Should I feel guilty if I TPK in a modified Adventure Module

[Learn34]

The title has my central question, but I feel context is important in this case. I've tried to compact the chain of events leading to the my current conundrum below, but it basically reads like campaign cliff notes.

>Party is 6 PCs:
>>2 proper Optimizers (Cleric & Warblade, both new to 3.5 but dedicated to character crafting),
>>1 thematic optimizer (a "tank" themed on Baloo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baloo)),
>>1 player who's been playing for over a year but doesn't really care to learn the rules (Rogue w/ greatsword, built by the thematic optimizer),
>>2 new players (Druid & Evoker-Wizard, but without sufficient experience to play their classes well).

>Party is ECL5-ish

>Module is Expedition to Castle Ravenloft.

>Initial complaint from more experienced/involved players: strahd zombies are just a nuisance, not presenting a significant threat and taking a long time to chew through.
>>Solution: Homebrew (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?625966-Alternate-Infected-Zombie-for-EtCR&p=24897546#post24897546) upgraded version with more damage potential and less HP

>Minor complaint from some players and personal worry: even with homebrewed zombies, repetitiveness of random house/street encounters will disengage players.
>>Solution, generate table of EL7(in accordance with module baseline) encounters to randomly assign in place of standard module encounters.

In and of themselves, these two solutions haven't caused problems prior to last night. As I've gotten a better handle on both DMing and prepping for our sessions, I've been able to account for more variables. Specifically, I've been able to factor the Cleric's -14 Move Silently modifier (2 flaws ea. @-4, and -6ACP from fullplate), treating it akin to a 140' aggro radius (Listen check of 0 would hear him at 140' when he's not trying to move silently, and the party hasn't bothered to try.). This aggro radius is important, in that is has drawn 7!!! random encounters towards into the PC's most recent battle (Village encounter E6).

They have managed to flee from the battle, but ran straight to E7 and started that fight. Given the distances involved (~60' from the E6 location to their present position) all those aggro'd encounters are just going to follow them.

Some key problems:
>>Several of the random encounters I threw together include Swarms, and the Wizard has no damage spells remaining. She didn't recover them in the previous night's sleep (didn't get a full 8 hours due to die rolls) and the party has not taken the time to allow her to rest before pressing on.
>>The Druid is a new player, and so has been largely relying on Wildshape to engage.

In summary, with ~8 EL7 encounters collapsing on the Party's heads, they're probably going to die. I need to know if I my deviations from the rules are to blame (in which case it's my failure as a DM) or if they've not been properly cautious (in which case I'm guilt-free). Any additional info will be edited into the initial posting as questions are asked.

[ksbsnowowl]

I need to know if I my deviations from the rules are to blame (in which case it's my failure as a DM) or if they've not been properly cautious (in which case I'm guilt-free).

A little of Column A, a little of Column B.

Expedition to Castle Ravenloft has some encounters that are easy, but a lot of encounters that are pretty tough, especially if they get strung together (as happens in the opening chapter, and can easily happen in the Castle, especially if you maintain this level of aggro radius [and I don’t actually disagree with that, given the massive move silently penalties]).

I’ve run this module twice, and had vastly different experiences both times. One party of 3 succeeded in destroying Strahd, suffering only one character death along the way. The second group suffered 10 or more character deaths, and we didn’t even really get into the castle at all. If you look through my post history, there’s a thread about that second group, if you want to read more about that...

How is the Cleric suffering such a massive penalty to Move Silently? Really low Dex, full plate, and tower shield?

Something to keep in mind is that you shouldn’t assume a roll of 0, even if they aren’t trying to be stealthy (unless they are purposely making noise). I wouldn’t treat it as a 10 either, but something like a 5 or 7 would cut down that auto-hear aggro radius to something a bit more manageable. Also keep in mind that the party aren’t the only things in Barovia; the zombie assault on the town square outside the Blood of the Vine tavern would be making more noise than the party just moving through the streets. Sure, battles there won’t be raging 24/7, but it’s something to keep in mind.

If the party has not yet seen these aggro-activated encounters that are heading their way, the easy thing to do would be to turn them into groups of Strahd Zombies. The two Min/Max players may reassess the danger/challenge of them when a few mobs of them descend on the party in waves, from different directions. If one PC were to go down, and subsequently quickly turn into another one (with added AC?) that may make them a bit more terrifying.

[lylsyly]

Ask yourself 1 ?: Is the party having fun?
Then realize 1 thing. A TPK isn't fun!!

[Calthropstu]

Always. A tpk is generally a giant frustration for all parties, unless it was deliberate and discussed beforehand.

[RNightstalker]

in that is has drawn 7!!! random encounters towards the PC's most recent battle (Village encounter E6).


This is what's ringing my alarm bells. If the players are cool with farming experience points, that's one thing. For the most part 2 random encounters is too much, let alone 7. I understand if the party is trying to rest and recover spells and whatnot after every encounter to throw an encounter to keep them on their toes. Unless a party is blatantly stupid, a TPK should rarely happen.

[Fitz10019]

How exactly did die rolls prevent the wiz's 8-hour rest?

[aglondier]

As you seem to have noted yourself, increasing the encounter level is leading directly into a tpk. The obvious choice, if that is not your goal, is to redo your random encounter chart to EL5 and generate those 7 incoming random encounters at a more reasonable level.
It's still going to stretch them to breaking point, but clever tactics, use of environment, and potentially the heroic sacrifice of the walking clanker should see them through.
Hit them with a few (3-4) encounters, then give them a chance to figure out that the clanker is attracting danger. Give them a brief lull in the action to do something about it, then hit them with the rest...losing the platemail will make it easier to sneak around, and the cleric a much softer target later on...

