Do TPKs happen at your table?

[BigONotation]

There's another thread which is an informal poll about playstyles and it was eye opening that many DMs have not TPKed their PCs even once. I find it highly dubious (especially for new groups) that they never have bad luck in a tough fight or bite off way more than they could chew. It feels like the DMs who responded are largely pulling their punches which I personally never ever do as I would never want that as a player.

So I posit this question, if your players earned their TPK, will you let it happen?

And to the players, if you earn your TPK, do you not want it to happen? What glory is their in a fight you cannot lose?

[SharkForce]

i've had campaigns end in TPK. usually at lower levels, though. at higher levels, the party is more likely to be able to escape.

[Armok]

In the nearly three years I've run for this group, it's only happened twice. The first was when the party was being very overconfident in their strength, and decided to try and steal from a black dragon's horde without doing any sort of prep. Needless to say, "it went poorly" is a massive understatement.

The second time was a few weeks ago, while running PotA. They attempted to assault the keep of the fire cultists directly, but rather than use resources to heal themselves they wanted to take a rest. So of course I allow it, but realistically that gave the cultists time to finish summoning their fire elemental, and then when they assaulted they had to deal with wave after wave of reinforcements.

I play encounters the way the enemies in question would have reacted. A black dragon is going to cruelly, mercilessly divide and brutalize the worms that dare defile its lair. The fire cultists burn first and ask questions later, and didn't really seem to be a "take prisoners" sort of group.

Generally the party is able to handle any encounter, but when they overestimate their own strength, go in unprepared, make poor tactical decisions and forget their sense of urgency... well, at that point they get what's coming to them. Not out of spite, but just as a consequence of running the game impartially.

[Kane0]

My group TPKs about once per three one shots, but pretty much never during actual adventures. I remember only once, during the final boss fight. It was set up as holding on as long as possible and succeeded, but we were actually trying to survive.

I'm OK with TPKs and PC death in general, but prefer it only if we decide to do so in a blaze of glory or whatever. TPKs because of stupidity on our part is fine but less fun, TPKs for reasons beyond our control isn't fun at all.

[lperkins2]

It depends a bit on what you mean by TPK, if you mean actually have everyone die and have to roll new characters? No. Have the party lose the fight, all have to roll their death saves, and wake up later sans stuff? Yes. Half the party didn't wake up.

[Mr Beer]

Never had a full TPK that I can remember. Had a few times players were planning to do something dumb that would likely get them all killed (the time they were going to give an ancient red dragon a bunch of pre-poisoned hobos springs to mind) but they decided against it at the last minute.

There were a two encounters where basically everyone died bar one guy, which is close to a TPK. They weren't coming back to life either due to circumstances, so it was pretty bad.

[Kane0]

As an aside, I wonder how many parties replace all their original members before the end of the adventure?

The closest i've gotten is one remaining original member from a party of 8, during a kingmaker campaign (the leader/ruler, coincidentally). Everyone else either retired or got killed.

[LeonBH]

And to the players, if you earn your TPK, do you not want it to happen? What glory is their in a fight you cannot lose?

TBH, I'd rather not die. There is no glory in losing, as some movie characters would say. I'd do my best to weasel out of the TPK situation as best as I can, because the heroes coming back and winning from a near zero chance of victory is one of the best "movie moments" you can create in D&D.

[sir_argo]

In recent history, I can only remember one TPK. Superhero campaign. GM had a portal that took us to an alien ship. The ship was in zero-g. Disadvantage to all rolls. Aliens have advantage on all of theirs because we're basically floating helpless. Only one of us had flight and was the last to die. It wasn't even close. It was a complete, utter slaughter. As players, we were like, what the f#$%? GM said he didn't realize it would be so tough. To this day, we use "zero-g room" as a metaphor for a potential TPK. "Holy crap guys, this looks like a zero-g room"

[Toadkiller]

And see- that’s where the DM should “happen to create” a button that turns on the artificial gravity or ships engines or whatever. Then give the party a chance to hit the button and readjust the fight. Cause, really. “I messed up the scenario, but was just helpless to do anything about it.” That’s just plain sad.

[Ganymede]

My party confronted Baba Lysaga and her creeping hut today, and it was very close to a TPK.

It was the same story when they decided to walk into that dreaded central chamber at the Amber Temple.

In both cases, their ingenuity was not in their preparation or their combat prowess, but in their ability to work in clever ways to extricate themselves from a messed-up situation.

[Afrodactyl]

Our latest campaign ended up with our bard and paladin dead, the monk and sorcerer missing and my warlock unconscious. It was down to the druid get my warlock back on his feet and then we went on a quest to revive our fallen and find our missing members.

If it wasn't for me remembering I had a potion to heal the druid back to consciousness to fire off a lightning bolt it would have been a TPK.

[Xetheral]

There's another thread which is an informal poll about playstyles and it was eye opening that many DMs have not TPKed their PCs even once. I find it highly dubious (especially for new groups) that they never have bad luck in a tough fight or bite off way more than they could chew. It feels like the DMs who responded are largely pulling their punches which I personally never ever do as I would never want that as a player.

So I posit this question, if your players earned their TPK, will you let it happen?

And to the players, if you earn your TPK, do you not want it to happen? What glory is their in a fight you cannot lose?

I find perplexing the notion of "earning" a TPK. Could you please elaborate as to what you mean?

From my standpoint, if the PCs choose to enter a fight accurately knowing that their odds of success are low, sure, I'd kill them off if the fight goes poorly for them. But I've never had PCs make that sort of decision. If they enter such a fight incorrectly beliving they have the advantage, then it's my fault for not adequately telegraphing the difficulty and I'd make sure a TPK doesn't happen. But that hasn't happened either.

There are plenty of threats in my campaign world that the PCs couldn't take on, but in decades of play I've never had a party that tried. Ergo, I haven't had any TPKs. I have had groups where fights went poorly and PCs died, but they weren't in so far over their head that the survivors couldn't flee.

[LeonBH]

Accidental TPKs are bad. Intentional TPKs are tricky. Done for the wrong reasons, it sucks. But if the DM has a valid reason for inducing a TPK, it can be very memorable in a positive way.

[hymer]

So I posit this question, if your players earned their TPK, will you let it happen?
Yes, and my players know this.


And to the players, if you earn your TPK, do you not want it to happen? What glory is their in a fight you cannot lose?
If we go down in flames, then that's what happens. Actions should have reasonable consequences, and if there is no risk of failure, it's no accomplishment to succeed.

[Asmotherion]

As a DM, I have a simple policy; "Death" needs not be the end of a character, but it certenly comes with a penalty. So, failing their 3rd save, a player has the option to continue playing their character (allowing me any alterations I feel necessary to do so, and the appropriate penalty), or roll a new character.

If a TPK were to happen, I discuss with my players what they wish to do. I never let it be the end of a campain.

It can be explored in a lot of creative ways, from RP in Spectral Undead forms untill they can become alive again, being captured and needing to escape from an other plane of existance (for example the 9 hells), or lost in the astral plane, and hunted by Gith Pirates who stole their souls from their etternal rest, to sell theim to Hags for their rituals. In any case, they could either find their dead bodies (if within the minute of their death/time passes different in some planes), get someone to resurect them, or possess a whole new body...

An other nice option I like is a Deus Ex Machina that brings them back to life, but with a cost (adventure hook).

[Hastati]

I think the last TPK we had was back around 1984. However, I (nor the other DMs in our group) don't pull any punches with die rolling and if it were to happen, then it happens.

[Pex]

In my many years of playing I've been in two TPKs. The first was a 2E game long, long ago that just happened. It was a fair fight, just didn't go our way. The second was a 3E game long ago on purposeful design of the DM with conspiracy of another player (his wife) because he wanted to end the campaign. He was called on it and used Deus Ex Machina in the next campaign for those characters to be resurrected as NPCs.

In my opinion TPKs should be rare. The DM should not be upset it never happens. There is no quota of required number of TPKs for a DM to have or else he's doing it wrong. TPKs are not a measuring stick on the worth of the risk/reward of a game, the fun of a game, or the challenge level of a game.

To be blunt, I object to the premise of this thread.

Edit: Not meaning to imply you shouldn't have posed the question how dare you :smallsmile:. I'm only disagreeing with your train of thought on this matter.

