I feel the Coup de Grace should be used only in extreme circumstances or where it fits a mindless enemy, whether we are talking regular play or PFS play, and for intelligent enemies I feel it should not be used unless it is noted in their tactics block. But aside from all that, GMs that seem to get a kick out of killing PCs quickly make onto my list of GMs I will never play with. Sure, deaths happen, but it should be because of player error and not because of a GM's bloodlust.
|
I've created a monster!
This thread has gone in many different directions, and apparently all at once.
It is also clear to me that some people don't actually read entire posts before commenting.
=-=-=-=-=
I wish I had never posted what happened. For one thing, I didn't have all my details strait (thanks Tom for hashing and re-hashing how it went down to clearify. I felt you did nothing wrong and I now also know it with certainty.) And for another thing: Most of the posters are focusing on how the character died instead of whether or not "CDG" should or should not be limited.The facts are in, so the opinion of whether or not the GM's actions were wrong no longer matter. His actions were in the legit.
As for his motives: He told me his motives but I wont share them because they contain spoilers.
Also, everyone who thinks I'm crying over this lost character: I'm not. I felt a little shock and found I was a little attached to the character, but I'm a big boy and I can handle it. I just couldn't handle it if a GM was using this sort of thing abusively and thought it should be discussed.
I thought about answering the questions about the stats of my character, but decided it would be off topic. This wasn't meant as a pity party, or a player tactics discussion. I wanted to discuss whether or not NPCs should use this tactic when ever possible, or if there should be some rule that says they should try to kill or disable the standing PCs first.
=-=-=-=-=My concern is/was (which someone stated in a form far better than I had) that this sort of thing could be abused. It certainly can be a party killer.... Apparently there are a lot of party killers in the game, and oh well: So be it.
=-=-=-=-=
As for my opinion on the topic (since I started it): I don't like to kill player characters before they reach level three. (In home brew games.) I am generally more forgiving to new characters and new players when it comes to these sort of things.Here are some questions I think help bring...
As I understand your question, It is whether or not an NPC should use Coup De Grace or other instant kills against helpless pc's. I would say it depends on the situation.
I did have Count Strahd Von Zarovich kill an unconcious PC with a spell in the Ravenloft module because the PC in question was a cleric and the group would have brought him back in the combat after the next round. I did this because the group had three paladins, a cleric, a wizard and a rogue. Strahd had hit them with numerous area effect spells and the cleric plus paladins just healed the damage every round. After the combat went on for over an hour real time I was convinced that the vampire felt truly threatened by the party and was taking desperate measures to survive. My cousin was annoyed at first but soon understood that the vampire viewed him in a similar matter as a pc would have viewed a troll. The PC had to be taken out so that he just didn't auto heal and continue fighting. There are certain situations where a monster needs to take a PC out and Coup De Grace is a viable means to do that. If the rest of the party leaves a pc vulnerable to this tactic then maybe the group needs to review their tactics and watch over each other better. LE villians may see this tactic as unfair and shy away from using it unless absolutely needed but CE & NE villians as well as CN & N villians should have no compunctions against deploying shady or underhanded tactics agains the PC's. They are villians after all.
|
Personally I do not have any problem with the CDG rule and think it should remain in PFS.
The CDG rule is as much a storytelling element as it is a combat rule, if not more so.
The problem with "bloodthirsty" GMs really has nothing to do with the CDG rule. If a GM wants to off a character that can easily be accomplished without CDG. One thing is the GMs ability to fudge rolls, but also knowledge of the scenario and normal tactical combat options can often accomplish the same as a CDG.
CDG has a distinct dramatic flair and when that adds to the story the GM should use it. For instance if a character is going to die from bleed in the next round regardless of other players actions the GM can end the PCs life with a more dramatic CDG, than just having the character bleed out in the mud.
If a GM has a serious problem with a player that cannot be solved in a rational dialoge, he should just have the player leave the table, rather than kill the character anyway. I am sure most players would respect such a decision far more than the execution of an anoying player's character.
SO! The problem is not with the rule. If there is a problem it should be settle off-game.
Venture-Captain, Arizona—Tucson
|
Since clerics can drag multiple downed fighters back from the brink through channeled energy, foes who realize their full power are likely to finish off downed opponents rather than risk having them pop back up to fight again.
