When do the gloves come off? School of hard knocks?

[Frenth Alunril]

I have seen a lot of chatter about nurse-maid DMs who pamper their players with a promise of no character death. I have seen statements to the affect of, "too much went into my character to have it die."

As a DM, I come from a peculiar school of "train them up and try to kill them, reasonably."

My players like it, because they get some free levels of play to learn the world they are in, to establish themselves. But I have a standing house rule that the gloves come off at level 5 and from there, they can go anywhere they like, but just because I introduced a dragon as a story item does not mean they stand a chance against it.

I guess it comes from a thing that happened to me.

orcs had ambushed our wagon, we didn't stand a chance. Everyone grabbed a horse and raced for the forest. I went last. On the escape, the fighter was thrown from her horse. Racing to save her, I lowered my hand and tried to swing her up to my horse. She made the strength check. I failed the ride check. We looked at each other, Drew our weapons and stood back to back, facing down the hoard so that our companions could go free. It was the most stoic I ever felt. Back to back with a champion, facing down a raging hoard of orcs. Sure we would die, but some of them would too, and it was going to be a story for the ages...

Until DM intervention. He scared away the orcs with unimportant story to save our skins. He made the vision crumble away with his saving hands, and still today I want to roll those dice, and watch as Geoffrey and Beth are over run by savages.

So, maybe I'm a relic, and my players are perverse, but character death is a fabulous tool.

What say ye?

[Glimbur]

I generally have an idea of what the players will do next, and I try to come up with difficult but survivable challenges for them on that path. If they decide they want to dragon hunting instead... that is where PC death starts to pile up.

[Oracle_Hunter]

It all depends on the game you're playing.

Spoiler

Show

In Bliss Stage every character but 1 must "die" before the game is over. That manner of that death is entirely in the hands of the Player and can range from disintegration to permanent coma to fleeing your friends and allies and never returning. However, when the game says your character must die (and it will!) it is time to make your final scene.

In AD&D you could die from anything ranging from an assassin's dart to a fall off a horse. Even at "high" levels you were often one dice roll away from death. There were resurrection mechanics but they were typically out of reach of Players and, even then, often had the risk of Final Death or being returned as a squirrel. However, character creation was simple and advancing in level wasn't really the point of the game -- you gained some HP and some better saves but that was it. Since the journey was more important than the travelers it was OK to kill off characters now and then.

In 3rd Edition D&D death was random at low levels but increasingly rare as you went up. HP death became rare after your HP outpaced the crit damage of standard weapons and Save or Dies were mitigated by clever feat and class selection, not to mention purchases from the Magic Mart. Resurrection became easier and level progression became more important to the game -- every level was a chance to gain a new class or even a fancy Prestige Class! Losing all that work is frustrating to Players who want to try out all of those fancy options and making a new character becomes more complicated as the levels increase -- you can't just roll some dice and add a few numbers to show up as another Elven Magic-User by the side of the road. As a result, character death inconveniences everyone around, so it becomes relatively rarer.

IMHO, a DM tailors his style to the game he is running, or only selects games that conform to his style. It would be no better to kill off characters willy-nilly in a 3e game than it would be to save them in a game of Bliss Stage.

And, of course, you need to meet your Players' expectations. If your Players do not like it that you are or are not killing off their characters then you should adapt to suit their desires.

[Morghen]

What say ye?

I say you're not REALLY useful as an ally until you've had a few characters killed.

I don't want to go into [super-hard dungeon X] with some guy who is going to be dropping Fireballs too close to the party or unleashing war cries every 20 feet.

That being said: Stupid mistakes are important. You have to make them to learn anything.

[kyoryu]

It all depends on the game you're playing.

Critical hit, Mr. Hunter.

(I will add that it goes beyond just the rules, and into the type of experience the game is about - you could theoretically play a 3rd ed style game in 1e, or vice versa, but you'd be fighting the rules to some extent.)