[noob]

As you seem to have noted yourself, increasing the encounter level is leading directly into a tpk. The obvious choice, if that is not your goal, is to redo your random encounter chart to EL5 and generate those 7 incoming random encounters at a more reasonable level.
It's still going to stretch them to breaking point, but clever tactics, use of environment, and potentially the heroic sacrifice of the walking clanker should see them through.
Hit them with a few (3-4) encounters, then give them a chance to figure out that the clanker is attracting danger. Give them a brief lull in the action to do something about it, then hit them with the rest...losing the platemail will make it easier to sneak around, and the cleric a much softer target later on...

If the cleric is a softer target the risks of TPK are massively increased.
I am not sure it is a good trade.

[Efrate]

Been a while since i ran it, but pretty sure each night there are a variety of circumstances that work so you do not let you rest properly. That the module as intended. Safe rest is nearly never guaranteed iirc.

As for the encounters, dropping to cr 5 helps, and never ever use swarms, especially diminutive
and fine, unless your party has multiple aoe options. Even seeding a crate of alchemist fire beforehand helps. Paizo is notorious for doing that in most APs because ofc the arcane caster is a blaster why would they be anything different? Its pretty much a tpk by itself vs. a party in heavier armor or anything with less movespeed than them without aoe.

[ksbsnowowl]

Yeah, the nighttime Strahd’s Spies chart starts with EL 7+ encounters bothering the party every night. Likelihood of higher EL encounters goes up each day (add 1 to the d20 roll for each night they’ve been in Barovia).

A group of 2-5 vampire spawn could really tax a party, as could 1d3 spectres, or several other of the higher rolls on that chart. Though, this early in the module the spies’ goals should be escape, to report back to Strahd, not combat with the party (unless the party engages them and they need to fight to get away from the party).

Assuming there is only the one encounter at night, it would only add one hour to the wizard’s sleep time to be able to reprepare his spells. The other party members refusing to let him take that time is just foolish.

[Learn34]

...How is the Cleric suffering such a massive penalty to Move Silently? Really low Dex, full plate, and tower shield?
Edited into original post: 2 flaws, each applying a -4 penalty, and a -6ACP from Full plate


...Something to keep in mind is that you shouldn’t assume a roll of 0, even if they aren’t trying to be stealthy (unless they are purposely making noise). I wouldn’t treat it as a 10 either, but something like a 5 or 7...
I went with 0 based on the Move Silently (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/moveSilently.htm) skill description, which applies a -5 penalty when one moves "a speed greater than one-half but less than your full speed". Given that their not making any effort to be stealthy and moving at least their speed, I thought it was appropriate to apply a further -5 (seeing as running/charging is -20), but I could bump that to -2 or so.


...the zombie assault on the town square outside the Blood of the Vine tavern would be making more noise than the party just moving through the streets. Sure, battles there won’t be raging 24/7, but it’s something to keep in mind...
My understanding was that once the PCs handled that encounter, there were only small roving bands of zombies which would show up. They dealt with that several sessions ago (first day in town game-time). These aggro'd mobs are from within 140' of the path between the town square and E6/Church. There's bunch of other mob clusters elsewhere, they just haven't gotten near enough to trigger those. They have, however, already dealt with Listen-aggro'd fights, when they tried to rescue Ireena.


...If the party has not yet seen these aggro-activated encounters They have, and have already engaged these mobs. The Cleric's burned 2 rebukes to awe 2 of the mob clusters, and the "Baloo" tank has (courtesy of a homebrewed taunt mechanic and a lot of mindless enemies) held 3 more at bay (though he has acquired 4 negative levels and has only 5HD). The Warblade has killed both the E6 encounter (which was weakened by the rogue triggering the infighting option) and the other aggro'd mob.

[Learn34]

This is what's ringing my alarm bells. If the players are cool with farming experience points, that's one thing. For the most part 2 random encounters is too much, let alone 7. I understand if the party is trying to rest and recover spells and whatnot after every encounter to throw an encounter to keep them on their toes. Unless a party is blatantly stupid, a TPK should rarely happen.

The thing is, they're closer to the opposite end of the spectrum of rest/fight ratio. They've pressed through 6 EL7 encounters in the first 2-3 hours of this adventuring day with relatively little resource expenditure, but have not allowed the Wizard to recover spells.

[Learn34]

How exactly did die rolls prevent the wiz's 8-hour rest?

That one is, admittedly, a homebrew on my part. The wizard was suffering from a Vargouille's kiss-curse, so I had her roll a DC15 wisdom save to fall asleep, and she failed a couple times (costing her two hours of sleep). The party did not let her sleep in.

[aglondier]

Edited into original post: 2 flaws, each applying a -4 penalty, and a -6ACP from Full plate

If the player took two separate flaws directly effecting stealth, and wears full plate on top of that, then they were quite honestly asking for it. Use those flaws for everything they are worth. When playing in an already dangerous setting, you really shouldn't set up neon signs declaring "here i am"!

[Learn34]

As you seem to have noted yourself, increasing the encounter level is leading directly into a tpk. The obvious choice, if that is not your goal, is to redo your random encounter chart to EL5...clever tactics, use of environment...
The encounter level I'm fine with, as it's what proscribed in the module. They have already swept 6 EL7 encounters (4 overlapping, though not completely simultaneous) this same adventuring day with relative ease through good positioning and most of the enemies being mindless.