[Naanomi]

It happens on occasion... twice while I was GMing since we switched to 5th; (and once to me as a player). Looking back in my DnD history, TPKs fall under three categories

-heroic sacrifices: characters had other options, perhaps less good or heroic ones, but consciously chose to fight against unlikely over impossible odds to the end

-player stupidity: if your party decides to ‘sneak attack’ the Dragon-Emporer at low level during your audience with him... or try to steal magic items from the transplanar market place... you get what you have coming to you

-Evil Dice: you play enough games and even with the best encounter design the dice can turn against you on a large scale

There is probably a fourth ‘unintentionally deadly scenario’, that I tend to attempt to salvage before it becomes a ‘T’PK; or reverse in some way afterwards

[GooeyChewie]

Very rarely. Once I gave a party of relatively inexperienced players a Deck of Many Things. Oops.

On the bright side, we all remember the time that one guy had to fight Death by playing Summoner Wars.

[HermanTheWize]

Have only ever killed single players, never whole groups.

Generally my groups are smart and never get into a TPK situation.

[PhoenixPhyre]

In my opinion, TPKs should only occur when two things are true

1) the party takes on a challenge that they can't overcome in their present state (either due to attrition or due to sheer challenge)

AND

2) the party knows (or has sufficient reason to know) that it's a high risk and chooses to attempt it anyway.

Condition #1 says that planned encounters (especially forced ones) shouldn't be designed with significant TPK risk. As a result, the normal encounters should not pose TPK risks.

Condition #2 requires that the party be able to avoid the encounter, and choose not to.

If there's a pending TPK due to DM error (miscalibrating monster abilities, etc), the DM should alter the encounter to avoid a TPK. They should do this in as subtle manner as possible--withholding a few reinforcements from a wave of monsters, dropping max HP, "forgetting" a few of the use-based abilities, etc. Full-out retcons are best avoided, and if necessary should include a mea culpa from the DM.

The idea of "well, I planned this encounter and didn't realize it'd be that bad, sucks to be you" is, in my opinion, an attempt to avoid responsibility. Nothing exists or acts unless the DM places it there and makes it act. The DM bears all responsibility for his pieces being out of whack with the intent. Own it and make it better.

[Knaight]

The lack of TPKs could also just reflect total number of games played. The DMG was released just three years ago (plus a few weeks). If you assume a group that has been playing from the outset, meets monthly on average (which usually means nominally more than monthly but with cancellations), and only plays D&D 5e you get 36 sessions total.

During that limited time the players not only need to get in over their head to where a TPK is a serious threat, but then also every single one has to fail to retreat successfully.

[Renvir]

The lack of TPKs could also just reflect total number of games played. The DMG was released just three years ago (plus a few weeks). If you assume a group that has been playing from the outset, meets monthly on average (which usually means nominally more than monthly but with cancellations), and only plays D&D 5e you get 36 sessions total.

During that limited time the players not only need to get in over their head to where a TPK is a serious threat, but then also every single one has to fail to retreat successfully.

This is an interesting way to look at it. I've mostly DM'd and played 5e and never had a TPK but some close calls. Our numbers probably look like this:
-50 to 55 sessions over 3 years.
-Approx. 1/4 sessions have an encounter that pushes the party to the very edge.
-I'd like that to be more common (1/3) but sometimes they just steamroll you.
-3 times the party ran away.
-1 time the party surrendered.

So there have been several close calls but only one legitimate TPK situation that instead led to capture.

[GlenSmash!]

In my experience, good fights aren't always about winning or losing. In fact I'd argue that fights that rely on reducing the other side to 0 hitpoints can be very boring. As a DM I prefer to make different stakes than that for my fights.

Fights were the party can easily win, but shouldn't fight at all.

Fights where the party will surely lose, but fighting may save the village/town/city/castle/nation (think 7 Samurai)

Fights were you should fight for a round or two to delay the bad guys, but retreat or be overwhelmed.

Fights where you should blow resources to win quickly because the clock is ticking, even if you know it will leave you blown before fighting the BBEG.

So far I haven't had a TPK, but it could very well happen. When It does it will be my job as the DM to make sure it is as fun and memorable as possible.

[ad_hoc]

What glory is their in a fight you cannot lose?

This. I see a lot of 'well my group just has amazing tactics so we win hard fights'. I posit that if the group never loses, the fights aren't hard.

Case in point I had someone argue on this board that their party of level 2 characters defeated 5 CR 5, 1 CR 8, and 12-15 CR 2 creatures in a single encounter because they were just great at the game. Of course, the DM wanted them to win to avoid a TPK.

There is a lot of advice given on this board. I find most of it weird because at my table the characters need to work together to survive. Most of the advice here is about having an individual character gain more spotlight time because the group is going to succeed anyway.

To answer the question we have played HotDQ, OotA, and CoS and a TPK has happened in each adventure.

In HotDQ it happened while succeeding at the final chapter. In OotA it was fairly early on in the Duergar city. In CoS it was later on, in their last quest before storming the castle to confront Strahd.

Knowing that a TPK is an imminent possibility has ramped up the fun at the table. Victory is a cause for celebration and the characters all work together to survive. For example, there is no concept of splitting up the loot evenly, the only thought is who will best use it to enable survival.

[Pex]

In my opinion, TPKs should only occur when two things are true

1) the party takes on a challenge that they can't overcome in their present state (either due to attrition or due to sheer challenge)

AND

2) the party knows (or has sufficient reason to know) that it's a high risk and chooses to attempt it anyway.

Condition #1 says that planned encounters (especially forced ones) shouldn't be designed with significant TPK risk. As a result, the normal encounters should not pose TPK risks.

Condition #2 requires that the party be able to avoid the encounter, and choose not to.

If there's a pending TPK due to DM error (miscalibrating monster abilities, etc), the DM should alter the encounter to avoid a TPK. They should do this in as subtle manner as possible--withholding a few reinforcements from a wave of monsters, dropping max HP, "forgetting" a few of the use-based abilities, etc. Full-out retcons are best avoided, and if necessary should include a mea culpa from the DM.

The idea of "well, I planned this encounter and didn't realize it'd be that bad, sucks to be you" is, in my opinion, an attempt to avoid responsibility. Nothing exists or acts unless the DM places it there and makes it act. The DM bears all responsibility for his pieces being out of whack with the intent. Own it and make it better.

Yay! We agree on something!
:smallbiggrin:

[Crusher]

Just this Monday I nearly TPK'd the party by accident in a fairly long-running campaign I'm DMing. Was intended to be a tough fight against a major opponent. The party was at 4 instead of the usual 6, so I toned the fight down a bit (fewer guards, and I mildly nerfed the remaining stronger ones) and let the party talk one of their allies into lending them some help (a handful of Scouts to provide archery support).

Even with the changes, the fight may have been a smidgen too hard, but the real problem was the battlefield. The party was trying to surround the bad guys so the BBEG couldn't get away. The downside was that the party was pretty split up and couldn't support each other very well. The Land Druid and Warlock were the ones missing, so the party was light on casters and AoE. So instead of focusing down the BBEG right away, half the party was tied up with the guards, while half the party got the BBEG and his body guard head on.

Since their target was a powerful Sorcerer, this resulted in half the party eating multiple fireballs and cones of cold. It was burstier than the party expected, and the life cleric went down and the paladin would have dropped as well, but he had an amulet that, once/long rest holds the wearer at 1 hp instead of getting knocked out for one attack (like the half-orc racial).

If the paladin had gone down, it could easily have been a TPK. The ranger's pet was already down, the ranger himself was pretty beat up, and while the last party member was actually fine, the BBEG plus the remaining guards probably could easily have overwhelmed them. Really, it would have come down to whether the Ranger could knock out the BBEG (who was badly hurt) before he got another fireball off.

Instead, the paladin didn't go down, and thanks to the initiative order, he was able to Lay on Hands the cleric (getting her back up) and she was able to heal them both before any of the bad guys could finish them off. That allowed the party to finish off the BBEG and whittle everyone else down as well.

Lots of folks have gone down in fights before and there have been plenty of close calls, but this is the closest call a group I've DM'ed has had in a long time.