[oxybe]

depends on the game, but for the most part, as a GM i try to challenge the players, not kill them.

as a GM, "... then they all died" is the worst possible outcome i believe i can have since it generally leads nowhere. i have no problem having the PCs lose, but losing still moves the game forward as i give them plenty of outs.

generally speaking i feel i've done my job if they've lost and wish they had died so as to not have to live with their failure then simply have the PCs shoved on pikes and be done with it.

as a player, if the more lethal the game, the less i feel the need to be invested in the character and by extension the campaign. i don't mind losing, but losing should mean something to both the character and the campaign. dying is one of the most boring outcomes i can think of for any character.

[Masaioh]

I don't go out of my way to kill my players, but I tend to roll strings of 20s at the worst possible times. Human skeletons are still among the monsters my players fear the most because of those scimitars. That, and a Troll that got a greataxe critical and took the party meatshield from full hp to -17.

Okay, so the Troll cleaves you in half with a single swing. Roll your character's twin brother.

A set of orc barbarian triplets later...

[Dire Panda]

In my experience, it depends heavily on what kind of story you (as DM) want to tell and whether your players have the same expectations. Talk to your players beforehand and make sure you want the same thing!

If your story is about a group of close friends or heroes marked by destiny, character death is probably something to avoid - have them taken prisoner, knocked unconscious and left for dead under rubble, or what have you. On the other hand, a game based on Greek epics (exactly how many of Odysseus's crew survived the journey home?) or a tense struggle for survival in a post-apocalyptic world crawling with zombies have character death as an integral part of the story, and players should be prepared for that.

I used to play with someone who routinely wrote five- or six-page backstories for each of her characters and actually cried when her character was swallowed by a dragon. It was all done by the rules, and was a suitably heroic death - she singlehandedly held it off while the rest of the party evacuated the village - but she was under the impression that her character was too important to the story to die. She left the game after that because I wouldn't retcon her death (and the campaign wasn't going to reach levels where True Rez was available). Lesson learned: talk these things out ahead of time. On the other end of the spectrum, I've had players who basically said "The story will be more interesting if I make this decision, even though I as a player know it's a bad idea. Can my character die in a way that furthers the story?" Both styles can make for a satisfying game if the players and the DM are on the same page.

(Character death can also be a maturity issue if your players are too young to accept the loss, so games for younger players should probably lean towards the former extreme)

[Bearpunch]

It depends on the game for me. If I am running Pathfinder/Star Wars/4e, I want the players to feel relatively heroic and powerful, so they rarely die unless they mess up. Bad.

In Shadowrun, I want the players to feel like regular people that do dangerous work. I don't try to stack the odds too badly against them, but their Pink Mohawk style generally tends to backfire, so there is a high bodycount in that game. Mostly from two players who make really bad decisions, so it's not that bad.

All Flesh Must Be Eaten is another highly lethal game, even without the DM trying to murder the PCs. I don't attempt to murder the PCs and we have at least one person die every time we play. Guns are brutal in the game. One headshot without a helmet and you are done. Plain and simple.

In World of Darkness, however, you will die (We are playing Hunters). It is only a matter of time, or a matter of luck. It may sound harsh if you have never played Hunter, but that is actually how the game kind of works. I'm even merciful with characters, as only one of them has died during combat so far (others wanted to die for random reasons).

[Hiro Protagonest]

(I will add that it goes beyond just the rules, and into the type of experience the game is about - you could theoretically play a 3rd ed style game in 1e, or vice versa, but you'd be fighting the rules to some extent.)

Yep. Exalted is all about big and epic heroes doing awesome things. Or sometimes mortals. They exist too.

But if you try to go to Nexus and take down the Guild's top men, expecting to come out alive, as a chargen Solar? Yeah. You could kill him if you're fast enough, but once the Emissary arrives, you're dead. If you do get out alive, you're the most wanted man in the Scavenger Lands, and a chunk of the Seventh Legion is coming after you, as well as the Wyld Hunt, and small mortal armies from Guild-dependent kingdoms. And if you defeat them, that leaves a power gap, meaning the Realm's coming from one side and Wyld barbarians from another. Then there are also the Infernals, who will take advantage of the chaos to raise their own kingdoms or destroy weakened ones, and the Abyssals, who are simply going to destroy weakened ones. And don't think the Deathlords are going to pass up this opportunity to invade Creation, once the Realm is in the midst of a three-sided war with the Scavenger Lands and the barbarians, they're going to immediately start bringing their armies through the Shadowlands, perhaps coming together to once again bring a disease forth, less powerful than the Great Contagion, but enough that Creation will no longer be able to stand against so many enemies. As the Deathlords strike, so does at least one Fair Folk army, eager to turn Creation back into Wyld. The Chernozem, Stewards, Viziers, and Lawgivers will all try their best, and the Infernals and Dragon-Blooded are going to turn back around to fend off the greater threats, but it will still harm Creation heavily, making it smaller and even less populated.

