter hearing distance.

[Waazraath]

By containing my pure sense of satisfaction and supremacy until I can get out of maniacal laughter hearing distance.

Ah come on. If you like it, rub it in! Don't forget to tell your players that YOU WON THE GAME and that their skills are lacking!

[ChubbyRain]

Just had a discussion about this recently with my co-dm. What do most DM's do in case of a tpk?
Do you allow the character to continue the adventure with new characters? Isn't that a bit weird story wise? If 5 new adventure suddenly pick up where the others left?
Do you restart the adventure though the players might find it boring to replay the same scenario even if you change a lot of stuff.
Or do you simply start a new adventure?
Or do something else?

Pls give me your motivation as well


As a player, I typically want my new character to have some relation to my old character. I want to be connected to the story and have a sense of "I need to finish what X started).

As a DM... Typically I describe all the bad stuff that happens due to the characters defeat and then ask if they want to continue with the current adventure or start an entirely new one.

Then roll characters, changes can be made before the start of the next game. In good enough of a sandbox DM that I can crank out a few sessions without needing to prep anything (in 3e and 4e too).

[The Shadowdove]

Ah come on. If you like it, rub it in! Don't forget to tell your players that YOU WON THE GAME and that their skills are lacking!

Players are pansies. Can't have them catching on or they will learn to predict my playercidal urges

[MrConsideration]

A smug tittering, or if suitably inebriated, a sinister laugh.

In game, time advances a number of months/years and all storylines play themselves out without player intervention. Now the NEW party is dealing with the fact that the Lich they were going to foil has taken over the kingdom or what-have-you.

[Randomthom]

It also depends on the enemy that TPK'd them. If they are an intelligent/semi-intelligent race they might have taken some/all of the PCs captive instead (i.e. not finishing them off when unconscious). This is a good opportunity to let a PC off-the-hook if they don't like their current hero much, theirs can be the one who bled out on the way back to the gnoll's holdfast or something similar.

The PCs can then awake to torturous Gnolls and a chained and brow-beaten prisoner who has been here for months (new Hero for the player who wanted rid of their old one). Cue escape...

Of course if they were taken down by zombies then they are just dead, brains eaten... oh well!

[Talwar]

The one time I was part of a TPK, even the DM didn't see it coming. We players came in with some assumptions about how our characters and the enemies would function, and we were wrong. Afterward, we discussed what had happened, and our subsequent character builds (and tactics) better reflected the reality of the setting.

Since it had come right in the first battle of the campaign, we more or less just picked up in the aftermath.

[ChubbyRain]

It also depends on the enemy that TPK'd them. If they are an intelligent/semi-intelligent race they might have taken some/all of the PCs captive instead (i.e. not finishing them off when unconscious). This is a good opportunity to let a PC off-the-hook if they don't like their current hero much, theirs can be the one who bled out on the way back to the gnoll's holdfast or something similar.

The PCs can then awake to torturous Gnolls and a chained and brow-beaten prisoner who has been here for months (new Hero for the player who wanted rid of their old one). Cue escape...

Of course if they were taken down by zombies then they are just dead, brains eaten... oh well!

Yeah, using the "fail forward" method works for more than just skill checks.

[Armok]

First of all, I've decided as a DM to stop holding my punches. Not every encounter should be without the risk of death. Death should be a real possibility, so that combat feels tense and dangerous.

This means that if I'm playing a group of enemies that want the party dead, they'll kill them if they have an advantage they can press. Sometimes enemies might have more motivation to capture the party, in which case they take people who survive their death saves back to their lair. Play resumes from there, now the party has to escape with their lives.

Sometimes everybody dies. Storylines then play out without the players intervention, and the game picks up some time down the road, perhaps even in a new location if it's a real big loss.

[Ruslan]

Do you allow the character to continue the adventure with new characters? Isn't that a bit weird story wise? If 5 new adventure suddenly pick up where the others left?

Not at all. "We sent a group of mercenaries to investigate the strange rumors around demonic creatures sightings in Westhaven, but the adventurers were never heard from again. Would you five care to try? The money is good."