Edit - To be clear, had the paladin gone down, I'm not sure what I would have done. If a party does something reckless or stupid, I'd be perfectly willing to TPK them (in a different campaign, a very reckless party escaped what I thought would be a near-certain TPK through some of the luckiest rolling I've ever seen). But that wasn't the case here. The party took the fight seriously, prepared heavily, and while their plan caused some trouble in the end, overall it was well thought-through. That's an unfortunate situation for a TPK.

The BBEG was a major rival of the party's patron, and he knows the party are her agents. After giving it some thought, if the party had all gone down, I probably would have had him capture the party for use as leverage against her, while she worked with the remaining two party members to set up a jailbreak for the next session.

[SirGraystone]

While playing Curse of Strahd, while in a werewolves' den in which a large part of the pack was away, the group killed those in the den and did the goal of their mission there. But when howling warned them that the pack was coming back they got greedy and started searching for loots instead of escaping by the back entrance. They lost the fight... they awoke chained to the wall of the cave, some fast talking with Strahd who wasn't done toying with them let them leave.

Also in COS, this time in Argynvosholt an encounter with Vladimir who did warn them several time to leave him alone, ended up with another lost and dead paladin and warlock. The paladin was brought back as a revenant by Argynvost who gave him a quest. The warlock was offered a deal by the dark power and was reincarnated into a dwarf.

[Demonslayer666]

There's another thread which is an informal poll about playstyles and it was eye opening that many DMs have not TPKed their PCs even once. I find it highly dubious (especially for new groups) that they never have bad luck in a tough fight or bite off way more than they could chew. It feels like the DMs who responded are largely pulling their punches which I personally never ever do as I would never want that as a player.

So I posit this question, if your players earned their TPK, will you let it happen?

And to the players, if you earn your TPK, do you not want it to happen? What glory is their in a fight you cannot lose?

The other thread did specify 2017 and I only answered as a DM, I did have one as a player not too far back. Secondly, a lack of TPKs does not equate to pulling punches. It certainly can be a result of pulling punches, but a certain number of TPKs is absolutely not required in a D&D game. It can simply be a result of careful planning and investigating.

I always find it humorous when people worship the dice and think fudging a roll is sacrilegious when the DM controls every action they take in combat. A misjudgment in encounter difficulty on the DM's part should never penalize the players with the permanent death of the entire party, ending the campaign. Only the faulty actions of the players should cause such a penalty.

To your questions:
1). Absolutely. If the party acted foolishly after being warned, then they made their bed and have to sleep in it.

2). Yes, I want it to happen if it was earned, but it needs to be properly handled. What I don't want to happen is to stop playing because of a TPK. E.g. it should never be adversarial, where the DM is pissed off at the players. There should be some method for continuing the game, either with new characters, or a resurrection.

[lunaticfringe]

I've almost had one, the party was rolling terribly and my dice were hot. I roll combat in the open so I can't fudge, not that my players would want me to. They don't want me to dumb down behavior or softball encounters, they like mean combat.

I've had some deaths, 2 of my players are Dead is Dead and both have bought the others time to escape.

[KorvinStarmast]

There is a lot of advice given on this board. I find most of it weird because at my table the characters need to work together to survive. Most of the advice here is about having an individual character gain more spotlight time because the group is going to succeed anyway.
Indeed.

Victory is a cause for celebration and the characters all work together to survive. For example, there is no concept of splitting up the loot evenly, the only thought is who will best use it to enable survival. That's our usual approach.

[Ignimortis]

So far I've played in two 5e campaigns, each lasting for almost a year. We've had an almost TPK at the climactic boss fight at the first "act's" end (7 PCs entered, 3 left, of whom 2 got trapped in a side-fight and could've died just as well in the main one, and the last one survived by an insanely good DEX save), a complete TPK by dragon (which ended the campaign), and a fight which would've been a TPK if the last PC not at death's door had not rolled a crit with a dagger (that was me and it was kind of a weird situation, since I fired off a cantrip and then declared that I attack with a dagger as an off-hand attack, which is kinda rules-illegal). There were also fights where PCs just died (a surprise roper attack, for instance). So yes, TPKs do happen at our table.

[Gryndle]

TPKs are extremely rare at my table, and have been universally attributed to player stupidity. the way I see it, character death happens and that's fine. but a tpk can easily spell the end of a campaign. so if the player's aren't being idiots, and a tpk happens, that's MY fault as a DM. If my group is playing smart, and a tpk still happens, then I obviously grossly miscalculated the balance of the encounter.

[PhoenixPhyre]

TPKs are extremely rare at my table, and have been universally attributed to player stupidity. the way I see it, character death happens and that's fine. but a tpk can easily spell the end of a campaign. so if the player's aren't being idiots, and a tpk happens, that's MY fault as a DM. If my group is playing smart, and a tpk still happens, then I obviously grossly miscalculated the balance of the encounter.

I very much agree. For me, the fun is the continuing adventures. I'm not playing it as a competition or as a "see how high we can make the difficulty" thing. So TPKs are completely a negative (especially if they kill a promising campaign). Player deaths? Sure, especially if they did something stupid like go wake up a sleeping Dire Yeti and yell in its ear for a while. At level 2. After being warned repeatedly and the rest of the group NOPE-ing out.

[huttj509]

TPK? Not so much in my groups.

On the other hand, "Why are you running?" "It's round 2, the barbarian's mind controlled, you're down, the priest and I cannot handle this, I'm at the wrong side of the room from the door, and my strength is 4 and ticking down from poison, I'm OUT." Yeah, that's happened.

For my groups to be a TPK it needs to be an unexpectedly rough fight, which means either bad luck or bad planning (either in character or out), AND retreat must not be an option.

I've had the rogue and mage piling a couple bodies on the mule to take them back to town.
I've had a round 1 double NPC surprise round sneak attack roll max damage dropping the wizard who happened to be in the wrong place.
I've had my character cleaved in 2 by the paladin trying to save me from the cloaker eating me, and then he crit (I was yelling at him to take the shot).

Character death isn't exactly common, but is definitely no stranger at the tables I play at, but for it to be a TPK soooooooooooo much needs to go wrong all at once, it's rare.

[Davrix]

This is always a fun topic.

A TPK is really something the party should always earn or to put it in another way. The party's action dictate if a TPK happens not the DM ever.

If you have made an encounter with monsters that are kicking the party's ass when you didn't intend for it to be that hard. You don't wipe the floor with them, you adjust and go about your day. As someone said earlier, the party decided to rest during a timed event. That was their choice and thus got themselves killed because of it.

TPK are always best when the party thinks its either being smart or simply cant fathom they can loose and do very stupid things.

The best TPK i've ever had was when they were fighting what I lovingly call a cross between a dracolich and Kathulu or what I named him. Drakulu (yes you may groan)

It was camping out over an extra-dimensional rift on a hovering island powered by some sort of energy crystal deep within this old ruined elf city. The fun part was it only had about 30 HP left and I was going to let the next attack kill it whatever the damage roll was and our rouge of the day thought of the brilliant idea to use one of the homemade bombs he had created earlier in the game out of fireworks. Now you have to understand that the rest of the party unfortunately at this time had all been knocked prone to the ground after the bosses last attack, two of them alive and two unconscious, I was pretty pleased with myself. It was a good tense fight and they were going to make it out and I wasn't going to have to actually kill anyone because I was afraid of it going that way a few times though to their credit they pulled off some fancy **** and kept on going. So the rogue had been off the island the whole time making ranged attacks and for the most part doing quite well in annoying the hell out of the boss. So there i am getting ready to declare he makes some cool trick shot and shoots Drakulu in the eye when he instead declares. "I throw several bombs at he crystal under the floating island. My reaction and the entire table in unison say, "you do what?" He repeats his words. I fully expect the rest of the table to say something, to yell out advice but sometimes I forget that I have very very dedicated role-players in my group and not a single person said anything after that point though i could tell a few knew this wasn't going to end well. So being a good little DM I ask. "are you sure you want to do that?" He nods his affirmative and I quote. "Yea I'm gonna blow that thing sky high sense its right beneath the crystals. ( I should point out that I had set this up during the trek in. The crystals were an old Elvin power source that tapped into another dimension and were highly unstable when hit with enough force. What I never had mentioned because one I thought it rather obvious but no one had bothered to experiment or ask about it so it never had come up, was that the platform over the rift was being held up by said crystal. In my head in like oh **** this is bad so I even ask one more time. "you really sure man?" Once again I was told yes and so well I let him roll and of coarse he rolls a 20 (Not making that up either)