But if the Solar waits 'til later, not even necessarily that much later (given training times, probably a year. But this is considering people who live for thousands of years) he'll have a Circle. His group will be able to keep the kingdoms fed, stay the hand of the Seventh Legion, fight down the Emissary, have his own fighting force which he's trained to perfection with Tiger Warrior Training Technique and Legendary Warrior Curriculum, have allies among the Lunars who are ready for the Wyld Barbarians, possibly with troops under their command that you or one of your allies took the time to train with the previously mentioned training Charms, be able to tend to any disease weaker than the Great Contagion, supplied thaumaturges all over the world with salt, possibly have a deal going with the Guildsmen controlling the Caladrius Palace or just killed them off entirely and have one of your Circle members there with some mortal troops to fend off any ghosts or Guild mercs trying to seize the location, and then you can begin to orchestrate the downfall of the Guild.

[EatAtEmrakuls]

In 30 levels, my party had numerous deaths, but each time I somehow made it meaningful:

Tiefling Paladin, level 4, died saving his comrades from Hobgoblins, resurrected as an Avenger. This also released the inner spirit of his Dragonborn comrade, who changed from Wizard to Sorcerer, so it worked on two levels, as they both wanted to change their characters.

Tiefling Avenger...again...level 9 this time. Defending a city from a demon Orc, died in combat.

Warforged Barbarian, level 9. Same battle. This one was permanent.

Minotaur Fighter, level 15. Went evil, joined a succubus, ended up killed by the party in a group fight. Party decided to revive him, cautiously. Took a vow of silence until he could redeem his actions.

Eladrin Cleric, level 17. Died fighting the Tarrasque. His soul ended up captured by a Lich chimera, and the party had to go fight to get it back.

Eladrin Cleric, level 18. He discovered all the horrible things his people had done to the devas, so he gave his life to correct a great error and reseal a rift, freeing ten-thousand of their souls.

Tiefling Paladin, after he changed back, level 19. Defending the newly gained Changeling Wizard, who was only fourteen years old, and had replaced the eladrin cleric.

Changeling Wizard, level 19. Died in the same battle. Both were resurrected as undead to fight their former allies, as a death guard and a lich, respectively.

Half-Orc Ranger, level 19. Killed by the undead tiefling in the ensuing battle.

Minotaur Fighter, level 26. Killed by mindflayers, which released a shard of Tharizdun's soul, and, after the mindflayer absorbed it, the party had to take the mindflayer with them and figure out how to get it back. It was eventually taken by another BBEG while the party was out getting a ritual from Vecna to fix the situation.

Dragonborn Sorcerer, level 28, fighting ten-thousand adult chromatic dragons on their way to kill Tiamat.

[Lord.Sorasen]

I don't really think of it as pampering, really. I like to see characters die but I also like to see them live. Your story is fascinating to me because it actually lines up perfectly with the exception I have to not allowing character deaths. In your story, your characters made the decision that would lead to death, and accepted it. To me, the game is often about the narrative. I don't want the characters to die because the game world is full of deadly things. Sure you've established that the PCs aren't the walk of the walk, but you've also killed them all so the characters never really learned anything. Maybe the players did, but I feel like I'm not here to teach the players life lessons.

In a session I had just last week, one of the players, playing a very curious bard, walked up to what he thought was a dead corpse and turned out to be a zombie. The gunslinger in our party, having the best health and AC and being a hero, grabs him and moves him behind her. On his turn, he gets angry, because she is a woman and he is a MAN, and he has to be manly, and hiding behind a woman isn't manly. So he rushes around her and charges at the zombie. And is in a single attack moved to 2 hit points.