[CaptainSarathai]

Ugh, the TPK...
As a DM, our goal is to cooperatively tell a story with the players, not defeat them.

That said, some stories do have "bad endings" or a tragic "passing of the torch" moment. These are situations where a TPK can actually make sense. Throw in that Deadly++ encounter, and don't pull your punches.
But if the whole party gets wiped just because of a run of bad luck while fighting some no-name minions... that's not how you'd want to see a book or movie end. So as a DM, part of your responsibility is to prevent that.


First of all, I've decided as a DM to stop holding my punches. Not every encounter should be without the risk of death. Death should be a real possibility, so that combat feels tense and dangerous.

I agree, but this doesn't mean a TPK. This just means that indivodual characters can die.

For example, if the players think that they can just walk through the front door of a Hobgoblin fortress, then people are gonna die. Will they all die? Nah, the HobGobs will at least offer a few of them surrender, once defeat is obvious. Normally, my players avoid the TPK, because I have told them that if they do all get killed, it is up to me, as DM, whether they get to carry on the campaign with a new party.

[Naanomi]

I've had two TPKs so far. One was from a very challenging fight that was easily avoidable but the party attempted it anyways, then the dice turned against them. Because the fight was avoidable (and the opponent they were facing wasn't the type to pull his punches) I let the party fall and we started a new party; one that eventually started picking up the threads of the old campaign (but started on their own formative adventures first).

The second TPK was a bit of poor tactics (should have scouted better perhaps), but mostly unfortunate dice interactions (couldn't stop being confused by umberhulks!), and the party did spend a lot of effort keeping each-other from dying mid-combat. Their opponents were slavers, it made sense for them to enslave them and make an opportunity for a 'reclaim your equipment and escape the slavers!' adventure rather than wipe them out, even though they were clearly all down.

[BW022]

...
Or do something else?

Pls give me your motivation as well

I don't permit the TPK. Normally, TPKs shouldn't happen unless something went wrong -- the DM made a bad encounter (or is blindly following a bad module), they players were really stupid, insanely bad luck, etc. If a TPK is coming, the DM should see this and then do something to avoid it...

a) Have the players taken prisoner.
b) Have an NPC come in and save them.
c) Have the enemies suddenly start taking non-optimal actions, walk off, etc.
d) Have an earthquake make a huge rift between the PCs and the enemies, or the ceiling falls.
etc., etc.

Worst case...
x) Apologize to the players, say you make a mistake, and have them wake at a nearby monastery with a local cleric having found them and cast raise dead on them.

Most campaigns have a lot of work and the idea is for players to finish them. Repeated starting/stopping creates a lot of problems. You only need to kill players enough such that they know that it can happen. Failure of most of the above could still have serious consequences for failure, bad luck, stupidity, etc. -- i.e. loss of gold, equipment, XP, time, enemy escapes, bad plan starts happening, etc.

About the only times I would generally permit a TPK would be things such as (a) they are deliberately being stupid, (b) it is one of the final battles/encounters of the campaign and they do fail (not great, but not terrible given a 6 month+ game), or (c) the campaign is ending anyway.

[Laserlight]

It depends on the campaign. In the New Sun campaign, I pulled some punches except in the last few sessions, but if the players had managed to screw up badly enough to TPK, then the Night Serpent devours the Sun and everyone in the world dies, The End. In my Frostgrave campaign, well, if everyone dies--might happen tonight!--then the city fathers will recruit a new bunch of suckers mercenary explorers to step through the Portal and see what's on the other side.

[Arkhios]

I'm fortunate enough for not having faced such a thing yet as a DM, but our old campaigns which had a TPK occur simply ended. No new groups. Nothing. Just ended.

Personally, I would maybe fastforward a reasonable time period and have the players come up with new characters that have emerged in the light of the latest events that might have occurred because of the previous party was killed and failed to stop whatever threat they were up against.

[Deleted]

I ran a game the other week, straight up murdered everyone in the room. Wasn't even a deadly encounter, but I wasn't pulling punches.