So from here its just a slow motion action movie moment. The bomb sails end over end in the air. The opera music starts playing and the fat women begins to sing. The crystal blows up, taking half the island and Drakulu with it and the reaming damage knocks the last 2 party members out. There not dead but all 4 now are having to make death saving throws. (I even was taking pity at this point giving them a bonus to doge the damage because i knew both of them were very low on HP but god the dice in that moment though it was a 1 and 2's party. So we wave goodby to our adventurers as they fall dazed and confused into a endless abyss of dimensional energy and are torn apart and the resulting explosion of energy sets off all the nearby Elvin crystals in a chain reaction and nukes half of the ruins and our would be mad bomber rogue. Now some could say I could of saved the party but I had made things very clear that the crystals were unstable and did explode. The party chose not to learn more about it and when you throw a bomb at a thing like that and commit to the action. Well you just don't pull the punches at that point. On the plus side they did manage to collapse the rift and brought peace to the land that had been suffering madness for several centuries.

[MrStabby]

At my table we play a style of tough is fun.

There has been a progressive escalation in difficulty as we progress. The big risks are more at the strategic level - the need to progress towards ending threats whilst keeping the Doom Clock from running out.

There have been no TPKs - some close, some fleeing, some being hunted down, some time where the party hat to use nearly every consumable resource they have had.

Now they are in the middle of a fight and it is tough. I don't know that they know how tough. Lack of research, little preparation, a spot of bad luck, poor knowledge rolls and a really, really tough fight are putting them in a tough position.

I am planning to let the battle play out but this might kill them. Letting people die because their characters don't know how to win feels so heartless. I did say from the start that skills are important, that they will have combat as well as non combat implications. To have an effect only when it makes no difference to the outcome of a fight seems a little low key. I feel that I did make the fight tough but, to my mind, fair.

Fighting a fire sorcerer without reading his research to know more about the custom spells he has researched, not looking at the alchemy bench to pick up the potions of fire resistance he had been using to protect himself from his environment, not interrogating the bound devil that had enabled the sorcerer to deflect damage into statues... they would have some issues. Add to this that there are no teleportation effects (or similar) at all allowed in the area and normal retreat options might be out of luck.

And now the players are fighting fire elementals - being ignited is forcing skipped actions or concentration spells every turn. They are down to about 2/3rds hitpoints and haven't really inflicted any damage. Lair effects are building up. I wouldn't say it is grim yet but there are some serious risks.

The thing is that the difference between a fair and relatively balanced fight and a potential TPK (in this case) is very much information. The players were not as circumspect as they usually are and now they are in a tough spot. I am faced with trying to pass through higher level spells that might seem to be kicking the PCs whilst they are down. Trying to not pull punches and to run the fight as i have statted it is tough, especially tough as the PCs never found the abilities this guy has to know he isn't using them.

[Bubzors]

In the decade of playing d&d on and off with the same group a TPK has only happened twice. Characters deaths for sure and close calls, but only 2 TPK.

First one was a miscalculation on my part as DM playing 3.5. Introduced a new enemy type that was to become recurring that blew up upon death. Party was thinking strategically and chokepointed them. However they didn't know they exploded and I did not realize how much damage the explosions could do if multiple enemies died and exploded at once. The whole party died in one turn.

Felt bad and talked it over with the group. Decided to pull the "instead of dying you wake up captured" routine. Haha but the players made damn sure to give that enemy a wide berth the rest of the campaign

Second was at the end of red hand of doom. All the party ended up dying during the defense of Brindol. However the had scored enough victory points and killed most of the assaulting army, so we deemed it epic enough to be satisfying. Had a small epilogue and started another campaign

I'm in the boat that a TPK should be extremely rare and be due to a failed challenge that the players knew they were getting into, not a screw job

[ad_hoc]

The important thing here is that advice given by someone who plays in a game where TPKs are very rare and seen as a mistake by the DM, will be much different than a game where the world is as it is and a TPK may be a natural consequence of that.

In the former, advice is typically about how to stand out as a more powerful character than others in a game where the party can't fail so teamwork is less important.

The latter is focused on party survival and success.

A common example of this is ignoring AC, especially for ranged characters. I've seen people both imply and state explicitly that AC doesn't matter for ranged characters. They play in a very different game than I do.

Personally I much prefer a game where TPKs can happen. In our last session the characters were poking around in an orc cave when an ogre with a dire wolf confronted them. They responded to this by jumping into a chasm and casting Feather Fall. They didn't know what was down there but figured it was probably better than what they were faced with. In a game where TPKs can't happen, I'm sure they would have just taken the fight. Instead they did something unexpected.

Allowing failure gave them agency to impact the story.

[Gryndle]

The important thing here is that advice given by someone who plays in a game where TPKs are very rare and seen as a mistake by the DM, will be much different than a game where the world is as it is and a TPK may be a natural consequence of that.

In the former, advice is typically about how to stand out as a more powerful character than others in a game where the party can't fail so teamwork is less important.

The latter is focused on party survival and success.

A common example of this is ignoring AC, especially for ranged characters. I've seen people both imply and state explicitly that AC doesn't matter for ranged characters. They play in a very different game than I do.

Personally I much prefer a game where TPKs can happen. In our last session the characters were poking around in an orc cave when an ogre with a dire wolf confronted them. They responded to this by jumping into a chasm and casting Feather Fall. They didn't know what was down there but figured it was probably better than what they were faced with. In a game where TPKs can't happen, I'm sure they would have just taken the fight. Instead they did something unexpected.

Allowing failure gave them agency to impact the story.

As normal, I disagree with you. Failure of teamwork is one of the few instances where a tpk can happen without me feeling guilty. Not working together as team in a hazardous situation is something that I define as extremely idiotic, which if you look at my post you will see that I specifically call out as one of the few good reasons for a tpk. Nothing about what I posted indicates anything about making characters stand out as more powerful than others, nor did I indicate that they cannot fail.

I tend to build the majority of my planned encounters with following assumptions; the PCs will have to work together, they will have to spend significant resources, they will take a beating, and someone might die. Beyond even that, the majority of my encounters have a success/fail option that may be completely unrelated to the survival of the PCs.

Now sometimes they outsmart the encounter completely, good for them. I revel in their ingenuity with them. If on the other hand they completely dead-brain it, then any/all deaths are on them.

My "sweet spot" for encounter design is that at least half the party will hit single-digit HP or have to make death saves, and at least half the party will spend 40% of their resources. I count on the players to use their teamwork and brains to mitigate that as much as possible. Dice rolls can swing it one way or another, player participation has the most affect. If one or two die, well, violence sucks.

BUT if they all die I have to ask 2 questions: Did I overplan? If yes, then my fault. OR did the players have a case of the stupids and get what they deserve? If yes, then their fault.

My opinion is that pointless tpks threaten the continuity of a campaign. Its my job as DM to run a game that is enjoyable AND challenging to play. having to remake an entire party of characters and start over every few sessions doesn't fit that description for my players or me. Therefore it falls on me to plan better, and falls on them to play smarter, which requires them working together and precludes anyone from falling into special snowflake mode.

[Pex]

The important thing here is that advice given by someone who plays in a game where TPKs are very rare and seen as a mistake by the DM, will be much different than a game where the world is as it is and a TPK may be a natural consequence of that.

In the former, advice is typically about how to stand out as a more powerful character than others in a game where the party can't fail so teamwork is less important.

The latter is focused on party survival and success.

A common example of this is ignoring AC, especially for ranged characters. I've seen people both imply and state explicitly that AC doesn't matter for ranged characters. They play in a very different game than I do.

Personally I much prefer a game where TPKs can happen. In our last session the characters were poking around in an orc cave when an ogre with a dire wolf confronted them. They responded to this by jumping into a chasm and casting Feather Fall. They didn't know what was down there but figured it was probably better than what they were faced with. In a game where TPKs can't happen, I'm sure they would have just taken the fight. Instead they did something unexpected.

