TPK's - Where next?


General Discussion (Prerelease)

1 to 50 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I'm running a second group through one of the AP's and they're approaching a well known possible TPK encounter. The first group survived...just, and I mean just! My question is what do you do when a TPK happens?

Having invested time with a group getting to know the locals from the base Town it would seem pretty much like game over if a TPK happens after 2 parts of a 6 part adventure path.

How do you guys cope with this situation?


Sometimes TPS's happen. Iv'e run games where it wasnt my intention to TPK the party, the mob was going to be tough for the group and they maybe might lose a couple members in the fight. Some unfortunate dice rolls on their part and some good dice rolling on my part really broke the fight. Like everything, real or not, Murphy's Law still applies.

What I've done to counter this random TPK encounter as a DM is to make a couple of contingency plans while I create the storyline or world. Here's a couple that I have used: 1. If they happen to be doing the whole good vs. evil campaign or quest, I might have a god's avatar extract them once they go down and give them the "your not high enough speech" or the "you have alot of potential and the gods want you to take care of something else for us".

2. Sometimes I'll have the players create new characters has a back up character. This way you already have characters made, although, you might have to level adjust before starting. A quest you can do with this is either start completely over or you can have this new party be the rescue party. Go in, get their bodies and bring them back to the church to get raised.


Here is the table I think you are looking for from the MM Size Increases however I think it probably isn't really what you need for your particular case. And this table doesn't cover "younger" characters than the starting age Age, aging effects.

I personally would just tack on a -2 str to any younger/child character who might be changed and leave the rest of the stats as rolled/created normally. Mental attributes usually don't play too much of an impact in terms of NPCs and as undead they could possibly be hundreds of years old and twice as smart or wise or clever as the PCs even if they look like children. The PC races don't follow the size adjustment table for creating monsters and with what you have said I don't see any reason to use it here. Size adjustments are also typically relative, a small ogre might be 8'2" and large size while a tall human who is 8'1" is still medium sized. With that in mind a younger human is still going to medium sized in comparison to a small sized adult gnome.

As for if it is going too far, I'd say it depends on the gaming group age and how you portray it. You can make it as nasty or as bland as you want to. It is going to be in the details that you give, the mental images they draw from what you describe really. If you are worried about it being too nasty I would just leave it as "there are children vampires" and see how they take it and go from there assuming a younger-ish crowd, but then you know your players, I don't. Also remember even if they are children the process of being turned to a vampire is usually portrayed as becoming more cunning which would probably make them act older than they might normally doing things more intelligently than a child might go about them. Again it is all in the portrayal.

Paizo Employee Chief Creative Officer, Publisher

It occurs to me that it might be a good idea to publish a module that handles "what do I do now" when a TPK wipes out the party, particularly if you, as the GM, didn't really want the campaign to end.

I think a lot of people would enjoy a module of this sort. I don't know, maybe it takes place in Pharasma's Boneyard or some sort of demiplane or something, but the idea behind it would be that if you survive this adventure, you somehow "aren't dead," and maybe get another chance to redo the encounter that wiped you out in the first place.

Or something.

The following problems present themselves:

1. It'd be impossible for the author to know what level the PCs will be when something like this is needed. The module would therefore need to be scaleable, which is frankly a pain in the ass for just about everyone involved.

2. The adventure ideas that spring immediately to mind recall things like Marvel Comics's "Contest of Champions" or other frankly pretty BS "challenges" set by some sort of extraplanar overlord. That sort of thing has the capacity to get real stupid real fast.

3. Maybe dead characters should stay dead.*

(*Sort of sucks when this happens and it isn't really their fault, though.)


I one of the AP's I ran the group TPK'd 3 times in the first book. They took it as a challenge, part of the first 2 times was greatly influenced by the fact they were still low level for the encounter (which would have been tough for an appropriate level group), they just ran into it early unfortunately. The second time they went to do other things (aka level up more) and came back and party composition was a big factor even though they had prepared some what.

As for getting to know the town and such, there a many ways to deal with it. One way is that the town will be more "open" to the next party. If the previous party helped the town and did well by them, if another party comes through and is willing to take up the cause (so to speak) the town will probably be relieved and more friendly. The previous party paved the way, the second party benefits from that in a way. I really dislike the hokey(?) "someone bigger than you brings you back" scenario when PC's die and in all the APs we've run/ready through I really don't think it fits with the story lines that have been published so far.

Part of being an "adventurer" is knowing you could possibly die, it happens and is part of the game. I personally have played a character for less than 20 min before dying to crappy rolls even when the DM gave me every chance and bent the rules a bit, it wasn't even combat, we were getting to where the adventure was supposed to be lol. It sucked and I always have at least a character concept in mind when playing so if something happens it doesn't take long to get things going again. I also never really liked the "second party to the rescue" thing because what if someone likes the new character and has more money/xp/levels than the other raised members of the group who are a level lower now? I don't like taking things away from characters to balance them out. I'd just as soon start with a clean slate in a TPK honestly.


Erik Mona wrote:

It occurs to me that it might be a good idea to publish a module that handles "what do I do now" when a TPK wipes out the party, particularly if you, as the GM, didn't really want the campaign to end.

I think a lot of people would enjoy a module of this sort. I don't know, maybe it takes place in Pharasma's Boneyard or some sort of demiplane or something, but the idea behind it would be that if you survive this adventure, you somehow "aren't dead," and maybe get another chance to redo the encounter that wiped you out in the first place.

Or something.

The following problems present themselves:

1. It'd be impossible for the author to know what level the PCs will be when something like this is needed. The module would therefore need to be scaleable, which is frankly a pain in the ass for just about everyone involved.

2. The adventure ideas that spring immediately to mind recall things like Marvel Comics's "Contest of Champions" or other frankly pretty BS "challenges" set by some sort of extraplanar overlord. That sort of thing has the capacity to get real stupid real fast.

3. Maybe dead characters should stay dead.*

(*Sort of sucks when this happens and it isn't really their fault, though.)

3a. Opinions differ and sometimes one or two characters could be the catalyst. As much as it would be nice to say "everyone except you gets a raise," it isn't very fair. It isn't really the DM's job to enforce party cohesion (and following that teamwork), most of the time it should be the party's job. A party willing to work with a disruptive character concept (disruptive players are more the DM's job) should have to deal with the consequences of having that character along whatever they are really. That is part of the "role-playing." Also some groups get used to "steam rolling" through an adventure and might get upset that they can't do that/fails to work on a particular encounter and they die. They don't think it is their fault even though it is the play style that they were using.

4. Once it happens the first time the PC's will expect it to happen again...

Dark Archive

TPKs in planned encounters can be exciting.

TPKs as a result of a random encounter chart are just annoying. Our first run-through of Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil, we had three consecutive TPKs, one as the 5th level party met a white dragon, one as they met a pair of wyverns and one as they met a trio of stone giants. We gave up. We couldn't even travel from Hommlet to Nulb without something twice our level flying up and eating the whole party!

I played it again later, without random encounters, and we had a few rough fights (those Spider-Eaters are insane!), but nothing too scary.

A book for 'what happens next' could be fun. Ghostwalk kind of covers that niche already, in a way.