This wasn't smart at all. But it's the roleplaying I want to see. I think there's a gaming article the Giant posted a time ago about a paladin character he made who also made terrible decisions in the name of roleplaying. it's fascinating to me to see it happen.

The point is there's a difficult decision to make here: If I do not provide any help, and actively aim to kill a party that makes stupid errors, then I discourage the game as a roleplaying opportunity, which isn't what I wanted. But if I provide too much of a cushion, then there's no real risk in any action, and the daring acts of the players won't be seen as such because there's no real risk or sacrifice.

I suppose what I'm saying here is that I believe that character mortality must be decided by the scenario and the roleplay perspective.

Do I really need to say this last part? Just in case: What's fun for me isn't fun for everyone, but attaching "in my specific game" everywhere is really difficult so I'm going to hope you understand my position. I'm sure I could get into a game where tactics was valued more as well, really.

[Sudain]

Unless I'm teaching them the game, the kid gloves were never put on to start with. And if I'm teaching you the game; I'll let you know "I'm focusing on AC so you learn that mechanic. Okay you got an AC of 30 at level 5? Wow, excellent. k, now I'm going to teach you about saves..." they they at least know I'm not picking on them; but slowly and thoroughly teaching them about the system.

Even if the story REQUIRES that person, they can expect serious wounds at best for stupidity. Otherwise if they die, they die. If they are too invested in their character to have them die then they should invest in a healthy dose of paranoia and caution. The world does not care about who you are and how important you think you are. If you want to live, then behave like it.

If they die to extreme unluck, then they will have a much easier time finding someone who will res them and front the cash. But they will also be expected to repay the cost or owe the resser a favor.

Being smart enough to live so a bard decides to tell stories about your exploits is a large part of being a epic, just as important as not picking bar fights and dying to a rusty bottle.

What would you do if you were exploring a mineshaft and you saw 4 well equipped bodies in the hall; half of which have a severe case of disembowelment? Charge forth? Loot the bodies? Come back with supplies? Or go find someplace else to be?

[navar100]

It is not the DM's job to kill PCs.

A DM who boasts his PC death count is not a good DM.

A DM who doesn't feel he ran a good game unless a PC died or at least brought to negatives is not a good DM.

A DM who has a PC death rate to encounter/adventure arc ratio is not a good DM.

A DM who is proud he killed a PC is not a good DM.

None of the above means a PC should never, ever die. When it happens it's sad. When it happens it's a consequence. When it happens it's inherent in the risks.

[Jeopardizer]

It depends.

As much as I don't mind seeing my characters die often in a dungeon crawl (what I like to call "tomb-raider parody") because the goal is to be the more genre-savvy bastard there is, I prefer the deaths of my chars, if they are permanent, to be a bit more meaningful in a story-driven campaign.

Dieing because of a fumble on a ride check (very bad DM) or because I failed a spot-check in a dark alley would have no purpose, I feel, if the campaign depends heavily on the characters. Alternatively, dieing in combat because of bad rolls/decisions/whatever is ok because it would enhance the story.

What I meant to say is: don't pull your punches but don't be an a**hole either.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Not gonna lie, in practice I'm something of a carebear. I don't kill PCs unless they explicitly ask for it to happen: If they get in a situation where death or defeat seem imminent, I try to give them a way out at the cost of sacrificing something important to the character. "Those orcs look tougher than you can handle? Well you could always toss them your little sister as a distraction and make a run for it..." Generally it creates much more interesting possibilities for everyone involved than "You are dead. Roll up a new character."

Of course I realize this won't work with a munchkin who will *always* toss the girl to the orcs without a second thought, but I've never had to deal with that kind of player. Cross that bridge when I get to it, I guess.

[Frenth Alunril]

I guess this turns into a couple of things:

No screen. My players want to know when I've crit on them. They like the rush. I made them promise not to shout out odds.

True treasure by the books. By level 8, a properly treasured party who has invested their money has access to full resurrection (provided it has a cleric of sufficient level as an npc ally.)

Sandbox. I don't have a story based on the players any more than some dreams or goals that they suggested in their back story. Players usually make enough trouble to spontaneously generate adventure.