Hit them with a few (3-4) encounters, then give them a chance to figure out that the clanker is attracting danger. Give them a brief lull in the action to do something about it, then hit them with the rest...losing the platemail will make it easier to sneak around, and the cleric a much softer target later on...
What you describe was pretty much exactly the session prior the one on Friday (22 Jan). They agrro'd 4 encounters running through one chunk of the village, swept those with maybe three spells burnt by the cleric, and the tank keeping everyone topped up on HP. Hole'd up in a mansion talking to a NPC for an hour before clearing another 2 encounters (again, positioning and environment meaning the Cleric and Warblade 2-manned the mob clusters). They did nothing about the walking boom-box of a cleric, turned around and moved full speed to the other side of town, and that gets us to last night's session.

[Learn34]

... never ever use swarms, especially diminutive and fine, unless your party has multiple aoe options.
Well, there's a Druid and a Wizard. The Wizard burnt all of her combat(#Fire, #Evocation) spells the previous day, didn't get her rest overnight, and the party hasn't taken time to let her sleep. The Druid's been out the last several sessions and so was topped off, but is a new player and so has been relying on Wildshape to beat-face. That said, he does have his spells and is low enough on HP that he's likely to switch to spells (I will be providing suggestions and guidance).


...Even seeding a crate of alchemist fire beforehand helps.
It's a little late for that, but I'm thinking about spontaneously upgrading the NPC Paladin that's accompanying them into something with better options and some grenades.

[Learn34]

Assuming there is only the one encounter at night, it would only add one hour to the wizard’s sleep time to be able to reprepare his spells. The other party members refusing to let him take that time is just foolish.

So, my reading of RAW is that the wizard requires 8 straight hours of uninterrupted rest to recover spells, and AFAIK 3.5 does not have a mulligan for short interruptions like 5e does. If I've missed something, great! Doesn't help the wizard in this case*, but I'll go back and reread the relevant rules for future reference.

*The wizard was suffering from a Vargouillle's kiss-curse, so I had her roll a DC15 Will save to fall asleep. She failed the first two, and so lost 2 hours of sleep. The party did not let her sleep in; instead choosing to wake her up, have the cleric cast his freshly-prepped Remove Disease, and press on with their day.

[aglondier]

*The wizard was suffering from a Vargouillle's kiss-curse, so I had her roll a DC15 Will save to fall asleep. She failed the first two, and so lost 2 hours of sleep. The party did not let her sleep in; instead choosing to wake her up, have the cleric cast his freshly-prepped Remove Disease, and press on with their day.

As a rule, never interrupt a party when they're making totally exploitable mistakes.

[icefractal]

One thing that might help in the current situation -
I'm not sure what kind of swarms these are, but most swarms are mindless and don't really "cooperate" with other foes or even other swarms. Unless these are specially controlled, they should be as likely to target whatever the other mobs are as they are to target the PCs.

Also, does the party realize that their noise is the source of all these incoming encounters? And not in a "noisy mean higher encounter rate" way, but that the creatures are in specific locations and they could thus reduce the problem by stopping and not moving more once they provoke one? I ask because many modules seem to go with a more abstract system for outdoor encounters and they may assume this many is inevitable.

Not resting a couple extra hours does seem dumb on the party's part. Are they under severe time pressure? Regarding interruptions in general:
Rest
To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing her spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells.

[H_H_F_F]

First, make sure they fully realize what's the source of their issues. Don't even hint it, be direct and out of character if needed. Players can miss the obvious sometimes.

Second, give them an option to dig themselves out of the hole in ways other than combat - but at a price. Them trying to do a fighting retreat is, in general, good tactical thinking. Give them an avenue to escape their issues, but one that would force some sacrifice.

Getting TPK'd sucks. It does happen, but it sucks. Get them out of it if you can. Maybe give them an escape and have the pally take a last stand? You can have consequences without ending the campaign.

[Kelb_Panthera]

That aggro radius, you're remembering to apply circumstance modifiers for obstructions and weather, yeah? A nice downpour can absolutely -terminate- encounter distances to the point you practically have to step on the other party's toes to be discovered. What about local noise interfering with the listeners' checks? Just a flat, "if they're inside this 140ft radius sphere, they detect you" isn't realistic or even fair, really.

[RNightstalker]

As a rule, never interrupt a party when they're making totally exploitable mistakes.

Where's the love it button?!?! That's one of the best quotes I've seen on here in a long time!


The thing is, they're closer to the opposite end of the spectrum of rest/fight ratio. They've pressed through 6 EL7 encounters in the first 2-3 hours of this adventuring day with relatively little resource expenditure, but have not allowed the Wizard to recover spells.

I see a contradiction in terms if few resources have been expended but the Wizard is out of spells...hopefully this becomes a lesson for the wizard to invest in some items that store spells, so when all the spell slots are used up, there is still something for them to do.

[ksbsnowowl]

Ah, some of the added info alters my interpretation and reactions a fair bit.


Edited into original post: 2 flaws, each applying a -4 penalty, and a -6ACP from Full plate

He CHOSE this penalty? Twice?!?!
Yeah, I fully agree with aglondier, the player chose to handicap himself to this degree. He should absolutely suffer the consequences of those poor decisions. Make it obvious how this choice is hurting the party, and make it hurt.


If the player took two separate flaws directly effecting stealth, and wears full plate on top of that, then they were quite honestly asking for it. Use those flaws for everything they are worth. When playing in an already dangerous setting, you really shouldn't set up neon signs declaring "here i am"!Agreed 100%



I went with 0 based on the Move Silently (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/moveSilently.htm) skill description, which applies a -5 penalty when one moves "a speed greater than one-half but less than your full speed". Given that their not making any effort to be stealthy and moving at least their speed, I thought it was appropriate to apply a further -5 (seeing as running/charging is -20), but I could bump that to -2 or so.