My group has encountered this problem many times. We have since started using a DM screen full time. The players don't want their characters to die and neither do you, especially if you have an investment in resources, contacts, etc. The screen is so you can fudge your rolls of course, so I hope you have a poker face or at least can fake one. If the party is doing so poorly that you can see your party laying in pools of their own blood, this is where the fudging begins. A critical fumble, or a series of missed attacks can save the day.
Don't have money for a screen or (like me)hate using them because they are too tall and in the way? Make your own. You don't need all the info on them anyway. Cut out a big enough piece of cardboard to your desired height, length, and fold the ends. You're ready to lie!
Now I know this doesn't solve the problem if it still happens, but you certainly have an edge in preventing it from happening.
From the get-go you can use a character tree, have several characters for each player. When the PCs don't come back from their latest foray, curious friends or relatives start poking around and eventually all come together for the same reason. It would be up to the DM to suck them further into the story from that point.

Liberty's Edge

Another way to handle a TPK nicely, and which brings back good memories of the fantastic genre, is to have them die to the last, and then ... THEY WAKE UP !!!

Yes, it was all just a dream, but a disturbing one. And it will get even more disturbing as they replay a day similar to the one they just dreamed about. Can they now change they way it ends ?

Obviously, this should only be done once.


Why not just...

Not TPK?

I mean really, is it DM vs. PCs here? Does the DM win with a TPK?

Of course not.

We're working together, DM and Players alike, to build a collaborative story. Along the way we face gamey challenges that involve random rolls and random outcomes, but those can be predicted, a little.

There are almost as many ways to prevent a TPK as there are ways to set up the encounter in the first place.


  • An unknown NPC saves the day (good way to introduce a new contact).
  • A known NPC saves the day (a love interest, or the kid who wanted the paladin to take him as a squire, or the NPC they saved last adventure who has followed them to pay back his debt, etc.)
  • Enemies fail some important rolls (DM fudge - not everyone makes every save, or hits every attack).
  • Enemies hit, but for weak damage (DM fudge - even a greatsword can roll a 1 sometimes).
  • Enemies flee because they think they're losing, even if they're not.
  • Enemy minions turn on the BBEG ("Let my people go!").
  • Enemy minions turn on each other ("Give me back my gold, you thief!").
  • Tell players who almost hit that they really hit (they don't know the AC anyway).
  • Enemies choose bad tactics (so eager for the kill that they don't try to flank, or they ingore the dangers of provoking AoOs, etc.)
  • A wandering monster comes by (especially something the PCs have seen before in this location) and starts eating the enemies.
  • An environmental accident happens (enemy's spell causes a small cave in, enemy trips into the fire, etc.)
  • Enemies fumble in comical and fatal, or near fatal, fashion (too eager, trying too hard).
  • Deity intervention (useful if players are on a critical mission to save entire populations, or defeat ultimate evil, etc.).
  • BBEG stops to deliver a classic movie-like speech about how nothing can stop him now, then leaves to let his minions finish the fight (James Bond, anyone?).

That's a short list off the top of my head. I'm sure there's lots more. And specific situations can prevent themselves in specific encounters. For example, maybe this dungeon has someone captured in a cage near the battle. The module says he's a nobody towsfolk, but you're facting a TPK, so turn him into an appropriate level rogue who improvised a lockpick and was looking for the chance to break free. He grabs a spear off the ground and hits the baddies from behind.

Yeah, maybe that doesn't work everywhere, but if your scenario has someone in a cage, make it work for you. Whatever your scenario has, make it work for you. Or just add the solution down the nearby hallway where the PCs haven't explored yet.

You don't have to read every die literally, and you don't have to play the scenario exactly as written, and you don't have to behave as if the dungeon is set in stone.

There is no reason to have a TPK in the first place - unless you've scripted for one.

I have. Twice.

Once a vampire killed the entire group of PCs because he was a slave to a more powerful vampire, and the PCs were in that other vampire's home territory, so his plan was to make them die horrible, vampiric deaths, in town, where they would be rezzed, and where they would be so outraged that they would hunt the (other) vampire and kill him, thus freing the scheming vampire from his servitude to the more powerful vampire.

Once I wanted a campaign where the PCs would be manipulated by an evil demigod and forced into servitude, and they did something horribly stupid (provoking the entire city to send a mounted posse after them when they were on foot) and then they fought that posse instead of surrendering. So the evil demigod forced them into service in exchange for rezzing them (otherwise he would have forced them after they surrendered). Later, a good god undid the contract, freeing the PCs from their servitude in exchange for servitude to the good god - which the PCs found more binding and more irritating than when they had to serve the evil demigod. It was a whole campaign based on good vs. evil, black vs. white, and though it didn't require the TPK, once those PCs fought the overwhelming posse, I decided they had earned one.

I have never had an accidental TPK in 30+ years of DMing. I have never even had a TPK that happened unless it was specifically scripted to happen.

I see no reason for any DM to allow a TPK when it's not scripted, nor to worry about what to do after a TPK (if you scripted it, your script should handle the aftermath, and if you didn't script it, then don't have a TPK).


X51 wrote:
My group has encountered this problem many times. We have since started using a DM screen full time. The players don't want their characters to die and neither do you, especially if you have an investment in resources, contacts, etc. The screen is so you can fudge your rolls of course, so I hope you have a poker face or at least can fake one. If the party is doing so poorly that you can see your party laying in pools of their own blood, this is where the fudging begins. A critical fumble, or a series of missed attacks can save the day.

As a long-time DM, this is the way to go. The problem is the DM MUST AND ALWAYS be the arbiter of who lives and who dies. DMs must give their allegiance to the story, not always the characters.

In other words, the DM could at any time introduce an encounter advertently or inadvertently that could kill the entire party. Characters must die at certain times to remind the players that death is a part of adventuring and that they're taking real risks.

However, characters dying all the time is no fun. So the solution, as the DM, is to decide when character death is warranted.

Did the PCs make a critical mistake that results in an encounter too difficult for them? Kill off one PC, maybe chosen at random, to illustrate their error and let the rest escape.

Do the PCs approach the highly powerful evil creature's lair without some trepidation? Let the PCs win the day but kill off more than one PC to remind them of the dangers of the BBEGs.

If, like in some adventures, a certain encounter commonly results in a TPK, ask yourself, is it a good point in the story for a new batch of adventurers to show up and take up the cause? If the creation of new characters doesn't kill the flow of the plot, let it happen to make a dramatic statement.

And last but not least, NEVER, under any circumstances, play with people who get emotional about their characters dying.


I am running my players through "Children of the void" and we ended last session with every pc unconscious in the cave. I thought long and hard on would I should do next as I want to be true to the story and at the same time do not want a TPK. Fortunately we had a player who could not make it last session so his pc was left behind at the campsite. What I am going to do is this: I am going to say the absent pc along with some of Zinchers men followed the pc's trail to the caves; we are going to pick up the round after we left off the last session. Therefore; this will allow for a dramatic rescue attempt and also give said pc's another chance to make it out alive. Worked out great IMO.

Scarab Sages

Richard the Lame wrote:

Sometimes TPS's happen. Iv'e run games where it wasnt my intention to TPK the party, the mob was going to be tough for the group and they maybe might lose a couple members in the fight. Some unfortunate dice rolls on their part and some good dice rolling on my part really broke the fight. Like everything, real or not, Murphy's Law still applies.

What I've done to counter this random TPK encounter as a DM is to make a couple of contingency plans while I create the storyline or world. Here's a couple that I have used: 1. If they happen to be doing the whole good vs. evil campaign or quest, I might have a god's avatar extract them once they go down and give them the "your not high enough speech" or the "you have alot of potential and the gods want you to take care of something else for us".