The great provider: death. I had a player die recently. Opened a great conversation about whether the player wanted a new character or not. Did some solo, fugue plane rp that was fantastic. The player is fully motivated to play the character now. Party blew their wealth on Res, but found a king's hoard at the same time...

A new question, I see a lot of mention of a DM story:

Do you really have those? Don't get me wrong, I do prep, and the game has turned into something wonderful, but character dependent story seems really hard. Characters never go after what you plant for them.

I found, most recently, my party has had the best time just shopping in the city of brass.

[Fiery Diamond]

It all depends on the game you're playing.

Spoiler

Show

In Bliss Stage every character but 1 must "die" before the game is over. That manner of that death is entirely in the hands of the Player and can range from disintegration to permanent coma to fleeing your friends and allies and never returning. However, when the game says your character must die (and it will!) it is time to make your final scene.

In AD&D you could die from anything ranging from an assassin's dart to a fall off a horse. Even at "high" levels you were often one dice roll away from death. There were resurrection mechanics but they were typically out of reach of Players and, even then, often had the risk of Final Death or being returned as a squirrel. However, character creation was simple and advancing in level wasn't really the point of the game -- you gained some HP and some better saves but that was it. Since the journey was more important than the travelers it was OK to kill off characters now and then.

In 3rd Edition D&D death was random at low levels but increasingly rare as you went up. HP death became rare after your HP outpaced the crit damage of standard weapons and Save or Dies were mitigated by clever feat and class selection, not to mention purchases from the Magic Mart. Resurrection became easier and level progression became more important to the game -- every level was a chance to gain a new class or even a fancy Prestige Class! Losing all that work is frustrating to Players who want to try out all of those fancy options and making a new character becomes more complicated as the levels increase -- you can't just roll some dice and add a few numbers to show up as another Elven Magic-User by the side of the road. As a result, character death inconveniences everyone around, so it becomes relatively rarer.

IMHO, a DM tailors his style to the game he is running, or only selects games that conform to his style. It would be no better to kill off characters willy-nilly in a 3e game than it would be to save them in a game of Bliss Stage.

And, of course, you need to meet your Players' expectations. If your Players do not like it that you are or are not killing off their characters then you should adapt to suit their desires.

Critical hit, Mr. Hunter.

(I will add that it goes beyond just the rules, and into the type of experience the game is about - you could theoretically play a 3rd ed style game in 1e, or vice versa, but you'd be fighting the rules to some extent.)

In my experience, it depends heavily on what kind of story you (as DM) want to tell and whether your players have the same expectations. Talk to your players beforehand and make sure you want the same thing!

If your story is about a group of close friends or heroes marked by destiny, character death is probably something to avoid - have them taken prisoner, knocked unconscious and left for dead under rubble, or what have you. On the other hand, a game based on Greek epics (exactly how many of Odysseus's crew survived the journey home?) or a tense struggle for survival in a post-apocalyptic world crawling with zombies have character death as an integral part of the story, and players should be prepared for that.

I used to play with someone who routinely wrote five- or six-page backstories for each of her characters and actually cried when her character was swallowed by a dragon. It was all done by the rules, and was a suitably heroic death - she singlehandedly held it off while the rest of the party evacuated the village - but she was under the impression that her character was too important to the story to die. She left the game after that because I wouldn't retcon her death (and the campaign wasn't going to reach levels where True Rez was available). Lesson learned: talk these things out ahead of time. On the other end of the spectrum, I've had players who basically said "The story will be more interesting if I make this decision, even though I as a player know it's a bad idea. Can my character die in a way that furthers the story?" Both styles can make for a satisfying game if the players and the DM are on the same page.

(Character death can also be a maturity issue if your players are too young to accept the loss, so games for younger players should probably lean towards the former extreme)

These guys have said it best. My personal preferences are in line with those who dislike character death and especially dislike random character death. The story is about the characters and their actions in games I run, not about the world itself or about the players. Therefore, barring things like intentional heroic death, character death and a replacement character is jarring, since the characters are the ones in the spotlight, not the players, and there is a spotlight.

[Rallicus]

It is not the DM's job to kill PCs.