Allowing failure gave them agency to impact the story.

If player only thinks about himself then a TPK will surely happen. If the player is a Real Jerk he wants everyone else to die while he alone survives to prove his superiority. When TPKs can happen as a matter of course players could start thinking survival mode. They make sure their character lives. If it means running away from battle that's going badly letting another character die instead of joining the fray and help turn the tide so be it. It is where TPKs are rare to non-existent that proves the teamwork of the players because it is that teamwork that prevents the TPK. If the party has to retreat they all retreat. No one is left behind save for the occasional player who chooses to remain so that the others may live.

[ad_hoc]

My "sweet spot" for encounter design is that at least half the party will hit single-digit HP or have to make death saves, and at least half the party will spend 40% of their resources.

How can you have more than 1 encounter in a day?

What is the point of hit point loss, resource loss, etc. if they can't TPK?


It is where TPKs are rare to non-existent that proves the teamwork of the players because it is that teamwork that prevents the TPK.

This is a variant on the 'but we're just so good at the game that we avoid TPKs by being awesome'.

Really, they're avoided by having a low difficulty.

Also, 95% of the advice about characters on this board ignore how they will be helping/relying (eg. hindering) the party.

[Gardakan]

I've probably DMed more then 1 000 combats. It happened about 10 years ago, I was 14-15 yo and I slain a whole table of 4 friends with Wraiths.

It has never happened up to this day. Which I'm proud of. I've killed numerous characters, but never again the whole party.

I was willing to kill them in Dungeons Dragons Miniature though. There lied the other side of the RPG (the wargame).

[ZorroGames]

No TPKs yet but highest character is 5th... so maybe no “opportunity” yet?

My usual DM does revel in the occassional character death and states that the higher the level, the better the risk of a TPK...

[Regulas]

Things being lethal is one thing and some people dying is normal in a harder fight or campaign.

TPK's however are not typically normal (unless the campaign is geared for high risk specifically).

The big question to ask yourself as a DM:

Are the players ignoring or unaware of the threat involved?

e.g. even a child would know that a dragon is immensely strong, so if your lvl 2 players want to charge it you should be reminding them that their characters are well aware this to be suicide. (Phandelver dragon wipes groups so often because they all just go and confront it when in reality that should be an irrational action, which the DM should be reminding them of).

Or possible that the threat was hidden from them. That Balor disguised as a goblin gets attacked because the party thinks it's just a goblin and they missed your clues telling them it's really a Balor. Less exaggerated the party may not realize that those guards are higher level, because they thought your description was style and didn't realize it indicated better strength. So now they are fighting a large group of higher level guards, not because they wanted to try something risky, but because they thought they weren't risking anything.

The players can always choose to try anyway, but I find more often then not when they do something suicidal they didn't realize it was that suicidal.

[UrielAwakened]

5e seems way too easy for a TPK to happen.

We've only ever even lost characters to individual incorrect play, like running off or charging ahead. I can't imagine an on-level encounter that would wipe us.

[Pex]

How can you have more than 1 encounter in a day?

What is the point of hit point loss, resource loss, etc. if they can't TPK?



This is a variant on the 'but we're just so good at the game that we avoid TPKs by being awesome'.

Really, they're avoided by having a low difficulty.

Also, 95% of the advice about characters on this board ignore how they will be helping/relying (eg. hindering) the party.

In other words, those who don't experience the game like you are doing it wrong.

[Gryndle]

In other words, those who don't experience the game like you are doing it wrong.

that's pretty much what I get from him every time I interact with him on here.

[ad_hoc]

In other words, those who don't experience the game like you are doing it wrong.

I didn't say it was wrong, I said it was a different playstyle.


In my opinion TPKs should be rare.

To be blunt, I object to the premise of this thread.


You said it was wrong.

You and others also made the implication that not having TPKs is the result of good teamwork (and thus the inverse, TPKs happen due to a lack of teamwork) and that TPKs only happen in tables full of idiots.

In other words, you can play a game without TPKs, just don't pretend that you are.

[Pex]

I didn't say it was wrong, I said it was a different playstyle.



You said it was wrong.

You and others also made the implication that not having TPKs is the result of good teamwork (and thus the inverse, TPKs happen due to a lack of teamwork) and that TPKs only happen in tables full of idiots.

In other words, you can play a game without TPKs, just don't pretend that you are.

No, I did not say TPKs were wrong. What I said was that you shouldn't use TPKs that happen as a validation of how well the DM is running the game, which is what you are doing. Perhaps I'm looking at this wrong. The rest of us really are that awesome to avoid numerous TPKs. Maybe it is your group who isn't playing well to have TPKs be a worry every game session. Need lessons?

[Demonslayer666]

...

Really, they're avoided by having a low difficulty.

...

If you are saying the player's actions don't factor in to how deadly an encounter is, you couldn't be further away from the truth.

[Darth Ultron]

All the Time.

Death to the Characters!


I'm a Killer DM and run a lethal game.

I find the threat of character death to make the game more fun and engaging. Players pay attention a lot more when they are worried their character might die.

[ad_hoc]

If you are saying the player's actions don't factor in to how deadly an encounter is, you couldn't be further away from the truth.

If an encounter is not allowed to be deadly, then the player's actions don't factor.

Surely you can't be arguing that not allowing TPKs doesn't lower the difficulty.

[MrStabby]

I find it is a very fine line between one character death and a TPK.

Where players stabilise and heal downed characters there isn't so much that will kill a player whilst others stand.

Where there are higher level spells or limited use items or other resources than can turn the tide of a battle they will be used... unless the whole party are low on resources.

The circumstances where a player can die whilst others live are pretty narrow. Monster effects that directly cause death are the major risks - gibbering mouthers, mind-flayers, shadows...

[Tanarii]

When I first started running my own campaign, TPKs were about once a week or so. Despite the players being warned it was a combat-as-war and potentially highly lethal game.
Now that most of them are on their toes, it's about once every 3-4 weeks.
(Both of those are very rough estimates, not actually referencing my campaign notes.)

I always let it happen. In fact, I'm trying to kill the players, within the bounds of what the enemies would try to do and the rules of the system. It's actually pretty hard, between my not being a tactical genius, forgetting about creature's powers in the rush of combat, and the way 5e is balanced. Although the first 2 apply to the players too. Regardless, that means it's usually because the players have pushed too far in an adventuring day against reasonable challenges, or bitten off a bigger challenge than they can handle for a single encounter.

Tier 1 characters are usually written off when it happens. 500 gp is too much to get them back, and they're effectively nobody important at that level.

In Tier 2, players always have a backup plan to mount a rescue operation to recover the bodies for Raise/Resurrection, if they fail to return and check in with someone or other. In fact, it's one of the primary things henchmen are for, at least for Tier 2 characters. They're the ones that hire other PCs (typically needed for necessary power), and organize the rescue run.

Edit: Oh yeah, I always laugh on the inside when it happens. Like any proper Evil, Tyrannical & Bad DM does. :smalltongue:

[Demonslayer666]

If an encounter is not allowed to be deadly, then the player's actions don't factor.

Surely you can't be arguing that not allowing TPKs doesn't lower the difficulty.

You made the claim that a DM isn't challenging them enough if they can overcome a challenge by their actions (removing the likely hood of a TPK). I am saying that's not true at all.

The chance of something isn't eliminated if it could be overcome. It's only eliminated when it can always be overcome.

If a TPK can always be overcome, then yes, I'll agree that it needs to be more challenging.

[Ronnocius]

When the players were still at 1st level there was almost a TPK when they assaulted an orc outpost without help. Other than that there haven't been a whole lot of near TPK situations.

In my opinion as long as the party is given an opportunity to avoid combat, escape, parley or surrender it is usually fair to have a TPK. I disagree with the "waking up without stuff" concept. In my opinion if the party is defeated unless there is a logical explanation for why they would not be killed they are either taken prisoner or slain.