2. Sometimes I'll have the players create new characters has a back up character. This way you already have characters made, although, you might have to level adjust before starting. A quest you can do with this is either start completely over or you can have this new party be the rescue party. Go in, get their bodies and bring them back to the church to get raised.

You could always do the Family Guy thing and have Spider Man swing down help out and then say, "everyone gets one, isn't that right Peter?"

Just kidding of course...one of the reasons I love Action points is they help counter that problem.


veector wrote:
X51 wrote:
DM screen, fudging die rolls, etc.
As a long-time DM, this is the way to go. The problem is the DM MUST AND ALWAYS be the arbiter of who lives and who dies. DMs must give their allegiance to the story, not always the characters.

Well said.

veector wrote:
In other words, the DM could at any time introduce an encounter advertently or inadvertently that could kill the entire party. Characters must die at certain times to remind the players that death is a part of adventuring and that they're taking real risks.

Mostly agreed.

A character dying once in a while reinforces the fear of the risks of adventuring.

A character dying once in a while encourages the players to be cautious, to think ahead, to plan their risk management in advance.

But this thread wasn't about killing just one character. Or even a couple, or even a few characters.

This thread is about TPKs.

A TPK only says "Hey, guys, I win! Wasn't that fun?" and encourages the players to find a new DM.

veector wrote:
However, characters dying all the time is no fun. So the solution, as the DM, is to decide when character death is warranted.

By killing a character, or maybe a couple of them. But not all, not a TPK, right?

veector wrote:

Did the PCs make a critical mistake that results in an encounter too difficult for them? Kill off one PC, maybe chosen at random, to illustrate their error and let the rest escape.

Do the PCs approach the highly powerful evil creature's lair without some trepidation? Let the PCs win the day but kill off more than one PC to remind them of the dangers of the BBEGs.

Ah, OK, then it seems we agree.

veector wrote:
If, like in some adventures, a certain encounter commonly results in a TPK, ask yourself, is it a good point in the story for a new batch of adventurers to show up and take up the cause? If the creation of new characters doesn't kill the flow of the plot, let it happen to make a dramatic statement.

If the answer you get from yourself is "Sure, this IS a good point in the story for a new batch of adventurers." then you had better talk to your players and see if they agree.

Remember, this is a collaborative story. The players are building the story too, through their decisions and their roleplaying and their investment of time.

Don't rob them of their contributions just because you arbitrarily decide it's a good time for new characters.

Get the players' input. Who knows, they might be tired of their existing characters anyway.

veector wrote:
And last but not least, NEVER, under any circumstances, play with people who get emotional about their characters dying.

That's a bit harsh.

I want my players to care about their characters. I wnat them emotionally involved in their characters' lives, theire adventures, their successes, their advancement, their place in the culture and history of the campaign I have created for them.

Players who don't care might as well be playing a video game. "Oh, I died? Well, let's load it up from the last save. Or, maybe, I'll just play some other game for a while instead. No big deal."

In my three and half decades playing tabletop RPGs, I've played in many campaigns under many DMs, and DMed many campaigns myself. I've gamed with at least a hundred players regularly, and maybe a hundred more in little one-shots in conventions and tournaments. I've seen lots of players who care about their PCs, and lots of players who don't (especially in one-shots).

Over all that time, it's been my consistent experience that those who care are much better roleplayers, much more involved in the story, much more willing to show up on game day instead of staying home with their Nintendo, much more willing to work out a schedule with their girlfriend or wife to make sure they can be there consistently, and much simply much more "with it". They might get sidetracked about the latest episode of Heroes for a moment, but they get right back to the game because they care about it.

On the other hand, those who don't care often don't bother to role-play, often do silly things like insult the king, or create silly characters so they can goof around when the other players are trying to enjoy the game. They often spend more time talking about the latest Adam Sandler movie or the latest episode of Battlestar Galactica than anyone else, excessively detracting from the game and taking up everyone's time. Their PCs die. They get other PCs killed. They goof around. And that's only when they show up. Since they don't care about the game, they often blow it off for a Halo lan-party, or whatever.

Sure, that's the extreme.

But I would rather have everyone at the table lean toward the picture I painted of the caring players than have any of them anywhere near the uncaring version.

I want my players horrified at the prospect of their precious PC dying, and doing everything they can to prevent that. If they do die, I want them to feel crushed, then elated when they are rezzed, then vengeful against whatever killed them.

I want to experience that when I play, and I want my players to experience as much of that as they're ready to handle when they play.


Maybe he means act in an emotional way in the negative sense. I have played with grown men who when something happened negatively to their characters they behaved like spoiled kids and stood up and threatened to leave. It is fine if they get emotionally attached and even saddened when their pc passes away but when they start acting like kids and threatening the DM, and I have seen this happen, then things are a little out of hand

P.S. And yes, the player in question was asked to leave and never to return again.


If you can guess what I would say to the concept of a TPK, award yourself a cookie. Lilith can send me the bill. :D

After a TPK ... well ... that's not really been discussed much here, more about how 'wrong' it is to see a TPK and so on. It takes real effort to wind up with a TPK in my experience. Take that how you will. :)


Another way to revive from a TPK, is to have everyone think they're all dead...

later they are all raised from the dead by a new contact...one they literally now owe their lives to...

I have a feeling I'm going to have to do this to my players at some point when we start one of the new APs...

First I have to strategically kill off their characters in Xen'drik so I can start a new AP in Golarion...or I suppose I could have some sort of fun effect that transports them all to Golarion...possibly to take up where their old characters just died...warforged in Golarion go from being weapons of war to a wondrous new invention...sentient contructs...now how do we build one of those??? let's take it apart and find out....MWUAHAHAHA

Liberty's Edge

Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:

Another way to revive from a TPK, is to have everyone think they're all dead...

later they are all raised from the dead by a new contact...one they literally now owe their lives to...

Tricky part about this one is that all the various ways to raise people specify that you know the name and the alignment of the person trying to raise you. You have to be pretty careful about how you handle that, or else you'll get a party full of people saying, "Thanks, but no thanks"...

Liberty's Edge

Erik Mona wrote:

It occurs to me that it might be a good idea to publish a module that handles "what do I do now" when a TPK wipes out the party, particularly if you, as the GM, didn't really want the campaign to end.

I think a lot of people would enjoy a module of this sort. I don't know, maybe it takes place in Pharasma's Boneyard or some sort of demiplane or something, but the idea behind it would be that if you survive this adventure, you somehow "aren't dead," and maybe get another chance to redo the encounter that wiped you out in the first place.

This is a grand idea. However, I agree with the critical issue and that is not being able to anticipate what level the heroes are at. Here are three possible ways to address it:

1. Adventure Hooks. Provide a short briefing on encounters and the path out, with perhaps some hints on how to provide encounters - threats that they should be able to defeat at each level.

2. Challenge of Champions. Instead of adversaries, have puzzles and challenges as the way out.

3. Three short adventures: low, medium, and high level. Pick a medium for each adventure and provide sidebars on how to increase or decrease challenge levels.

As I see it, the adventure should seem like a challenge but be nothing like what they faced in mortal life. Afterall, the point is that you want them to escape.

As an aside, I did this once for a player. His character died and we did a solo adventure that brought him from the fugue plane to gehenna. We didn't make it farther, but our goal was to have him traverse various planes and eventually return to the mortal realms at a level equal to his former allies.