A DM who boasts his PC death count is not a good DM.

A DM who doesn't feel he ran a good game unless a PC died or at least brought to negatives is not a good DM.

A DM who has a PC death rate to encounter/adventure arc ratio is not a good DM.

A DM who is proud he killed a PC is not a good DM.

Debatable.

DM stands for Dungeon Master, not Storyteller. If you were referring to STs pulling something like that then yeah, I wholeheartedly agree, but DMing is a broad term that encompasses a lot of different play styles. I wouldn't mind being in a game with a DM who actively tried to kill players, provided there wasn't a bunch of bs from anything other than the dice. A DM flaunting PC death would entice me to continue at this challenge until victory. And victory would be that much sweeter.

OP's question is an interesting one, though. Over the years, many tabletop games have changed into a story-based, interactive game among friends. Fudged dice, miracles, NPCs acting out of character to avoid PC death... all prevalent thanks to the change in gameplay. No doubt this came about due to wanting to develop one's character alongside the story, but at what cost?

So when do the gloves come off? I don't know, but I wish they'd come off more often in the games I play in. I've experienced several instances of fudged dice and bs in some games I've been playing, one in particular that should have outright decimated a fellow PC for playing like an idiot. But guess what? Suddenly the monster's 30 foot reach (which was established) didn't provoke any AoO against a character moving through three or four threatened squares.

Times like that frustrate me to no end. I don't know, I've sort of lost hope. Even I'm guilty of preventing PC death, because my players were sulking about essentially losing a "last stand" against an easily avoided foe (provided they played a little more intelligently), so I gave them an opportunity to "stabilize or die," and all of them succeeded because the dice felt like giving out miracles that day. Two of them managed to live on the very last possible roll.

Part of me feels like I should have just killed them off. Yeah, it wouldn't have been pretty. Yeah, it wouldn't have ended the story on a good note. And yeah, giving them a chance to stabilize while bleeding out sort of made sense as far as the NPC's decision went. But still, it showed the players that "roleplay" is a viable option in my games since I backed down from killing them legitimately, and I'm no longer sure I want to DM this way.

[NikitaDarkstar]

As a player I'm not a huge fan of utterly random character death. As in death by one lousy dice roll in a random encounter, that just sucks. But if I as a player (or my character) does something really stupid? Yhea, I'll have to deal with the consequences. And an epic and heroic death? I can totally deal with that too.

But on the other hand, the one thing I don't want to notice is plot armor. I have a DM who's great with plots, interesting twists and a fun homebrew setting, but darn it he makes the plot armor painfully obvious at times. We still have fun and everything, but not even the illusion of maybe, possibly needing to make a sacrifice is there, even against BBEG's. I've played with him for somewhere around 5-6 years I think and never even had a character dropped to negative hit points. (Even worse now when we know each others style well enough to read each others minds.) And that's kind of nut fun either. I really wouldn't mind having a character killed while defending a city from a rampaging dragon or something, but the DM can't stomach killing characters.

[Siegel]

Play Mouse Guard - it doesn't work with Gloves on

[Aeryr]

I generally have an idea of what the players will do next, and I try to come up with difficult but survivable challenges for them on that path. If they decide they want to dragon hunting instead... that is where PC death starts to pile up.

And remember PCs if your party decides to go dragon hunting always get an escape plan.

[Acanous]

I still tell my players to come prepped with three premade characters.

Just in case.

Even if I don't plan on anyone dying? It's ample warning, sets the theme, and if someone DOES die, it doesn't interrupt gameplay for long, as they have a spare sheet and all I need to do is work the char in.

[Morph Bark]

You mean DMs are supposed to start with their gloves on? What is this madness?!

[Zerter]

Rather then tell everyone what kind of DM I am or the group is, I want to do it the other way around. I am gonna describe character deaths in our party by DM (and how long each campaign lasted so you know what the ratio is) and someone tell me what kind of game we are running.

Sessions are tabletop and last for about 12 hours each.

DM A: 6 deaths in 15 sessions.

Spoiler

Show

2 deaths were caused by the party challenging a Wizard trying to get away despite having received in-game warnings he was much too powerful and would kill members if provoked. He dropped a 10d6 fireball on the level 3 party causing two of the three members hit to die.