Ah, excellent point about the -5 for moving more than half speed. Combine that with my previous advice (treat it as though he’d rolled a 5), and you get exactly what you were calculating. So, yeah, zero issue or advice at this point, aside from agreeing with Kelb, to be sure to alter the DC/“die roll” by any relevant circumstance modifiers for intervening obstructions. I would probably just go with the +5 “through a door” modifier, on top of the distance modifier, to account for intervening buildings. They block direct line to the source of the sound, but the sounds still have a clear path to the monsters, down streets and around corners.



My understanding was that once the PCs handled that encounter, there were only small roving bands of zombies which would show up. They dealt with that several sessions ago (first day in town game-time). These aggro'd mobs are from within 140' of the path between the town square and E6/Church. There's bunch of other mob clusters elsewhere, they just haven't gotten near enough to trigger those. They have, however, already dealt with Listen-aggro'd fights, when they tried to rescue Ireena.

Gotcha. I was errantly assuming they had just entered the town, and were working their way toward the town square. Yeah, if there are no other disturbances currently ongoing in town, then yeah, the monsters will have an easier time hearing the clanking tin can.

Given the additional info I don’t have much sympathy for your players.


So, my reading of RAW is that the wizard requires 8 straight hours of uninterrupted rest to recover spells
This is incorrect. Icefractal provided the relevant quote from the SRD.

Even though the sleep deprivation was from a house rule, it’s still 100% on the party for not allowing the Wizard to rest and reprep spells. It was 2 frickin’ hours. Getting started 2 hours sooner in the morning isn’t likely to have much impact on the plot or encounters; certainly less than hamstringing your Wizard for no reason does.


As a rule, never interrupt a party when they're making totally exploitable mistakes.
This quote is amazing, and entirely applicable to this situation, given the additional info we’ve been provided.


That aggro radius, you're remembering to apply circumstance modifiers for obstructions and weather, yeah? A nice downpour can absolutely -terminate- encounter distances to the point you practically have to step on the other party's toes to be discovered. What about local noise interfering with the listeners' checks? Just a flat, "if they're inside this 140ft radius sphere, they detect you" isn't realistic or even fair, really.Once the party deals with the zombies assaulting the town square, I’m not sure there really is much local noise to interfere with the listening monsters’ checks. The townsfolk are hiding from the zombie apocalypse, after all.

Intervening obstructions and weather should certainly be taken into consideration, though. A quickly-onsetting storm might be useful to save the party’s bacon once, but I definitely wouldn’t do it more than one time. At least the perpetually-cloudy skies make it plausible to have a storm start out of nowhere.


First, make sure they fully realize what's the source of their issues. Don't even hint it, be direct and out of character if needed. Players can miss the obvious sometimes.

If he hasn’t done so yet, I would suggest the OP start with bringing up the rattling and clanking sounds of the cleric in his descriptions of the scenes to the party. As a group of monsters moves toward the party, ask for Listen checks, then describe what they hear like this:

“As you move through the dead-silent streets of the town, the metal scraping of the cleric’s steel-encased boots against the cobbles echoes loudly through the silence. Over the scrape of the cleric’s scabbard against his armor, the rogue hears snarling from the side street up ahead.”

If the party still doesn’t catch on after a session of describing the sounds of the scene like that, at least 4 times an hour, then take the direct, out of character approach.

Honestly, given the additional info the OP has provided, the situation is almost entirely on the PC’s and their decisions (the big X-factor being how good the DM is at describing the soundscape of the scene as the party moves through town; every other sentence should be colored with the sounds of the cleric’s rattling gait). I wouldn’t give them an easy out for dumb decisions; that doesn’t fit the theme of Ravenloft. To quote a wise man:


As a rule, never interrupt a party when they're making totally exploitable mistakes.

[aglondier]

*feeling the love*

[Zancloufer]

I mean that sounds pretty bad for you to do. Except the Cleric is a literal walking noise maker.
Probably could double the range required to hear them through buildings though. Might help.
Also why didn't they take two extra hours to let the wizard recover their spells?

Finally if they have been breezing through the encounters so far it might not be a TPK. If you are really worried just stagger them, give the party a chance to realize that they might get overwhelmed.

[noob]

Even if the cleric did not have heavy armour they would be noisy so they still are better off wearing armour in my opinion.

[aglondier]

I think it comes down to resources. Right now is the perfect time to explain to the players the concept of expended resources. Hit them with successive encounters until at least one character goes down. Don't give them a chance to recharge or heal. Bam, bam, bam. Once a party member is down, and the party is actually at risk of dying, that is when you ease up. Give them a breather.
If they use that breather as an opportunity to make more noise, send a half strength encounter. Then give them another breather.
If they keep making noise, keep hitting them with weak encounters, while bringing a loud and visible Major encounter into the area. Let them know it is there. Keep hitting them with small ones any time they make noise. Keep threatening the big one.

Don't let them rest and recover. Make them expend all their spells, scrolls, potions and wand charges. Make them use up all their arrows and bolts. Sunder their shields. If it is a choice between a killing blow, have the enemy sunder their weapons and armour first.

Crush them, but don't kill them...yet...

[noob]

I think it comes down to resources. Right now is the perfect time to explain to the players the concept of expended resources. Hit them with successive encounters until at least one character goes down. Don't give them a chance to recharge or heal. Bam, bam, bam. Once a party member is down, and the party is actually at risk of dying, that is when you ease up. Give them a breather.
If they use that breather as an opportunity to make more noise, send a half strength encounter. Then give them another breather.
If they keep making noise, keep hitting them with weak encounters, while bringing a loud and visible Major encounter into the area. Let them know it is there. Keep hitting them with small ones any time they make noise. Keep threatening the big one.