DM_Blake wrote:
A TPK only says "Hey, guys, I win! Wasn't that fun?" and encourages the players to find a new DM.

I disagree. Sometimes TPKs are unavoidable. Why should players get any rewards if they made a colossal mistake or the bad guys are incredibly powerful? I feel like the flow of the story that the players must overcome EVERY SINGLE bad guy right at the moment that the bad guy makes an appearance is unreasonable. Reasonable players know that sometimes the bad guys win, and sometimes they win really big.

I never meant to suggest that the DM should be looking for ways to have a TPK happen, but if the players are aware of a danger, are unable or unsuccessful in avoiding danger, and a suitable story for new characters exists, then a TPK isn't a horrible thing.

And, as far as players caring about their characters. There's a difference between enjoying a character and getting emotionally involved with a character. Players who get overly emotionally involved with their characters are not good to play with in the long run unless their characters never die.


stuart haffenden wrote:

I'm running a second group through one of the AP's and they're approaching a well known possible TPK encounter. The first group survived...just, and I mean just! My question is what do you do when a TPK happens?

Having invested time with a group getting to know the locals from the base Town it would seem pretty much like game over if a TPK happens after 2 parts of a 6 part adventure path.

How do you guys cope with this situation?

If you're speaking of a certain clock tower, I have had this happen and can provide some specific ways of dealing with it.


veector wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
A TPK only says "Hey, guys, I win! Wasn't that fun?" and encourages the players to find a new DM.
I disagree. Sometimes TPKs are unavoidable. Why should players get any rewards if they made a colossal mistake

Why indeed. So they get no xp, no loot, no rewards. Worse, the monster rampages through town and eats the princess, and now the townsfolk blame the careless PCs who let it happen. They won't do business with the PCs and the sherriff asks them to leave town. Word spreads, and other towns don't trust the PCs either.

But you, the merciful DM, leave a trail of breadcrumbs for the PCs to discover a horrible plot that will unleash great evil in the region and the PCs are eventually able to redeem themselves as heroes.

veector wrote:
or the bad guys are incredibly powerful?

Uh, why would a DM create "incredibly powerful" bad guys and then force or encourage the PCs into a fight with these bad guys and then allow a TPK?

Make the bad guys something the PCs can handle. If not, give them obvious clues to find the weapon they need, or the ally they need, or whatever they need, so they can confront the "incredibly poerful" bad guys and win.

And if they blow it, miss the clues, ignore the allies, then see my previous response about the bad guys eating the princess.

veector wrote:
I feel like the flow of the story that the players must overcome EVERY SINGLE bad guy right at the moment that the bad guy makes an appearance is unreasonable. Reasonable players know that sometimes the bad guys win, and sometimes they win really big.

Reasonable players know this, and reasonable DMs provide tools (rumors, evidence, research) for reasonable players to know when they are outmatched and tools to level the playing field (magic, allies, or side quests that give them enough XP to level up) so they don't have to TPK.

Ultimately, if a DM creates an unbeatable encounter and railroads the PCs into a TPK, that DM is not reasonable at all.

And if the DM provides the necessary tools for the PCs to handle the unbeatable encounter and the PCs miss the boat or ignore the tools, well, I've already commented on ways to punish them without a TPK.

veector wrote:
I never meant to suggest that the DM should be looking for ways to have a TPK happen, but if the players are aware of a danger, are unable or unsuccessful in avoiding danger, and a suitable story for new characters exists, then a TPK isn't a horrible thing.

Aware and unable to avoid it is DM railroading, the worst kind of DMing, especially if it causes a TPK.

Aware and usuccessful in avoiding it is variable. Why were they unsuccessful? Bad playing? Punish them without a TPK (see above). Bad die rolls? Give them a non-punishing way, or lightly-punishing way out (see my prvious post with many ways to avoid a TPK). Why punish the players, punish the group, and waste everyone's time with a TPK because some dice rolled poorly?

Now, as I've said already, if the players agree that they want to move on, make new characters, and don't care if their current characters die or retire, then sure, maybe a TPK is a good campaign closer. But it's vital to get the players' on board before you wipe out their beloved characters.

veector wrote:
And, as far as players caring about their characters. There's a difference between enjoying a character and getting emotionally involved with a character. Players who get overly emotionally involved with their characters are not good to play with in the long run unless their characters never die.

I've alrady commented on this. Apparently you and I disagree.

For me, enjoying a character means emotional involvement.

Do I freak out when I die? Nope. Does it piss me off? Yep, but I handle it.

If it was my own fault, then I shrug it off and wait for my resurrection or roll a new character and call it a learning lesson.

If it was my DMs fault then I expect him to help me restore my character to life in a way that is non-punishing. That's what collaborative story telling is all about, player and DM working together to tell the story. Killing me for no reason means the DM's job now is to restore me to the story we're telling together.

If I find a DM who doesn't understand this basic concept, and many don't, then I teach him. If he's unwilling or unable to learn it, then I find a new DM. I don't have the time or inclination to spend weeks, months, years building a beloved character, only to have him ripped away from me by a careless or railroading DM for no compelling story reason.

And I certainly won't inflict that on my players.


DM_Blake wrote:
Make the bad guys something the PCs can handle. If not, give them obvious clues to find the weapon they need, or the ally they need, or whatever they need, so they can confront the "incredibly poerful" bad guys and win.

Just one point in particular.

If a TPK happens at the BBEG at the end of a campaign, it's pretty much a do-or-die thing. In that situation, the DM should provide an appropriate level of difficulty.

However, in other parts of a campaign, facing a powerful bad guy is sometimes part of the story and it's a part of the story in which the characters lose and/or MUST flee.

I sincerely believe that elements like this are necessary and part of every long-term adventure path because they tell the players "Hey, this is a real world, not a game world."

If the characters intentionally get in the way of the bad guy because they believe (metagaming) that every encounter is designed for them to be able to handle it, then they're really not playing well in the story.

I don't believe this is DM railroading because players ALWAYS have the option to flee UNLESS it's the very last encounter of the campaign.

In my personal opinion, and the way I enjoy playing the most, the characters are and MUST be part of a story that is dramatic. I feel that if the players believe they always have the capacity to overcome every encounter, that is not dramatic. Sometimes evil will win.

The Exchange

Erik Mona wrote:

It occurs to me that it might be a good idea to publish a module that handles "what do I do now" when a TPK wipes out the party, particularly if you, as the GM, didn't really want the campaign to end.

I think a lot of people would enjoy a module of this sort. I don't know, maybe it takes place in Pharasma's Boneyard or some sort of demiplane or something, but the idea behind it would be that if you survive this adventure, you somehow "aren't dead," and maybe get another chance to redo the encounter that wiped you out in the first place.

Or something.

The following problems present themselves:

1. It'd be impossible for the author to know what level the PCs will be when something like this is needed. The module would therefore need to be scaleable, which is frankly a pain in the ass for just about everyone involved.

2. The adventure ideas that spring immediately to mind recall things like Marvel Comics's "Contest of Champions" or other frankly pretty BS "challenges" set by some sort of extraplanar overlord. That sort of thing has the capacity to get real stupid real fast.

3. Maybe dead characters should stay dead.*

(*Sort of sucks when this happens and it isn't really their fault, though.)