1 death was caused by a player failing to protect himself against a magic storm. He was given a letter in-game he failed to read properly (telling him to do so) and ignored hints he was in danger unless he would protect himself.

2 deaths were caused by two party members trying to kill a powerful Lizard. There were no hints dropped that he was pretty powerful, but it was an established NPC they had the option of negotiating with and they knew he could be powerful as the party was warned all monsters might be.

1 death was caused by the newly made dwarven PC killing the newly made goblin PC after the goblin PC sneaked up on him in two rounds after being introduced.

DM B: 13 deaths in 34 sessions.

Spoiler

Show

1 death caused by PC sending another PC a letter containing a power word death. This was in an evil campaign where the PC in question was plotting against others.

1 death caused by a PC refusing to negotiate with an enemy he knew to be much stronger and dying in the resulting combat.

1 death caused by PC staying behind in hiding to challenge the spotted assasin, killed in a close 1-on-1 combat.

1 death caused by a PC getting crit in the air by a Llamia in a random encounter.

1 death caused by a PC unnecessarily killing a drow orphan and the rest of the party refusing to free him from captivity because of it.

1 death caused by a PC provoking another PC and that PC ordering his giant turtle pet to eat the provoking PC.

1 death caused by a failed magical experiment intended to obtain divine power (the PC in question knew it was a long-shot, another PC did succeed).

1 death caused by suicide after discovering he was in fact a clone from the PC he thought he was playing all along and not the real one.

1 death caused by a PC trying to backstab another PC in the middle of combat only to be killed himself.

1 death caused in random ecounter with a skindancer, the PC went into negatives and bled out while the battle continued.

1 death caused in heroic defense of own tribe against a invading githyanki force.

1 death caused by character first trying to rip off a vampire lord and failing, than getting captured by him, than lying to him while being captured and than by refusing to negate after being exposed a liar.

1 death caused by fail against poison for 3d6 constitution damage (the dice gods did not favor this one).

DM C: 5 deaths in 14 sessions.

Spoiler

Show

1 death caused by character drinking potion labelled poison.

3 deaths caused by three level 5 PCs facing a CR 9 vampire in an arena fight.

1 death caused by PC dying of failing saves vs. poison after random encounter.

DM D: 2 deaths in 4 sessions

Spoiler

Show

2 deaths in two random encounters

DM E: 7 deaths in 10 sessions.

Spoiler

Show

1 death in random encounter

1 death caused by party letting the PC bleed dry after the PC tried to plot against them.

1 death caused by PC being betrayed by another PC because the PC betrayed was deemed to dangerous for the party by the betraying PC.

1 death caused by random encounter.

1 death caused in random encounter when the PC in question provoked an attack of opportunity to escape while at 1 HP (he had other options).

1 death caused when a PC tried to obtain a powerful magical item resulting in the rage of a powerful demon (he was warned in-game that it was not a good idea).

1 death caused in defense of the city against a powerful demon.

DM F: 2 deaths in 5 sessions.

Spoiler

Show

1 death caused when PC tried unsuccessfully to assassinate powerful NPC, only to be hit in the back with an arrow while trying to escape by another PC.

1 death caused when PC tried to kill a powerful NPC in a combat that lasted 2 rounds.

DM G: 2 deaths in 12 sessions

Spoiler

Show

1 death caused by PC jumping out of zeppelin with an experimental fly potion.

1 death caused by PC deciding to attack the band of giants, alone, instead of negotiating with them as planned.

[Grail]

Gloves should never go on.

DM's aren't fighting against the characters, but neither should they protect them. Player Characters should live or die on their own merit.

If as a DM you wear gloves and treat your players too leniently, then they become bad players. They won't learn from their mistakes, they will think that it is appropriate and acceptable to take stupid, irresponsible and foolish risks and that they should be rewarded for them.

Also, without the threat of death, then characters can't be truly heroic. To be heroic, there needs to be risk. Taking away any risk robs a character of this right.