[goatmeal]

I generally think of TPKs as the result of something having gone wrong with the game, whether that be the DM or the players. Of course it is also possible to err on the side of not being challenging enough, but there isn’t something as obvious as a TPK to show that this is the case.
I had 2 TPKs way back in 2e (so around 20 years ago now), both of them were my fault and should have been avoided.
One was as a DM, the players decided to attack a bartender because they saw a rat running through the bar. The result of that was the town guards came and arrested the PCs and they were hung. This was done by DM fiat, they didn’t even get to roll for the fight itself. What I should have done differently is realize they were murderhobos that weren’t interested in even a little bit of roleplaying and sent them straight into the action. Or, stat out the guards in the town so they could at least roll some dice while they were dying.
One of them was as a player. I was a gnome illusionist and a mummy was attacking us. I threw greek fire and had a really good die roll. Somehow this meant everyone died but my character, and the DM made me reroll a character because everyone else was. I still don’t know why this was the result of my characters actions, but I do remember everyone telling me it was a really bad idea but I did it anyways.
More recently, I was involved in a near TPK in a PbP game. Two of us escaped from a party of 5 first level characters. One or two of the PCs didn’t really know what they were doing, but more than that the DM was terrible at communicating things and had a fairly unrealistic final battle. If all the players knew what they were doing, we could have avoided it. If the DM had done a better job of communicating the situation, we could have avoided it. But the combination of the two meant several of us were going to die. This same DM has had several other disastrous campaigns, and I’m probably going to avoid his games from now on. I’m not averse to deadly campaigns: I once played in a game where we had about 100% turnover in the first day (not everyone had a character die, but some had more than one character die during that time), but it was great because the DM did an awesome job of making it come alive for us.

[mephnick]

Not a lot, but regularly enough that the players realize it's an option I'm totally fine with happening. Or, if they haven't experienced it, they've been told by older players in the group that I am dedicated to carrying it out if the dice go that way. I don't fudge dice for any reason, so it happens.

As a player (like the whole 2 campaigns I've played and not ran in 20 years) there was only one real opportunity for it, but I convinced half the party to run away before it happened.

Well... by convinced I mean my Mobile rogue dashed away and left everyone in his dust. Kind of forced the retreat there. Lost 2 guys though.

[ad_hoc]

I generally think of TPKs as the result of something having gone wrong with the game, whether that be the DM or the players. Of course it is also possible to err on the side of not being challenging enough, but there isn’t something as obvious as a TPK to show that this is the case.

I'm not following you.

If the assumption is that TPKs only happen by error, then the game is de facto not challenging.

[Pex]

I'm not following you.

If the assumption is that TPKs only happen by error, then the game is de facto not challenging.

A challenge is something to be overcome. Successfully defeating the challenge results in no TPK. Failing to defeat the challenge does not autoresult in a TPK. A TPK is a possibility but not the only result. Failure is not completing the goal, not counting how many PCs died.

[Laserlight]

There's another thread which is an informal poll about playstyles and it was eye opening that many DMs have not TPKed their PCs even once.

I had one occasion where the DM TPK'd the PCs--that is, the DM was in a foul mood, decided she wanted to kill off the PCs and pushed for that to happen. I felt that was extremely poor DMing; we rolled new characters and finished that campaign, but I wouldn't sign up for another campaign with that DM.


I find it highly dubious (especially for new groups) that they never have bad luck in a tough fight or bite off way more than they could chew. It feels like the DMs who responded are largely pulling their punches which I personally never ever do as I would never want that as a player.

So I posit this question, if your players earned their TPK, will you let it happen?

Now, if the PCs TPK themselves, that's a different question.
In the group where I'm a player: we've been defeated (unable to accomplish our objectives) but not TPK'd.
In the group where I'm the DM, I've told them that PCs can die; consequently the PCs retreat when it seems sensible--and on a few occasions when they didn't need to. No TPKs although they've been pressing the edge more closely lately.

[BW022]

No often.

D&D is a social game and it takes a considerable amount of real-world time and effort to setup a campaign. Players spend a lot of time on their characters and DMs spend an insane amount of time on crafting the campaign, modules, encounters, etc. Most campaigns can run two years or more with 'weekly' schedules. In fact, they are more likely to end due to ... players getting bored, real work events (marriage, work, moving, sickness, children, etc.), etc.

With these in mind... I'm generally going to do anything in my power to prevent a TPK situation. If players to dump things... there are usually a lot of in-game ways to punish players for bad decisions, bad luck, or just bad scaling/encounters. I often give players a "get out of jail" item (typically a powerful one-use scroll, item, or favor) which can be used as 'insurance' against accidental TPKs without needing to pull punches or make obvious party rescues.

This said, there are times when I've allowed a TPK. Typically, the players are bored or reached the point in the campaign where it is clear they want to start a new campaign -- and want to go out in a blaze of glory, or maybe its a short-term campaign or adventure series, or its really clear they are doing something dump, they know it, and they don't care. If it is just one player or some players, I'll typically talk with the group and just ask if they want to end it and do something else, or else just apply a non-TPK penalty to that/those characters.

In 1E (younger days), it was easy enough to start a new campaign every week. TPKs were fine. By 3.0 days, I'd say no-more than once a year and even then it would typically be on short-term stuff and not longer-term campaigns.

[Drascin]

Back when I was a fifteen year old, starting out with D&D, player death and even TPKs were reasonably common at my table. I was of the belief that such difficulty was important, and dumb moves had immediate and most often harsh consequences.

One day, though, I kind of noticed something. I had intended to make a character reappear in the campaign, this one duke that the PCs saved coming in with reinforcements at a critical moment and stuff, since callbacks are cool. And I realized... not a single person in the party actually knew this man anymore. The death treadmill had made it so not one of the PCs remained from the group that had originally saved this man, much less actually started in this quest. Like the ship of Theseus, pieces had been changed until it was no longer the same party.

This silly little thing was what made me start to think about it. Actually, what did the story gain from killing PCs that knocking them out won't accomplish similarly well? Not much. It mostly just seemed to make people less attached to their characters. the memorable fights were the ones that were fought for something other than survival anyway - a Macguffin, an objective, pride, whatever - and for those a knockout you get up from eight hours later is every bit as damning as a death. The only actual good part was that it let people try more character concepts. And in exchange we lost all sort of long-term interactions, and the willingness of players to plot long term was nonexistent. This became even more obvious as I branched out into other RPGs with much less lethal mechanics.

So I started experimenting with lowering the lethality, and GMing different games. And honestly, I felt my games became progressively better for it.

So, do TPKs happen at my table? Fifteen years ago, they did, often. Right now? Never.

[Sudsboy]

We started playing around 1977. Back then, TPKs were very common at our table. In fact, the DM always let us bring two characters because deaths were so likely. Part of this was a function of leveling speed and relative monster damage, part of it was a slightly competitive DM :-) (who was/is nevertheless a great game master who puts on compelling games to this day). A huge contributing factor was our use of the critical hit tables from Dragon Magazine #39 (I don't have enough posts to link them, but they're easy to find).

They were still happening in 2E, but less frequently. Since our game focused on lots of humanoid combat, wizards were a terror back then. Running into a high level caster was a nail biting experience. Character deaths were common, and it was rare to level beyond 6th - 8th, but we did have a few outliers who made it into the teens.

The greater player agency of 3E worked in our favor re: TPKs. I don't think we had very many, though character deaths were still frequent. Our change to the 3E critical rules calmed some of the carnage, though casters (wizards) were still a TPK danger.

When 4E hit, character deaths became non-existent. There was too much player agency, and not enough room for DM fiat in the rules. I think one character died in the whole edition. Our DM was miserable, because so much of his game style is narrative rather than tactical combat. 2/3rds of our players loved the edition, but we permanently lost a couple of regulars who hated it.

5E has been great for our table. We haven't seen many more deaths than 4E, and that's my main criticism of the edition - it's so perfectly balanced you're rarely in real danger unless the DM throws impossible challenges at you.

So no TPKs these days, but we lost so many characters in the early days of our campaign, I suppose we're due a break :-)

[GlenSmash!]

Failure is not completing the goal, not counting how many PCs died.

Well said.

[Desteplo]

Well see with my group. In a mind flayer ship ones brain already got eaten. Well see how they do the rest of it.

[Sudsboy]

This silly little thing was what made me start to think about it. Actually, what did the story gain from killing PCs that knocking them out won't accomplish similarly well? Not much. It mostly just seemed to make people less attached to their characters.