I think this is rather doable, you make it midlevel and place a few changes for parties of higher or lower abilities and it coudl be liek any other planar module. You don't do it like challenge but rather a quest to find something important that then would grant you a free res if you want it. It also has to be something that has been lost before and can be lost again makign it a cyclical adventure. Maybe even have part of the scenerio dedicated to some random encounters and a large chunk of the design set forth for non combat encounters. Giving the players a chance to roleplay why they should be allowed back.


veector wrote:
DM_Blake wrote:
Make the bad guys something the PCs can handle. If not, give them obvious clues to find the weapon they need, or the ally they need, or whatever they need, so they can confront the "incredibly poerful" bad guys and win.

Just one point in particular.

If a TPK happens at the BBEG at the end of a campaign, it's pretty much a do-or-die thing. In that situation, the DM should provide an appropriate level of difficulty.

However, in other parts of a campaign, facing a powerful bad guy is sometimes part of the story and it's a part of the story in which the characters lose and/or MUST flee.

I sincerely believe that elements like this are necessary and part of every long-term adventure path because they tell the players "Hey, this is a real world, not a game world."

If the characters intentionally get in the way of the bad guy because they believe (metagaming) that every encounter is designed for them to be able to handle it, then they're really not playing well in the story.

I don't believe this is DM railroading because players ALWAYS have the option to flee UNLESS it's the very last encounter of the campaign.

In my personal opinion, and the way I enjoy playing the most, the characters are and MUST be part of a story that is dramatic. I feel that if the players believe they always have the capacity to overcome every encounter, that is not dramatic. Sometimes evil will win.

I mostly agree with this. And in my previous post I mostly agreed with it.

(here's what you said, and my reply):

veector wrote:


I never meant to suggest that the DM should be looking for ways to have a TPK happen, but if the players are aware of a danger, are unable or unsuccessful in avoiding danger, and a suitable story for new characters exists, then a TPK isn't a horrible thing.
DM_Blake wrote:

Aware and unable to avoid it is DM railroading, the worst kind of DMing, especially if it causes a TPK.

Aware and usuccessful in avoiding it is variable. Why were they unsuccessful? Bad playing? Punish them without a TPK (see above). Bad die rolls? Give them a non-punishing way, or lightly-punishing way out (see my prvious post with many ways to avoid a TPK). Why punish the players, punish the group, and waste everyone's time with a TPK because some dice rolled poorly?

I certainly don't encourage metagaming. If the players metagame their theory that all encounters are appropriately challenging to their level, then it's up to the DM to show them that they're wrong. Ideally, a good DM has been doing this all along, not just waiting for the players to make this mistake and then slap them with a BBEG and a TPK.

But I don't condone a TPK as a suitable punishment for metagaming in any situation.

I also agree with you that not every encounter should be suitable to the level of the PCs. PCs should get to squash the occasional low-level encounter so they feel that they've become heroic. Likewise, PCs should also run afoul of stuff way out of their league from time to time.

But, if you'll notice, in all literature, TV, movies, etc., when the story involves unprepared or underequipped heroes encountering prepared and powerful BBEGs, it's a very common motif for the BBEGs to just laugh, insult, and tell the heroes to run along and mind their own business rather than exterminating them. Alternatively, when it's a BBEG bent on extermination, there is always a way out for the heroes. They can then come back later, better informed, better prepared, and ready to kick butt.

Think how fun Star Wars (A New Hope) would have been if Darth Vader had killed Leia on the Tantive IV (the ship in the beginning where she's captured), then killed Luke, Han, and Chewie right after he killed Obi-Wan on the deathstar.

Those heroes came up against a BBEG they couldn't defeat. One was captured, but later escaped. The others (including the escapee) fled their first encounter with the BBEG.

Isn't that a far preferable way to introduce BBEGs, remind the players that they're not the top of the food chain, and slap them down and put them in their place, than just wiping them all out?


Sorry. I'm just not exactly sure where you're getting that I would use a TPK as "punishment". If the bad guys "CLEARLY" have the power to kill the characters, and the players press on regardless, then a DM should not be sorry for playing the bad guys to their fullest capabilities.

What I was not agreeing with is the fact that (if I understand your point correctly) TPKs are not an option that is considerate of the players. I disagree because if a DM is doing his job and giving enough clues as to consequences should a certain course of action be taken, the players really don't have the DM to blame. They can't just rely on the assumption that the DM won't kill everyone.

Liberty's Edge

veector wrote:

Sorry. I'm just not exactly sure where you're getting that I would use a TPK as "punishment". If the bad guys "CLEARLY" have the power to kill the characters, and the players press on regardless, then a DM should not be sorry for playing the bad guys to their fullest capabilities.

What I was not agreeing with is the fact that (if I understand your point correctly) TPKs are not an option that is considerate of the players. I disagree because if a DM is doing his job and giving enough clues as to consequences should a certain course of action be taken, the players really don't have the DM to blame. They can't just rely on the assumption that the DM won't kill everyone.

Killing the PCs will only make your players frustrated.

Having the bad guy beat them almost to death and let them knowingly escape because he does not care enough about them to consider them a threat makes them scared, ashamed and eager for a rematch once they improved their abilities. Far better a tool for roleplaying IMHO.

There is a reason why heroes usually never truly die : defeat and revenge provide far more story potential.


veector wrote:
Sorry. I'm just not exactly sure where you're getting that I would use a TPK as "punishment". If the bad guys "CLEARLY" have the power to kill the characters, and the players press on regardless, then a DM should not be sorry for playing the bad guys to their fullest capabilities.

You're right, you didn't use the word "punish" specifically. What you did say sounds a whole lot like punishment to me:

veector wrote:

Did the PCs make a critical mistake that results in an encounter too difficult for them? Kill off one PC, maybe chosen at random, to illustrate their error and let the rest escape.

Do the PCs approach the highly powerful evil creature's lair without some trepidation? Let the PCs win the day but kill off more than one PC to remind them of the dangers of the BBEGs.

"illustrate their error" sounds like "punish them for their error" and "remind them of the dangers" of approaching "without trepidation" sounds like "punish them for approaching without trepidation".

If that's not how you meant it, then I apologize for inferring incorrectly.

veector wrote:

What I was not agreeing with is the fact that (if I understand your point correctly) TPKs are not an option that is considerate of the players. I disagree because if a DM is doing his job and giving enough clues as to consequences should a certain course of action be taken, the players really don't have the DM to blame. They can't just rely on the assumption that the DM won't kill everyone.

Now you're on to something.

IF you've given them the clues, IF you know for a fact that the players are fully aware that they are horribly outmatched, and they still charge ahead, then it's likely they get what they deserve.

But, all too often, players do metagame a bit. They do believe that the BBEG is within reach or the DM won't let them charge into certain death.

Make sure you have disabused them of this metagamey misconcpetion, or they won't be pleased when you kill them off.

And even so, a final warning from the DM may still be in order. I would say something like this:

"Really, are you sure this is wise? Remember what you learned about this guy." (here I remind them of the clues they got about how powerful the BBEG is). "He's killed bigger heroes than you. And just so you players understand, if you deliberately put yourselves in over your head, I won't save you. I've already given you the knowledge you need to make life-saving decisions here. And if you make the suicidal choice, and the result is a TPK, you're going to have to roll new characters. So make sure you want to do this."

Well, something like that.

It's a collaborative story. If the players are being careless, or overlooking or ignoring vital information, then, in a collaborative effort, make sure everyone at the table, DM and players alike, are moving the story where you all want it to go. If suicidal risks are where you want it to go, then go for it, TPK or not. And if the players agree to a TPK before the encounter, then hand it out if they lose.