Don't let them rest and recover. Make them expend all their spells, scrolls, potions and wand charges. Make them use up all their arrows and bolts. Sunder their shields. If it is a choice between a killing blow, have the enemy sunder their weapons and armour first.

Crush them, but don't kill them...yet...

But as you have noticed they do not have the choice of not making noise: the cleric have flaws reducing move silently to extremely negative values so even if they remove their armour they will still make deafening noises just by moving.
Punishing over a whole game the players just because of a bad building choice is not a good idea if you want to keep the players as friends.
So if the gm really care that much about that move silently penalty they should provide the option to change the flaws of the cleric instead of punishing the team over and over and have the players dislike them.
But that player intentionally picked penalizing flaws because they did not want to do cheesy optimisation: there is a lot of flaws that gives penalties 99% of the clerics care about only 5% of the time like that flaw that gives a -2 penalty to ranged attacks(only care about if you have spells needing ranged touch attacks or when plinking weakly at opponents with a bow).
Please note that the logic of the entire thread does not really makes a lot of sense: if moving noisily attracts encounters within a 170 feet range then fighting should attract immediately all the encounters within a 1000 feet range because fighting makes way more noise(you even use explosives or noise as weapons directly in some fights and charging inflicts a -20 move silently penalty so many noisy stuff like using the shatter spell or a thunder stone should be at -100) so moving nosily is negligible in terms of encounter attraction if you get in fights.
I mean hitting people with a sword 3 times in 6 seconds while someone else throws fireballs ought to make way more noise than moving.
Did you consider estimating if a fight should attract the next encounter or not?
It makes more sense to make fights chain each other due to the noise of the fights relatively to saying "oh in fights everybody is screaming and throwing explosives(fireballs) and running but nobody listens then you start moving and everybody suddenly hears"

Keep in mind the listening penalties chart.


Listen DC Modifiers Listen DC
Modifier Condition
+5 Through a door
+15 Through a stone wall
+1 Per 10 feet of distance
+5 Listener distracted
Stone walls have an huge impact as is listener distraction.

The other possibility if you use rule as written for "how much noise a battle is doing" is to make the cleric literally deafen everybody due to excessive noise because it makes sense if you assume throwing fireballs or throwing thunderstones is dc -10 to listen(due to being battling) that something that is at dc -30 to listen should break your ears.

[aglondier]

But as you have noticed they do not have the choice of not making noise: the cleric have flaws reducing move silently to extremely negative values so even if they remove their armour they will still make deafening noises just by moving.
Punishing over a whole game the players just because of a bad building choice is not a good idea if you want to keep the players as friends.
So if the gm really care that much about that move silently penalty they should provide the option to change the flaws of the cleric instead of punishing the team over and over and have the players dislike them.
But that player intentionally picked penalizing flaws because they did not want to do cheesy optimisation: there is a lot of flaws that gives penalties 99% of the clerics care about only 5% of the time like that flaw that gives a -2 penalty to ranged attacks(only care about if you have spells needing ranged touch attacks or when plinking weakly at opponents with a bow).

It sounds far more likely to me that the cleric's player intentionally picked those flaws to aid in a cheesy optimisation build. That sort of toxic munchkinism should definitely not be encouraged. Now, I'm all for getting the most bang for your buck, but dipping deep into the negatives to support a build is just unnecessary.

[noob]

It sounds far more likely to me that the cleric's player intentionally picked those flaws to aid in a cheesy optimisation build. That sort of toxic munchkinism should definitely not be encouraged. Now, I'm all for getting the most bang for your buck, but dipping deep into the negatives to support a build is just unnecessary.

I indicated that there was flaws less penalizing so the fact they picked more penalizing flaws than the least penalizing flaws suggests that they did not do maximal munchkinism and so "reined themselves in" at least to a degree.

[smetzger]

Maybe I missed it but I didn't see which flaw exactly the player took.
Q: Does the flaw just provide a penalty to move silently checks?
If so... I don't think this actually makes the character any louder. It just means that they effectively can't normally move silently.

I think the only DC in effect hear is the DC for hearing a battle which is...
-10 for battle...
+1 for every 10 ft distance

Even if you move silently in battle, the other creatures aren't moving silently, your attacks aren't included in the move silently. etc. Most likely the DC will be -10 for the battle regardless of the MS penalty for this cleric. The only practical way for the players to avoid this is via the silence spell.

So, either the encounters are too far away for a battle to be reasonably heard or they need to use a silence spell.

[Asmotherion]

Both their lack of preparation and your modifications are to blame.

Lack of strategy and positioning, not taking advantage of cover and concealment and generally being unprepared can make a trivial CR1 encounter with goblins deadly.

However it's also your job as a DM to bring the players a fair challenge, based on your knowlage of them. If you know half the party players have almost 0 experiance, don't plan more than 2-3 medium encounters per short rest and no more than 1 hard encounter per long rest.

[Learn34]

That aggro radius, you're remembering to apply circumstance modifiers for obstructions and weather, yeah?
Yep. Base Listen chk result=10, -5 for distracted listeners. House encounters suffer an additional -5(for the front door) or -10(for an outer wall) depending on how you look at it; I consider the creatures to exist in a superposition of all points within a building, and am only having him aggro encounters from buildings entirely within that 140' (aka -14 Listen DC) radius.