They all are now fighting their way out of through Carceri as their souls were sent there as payment. They had to break out of a cell, find some stuff, and are doing rather well. Fun times.

I think I'll have one of the planes of this planar prison be Rumbledy-Hump where everything is perfect and everything is nice and you just don't want to leave...

[furby076]

In a 9 year campaign, we were resurrected by a massively powerful archmage. He also gave us boosts, with minor drawbacks. My paladin got an arm of nyr, but his body was heavily scarred. Our druid became perm large size while in animal form (always +1 size category), but she was fat. We lost our gear, and had to borrow mimor magical gear (+1 fear). This was a pathfinder game, fyi, and we were 10th ish level

[Telwar]

The one time I was part of a TPK, even the DM didn't see it coming. We players came in with some assumptions about how our characters and the enemies would function, and we were wrong. Afterward, we discussed what had happened, and our subsequent character builds (and tactics) better reflected the reality of the setting.

Since it had come right in the first battle of the campaign, we more or less just picked up in the aftermath.

I remember an old 3.5 Dragon article talking about TPKs they observed in games at Gencon, and one of the common themes was the players might have known it was coming, but didn't really take any steps to prevent it until it was *far* too late.

Amusingly, not long after that, we had the closest we've come to a TPK, and realizing it fit the signs, I managed to persuade the party to GTFO and maybe the hobgoblins on worgs with 60' base movement rates (...that were, somehow, armed, armored, and ready from a dead sleep in one round, taking another round to get near the area, and then a third round to enter combat...the DM was a bit irritated by my mutterings about hobgoblins apparently sleeping upright, in armor, on top of their perpetually awake worgs...) wouldn't catch us, and as it happens we only lost the monk.

[xanderh]

I usually ask my players what they'd like to do. The two I play with the most have a lot of character ideas they want to play, so they usually just want to start something new with other characters.
I once tried a campaign with just the two of them, and they died to what was supposed to be an easy encounter according to the math, but the dice just decided that, nope, this is where they die. They both wanted to play a different campaign after that, in a different style (we were doing an evil campaign. They are bad at being evil...).
Recently, we had a tpk in Star Wars edge of the empire. Or, rather, the entire party was knocked unconscious. It's very hard to actually die. But the reason was that we were all learning the new system, they hadn't all built their characters well, and I had overlooked the words about encounter balance (which, to be fair, is only about a paragraph of text, with barely a headline, and no easy-to-find index entry). They would rather start a new thing, with new characters, which I totally understand.

[busterswd]

A TPK is just another end to a story. I'll give the epilogue as to what happens in their absence, at least in the short term. If there's enough interest, I'll find a way to continue the story from another group's perspective. Same thing happens if they win the campaign, though; I'll give an epilogue and find a way to continue the campaign if they really want to (and there's stuff left to do).

[Altair_the_Vexed]

I blogged about this ages ago - pretty much what everyone else here has said already, but in one handy blog post (http://running-the-game.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/after-heroes-are-dead.html)!

[sir_argo]

At least one time, we just did a do-over. The scenario included climbing a very tall rock pillar to get to a nest at the top. The party did the correct thing... they had the best climber at the front and tied everyone together so that if someone fell, the others (presumably two) would have the ability to make rolls to save the person. Well, as bad luck would have it, the "good" climber fumbled his climb roll. It was only then that everyone, including me, realized that he was a large character, about 300 pounds, and the second person in line failed a check to hold that much weight. Nobody had actually considered that the expert climber would fail and leave potentially the weakest person to try and catch a very heavy character. Yeah, well, he got plucked off the cliffside too. Now it was two characters weight vs. number three in line, and I guess you can figure out how the rest went.

Everyone died from the fall. That didn't sit well with me, so I said f*** it, you guys make it up. Let's keep going.

It was just a very unlucky roll and I didn't think the whole party should die from that.