Having said that, many foes able to understand that risk can also see the benefits of not killing their foes. The Pathfinder Society can be a formidable enemy, and has been known to send heavily armed teams of bloodthirsty killers (e.g.: PCs), slaughtering those who trouble its leaders. Although we tend to think of the Society as generally benevolent explorers, several PFS adventures clearly show its dark side.
Alternatively, captured PCs can be held for ransom or sold as slaves. Dead bodies don't keep well, but prisoners can be held for days or weeks, handy when some monster gets hungry. WE know that the PC is likely to escape, but a semi-intelligent monster may underestimate his fallen victim's abilities.
|
|
Since clerics can drag multiple downed fighters back from the brink through channeled energy, foes who realize their full power are likely to finish off downed opponents rather than risk having them pop back up to fight again.
This is the reason I've houseruled a delay in waking up from unconscious to my home games. No other rule has saved more PC lives.
I guess, I've been impressed with the amount PFS GMs don't have baddies use CdG when they probably should tactically (to prevent an incapacitated PC from rejoining the fight and turning the tables). For instance, from a tactical perspective, ghouls are incredibly inaccurate creatures with a low save DC paralyse that doesn't last very long--the only thing they have going for them is that when someone rolls low against the paralyse DC and fails it, they can coup de grace and extend that to a bit more...permanent of an effect. Ghouls that don't ever coup de grace downed party members and just focus on whoever is still awake are rarely going to be an actual threat except in manic numbers (after all, there's probably someone in the group with high AC and excellent Fortitude saves that they aren't going to be able to take down--I'm looking at you, Paladin). That said, they are only a CR 1, but at the least, adventures like The Skinsaw Murders seem to think that they are dangerous in numbers to higher-level PCs.
I'm not out for blood as a GM, but my PCs know that the ghouls will coup de grace any paralysed targets, and that brings a little bit of the horror back to these undead horrors--they're still not very frightening, but the possibility of the failed save and the killing blow brings back the element of danger.
|
|
Here's my take on PC death in organized play: If I am the GM and I am introducing players with 1st level characters to this campaign, the quickest way to chase people away from the system is to kill their PC. I just wasted 4 hours of their time and of mine. Do players want to participate in a game where there's no risk of their PC dying? Most do not. But there are a lot of ways that PCs can die without the GM being the one who flips the switch.
At the end of the day the reason that Paizo created Pathfinder Society is to draw in more players and sell more product. This is accomplished by providing high quality entertainment that keeps people engaged in the game and looking forward to more. If you are trying to help this campaign grow, then you need to think about why people play in the Society. It usually isn't to watch the GM trash their 1st level character that can't afford a Raise Dead. There's time enough rack up a body count when PCs hit the tier 5-9 stuff. At the low levels I entertain the players and try not to deliberately kill their PCs no matter all the chances they give me.
If a 1st level PC dies at my table, it was the dice that killed them, usually a crit (and not from a CDG). I am not condemning GMs that use appropriate, realistic tactics against low-level PCs. I am just saying, what are you trying to accomplish? Entertainment? Word-of-mouth advertising? A reputation? Your time is valuable. You might spend as much time preparing for the game as it takes you to run it. If the players never come back to your table because of a negative experience, what have you accomplished?
Director of Brand Strategy
|
I'm not really interested in including a list of tactics an NPC won't use, as that list will always be much larger than the list of what they do use in a typical situation. A GM is not a robot, and when presented with a set of tactics, should be able to deduce from those and the NPCs' backstory as given in the scenario what other tactics he might use if he can't, for whatever reason, "stick to the script."
|
Here's an interesting scenario I came upon this weekend on a CdG-like set of actions.
During the theater fight, you have a crap ton of zombies, some with zyphus rot, fighting the PCs. These zombies are basically being sent to kill and turn the dead into zombies.
Now, I'm relatively soft on players I don't know as well, especially low level ones. But I almost had a couple of deaths...and I felt I "needed" to do it. And honestly, the players were with me on it. I had a witch at the table get down to 1 hp, got healed for 1 hp, then the next round, the zombie took off like 4 or 5. Boom, one witch, bleeding and unconscious.
Now, normally, I would leave him be and go after the next one. But for Among the Living, I felt I had to keep trying to eat him...and I told him this as a metagame comment (only because he was low, otherwise I would have made someone roll a religion check) so he would understand what was going to happen. Luckily for this particular time, someone took out the zombie.