[Learn34]

As this is a recurrent question, I would say the main reason they didn't allow the wizard to rest is that the player who's effectively the party leader (Thematic Optimizer/Baloo) has a general axe to grind with spellcasters, and thinks in terms of the near inexhaustible resources of a base martial character. While he can walk the walk of character optimization, his favorite class is till the Ranger/Scout.

[Learn34]

I indicated that there was flaws less penalizing so the fact they picked more penalizing flaws than the least penalizing flaws suggests that they did not do maximal munchkinism and so "reined themselves in" at least to a degree.
It's not any attempt to rein in munchkinism, he just decided to treat MoveSilently as a dump stat. Note that this player also (and I allowed this) has a CR5 Zombie Dragon* under his control (Young Adult Mercury dragon, IIRC). He hasn't pulled it out this last session because he doesn't want to piss-off the Undead-hating paladin NPC, but that thing is a freight train.

*The players built at ECL5, and I allowed them anything they could have by RAW up to that point. Deathbound Domain+Some ACF to sac a domain to amp another+Desecrate meant alot of Animate Dead HD. One of the other players hated the minionmancy. So I allowed the Cleric to keep the Dragon and a Rebuke-controlled Ghostly Visage in exchange for clearing out all the other minions and getting a fresh couple of domains.

[smetzger]

It's not any attempt to rein in munchkinism, he just decided to treat MoveSilently as a dump stat. .

Yeah that is a perfectly valid 'dump' for a Cleric. Only person who needs MS is a scout type role, everyone else can just dump it. Having a 0 or a -14 in MS is functionally the same, you just never use it.

[weckar]

That's not really true. A s a group you're only as quiet as your loudest member. You're not getting the drop on anything with that kind of modifier.

[ngilop]

SO, I think this is a completely jerk move TPK and you should feel bad.

You homebrewed up a random rule, that you didn't explain to the players ow that would interact with them and the rest of the game mechanically.

Plus knowing that 3/6 of your group was new and didn't really know the rules you decided to cater to the 1/3 of the grout that were optimizers.

You deliberately created a rule that said there is a 61575.21 square foot area around the party that automatically triggers a combat. That 'aggro range' nonsense you thought up is literally the zie of most dungeons I have played in in my 30+ years. That 2,463 5-foot squares by the way.


So yeah you should feel guilty for not only making a rule that has a horrible. You deliberately created a rule to screw the party over in the worse way possible just because not everybody wanted to be a sneaky scout?

[smetzger]

That's not really true. A s a group you're only as quiet as your loudest member. You're not getting the drop on anything with that kind of modifier.

IME... unless the whole group is focused on stealth, there isn't a way (outside of magic) for the whole group to get a drop on something anyway.

I guess I don't see the big difference between having MS 0 and MS -14. Either way I am not going to be relying on sneaking up on an opponent (and me just walking around doesn't make anymore noise). Standard tactic of having the one sneaky character scout a little ahead, then come back, party decides if they want to use resources (e.g. silent/invisibility etc) to get the drop on the enemy.

Back to the OP...
1) Most adventure modules will give you guidance on how easy it is for guards etc to notice what is going on around them.
Stick to that guidance and you should be ok as the authors may not have completely thought about the listening rules.

2) Now if your players decide to take a nap next door to a group of hostiles, then they are probably going to have some trouble during the nap

3) If the players are having an easy time of blowing through encounters then start combining them together

[King of Nowhere]

As this is a recurrent question, I would say the main reason they didn't allow the wizard to rest is that the player who's effectively the party leader (Thematic Optimizer/Baloo) has a general axe to grind with spellcasters


this player also (and I allowed this) has a CR5 Zombie Dragon* under his control (Young Adult Mercury dragon, IIRC). He hasn't pulled it out this last session because he doesn't want to piss-off the Undead-hating paladin NPC, but that thing is a freight train.


ok, i will file this TPK as "suicide".
so, player A is more or less intentionally gimping player B, while player C is forbidding player D from using a strong asset.
What next? Somebody is going to blindfold the fighter? everyone decides to shoot themselves in the foot as a random act of chaos?
the only way they could sabotage themselves more would be to actively fight each other.

[Calthropstu]

ok, i will file this TPK as "suicide".
so, player A is more or less intentionally gimping player B, while player C is forbidding player D from using a strong asset.
What next? Somebody is going to blindfold the fighter? everyone decides to shoot themselves in the foot as a random act of chaos?
the only way they could sabotage themselves more would be to actively fight each other.

The paladin is an npc, not a player.

[icefractal]

ok, i will file this TPK as "suicide".
so, player A is more or less intentionally gimping player B, while player C is forbidding player D from using a strong asset.
What next? Somebody is going to blindfold the fighter? everyone decides to shoot themselves in the foot as a random act of chaos?
the only way they could sabotage themselves more would be to actively fight each other.It does seem like a case of intra-party competition smacking hard into non-relative opposition.

Like, in a campaign where the foes were tailored to the party's power level, it would make sense (in a more PvP way than I personally like, but YMMV) to try to be "the strongest" by reducing the effectiveness of others. When the foes exist as decided in advance and there's no guarantee the party will be able to handle them, then it can backfire hard.

[CatchaBreak]

It does seem like a case of intra-party competition smacking hard into non-relative opposition.

Like, in a campaign where the foes were tailored to the party's power level, it would make sense (in a more PvP way than I personally like, but YMMV) to try to be "the strongest" by reducing the effectiveness of others. When the foes exist as decided in advance and there's no guarantee the party will be able to handle them, then it can backfire hard.

So I think more context is needed... I am the aforementioned Warblade in the party this thread is discussing. Hi! (Btw this is hilarious to read)

Our DM (Learn34) gave me the link to the thread because my character (Mac - Warblade) is currently paralyzed... and can't stop the potential impending TPK. (Damn those traps!)