[Deleted]

A TPK is just another end to a story. I'll give the epilogue as to what happens in their absence, at least in the short term. If there's enough interest, I'll find a way to continue the story from another group's perspective. Same thing happens if they win the campaign, though; I'll give an epilogue and find a way to continue the campaign if they really want to (and there's stuff left to do).

With a vast multiverse and the fact that heaven and hell are real... I never understood why death would be the ending of a game.

[HolyDraconus]

From my experience there are two kinds of TPK. The ones that are preventable and the ones that are not. I DMED a campaign with the latter.

The party was informed to ferry a missive to a powerful king, who is currently fighting a three point war. They was told specifically to NOT engage with any of the soldiers on the field since they didn't know who was with whom and that the leaders of those armies are very powerful (lvl 15). The party was 9 at the time. As soon as they saw the battlefield the party attacked everyone indiscriminately. After 5 turns of this the leaders showed up. 3 rounds later a dying Ranger manages to natural 20 3times straight to give the letter to king. Technically they all died. Since she hit -10 and I had her roll for last words. Though it did lead to them needing to get stronger to reclaim a part of the party's soul from a demon..

[xanderh]

From my experience there are two kinds of TPK. The ones that are preventable and the ones that are not. I DMED a campaign with the latter.

The party was informed to ferry a missive to a powerful king, who is currently fighting a three point war. They was told specifically to NOT engage with any of the soldiers on the field since they didn't know who was with whom and that the leaders of those armies are very powerful (lvl 15). The party was 9 at the time. As soon as they saw the battlefield the party attacked everyone indiscriminately. After 5 turns of this the leaders showed up. 3 rounds later a dying Ranger manages to natural 20 3times straight to give the letter to king. Technically they all died. Since she hit -10 and I had her roll for last words. Though it did lead to them needing to get stronger to reclaim a part of the party's soul from a demon..

Uh, players don't die at -10 in 5e... Once you lose all of your hit points, you drop to 0. If there's enough left over damage to reduce you to negative your maximum hit points, you due instantly, otherwise you are at 0. Afterwards, you need to take damage equal to your maximum hit Points to die instantly, otherwise it just counts as 1 failed death save, 2 if it's a crit.

[hymer]

Uh, players don't die at -10 in 5e.

So presumably HolyDraconus is referring to an incident that took place while playing an earlier version of D&D.

[KorvinStarmast]

How do you handle tpk
1. Get up from table 'beer break' and 'bathroom break' and decide if it is:

a) roll up new characters
b) one or a few or all wake up in chains or buried under a pile of other dead bodies or whatever.

There is no pat answer. It depends on the situation, a lot, and the group, a lot.

And as a DM, I will sometimes offer to characters with a decent wisdom score, when things are going badly and they don't realize they are about to bit the bullet, a broad hint about "live to fight another day, game over, voice in my head, sounds like my grandpa, etc" ... particularly when the enemy has not yet committed its reserve and the fight is full on.

Sometimes, the hint is taken.
Sometimes, not.

OBTW, having DM'd for kids and young teens for a few years, back in the day, I have a standard briefing to players before the first adventure.

- Always have a plan B
- Always have an escape plan.

It's the same as driving instructions for new drivers.

[HolyDraconus]

Uh, players don't die at -10 in 5e... Once you lose all of your hit points, you drop to 0. If there's enough left over damage to reduce you to negative your maximum hit points, you due instantly, otherwise you are at 0. Afterwards, you need to take damage equal to your maximum hit Points to die instantly, otherwise it just counts as 1 failed death save, 2 if it's a crit.


So presumably HolyDraconus is referring to an incident that took place while playing an earlier version of D&D.

3.5 to be exact. Sorry for not making that clear.

[The-0-Endless]

Send them all to hell. Let them see if they can get out, planescape style.

[GPS]

I don't know about the best way, but our group handles TPK's the fun way, some complain, others accept, new campaign starts.

I recommend dealing with a campaign the hardcore way (for real gamers only):
1. Burn all the character sheets
2. Burn all of the various sourcebooks in the group's posession
3. Burn the table you used to play on, all the dice, any pizza you ate during the session, and the host's house (just to be safe)
4. Never speak of roleplaying again, they can't find you if you don't speak.