This is a solid point. We made the same discovery in 3E, though we fixed it by allowing resurrections instead of ratcheting down the danger. Keeping the original party together is really important for narrative cohesion.

[Dudewithknives]

In the 20 years I have played dnd there have been a total of 4 TPKS,

All 4 of which killed the game, 3 of which were half intentional, 1 wasn't.

The 3 that were kind if half intentional the game was dieing and we just kind of wrapped it up.

The one that wasn't was in 3.0 when one of our characters was playing a crazy broken wizard whose player got way over cocky and the DM was going to teach him a lesson and had a master thief steal his spellbook.

The player got pissed and broke his staff of the magi right in the middle of the biggest inn in the city. Killing just a out everyone in the party out of spite.

He told the DM, "You try to screw with me so I killed your game."

[ZorroGames]

In the 20 years I have played dnd there have been a total of 4 TPKS,

All 4 of which killed the game, 3 of which were half intentional, 1 wasn't.

The 3 that were kind if half intentional the game was dieing and we just kind of wrapped it up.

The one that wasn't was in 3.0 when one of our characters was playing a crazy broken wizard whose player got way over cocky and the DM was going to teach him a lesson and had a master thief steal his spellbook.

The player got pissed and broke his staff of the magi right in the middle of the biggest inn in the city. Killing just a out everyone in the party out of spite.

He told the DM, "You try to screw with me so I killed your game."

This last is somewhere between childish and petulant. I would never play with such a player ever again.

[Dudewithknives]

This last is somewhere between childish and petulant. I would never play with such a player ever again.

He just stopped playing with that DM after that, worked out for the best.

[Rhedyn]

the DM was going to teach him a lesson I'm sure that is a more mature way to handle the problem than just openly admitting that you need to houserule things breaking your game.

You don't teach players lessons as a DM, an NPC might but the universe conspiring against a character merited his reaction.

[Dudewithknives]

I'm sure that is a more mature way to handle the problem than just openly admitting that you need to houserule things breaking your game.

You don't teach players lessons as a DM, an NPC might but the universe conspiring against a character merited his reaction.

It was just a thief who took his spell book, it is not like he couldn't just use some spells to find him and get it back, or just spend some of the mountains of gold that flowed back then to get a new one.

[PhoenixPhyre]

It was just a thief who took his spell book, it is not like he couldn't just use some spells to find him and get it back, or just spend some of the mountains of gold that flowed back then to get a new one.

In 3e, losing your spellbook was a bad thing since you lost the spells you cast. That's why they went to such great lengths to protect them.

So definitely "NPC steals (no roll, no counter) your spellbook" is a jerk DM move. It's railroading of the worst kind. OOC problems (drastic imbalance) are best served by OOC conversations.

But metaphorically flipping the table on the campaign is a bit much IMO.

[Dudewithknives]

In 3e, losing your spellbook was a bad thing since you lost the spells you cast. That's why they went to such great lengths to protect them.

So definitely "NPC steals (no roll, no counter) your spellbook" is a jerk DM move. It's railroading of the worst kind. OOC problems (drastic imbalance) are best served by OOC conversations.

But metaphorically flipping the table on the campaign is a bit much IMO.

I never said there were no rolls or anything, back then it was very easy to get your skill roll up so high on certain things that it was almost impossible to make the check for it.

I was playing a rogue at the time, not a thief rogue but still a stealthy one, I had my stealth check in the 50s by level 15 or so.

There was a roll, it was just an EXTREMELY high one.

Now the DM could have just lied about what the results were, he did roll behind a screen but I can easily see a high level master thief rogue stealing from a wizard.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I never said there were no rolls or anything, back then it was very easy to get your skill roll up so high on certain things that it was almost impossible to make the check for it.

I was playing a rogue at the time, not a thief rogue but still a stealthy one, I had my stealth check in the 50s by level 15 or so.

There was a roll, it was just an EXTREMELY high one.

Now the DM could have just lied about what the results were, he did roll behind a screen but I can easily see a high level master thief rogue stealing from a wizard.

Right, but if a DM's "teaching the player a lesson," that's more often railroading than not (and a sign that something's gone wrong). "Arbitrarily high DC" and "impossible" aren't that much different after all. Now if there was significant foreshadowing (they knew that a thief was after them, knew that they were targeting the spellbook) and they didn't take precautions, then I'd take it back. But that's not how it came across--it came across as a typical "solving OOC problems with IC means," which means they're both partially responsible for the TPK. Remember that blame is not conserved--both sides can be 100% responsible.

[Arkhios]

I try to keep my players on their toes, but I also try to avoid causing TPK if I can help it.

So far no TPK has happened while I was DM.

As a player I've been in a few though. One was back in 3.5 and it was because of one bodak, which felt - simply but - so unfair (It used to have an always-active gaze attack with a literal save or die effect).

Another time we were running Council of Thieves (iirc), a Pathfinder Adventure Path, and were in a pre-written encounter in which we got slaughtered with no chance to stop it. The worst part wasn't that it wasn't in the DM's hands. I'm still a bit pissed at the DM who could've used some imagination to allow us gather a new group of adventurers, but refused because the adventure was in such a spot that it would've been difficult. With little more effort I honestly believe it wouldn't have been impossible. The encounter was like maybe fourth or fifth in the whole AP.

[mephnick]

I try to keep my players on their toes, but I also try to avoid causing TPK if I can help it.

So far no TPK has happened while I was DM.

As a player I've been in one though. Although, it was back in 3.5 and it was because one bodak, which felt - simply but - so unfair (It used to have an always-active gaze attack with a literal save or die effect).

The Bodak is back and I love it.

[jas61292]

I know some people think that TPKs are only acceptable if an encounter that is too hard is telegraphed to the players as being too hard and then they attempt it anyways. I disagree, and think this mentality stems largely from a view that all encounters have only two results: win or lose.

While there are many possible results, I think when it comes to combat, the main one missing is retreat. While my players rarely do so, I almost always have situations that allow for characters to run away in order to live to fight another day. And so long as that is an option, I have no qualms with occasionally throwing encounters at them where it is probably beyond their abilities to win. Especially in 5e where HP is the biggest defence, you will rarely discover that something is beyond your abilities without having enough stamina left to get away.

Now, an encounter that is too hard, not telegraphed, and without escape is dumb. But so long as it has at least one of these three things, I think it is fair. And players dying in fair combat is fine by me, as a DM, and as a player.

[mephnick]

While there are many possible results, I think when it comes to combat, the main one missing is retreat. .

The problem is retreating is very hard in 5e. Usually monsters are as fast or faster than PCs or they have ranged attacks or something that will murder you if you run away. Some claases have abilities that make retreating an option, some don't. Not to say you can't if you play it smart, but generally running away isn't as attractive an option as throwing dice and hoping for the best. It goes both ways. I have monsters retreat in pretty much every combat. 90% of them get mowed down by a ranged attacker or frozen by a spell. You pretty much have to fiat escaping and that's just lame.

[Arkhios]

The Bodak is back and I love it.

Hmm. I'll have to look it up. If it's as deadly as it was, I might 'brew a little pay-back encounter for the DM who is also a player in my group. See if he remembers, and make him fear for what might come (but in the end, be merciful, I'm not a bad person after all).

[Knaight]

The problem is retreating is very hard in 5e. Usually monsters are as fast or faster than PCs or they have ranged attacks or something that will murder you if you run away. Some claases have abilities that make retreating an option, some don't. Not to say you can't if you play it smart, but generally running away isn't as attractive an option as throwing dice and hoping for the best. It goes both ways. I have monsters retreat in pretty much every combat. 90% of them get mowed down by a ranged attacker or frozen by a spell. You pretty much have to fiat escaping and that's just lame.

It depends on the DM, both ways. It doesn't take many feigned retreats into traps to make players wary of following retreating enemies into unknown territory, and that goes both ways - if that tactic is established in a setting NPCs should acknowledge it. That's without getting into cases where driving away the opposition is good enough, and following them to hunt them down is just exposing yourself to extra danger.

[gloryblaze]

Hmm. I'll have to look it up. If it's as deadly as it was, I might 'brew a little pay-back encounter for the DM who is also a player in my group. See if he remembers, and make him fear for what might come (but in the end, be merciful, I'm not a bad person after all).