Missing Context... (In defense of our party)
Our party's current adventuring day has taken place over 5 sessions over the past 4 months. 3 of which sessions have been over discord because of COVID. Lack of coordination and forgetfulness of details are at an understandably all time high. We are also really wanting a few levels to get to some of the fun stuff we built into our characters. Hence the impulsive decision making.

(My comments critical of the party)
Yes... We should've let our wizard finish sleeping. I don't even remember our thought process in making that decision. Shame on us... Shame *rings bell while naked*

Next... Our walking cacophony of a Cleric. Yes he sounds like a wheel barrow full of power tools thrown into a woodchipper, but that was his choice and there isn't much the party can do about that. Yes, I guess we could banish him, or I could put him in an tank with water, strap him to my back and parade him around like a dead squid at an aquarium... Although, now that I'm typing it the idea is growing on me. In my opinion we shouldn't be punished for this, just maybe burdened. Which bring me to my friend DM Learn34.

(My comments critical of our DM)
He conveniently left out how he was going to TPK us. Apparently there is a priest(?) hiding in the church who will pop out, read a scroll and cast Circle of Death on our party. AND get this, you need a DC19 Con saving roll OR YOUR DEAD...

That's what I have a problem with. The 7 - CR7 encounters at once is challenging, but if I die to that at least I went down in the glory of battle (and not some old fart reading a piece of paper!)

Also, I don't like the diminutive swarm. But maybe that's just me being a baby.

(My comments in defense of our DM)
Learn 34 has been working very hard make this module fun and challenging. He has also been fairly generous by not restricting splat books and dragon magazine resources. (Which is why we've been stomping up to this point.)
He has also said he will consider changing the save or die event to a save or probably die event. (Oh the compassion ;P)


Anyway. Idk. I'm newish to D&D so I wanted to bounce my perspective off this forum to see where you all stand based on the additional context. We have a session tonight so I'll update you all on how it goes. Wish us luck!

[icefractal]

Also, I don't like the diminutive swarm. But maybe that's just me being a baby.
They are a pain in the ass. Like, check out the freaking Hellwasp Swarm (https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/swarm.htm#hellwaspSwarm). Weapons, no. Ordinary fire, no. AoE spells - maybe, but it has 90 hp and a good Reflex save, better hope you roll high damage. And good luck running away when they fly faster than most people. CR 8 for the right party, TPK for the wrong one.

Understandable on mistakes due to spreading-out over an extended period of real-time, I've certainly forgotten things that way which would have been obvious IC.

As for the scroll - yeah, one-shot death effects are nasty. It's probably within the CR, but I'm not a big fan either. Like, a "Wail of the Banshee" trap is only CR 10, so fair game for an 8th level party, but at DC 34 to spot it's often just "some PCs randomly die without any chance to respond"; not usually fun. I'm not going to say it's wrong to have that Cleric there, but personally I wouldn't throw that one into this situation if there was any way to plausibly not.


Edit: This is kind of an interesting illustration of how applying the sensory rules RAW leads to different results than most modules assume or that most people are familiar with. I'd say that in the majority of 3.x games I've been a player, the way it was effectively handled was:
1) Foes either are or aren't ambushers, decided in advance. Ambushers could be unprepared if you enter at an unusual time or from an unusual direction, and non-ambushers could become prepared if you slowly and loudly bash the door down, but generally they either will or won't regardless of your Move Silently.
2) Only at the point where you're trying to sneak past or ambush foes are there Move Silently checks being made.
3) Other foes will either stay in their own zones, or come in response to their allies yelling for help.

And that does result in a lot less difference between "mediocre stealth" and "absolutely horrible stealth".

[LetMacPlay]

Baloo the tank/leader here.
Update on the game, we are 4.5 hours in and Mac (optimized warblade) is getting his first roll. Also, we learned that the wizard was an elf so she had a full night's rest and had all of her spells this whole time (reminder that she's new and the cleric made her character for her).
We discussed it and figured out why we didn't wait for the wizard to rest. There are two reasons: 1. Based on our discussions with the townsfolk we were under the impression Ireena was in eminent danger and needed to be saved asap. If she died we would have no clues to the holy symbol that can defeat Strahd. 2. Our loud cleric was absent for the session where the wizard was infected by the vargouille. If she wasn't healed within a time limit, she was instantly dead. Although still a mistake, since the cleric was present for the session when we started the current day, this was just another reason we felt like we were operating on a time limit.
Now to defend myself. I do NOT have a problem with spellcasters. I don't like playing them myself, but know they are valuable members of the party and I know they need to rest. I have a problem with players taking forever on their turns and casters choosing spells are the biggest offenders. I don't think they are good for new players (and 2/3 of our casters are new). And I have a huge problem with our cleric. Since he's an extremely loud death worshipping necromancer (I have admittedly been a **** to his character the entire time for these reasons). My problem with the minonmancy is just that I'd like to spend some time actually playing. Even without the minions I get to roll one dice every 45 minutes to an hour (I miss a lot).
Our DM (Learn34), has told me to try to be more strategic by planning around the cleric being loud. I want to play strategically (which is kind of how I'm leader) but my plans are rarely followed and I have complained that the only strategy is to use the cleric as bait; or at least keep him away from the group. I don't think it's fair to him as a person to make his character walk 140ft away from the group as he aggros everything. It's impossible to strategize around the noise without screwing over his character.
Update from the end if the session. We all lived.

[smetzger]

Since he's an extremely loud death worshipping necromancer


I really think your group is missing the point. The cleric isn't loud, he just can't be quiet.