(This method should insure maximum security from Statsi secret police survillence. Better safe than sorry)

[Tanarii]

I say something like 'too bad guys'. Better luck next time.

OTOH the players know that TPKs are a somewhat common occurrence IMC. And in the case of Tier 2 characters, they usually have contingency plans to have another group of PCs (or even different players entirely) organize a body-recovery mission, if possible. A common primary task for henchmen is to escape and inform other groups of the need.


By containing my pure sense of satisfaction and supremacy until I can get out of maniacal laughter hearing distance.
It gets harder and harder every time. :smallbiggrin:

[Beelzebubba]

How do you handle tpk
1. Get up from table 'beer break' and 'bathroom break' and decide if it is:

a) roll up new characters
b) one or a few or all wake up in chains or buried under a pile of other dead bodies or whatever.

There is no pat answer. It depends on the situation, a lot, and the group, a lot.

Yeah, this.

The two times I've had it happen, we just blew off the game for a while and went out to have pizza.

We decided what to do after we were full and in a better mood.

[Dudewithknives]

I have always found it to be a much bigger problem when it is almost a tpk.

Ex when you have a group of 5 - 7 and they all die but 1.

That has happened in my old gaming group more than once.

I once accidently killed the whole party but myself and killed the villains we were fighting all with one misplaced crit fail, luckily we were high enough level to where we had a "party resurrection backup fund"

In a bank in waterdeep we kept enough diamonds and gold for emergency party revives.

[Matrix_Walker]

I see a TPK as a total fail on the part of the GM. Fudging, cheating, and divine intervention are all far preferable.

What kind of a storyteller kills all his primary protagonist characters?

[Arkhios]

I see a TPK as a total fail on the part of the GM. Fudging, cheating, and divine intervention are all far preferable.

What kind of a storyteller kills all his primary protagonist characters?

I kinda have to agree. Especially if the campaign they're running is homebrew, it's quite strange if DM doesn't fudge rolls or use divine intervention to prevent a total party death if they want the players to play the game of their own creation.

[Phoenix042]

Just had a discussion about this recently with my co-dm. What do most DM's do in case of a tpk?
Do you allow the character to continue the adventure with new characters? Isn't that a bit weird story wise? If 5 new adventure suddenly pick up where the others left?
Do you restart the adventure though the players might find it boring to replay the same scenario even if you change a lot of stuff.
Or do you simply start a new adventure?
Or do something else?

Pls give me your motivation as well

First of all, I try to make a significant handful of my encounter's obviously not insta-kill material. Especially BBEG fights; those are often the LEAST likely to result in immediate PC death in my games.

This is because mindless monsters hunting for food are often unlikely to do anything other than immediately eat the PC's if they die, but big dragons, intelligent spellcasters, etc all have their own alternate plans. A lot of monsters prefer to carry off live food, trap it somewhere, and eat it later. This gives players a second-chance (this time at escape) to avoid death.

If instant death is on the table as a consequence of failure, I also try to make that abundantly clear in my descriptions of monsters, including words like "starving," or "blood-thirsty," etc.

I let my players know ahead of time that I'm not going to fudge rolls, then I roll in the open whenever I can. I try to create encounters where the PC's have an out a lot of the time.

And if the PC's in any of my games die, they're dead. No redo's, no divine intervention.

I then describe events that transpire after their death as a result of their failure. Then I let the PC's choose whether they want to make new character's for this game after events have unfolded or start a new adventure and abandon the campaign.

[Phoenix042]

I kinda have to agree. Especially if the campaign they're running is homebrew, it's quite strange if DM doesn't fudge rolls or use divine intervention to prevent a total party death if they want the players to play the game of their own creation.

If failure has no consequences, success is meaningless.

For some people, that's just fine.

I prefer to simply make the player's actions and abilities determine what happens, alongside the cold hand of fate (read: dice).

[Matrix_Walker]

If failure has no consequences, success is meaningless.

For some people, that's just fine.