I have played in games where the DM's would be overly kind to characters, to the point that if someone died, then we happened to find a scroll of resurrection in the very next room, and that it could be used by anyone... yes, this actually happened. These games are utterly, utterly boring. It's like playing a PC game in god mode. Without tension there can be no drama.

I refuse to play in these kinds of games, and will not run them.

I kill characters. I'm proud of it. But I don't go out of my way to kill characters. Good players (and that doesn't mean that they are meta gaming munchkins, just that they play sensibly and learn from their mistakes), will have their characters survive from beginning to end in my games. Bad players will go through multiple characters.

When I ran Red Hand of Doom for one of my PnP groups, there were maybe 10+ character deaths. These deaths all belonged to only a couple of the players. They litterally just did stupid act after stupid act and wondered why they died. The other players had their characters survive the entire campaign.

Example of stupid act in RHoD.

The party was attacking a fort that had been captured by the Red Hand. During the assault, the Arcane Trickster turned invisible and started scouting out the rest of the structure behind the keep. He did this in the middle of a major fight with the rest of the characters and a concerted defensive effort.

He came across a Red Hand Sorcerer and a Bugbear barbarian (his bodyguard), fleeing the scene. Instead of retreating to try and alert his allies that the enemy officer was leaving the battle, he tried to attack them himself. He used a ray attack (I think it was scorching ray) + Sneak Attack, against the barbarian. He did about 1/2 HP damage to the Barbarian, but became visible, alone and isolated against 2 powerful enemies.

End result, dead. Sorcerer hit him with a lightning bolt, barbarian charged him and cut him down.

The rest of the players couldn't believe his actions. He was to blame for his character death. He as a player shouldn't be rewarded for stupid actions. I didn't fudge dice, he died fairly, but he died because of actions that he took.

This player now has actually improved considerably in the past couple years and I doubt whether he'd pull something as dumb as that again. He learnt and thus was able to evolve as a player.

[Jack of Spades]

As a player, one of my first thoughts when I have a character concept set in my head is along the lines of "So, how does this guy die?" I generally try to figure out what would be a death he would be happy with, what kind of death I would be happy with, et cetera. However, I have a very forgiving DM/ST who will generally keep a character alive as long as it doesn't kill itself through stupidity or ineptitude. Even with other peoples' games though, I tend to see the death of a given character coming a mile away, and when I do I take it smiling. It was just a character after all, and his death allows me to a) make sure he goes out in a blaze of ridiculous glory and/or b) start fiddling around with new character concepts. But that's just me.

[Thialfi]

Characters die in our campaign all the time. As a DM, I feel it is my job to balance the threat of death for PCs with the realization that the game is supposed to be fun and killing a player's characters is usually not fun for them.

The game is no fun if there isn't a challenge, so you should never be afraid to off a character if the flow of the story demands it. However, I am always looking for ways to reasonably save the character's lives.

We play a 1e/2e campaign and use bandage rules that allow a character to live up to -10 hit points. What I would have done in your example was to fight out that battle. Once both characters went down, I would have had the orc leader order that the characters be bandaged if possible and taken captive with the idea that they be sold into slavery. It would be the duty of the rest of the party to check on the characters and effect a rescue. If the dice were not kind and the character died instead of being bandaged, so be it.

[Tyndmyr]

depends on the game, but for the most part, as a GM i try to challenge the players, not kill them.

as a GM, "... then they all died" is the worst possible outcome i believe i can have since it generally leads nowhere. i have no problem having the PCs lose, but losing still moves the game forward as i give them plenty of outs.

Sometimes stories need to end. Victories may be more popular than tragedies, but both outcomes are legitimate.

[Thialfi]

Sometimes stories need to end. Victories may be more popular than tragedies, but both outcomes are legitimate.

I don't understand this line of thinking. Sure stories end, but characters don't have to. They can live to go on to another story. As a DM, I feel I have failed to provide an enjoyable experience if the party wipes, because I know if my character dies when I am playing, it really hurts my ability to take pleasure in that gaming session. I would be very upset as a player if a DM crafted his story with the idea that all the characters would die some kind of heroes death in the end.

This may be affected by the fact that we have had one continuous campaign for 32 years and no one (outside of Dark Sun where they start at 3rd) has ever rolled up a character that was higher than 1st level.