Collaboration for the win!


Believe me, I make it very clear to my players that if they get themselves into obvious danger, there is always the chance of a TPK. And usually after the first sign of serious danger, I give them plenty of opportunity to escape.

They know I will never kill any character unless there was a reason, and a good one at that.

I agree that the players ought to know that a DM is capable and has the potential to kill their characters. My players go into the story with that knowledge firmly seated and in my experience of gaming, I don't know of any players who don't want to play without the danger of character death. They know I don't do it hastily and they know that I'll give them fair warning (through hints, not overt warnings) that something is dangerous.

I don't think I would enjoy playing with people who wanted me to always keep the gloves on.


I can't recall having run or playing in a TPK, but two of my fondest memories from playing second edition were combats where the party was one die roll - made in the open - away from failure and a probable TPK. We won (though half the party died in one of those), but if I had felt that the GM would have fudged things so that we couldn't have lost, for me that would have cheapened those victories.

I partially agree and partially disagree with DM Blake. Conan gets his bacon saved by Valeria at the end, but the fight where two stood against many is cheapened if the two know that somehow, the GM will find a way to keep them from dying. I know that negotiated TPKs are OK with DM Blake - I think that some gaming groups run with a campaign-wide "We accept that a TPK is a possibility" agreement.

Some of the discussion on the page is coming from different Gamist/Narrativist/Simulationist perspectives. In other words, some GMs prioritize 'the way the world works' over 'the game', and some prioritize the other way. There's nothing wrong with either preference; they're just different styles.

My suggestion for a different way of handling a TPK - offer the players a chance to "reload from a saved game". Restart to the beginning of the fight (or before it, if it's a fight they "should" have skipped) and try it again the next week. If the players were "off" that week, or they didn't realize how much the paladin losing his powers at the last minute would affect the combat, they can adjust. It's jarring to character immersion, but IMHO not any more so than having a god save their bacon.

Contributor

There are a number of easy solutions for a TPK. One is for everyone to be raised by a higher level band of adventurers who happen upon the bodies and are wanting better intel than a "Speak with Dead" would provide. Another is for them to be bailed out by some high level NPC mentor or sponsor with access to a properly worded Wish.

Another is to simply say that all wands/staves are capable of a "retributive strike" in the right conditions, and a nearby goblin has found a Staff of Life....

Then there are some more interesting scenarios. Having the Fates offer a do-over if they succeed in some otherplanar challenge is a fun option. Another is for a friendly necromancer to offer a "Heaven Can Wait" scenario where their souls are transmigrated into other people's bodies and lives. Or this can be accomplished with an psychopomp ingenue.

PSYCHOPOMP INGENUE: Resurrection for Lord Ruthven! Is there a Lord Ruthven in the Vestibule?
PC: Why, uh, yes. Yes.... I'm Lord Ruthven....
PSYCHOPOMP INGENUE: Oh, good! It's my first day on the job....

They always talk about how resurrection can be bad magic, and sometimes people come back wrong....

Dark Archive Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games

eirip wrote:

Maybe he means act in an emotional way in the negative sense. I have played with grown men who when something happened negatively to their characters they behaved like spoiled kids and stood up and threatened to leave. It is fine if they get emotionally attached and even saddened when their pc passes away but when they start acting like kids and threatening the DM, and I have seen this happen, then things are a little out of hand

P.S. And yes, the player in question was asked to leave and never to return again.

We've got a guy in our group that always throws a fit whenever his character dies. Bear in mind, this is the same player who has his PC split off from the party so he doesn't have to share treasure, so it happens quite a bit. We've been playing with him for 10+ years, and he's got a pattern down:

1. Look of complete shock that his character died.
2. Asks DM to check die results.
3. Blames DM for creating overly hard encounter.
4. Pleads with DM for a "re-do"
5. Screams expletive (usually something like "This is BullS**t!")
6. Crumples up character sheet and throws it across the room.
7. Storms upstairs to have a cigarette.
8. Returns to the table and pouts until his character is raised.
9. Complains if the party cannot afford a True Resurrection and he has to lose a level.
10. Vows that he is done with D&D and that he will not be back for the next session (even though he's back for the next session each time).
11. Wait a few sessions, then repeat.

It's actually quite comical, now...


Larry Lichman wrote:
eirip wrote:

Maybe he means act in an emotional way in the negative sense. I have played with grown men who when something happened negatively to their characters they behaved like spoiled kids and stood up and threatened to leave. It is fine if they get emotionally attached and even saddened when their pc passes away but when they start acting like kids and threatening the DM, and I have seen this happen, then things are a little out of hand

P.S. And yes, the player in question was asked to leave and never to return again.

We've got a guy in our group that always throws a fit whenever his character dies. Bear in mind, this is the same player who has his PC split off from the party so he doesn't have to share treasure, so it happens quite a bit. We've been playing with him for 10+ years, and he's got a pattern down:

1. Look of complete shock that his character died.
2. Asks DM to check die results.
3. Blames DM for creating overly hard encounter.
4. Pleads with DM for a "re-do"
5. Screams expletive (usually something like "This is BullS**t!")
6. Crumples up character sheet and throws it across the room.
7. Storms upstairs to have a cigarette.
8. Returns to the table and pouts until his character is raised.
9. Complains if the party cannot afford a True Resurrection and he has to lose a level.
10. Vows that he is done with D&D and that he will not be back for the next session (even though he's back for the next session each time).
11. Wait a few sessions, then repeat.

It's actually quite comical, now...

LoL, now this guy, yeah, I would fudge a few rolls now and then to deliberately kill him, just to watch the histrionics.

Sovereign Court

Okay I figured I'd just not say anything, but while it is a collaborative story, it is also a game. If a tpk happens that the dm didn't fudge away it is not anyones fault. Its a game, sometimes you loose games, yeah it sucks to get so far with a character and have it all be for not, but that's the way it goes. Make new characters, and see if you can beat it this time. Or if the group doesn't want to start over, well guess what nothing is stopping you from picking up at the start of the adventure with the same characters if that's what your group wants to do, or do the you arrive as a party in the realm of the dead and have an adventure to come back to life, heck there are so many ways to handle a TPK that saying, they should only happen at the DMs choosing is a bit of a cop out in my opinion. I personally wouldn't want to play in a game where TPKs could only happen by DMs choice. Heck I'd almost say play without a DMs screen, but I do think the occasional fudge is called for. As a player I want there to be tpk just because the dice were against us one day. that's what the dice are for, thats why its a roleplaying game, and not just roleplaying.


What we do when there is a TPK, is hit the reset button. LOL. Yeah, if it is just one of those things where everyone dies and they were doing good and all that stuff, we just hit reset. Say, hey lets try that part one more time. Then I just "reload" from the PC's last "save point". Which is usually like the last safe zone, town, or whatever they were in. However, this works for my group which is nothing more than a group of friends getting together and talking crap. Seriously, we roleplay, but we spend more time out of character talking to each other than playing our characters. So, rules, powergaming, etc goes right out the window. This may not work for all DM's or all players, but we have only had 1 TPK ever and thats what we did. We just restarted the whole dungeon. Lame, I know, but everybody was happy and that's all that matters is if everyone has a good time.