I prefer to simply make the player's actions and abilities determine what happens, alongside the cold hand of fate (read: dice).

Makes for a pretty crappy story. Might as well play Skyrim.

[Arkhios]

If failure has no consequences, success is meaningless.

For some people, that's just fine.

I prefer to simply make the player's actions and abilities determine what happens, alongside the cold hand of fate (read: dice).

Eh... I mean that since you as the DM make the encounters, in the end a tpk IS your fault if the creatures and encounter are too strong for the group and they all die no matter what. Of course, actions should have consequences, but putting divine intervention in there doesn't have to mean that the PCs wake up well-rested as if nothing bad happened. Divine Intervention can be done much more creatively than that.

If you just end a campaign of your own creation after a TPK and never look back, wouldn't you feel that all the work and effort for the story ahead would have gone to waste?

Even if you were running a pre-written adventure, I think you should try to think ways to preserve at least some of their lives so it would be easier to explain why completely new adventurers suddenly take on adventure in midway.

[Knaight]

Eh... I mean that since you as the DM make the encounters, in the end a tpk IS your fault if the creatures and encounter are too strong for the group and they all die no matter what. Of course, actions should have consequences, but putting divine intervention in there doesn't have to mean that the PCs wake up well-rested as if nothing bad happened. Divine Intervention can be done much more creatively than that.

If you just end a campaign of your own creation after a TPK and never look back, wouldn't you feel that all the work and effort for the story ahead would have gone to waste?

Even if you were running a pre-written adventure, I think you should try to think ways to preserve at least some of their lives so it would be easier to explain why completely new adventurers suddenly take on adventure in midway.

Sometimes divine intervention isn't appropriate, and there are other ways to avoid the problem of why new adventurers suddenly took up the mantle of the old party (starting by not doing that at all).

[Beelzebubba]

Makes for a pretty crappy story. Might as well play Skyrim.

Maybe we don't want a story, and we want a game.

Fudging dice rolls makes for a pretty crappy game. Might as well read a book.

[Arkhios]

Maybe we don't want a story, and we want a game.

Fudging dice rolls makes for a pretty crappy game. Might as well read a book.

Maybe some people want both instead of limiting themselves to either rollplaying or roleplaying?

Abrupt end in a story-driven game is like watching a good movie that promises a sequel, but that sequel gets stuck in development and eventually is scrapped due to lack of funds.

[Dudu]

Well, tpk should be avoided... but not at all costs. I believe tpk needs to be a possibility. Players should be punished for taking bad decisions. They should die, if they were reckless. Otherwise the world you created sounds less like a living, dangerous world and more like a laboratory, a safe environment to test players, and I don't like that.

[xanderh]

I've had a tpk happen due to a medium encounter right after a long rest. I roll in the open, because my group prefers that. All players failed their death saves.
Once that was over, I asked whether they wanted to continue the campaign with new characters, or move on to another campaign. They wanted to move on.

It doesn't bother me that I lost the planning I had done. Most of it was world-building anyway, due to the way I prepare for campaigns, which means that I could reuse it later, and I have. In fact, one of my players in my latest campaign decided to play a hermit, and asked if his revelation could be about a dungeon in a desert. This happens to be the place in which they had a TPK.

[Beelzebubba]

Maybe some people want both instead of limiting themselves to either rollplaying or roleplaying?

Abrupt end in a story-driven game is like watching a good movie that promises a sequel, but that sequel gets stuck in development and eventually is scrapped due to lack of funds.

That depends on if you want a *story* that has gameplay in it, or a *game* that creates good stories.

Why do you think yours is the 'one true way'?

Why are you assuming I'm critiquing your way by asserting a different way to game?

[MrStabby]

I am in the camp of letting PCs die. Obviously the danger level is dependant on game style, but there are rules for character death for a reason.

I get the story telling side, I see its attraction but it is not well suited as an objective to a system based on luck and doubt over the outcome of actions. Given the group is playing 5th edition I see it as more of a game than a story.