The death gaze has been neutered, you have to fail a DC 13 Con save by 5 or more for it to drop you, otherwise it's 3d10 damage. It also just brings you to 0 instead of killing you. Still super annoying, since you have to avert your gaze (aka give yourself the Blinded condition) if you don't want to keep making that save whenever you start your turn.

[Dudewithknives]

Right, but if a DM's "teaching the player a lesson," that's more often railroading than not (and a sign that something's gone wrong). "Arbitrarily high DC" and "impossible" aren't that much different after all. Now if there was significant foreshadowing (they knew that a thief was after them, knew that they were targeting the spellbook) and they didn't take precautions, then I'd take it back. But that's not how it came across--it came across as a typical "solving OOC problems with IC means," which means they're both partially responsible for the TPK. Remember that blame is not conserved--both sides can be 100% responsible.

You tend to use a lot of "" on things that nobody said.

I never said "Arbitrarily high" I said it was extremely high, it was very easy to boost skill checks through the roof back then.
Also if a world class thief, with skill enough to steal from a 15th level arcane caster wants to steal something from you, you are not going to find out about it, otherwise he would not be a world class thief.
Solving the both in and out of character issue of the player and his PC being an arrogant tool by taking him down a peg in what is little more than a 10 min inconvenience, is not much.

[Arkhios]

The death gaze has been neutered, you have to fail a DC 13 Con save by 5 or more for it to drop you, otherwise it's 3d10 damage. It also just brings you to 0 instead of killing you. Still super annoying, since you have to avert your gaze (aka give yourself the Blinded condition) if you don't want to keep making that save whenever you start your turn.

Yeah, just found it. Still looking fun. I think I could use a bodak to scare the PCs away and lead them into certain direction, to actually make them start something I intended instead of just doing something stupid.

[Tanarii]

The problem is retreating is very hard in 5e.Yup. You have to have a plan for retreating, and initiate it on round one. Two at the absolute outside. After that, it's usually too late.

Same goes for monsters. Round one retreats in a coordinated (or sacrificial) fashion are a must. After that it's too late, unless they have a movement mode the PCs cannot emulate. The morale rules in the DMG are terrible because of that. I tried using them for a while, but by the time creatures start retreating (1/2 hps individual or 1/2 group size), unless there are a lot of them and they scatter, it's far too late. It needs to happen immediately.

Edit: Switching to the chase rules the moment a retreat begins helps. But if the retreating creatures are in the open against a faster enemy with decent ranged weapons, they're hosed no matter what. This is fairly realistic.

[ad_hoc]

Now, an encounter that is too hard, not telegraphed, and without escape is dumb.

Almost all encounters are telegraphed. The characters are going on an adventure filled with danger. They know there will be dangerous creatures when they traverse they cross the river of torment to explore the pit of ill omen.

[Xetheral]

Yup. You have to have a plan for retreating, and initiate it on round one. Two at the absolute outside. After that, it's usually too late.

Same goes for monsters. Round one retreats in a coordinated (or sacrificial) fashion are a must. After that it's too late, unless they have a movement mode the PCs cannot emulate. The morale rules in the DMG are terrible because of that. I tried using them for a while, but by the time creatures start retreating (1/2 hps individual or 1/2 group size), unless there are a lot of them and they scatter, it's far too late. It needs to happen immediately.

Edit: Switching to the chase rules the moment a retreat begins helps. But if the retreating creatures are in the open against a faster enemy with decent ranged weapons, they're hosed no matter what. This is fairly realistic.

Interesting--that hasn't been my experence. I've seen the PCs and NPCs both retreat successfully 5-6 rounds into a battle. Sure, sometimes retreat is hard or even impossible if one is cornered, but otherwise it only requires that one's opponent not choose to pursue. In many situations, driving off an enemy is as good as killing them, in which case there is little incentive to risk more pain and expend more effort chasing down a routed foe. Even when there is an incentive at the group level to outright destroy the foe, each individual may have little incentive to be amongst those who risk getting (more) hurt by giving chase.

At a mechanical level, escape is often fairly straightforward against an opponent with equal speed: if you take the dash action, they have to likewise dash to keep up, which means they can't attack. If they instead use a ranged weapon, the distance between you increases by at least your speed each turn. Unless you're on a featureless, level plain, you're likely only two or three rounds from full cover. And in a typical dungeon, a single dash action may be enough to get full cover from someone trying to move and attack.

Lastly, scattering can be an effective last-ditch retreat strategy, even when outnumbered. If the pursuing enemies don't instantly choose an optimal distribution of pursuers to pursuees, at least one of the pursuees is likely to be able to overpower their immediate pursuers and escape. (And if the enemy takes the time to decide on an optimal pursuit strategy, the pursuees get a head start.) If the fleeing party outnumbers the enemy, escape for some portion of the group is usually trivial.

[Tanarii]

Interesting--that hasn't been my experence. I've seen the PCs and NPCs both retreat successfully 5-6 rounds into a battle.You have all sorts of weird things going on with battles though. Like 5-6 round battles that aren't Deadly. :smalltongue:

However, I'll qualify my statement: I was thinking of when it's a turkey-shoot, one way or the other. The monsters are so outmatched that it's an Easy or Medium battle, which is over lightning fast. Or the PCs are facing a Deadly x2+ fight (while not full on resources). In those cases, the fight will be over in no time at all. If the heavily overmatched side doesn't start running right away, they're in trouble. My point was they can die in the round or two it takes to get far enough away and break contact.


Sure, sometimes retreat is hard or even impossible if one is cornered, but otherwise it only requires that one's opponent not choose to pursue. In many situations, driving off an enemy is as good as killing them, in which case there is little incentive to risk more pain and expend more effort chasing down a routed foe. Even when there is an incentive at the group level to outright destroy the foe, each individual may have little incentive to be amongst those who risk getting (more) hurt by giving chase.

At a mechanical level, escape is often fairly straightforward against an opponent with equal speed: if you take the dash action, they have to likewise dash to keep up, which means they can't attack. If they instead use a ranged weapon, the distance between you increases by at least your speed each turn. Unless you're on a featureless, level plain, you're likely only two or three rounds from full cover. And in a typical dungeon, a single dash action may be enough to get full cover from someone trying to move and attack.

Lastly, scattering can be an effective last-ditch retreat strategy, even when outnumbered. If the pursuing enemies don't instantly choose an optimal distribution of pursuers to pursuees, at least one of the pursuees is likely to be able to overpower their immediate pursuers and escape. (And if the enemy takes the time to decide on an optimal pursuit strategy, the pursuees get a head start.) If the fleeing party outnumbers the enemy, escape for some portion of the group is usually trivial.All true. But as I said, it doesn't matter if you can't GET away in that first crucial round or two without dying. That's what I was talking about. D&D 5e combat can be brutal and fast at the extremes. That's great, I love parties can dispatch a series of Easy or Medium encounters quickly. But it's not good if those creatures want to, for example, try to hit and run without getting annihilated in the process.

Edit: For PCs it can be even worse. If they don't run immediately when heavily outmatched, they can easily end up leaving a body behind. That's "worse" because a dead PC can be raised, but not without the body.

[ZorroGames]

Does True Resurrection (or whatever it is called) require the body? I thought it did not if you knew the dead person’s name.

Too tired to look it up right now.

[MxKit]

Does True Resurrection (or whatever it is called) require the body? I thought it did not if you knew the dead person’s name.

Too tired to look it up right now.

It looks to me like that'd be up to the DM, depending on how they read the spell:


You touch a creature that has been dead for no longer than 200 years and that died for any reason except old age. If the creature's soul is free and willing, the creature is restored to life with all its hit points.
This spell closes all wounds, neutralizes any poison, cursed all diseases, and lifts any curses affecting the creature when it died. The spell replaces damaged or missing organs and limbs.
The spell can even provide a new body if the original no longer exists, in which case you must speak the creature's name. The creature then appears in an unoccupied space you choose within 10 feet of you.

Bolding and italicizing mine, obviously. There's an argument to be made there that, by RAW at least, the spell only provides a new body and doesn't require you to touch the corpse if there is no corpse to touch. Some DMs might be more lenient about it than that, though, and/or read it differently.