[noob]

Baloo the tank/leader here.
Update on the game, we are 4.5 hours in and Mac (optimized warblade) is getting his first roll. Also, we learned that the wizard was an elf so she had a full night's rest and had all of her spells this whole time (reminder that she's new and the cleric made her character for her).
We discussed it and figured out why we didn't wait for the wizard to rest. There are two reasons: 1. Based on our discussions with the townsfolk we were under the impression Ireena was in eminent danger and needed to be saved asap. If she died we would have no clues to the holy symbol that can defeat Strahd. 2. Our loud cleric was absent for the session where the wizard was infected by the vargouille. If she wasn't healed within a time limit, she was instantly dead. Although still a mistake, since the cleric was present for the session when we started the current day, this was just another reason we felt like we were operating on a time limit.
Now to defend myself. I do NOT have a problem with spellcasters. I don't like playing them myself, but know they are valuable members of the party and I know they need to rest. I have a problem with players taking forever on their turns and casters choosing spells are the biggest offenders. I don't think they are good for new players (and 2/3 of our casters are new). And I have a huge problem with our cleric. Since he's an extremely loud death worshipping necromancer (I have admittedly been a **** to his character the entire time for these reasons). My problem with the minonmancy is just that I'd like to spend some time actually playing. Even without the minions I get to roll one dice every 45 minutes to an hour (I miss a lot).
Our DM (Learn34), has told me to try to be more strategic by planning around the cleric being loud. I want to play strategically (which is kind of how I'm leader) but my plans are rarely followed and I have complained that the only strategy is to use the cleric as bait; or at least keep him away from the group. I don't think it's fair to him as a person to make his character walk 140ft away from the group as he aggros everything. It's impossible to strategize around the noise without screwing over his character.
Update from the end if the session. We all lived.
Elves do reduce the time for a rest but not for a spell replenishing rest.
Elven wizards still needs 8 hours of rest before preparing spells.


To prepare her daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but she must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If her rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time she has to rest in order to clear her mind, and she must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing her spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, she still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells.
From srd

And I insist: do not punish the entire group for the disability of one character: it is just terribly bad for relationships between humans.
I think it is better to make him rebuild those flaws into optimiser non penalizing flaws like murky eyed(or non combatant and the like) or get feats from nowhere with DCFS shenanigans instead of letting him use a completely and utterly under optimal character(I bet he does not even have swarms of thousands of simulacrums or an infinity of wishes).
The problem of that cleric is not that he optimises: it is that he because he did not want to make a fully optimised character.
Min maxing(reducing some values to increase others) is inefficient when you can do max maxing(make all the values high usually so high you need a few decades just to write them).

Imagine if someone went at the table and said "I want to play a fat tetraplegic fighter" and that the gm said "yes but now your tetraplegic fighter weights infinity and turns into a black hole and it kills all his allies and resurrects all the opponents and I will repeatedly say it is the fault of the fighter for three hours in a row because I decided that in my games any tetraplegic would weight an infinity of times more" would people still want to play at a table with that gm?
Would the experience not have been better if the gm said "I am sorry but I do not allow tetraplegic fighters can you remove that handicap?"

[ksbsnowowl]

(My comments critical of our DM)
He conveniently left out how he was going to TPK us. Apparently there is a priest(?) hiding in the church who will pop out, read a scroll and cast Circle of Death on our party. AND get this, you need a DC19 Con saving roll OR YOUR DEAD...


This encounter is straight from the module; the DM isn’t plotting to kill you in some extra unique way. Welcome to Ravenloft; get used to death.

Also, as the encounter is set up, the Cleric only has a 70% chance each round that he can activate the scroll*. A 5th level Fighter is typically going to have a +6 Fort save, giving him a 40% chance to succeed on the save, assuming no other factors (buff spells, etc.), or put another way, a 60% chance of failure. That gives a total of 42% chance of death in the first round. Yes, the chance will be higher for a character like a wizard, but again, that’s not taking into account party buff spells or magic items.

42% chance that any one character dies.
17.6% chance that two characters die.
7.4% chance 3 characters die.
3.1% chance 4 characters die.

That’s only a 3% chance of a TPK of a typical, prepared party. By the time he gets a second turn, should his first attempt to read the scroll have failed, a smart party will be in his face; attempting to activate a scroll provokes AoO’s.

Yes, it’s a tough, deadly encounter. Again, welcome to Ravenloft.

*Technically Circle of Death isn’t a Cleric spell, so the writers messed up there, but it’s thematic. Easiest fix is to treat the cleric as if he had the Magic domain; then he’d only have a 50% chance to activate the scroll.

[Learn34]

Elves do reduce the time for a rest but not for a spell replenishing rest. Elven wizards still needs 8 hours of rest before preparing spells.

Well...s**t. Not really sure what to do there, as I would absolutely feel like a jerk coming intothe next session to tell that player "Whelp, you're back to plinking at zombies with a bow & arrow. My bad." Probably just give her a mulligan for this day and I know going forward.


And I insist: do not punish the entire group for the disability of one character: it is just terribly bad for relationships between humans.

This I think is a lost cause for other reasons, but regardless I'm really split on it:

1-Hand: I don't want to just let the players willy-nilly rebuild to suit the current module: part of teaching them how to play is forcing them to see how their builds works across scenarios. As is I've given the Cleric more power than he should-by-RAW have in order to keep peace at the table (see minionmancy issues in on of my previous posts). Were I to allow a character rebuild/alteration, I would feel obligated to let others (Warblade) rebuild as well.


Other-hand: There's definitely a thematic element to swapping one of the flaws, as it specifically describes the player being haunted by disembodied voices