On the other hand a TPK is not the end of the story unless people want it to be. The story is the story of the PCs community, their families, churches, and the people they fought to protect as well as the bad guys as well. Loss of a party is a setback, but a dramatic one. The dead characters are the prelude and the newly rolled PCs become the main event.

If players want a game with a real risk of character death, you should give it to them. Sure for a few sessions you might be able to bluff some risk but if you start rolling dice in secret when HP are low or if those NPCs that are attacked later in combat all have fewer HP than those attacked earlier it gets suspicious. If NPCs turn up to help, if monsters get bored and wander off or start to behave foolishly then it is even more blatant. Trying to RP someone trying to survive with all their skill is hard when it is clear that if they are ever in any real trouble something will magically happen to make that trouble go away.

[Arkhios]

That depends on if you want a *story* that has gameplay in it, or a *game* that creates good stories.

Why do you think yours is the 'one true way'?

Why are you assuming I'm critiquing your way by asserting a different way to game?

I'm not. I was merely adding to the list since it looked like a theme.

[Beelzebubba]

I'm not. I was merely adding to the list since it looked like a theme.

Touché, well played.

[Matrix_Walker]

I am in the camp of letting PCs die.

They don't die on their own. If they have not done something really stupid to invite such a fate, then a TPK means the GM has killed them or screwed up royally.

Yeah, till have to say that's a total fail on the part of the GM.

[MrStabby]

They don't die on their own. If they have not done something really stupid to invite such a fate, then a TPK means the GM has killed them or screwed up royally.

Yeah, till have to say that's a total fail on the part of the GM.

This is the kind of assumption that should be checked at a session zero. How lethal do the players want the world to be? If players seek out and die to a Dragon at second level it isn't the DMs fault for having dragons in the world or for not railroading them away. Sometimes luck is against you and you need appropriate research and an appropriate backup plan before diving in. The problem is that a lot of players are never going to recognize their mistakes - it is forgivable to misinterpret evidence and think you can take on a town guard, less so to complain when you die taking one on without even looking for evidence.

DMs do kill PCs when they shouldn't but it almost always involves railroading the PCs into a fight. If the PCs chose to fight then that's on them.

[Tanarii]

I see a TPK as a total fail on the part of the GM. Fudging, cheating, and divine intervention are all far preferable.

What kind of a storyteller kills all his primary protagonist characters?What kind of players want a DM that doesn't understand that the actual playing of an RPG has nothing to do with storytelling? What kind of players want a DM that will rob them of any chance to win or lose fairly, that removes all player agency, makes player in-character choices meaningless?


Maybe we don't want a story, and we want a game.

Fudging dice rolls makes for a pretty crappy game. Might as well read a book.Well said. Just like real life, it's very easy to make a story from events that have previously occurred during game-play after the session is done, and that's great! But just like real life, a game-play session is not a story. (Obviously unlike real life, it's a game.)

[Matrix_Walker]

DMs do kill PCs when they shouldn't but it almost always involves railroading the PCs into a fight. If the PCs chose to fight then that's on them.

As a GM, I would hint that the characters were biting off more than they could chew, and if they persisted I believe that's a case of the players of doing something stupid.


What kind of players want a DM that doesn't understand that the actual playing of an RPG has nothing to do with storytelling? What kind of players want a DM that will rob them of any chance to win or lose fairly, that removes all player agency, makes player in-character choices meaningless?

Yeah, I disagree with everything you said here... that's quite a bit of overstatement.

[Tanarii]

Yeah, I disagree with everything you said here... that's quite a bit of overstatement.I was responding to your fairly ridiculous statement in kind.

Although I absolutely do think that storytelling (deciding what happens with a plot or narrative) has nothing to do with Roleplaying (players making in-character decisions). Although some people confuse the two, or attempt to mix and match them (making decisions for what happens to a character, scenario, or world to fit the plot or narrative). Obviously it's possible to do the latter without removing player agency.