Larry Lichman wrote:


We've got a guy in our group that always throws a fit whenever his character dies. Bear in mind, this is the same player who has his PC split off from the party so he doesn't have to share treasure, so it happens quite a bit. We've been playing with him for 10+ years, and he's got a pattern down:

1. Look of complete shock that his character died.
2. Asks DM to check die results.
3. Blames DM for creating overly hard encounter.
4. Pleads with DM for a "re-do"
5. Screams expletive (usually something like "This is BullS**t!")
6. Crumples up character sheet and throws it across the room.
7. Storms upstairs to have a cigarette.
8. Returns to the table and pouts until his character is raised.
9. Complains if the party cannot afford a True Resurrection and he has to lose a level.
10. Vows that he is done with D&D and that he will not be back for the next session (even though he's back for the next session each time).
11. Wait a few sessions, then repeat.

It's actually quite comical, now...

I'm very surprised he is still in your game..........Yeah, it was funny at first with this guy but it got to be a big headache after awhile, especially when he started to threaten the DM.


I have played in games where the GM would never let the party lose big time. Sure some players died or were captured but it was a viable tactic to just plough ahead knowing eventually you would win. We would metagame around the fact that our victory was inevitable- try and pretend that we were risking losing the war but really we knew we werent. It was fun, but a bit dull.

I have also played in a game where the GM rolled important dice in front of us, where sometimes we all lost. Where TPK's happened. Victory in these games was truly something to be cherished. Dont get me wrong he wasnt a killer DM, the encounters still were such that if you played right and the dice didnt conspire against you the odds were strongly in your favour but sometimes you didnt- then you lost. He did have a rare reroll rule if the dice absolutely sucked.

The principal espoused by the latter GM was that being an adventurer you took big risks for big rewards(treasure, defeat of the Lich King etc)- if in fact the risks were negligible then you are just getting big rewards--that edge is missing.

I am more the latter than the former. I keep a bunch of TPK avoiders up my sleeve but these are secret and I would not allow more than 1 every 4-5 levels (these are as mentioned by an earlier poster- I have used 'crusading Paladin leading religous adventuring team arrives just in time' and 'evil henchmen betrays bad guy, stabs him and swipes his staff'), I stretch out close combats to give the PC's an extra round or two to get that miracle roll and I fudge every now and then but essentially when the characters win they have performed the deed themselves.

As for the original posters question- I like it that the world keeps turning rather than a reboot. A reboot is too PC game for me. The bad guy loots the dead PC's and feeds their bodies to his crocodile- the DM has to come up with some other reason why new PC's are on the case. What does the bad guy do next?- does he have to get new mooks? spending precious PC treasure, does this involve attracting the PC's attention?

Scarab Sages

All the smug posters, saying TPKs never happen in THEIR games; that all encounters are totally balanced...I don't believe you.

Every session I've ever seen is riddled with TPK after TPK, as one group after another is lured to their deaths, tricked into facing opposition who have all the advantages...

<off-stage whisper>

0_o?

Oh, sorry. You're talking about PLAYER characters?
Oh well, forget I spoke, then.

Sovereign Court

The whole point of GM screens is so that players don't see your rolls.

If you're showing your dice, change that now.

Et voila! No more TPK. Because your allowed to lie to players about what you rolled. No, scratch that.

You're supposed to lie to the players about your rolls.


veector wrote:


If you're speaking of a certain clock tower, I have had this happen and can provide some specific ways of dealing with it.

Oh yes the clock tower!

SPOILER
.
.
.
.
.
.

My second group are approaching said tower. The first time I DMed this encounter I used some ideas I'd picked up in a different thread. I used the statue of the angel and the fact that the supports for the roof were not looking all the great [Perception DC 20 or Knowl. Arc/Eng DC 15]. Luckily the PC's were experienced players and they used this info to squish the lamia....just! My second group are not so experienced and I fear some serious fudging will be required.

Fudging on the whole is ok to keep a game going and to prevent TPK's but as others have pointed out, sometimes, even with all the will in the world, the PC's just do stupid things and "saving" them doesn't promote learning, or good play in the long run.

Personally I think the best option is to allow stupid player's the opportunity to learn through character death, but to try not to let that develop into a TPK.

Thank you all for your input, experiences and thoughts.


Ok so heres an example:

The party was in second darkness, they wanted to go off track and do something that wasnt even covered in the module write up (which honestly should have been).

It was kinda stupid and suicidal.

Longstory short they ended up battling a CR20 at level 9, without the party rogue who was off "scouting".

what actually happened is the sorceress ended up using a wall of ice to break off contact and allow the party to retreat.
(didnt do any dice rolling just allowed it all to happen)

Would the Cr 20 have wiped them out? More than likely. The monk couldnt hit its ac. The fighter didnt have enough AC NOT to get hit and was down to 30 HP. and the spellcasters big spells hadnt but barely damaged it (lots of SR and DR).

What would I have done if they were wiped out? Easy, there are baddies out there that are enemies with other baddies and this fight wouldnot have gone unnoticed. Said baddies would have bartered for the bodies, raised themand questioned them in prision, all the while there would have been some chance for them to escape without their gear of course.

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

We were running through RotR, and reached towards the end of Fortress of the Stone Giants

Spoiler:
We were in the corridor outside the Library, and had summised that McMurrion would be in the library, because the doors were all inner-sanctumny. We decided to sweep everything else, and ended up in the fight against the Hounds. Things were going a bit slowly, and our TWF ranger was in a bit of trouble, and we hadn't seen that there was a door at the other side, so decided to lock the things in and deal with the later once we'd beaten McMurrion. So, we go to the doors, release the Shining Child and all loose our eyes. We manage to GDM it away, and our Cleric Heals his eyes back. We summise the Hounds must have the Key to this door, and go through, to find McMurrion's room. We ended the session there, as it was clear what was going to happen. We decided that that would be the end of the characters, but tried to take him in a set fight with our eyes back. He beat us (I survived, if only because I got Baleful Polymorphed.

We made a number of mistakes, and it lead to our deaths.


Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:

Another way to revive from a TPK, is to have everyone think they're all dead...

later they are all raised from the dead by a new contact...one they literally now owe their lives to...

I have a feeling I'm going to have to do this to my players at some point when we start one of the new APs...

First I have to strategically kill off their characters in Xen'drik so I can start a new AP in Golarion...or I suppose I could have some sort of fun effect that transports them all to Golarion...possibly to take up where their old characters just died...warforged in Golarion go from being weapons of war to a wondrous new invention...sentient contructs...now how do we build one of those??? let's take it apart and find out....MWUAHAHAHA

Well, do you want Eberron and Golarion to be on the same plane or not? If they're not, a quick plane shift is all it takes. A plot along the lines of "<insert evil group> from <insert plane> is building an army to invade the various material planes" could be the hook. The party defeats a group of demons or whatever, goes through the portal they came from, and fights a bunch more on the other side. The portals start failing, including the Eberron one, and the only one left to take is the Golarion one. The rest writes itself.

Alternatively, if they are in the same plane, then you could do some kind of space travel story. I'd look into Spelljammer or Dragonstar for ideas for that.


We just had a similar situation like this, but it was that we had had two member deaths in as many sessions, and one of our players new characters almost died in his second session out. It's up to you(the DM), or your DM if youre a player, what happens. In this case the player really liked his new character(and so did we, he was productive and funny instead of his usual hijinks). The DM fudged up some stuff and since it was a tomb consecrated with holy power the avatar of a god chose to hold him in the clutches of death(but not heal him in any way) and give our cleric a chance to save him. It worked, everyone was happy, and not too much obvious bullshitting was required. Maybe even one of your players makes it out and forms a rescue party? Anything to avoid an unsatisfying TPK IMO...

Dark Archive

My thoughts are thus:

Player deaths happen, and when they do stupid things, they get what's coming to them.

But sometimes, in some APs or modules, they encounter situations where they can try as hard as they can to survive, but they will all probable die anyways.

In these cases, call a quick break, maybe a BR break or take a break for smokers. Then, collect your thoughts on how you want to work it out. Ask yourself some questions, like "How are my players going to handle ultimate failure (TPK)?" or "Do I want them to fail?" ask yourself these questions because ultimately, its not just your game, its your players.

If you have to, you may have to "vote some characters off the island" so to speak, to enforce the deadliness of the encounter. Or, look at it as a way to fudge die rolls and make the character that usually doesn't have a chance to be a hero shine. That guy with the crazy ideas that the rules don't support therefore the ideas don't pan out? Well today, that guys saves the day, one of his ideas finally work.

But, telling them they died "just because the module says so"? You may be right, because you're a DM. Just remember, only a DM without any players is always right.

Liberty's Edge

Jared Ouimette wrote:
Just remember, only a DM without any players is always right.

Truly a quote for the ages.

I would like to add a quote from a recent Punisher issue : "You punish the guilty, Franck. Not the stupid."

Something which can sour players' moods even further is when the TPK happens because of stupid actions by one or 2 characters, with the rest of the party being just collateral damage.


Werecorpse wrote:


I have played in games where the GM would never let the party lose big time. Sure some players died or were captured but it was a viable tactic to just plough ahead knowing eventually you would win. We would metagame around the fact that our victory was inevitable- try and pretend that we were risking losing the war but really we knew we werent. It was fun, but a bit dull.

While I have argued against allowing TPKs, I never meant to imply that this kind of metagaming should be allowed. In fact, a couple posts back, I specifically said so.

No, if I as a DM have given the players the knowledge to know they shouldn't barge into the lich-king's crypt, and they still want to do it, I'll give them one warning. Something like "You know you've been told this lich-king is way too powerful for you. Are you sure this is the best plan for you right now? Because you could easily end up generating new characters before the day is over." and if they still go, then the TPK is on them - they knew what would likely happen.

Werecorpse wrote:
I have also played in a game where the GM rolled important dice in front of us, where sometimes we all lost. Where TPK's happened. Victory in these games was truly something to be cherished. Dont get me wrong he wasnt a killer DM, the encounters still were such that if you played right and the dice didnt conspire against you the odds were strongly in your favour but sometimes you didnt- then you lost. He did have a rare reroll rule if the dice absolutely sucked.

I agree with this. Death should be a risk. And for it to be a real risk, it must be possible.

I don't mind killing a player or two if the dice roll that way. No, probably not with every random wandering monster, but certainly for the BBEGs and other critical encounters in a story. Bad luck hurts everyone from time to time.

I also don't mind killing a player or two if they plan poorly or use crappy combat tactics. Lesson learned, I hope.

But a TPK is vastly different. Losing everyone, killing the entire campaign (or restarting with new characters picking up where the old ones died) is a huge step, and not to be taken lightly.

TPKs because of bad die rolls? Never.

TPKs to punish bad or metagamey players? Never.

TPKs because the players were warned and charged in anyway, knowing a TPK was imminent? Sure.

TPKs because the players are tired of their current characters and have said so, and it seems like an interesting story line to kill them off? Sure.

But, never, never, never on accident.

At least that's my DMing philosophy.

Werecorpse wrote:

The principal espoused by the latter GM was that being an adventurer you took big risks for big rewards(treasure, defeat of the Lich King etc)- if in fact the risks were negligible then you are just getting big rewards--that edge is missing.

I am more the latter than the former. I keep a bunch of TPK avoiders up my sleeve but these are secret and I would not allow more than 1 every 4-5 levels (these are as mentioned by an earlier poster- I have used 'crusading Paladin leading religous adventuring team arrives just in time' and 'evil henchmen betrays bad guy, stabs him and swipes his staff'), I stretch out close combats to give the PC's an extra round or two to get that miracle roll and I fudge every now and then but essentially when the characters win they have performed the deed themselves.

That's fair enough, though you and I seem to disagree a bit about our willingness to save our campaigns and ongoing story from pure randomness or player oversights.

Werecorpse wrote:
As for the original posters question- I like it that the world keeps turning rather than a reboot. A reboot is too PC game for me. The bad guy loots the dead PC's and feeds their bodies to his crocodile- the DM has to come up with some other reason why new PC's are on the case. What does the bad guy do next?- does he have to get new mooks? spending precious PC treasure, does this involve attracting the PC's attention?

Given that everyone at the table understands that they've chosen to have a TPK, either by design or by their own disregard for my warnings, and given that they want to remain in this campaign rather than start a new one, then yes, I always work their new characters into the existing story somehow, and I would tie it to the dead PCs and/or the events that lead to their deaths in some way.

Maybe the new PCs can be the mooks, and either choose to serve the BBEG (evil campaign) or were duped and didn't know he was evil, but they find out and begin to plot against him.


I have never had a TPK, but I have come close. When I get to sit at the table as a player I have always been smart enough to run away, reassess the situation, and come back later. If my players can't do the same I should feel no pity for them. There may be situations where they can't run, but those are rare.
This does not mean I won't fudge dice, but the players should not know you are saving them, and you should only save them from bad dice days, IMHO. If the party has tactics issues dying is a good teacher.


wraithstrike wrote:

I have never had a TPK, but I have come close. When I get to sit at the table as a player I have always been smart enough to run away, reassess the situation, and come back later. If my players can't do the same I should feel no pity for them. There may be situations where they can't run, but those are rare.

This does not mean I won't fudge dice, but the players should not know you are saving them, and you should only save them from bad dice days, IMHO. If the party has tactics issues dying is a good teacher.

I agree, sometimes the PC's need to judge whether a fight is the best option. Sometimes talking is best and sometimes running is best. Some players find the running option very difficult to take.


I am DMing my first adventure, the Kobold King. It is meant for four characters. I have two players, one inexperienced playing a fighter, and the other, experienced, playing two characters, a druid and a barbarian.

So, with no cleric they were never fully healed after they went under the surface. They were barely surviving (with me fudging cure lights and mod potions in loot)

Because they leveled so quickly (being only 3 PCs versus 4), and the loot in the mod, they had a lot of money and not a lot of healing. They couldn't just go back to town to buy better gear, wands of cure light, etc.

They TPKed at the end with many bad rolls on their part and the inexperienced character, the only one could speak with the kobolds, not disclosing a vital part of the last encounter.

Spoiler:
She learned of the human bane axe, in a party with two humans and a half-elf, didn't mention it, and they barged in, full melee. ... They never got past Merlokrep. So Hollin died and the PCs' siblings are going after their bodies. Luckily the children were left upstairs with the bard (who retreated after being almost dead from the "cauldron-elevator" trap) I rolled their likely survival and all of them got back to town, a week later.

The next group (relatives of the old PCs) has a cleric and I used a different stat-rolling method, so a TPK isn't as likely. The experienced player is trying to help me through this, because the only time my characters have died in his games were: 1) an epic game, where a cohort had true ressurections to spare, and 2) the "holiday" game, which is full of crazy games, occasional PC deaths, and god interventions.

1 to 50 of 90 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / General Discussion (Prerelease) / TPK's - Where next? All Messageboards