Personally I find it hard to believe it's possible for a DM to fudge without at least creating the perception among your players that you've removed player agency if you're caught doing it. But some DMs still seem to think it's a good idea anyway. :smallconfused::smallyuk:

[Matrix_Walker]

I think my statement makes perfect sense though... ;)

[Beelzebubba]

I think my statement makes perfect sense though... ;)

If you're writing a book, sure

But you don't want D&D, you want Fate, that's a cooperative story game

[Beelzebubba]

I think my statement makes perfect sense though... ;)

To elaborate, no, it doesn't make sense for D&D.

The game D&D has a mechanic for failure. Dying is part of the game. It is a natural result when you follow the rules and roll the dice. A good DM plays the game, and follows the rules. When that happens, sometimes characters die. If you think that makes the DM bad you're completely wrong.

You want a game without death. You either need to change the rules, or play another game.

There are much better games with mechanics built from the ground up to suit the kind of thing you want. I recommend you look into Fate. It doesn't resolve life or death with odds and dice rolls, it allows the players to completely control outcomes. It's really fun, if you want a rich, player-controlled narrative rather than emergent, player-driven gameplay.

[Matrix_Walker]

A player biting the dust is one thing, but we are talking about a TPK in the context of players playing things smart.

Die rolls are not everything, motivations of enemies are malleable and can be varied. If you are running a game and you kill all the PC's, it's not an accident.

[mephnick]

Die rolls are not everything, motivations of enemies are malleable and can be varied. If you are running a game and you kill all the PC's, it's not an accident.

Some enemies should just kill the PCs. If my party got killed by some gnolls and the DM tried to backtrack with some "uh they take you prisoner?" BS I'd request to stay dead. I'm not sure why people are so scared of TPKs. The bad guys win, you move the timeline forward a bit and start something completely new, or new characters fighting back against the now stronger enemy.

It's a game. You lost the game. Play a new round.

[Laurefindel]

Hasn't occurred to me yet, but if it happens, I guess we'd be 'dealing with it' as a group.

That being said, I don't see a TPK necessarily as the end of the story, or the death of the protagonists as a crappy story. As a DM, I kind of like when a wrench is thrown in the gears once in a while; forces me to reconsider all kinds of things.

I actively try to keep my players' characters alive, but I adhere to the no meaningful concequences = meaningless successes philosophy. The stakes must exist, and sometimes those stakes are the PCs' lives.

[Beelzebubba]

Die rolls are not everything, motivations of enemies are malleable and can be varied. If you are running a game and you kill all the PC's, it's not an accident.

Keep dodging the points I'm making, keep moving those goalposts!

DMs don't kill all the PCs.

Unlucky dice rolls, stupid decisions, rash actions, poor tactics, overreaching beyond their resources, reluctance to flee, pride, arrogance, poorly judging character, ignoring warnings, etcetera and so on - those kill all the PCs.

Run by the RAW, the game has *so much* protection for PCs compared to every version before that you have to almost intentionally try to die to make that happen.

Go play story games. D&D is not for you.

[Ruebin Rybnik]

I feel that PC death is part of the game and story. Without the risk and danger, there would be no sense of accomplish leading to a lackluster end of the campaign. with a TPK it depends on what type of campaign, what killed the party, and the results of the parties death on the story.


The only TPK I have been in the party was mostly chaotic with good or neutral. We had been summoned and set on our quest by an Archmage who told us that an evil organization was using 4 artifacts to release a demon lord from imprisonment. We had to find where these artifacts were taken, defeat the bad guys guarding them and destroy all four artifacts. We just destroyed the third artifact mid fight but then were killed by the bad guys guarding it.

After the we decided to continue with new characters, but there was a twist. The Arch mage was in fact a warlock in league with the demon lord. He needed the artifacts destroyed to release his master and had tricked us into doing it with a lie because he could not do it himself. Now our new party was part of the group protecting the artifacts and were sent on a quest to take the last artifact somewhere safe. problem was for every artifact that got destroyed the demon lords influence on the world grew as well as the Warlocks power in turn. The final battle was an epic clash with the Super powered Warlock and his Demon Henchmen.

I'd say that was my favorite campaign i played in as well. So i think depending how its handled PC death can add to the story.