So, my point? I don't really have one, just sharing that sometimes deaths happen, and tactic-wise it even makes sense. Should you be an ass and simply kill off a PC, especially low-level/first-timers? No, in fact I try to avoid it with game mechanics or RP ideas as much as possible...but it is going to happen.
|
Here's an interesting scenario I came upon this weekend on a CdG-like set of actions.
** spoiler omitted **
I agree with your actions because the undead is mindless. It's not unreasonable for them to continue attacking even after the target is down. The only caveat I would use, is if/when someone else damages that zombie while it's feeding, its attention is now been diverted to a new target and it should attack its attacker. This might help avoid a character death while still keeping a high level of fear and creepiness. I would also rule that since the zombie would essentially be using a bite attack while feeding, it would not do its normal slam damage, instead 1d3+Str, and may even provoke an AoO since it does not have Improved unarmed strike. Just my 2cp
*snip*
I don't play in organized play (never got into it, and it's not really big in my area, but I'd like to try it), but much of what you're saying sounds kind of whiny to me.
My players have regularly encountered groups of NPCs sporting adepts. Y'know, those little CR 1/3 npc classed characters sporting DC 14 sleep spells at low levels. They've took on a whole mob of enemies, and half the party was dropped by round 2, but there were no casualties because the party members who were awake woke them up (since you're allowed to do that by either inflicting some damage or using a standard action).
Your dwarven fighter gets a +2 save vs spells on top of his wisdom. If you dumped wisdom, then you were asking to get hosed by sleep. If you think Sleep is bad, try Colorspray (like getting knocked unconscious, blinded, and stunned, dropping all your gear? Do ya? :D).
Trying to get Coup De Grace and Sleep more or less banned seems silly to me. Why not ban greatswords? I mean, an orc with a greatsword can completely destroy a mage a 6 hit point wizard in one fell swoop. Elves are immune to sleep, so banning it also steals something from their immunities.
You should really meet a pack of orcs wielding glaives and a potion of enlarge person. I think it would make you feel much, much better about sleep. :D
The encounter as described could be either jerking or ok, depending on what chances the PCs had to detect it beforehand.
If they entered a ruin without any description of what they may face and pretty much no chance to prepare for it, it is off.
Basically it is the same as the GM saying "as you enter the ruin you drop dead!".
But if they neglected several warnings and refused to take advantage of adequate counter measures than yes, harsh but fair.
CdG itself has a very important role - the "don't come nearer or I kill the (helpless) hostage" ploy which usually isn't doable without CdG.
|
|
Surprise Round
Witch: begin casting sleep.
Guards: move to block easy access to witch/move adjacent to party.
PC (Andrinor): Ranged attack (ray of frost) on witch (success); witch succeeds concentration check.First Round
PC (Tyrth): attack nearest guard, misses
Witch: finishes casting sleep; spell takes effect
Guard: delivers coup de grace.
I apologize for bringing this thread back to the specifics, but I was compelled by this situation and, being a new GM myself, am a bit concerned about the lethality of it (i.e. "open the door and die!").
It seems to me that Tyrth could have delayed an action, to slap people awake if they succumbed to whatever clearly-bad mojo the witch was brewing, especially with the guards up-close-and-personal to do some harm. That does seem a bit meta-gamey though. If there's more to this that I'm missing then please fill me in.
|
|
I apologize for bringing this thread back to the specifics, but I was compelled by this situation and, being a new GM myself, am a bit concerned about the lethality of it (i.e. "open the door and die!").
It seems to me that Tyrth could have delayed an action, to slap people awake if they succumbed to whatever clearly-bad mojo the witch was brewing, especially with the guards up-close-and-personal to do some harm. That does seem a bit meta-gamey though. If there's more to this that I'm missing then please fill me in.
It would have been meta-gamey. Tyrth is a fighter and wouldn't delay his action to see whatever bad mojo the witch had brewing. Although, if the party had a quick thinking caster who identified the spell and announced it, this action might make some sense. For all he knew it was a defensive spell, a buff, or perhaps a summons. In any case, his job is to hack through the witch's bodyguards so she can be engaged directly. The issue mostly came down to the fact that this was a low-tier game where a single die roll is live or die. The defensive nature of the witch is clearly smart tactically and you cannot predict how many PC's will miss/make the save. But it could be just as bad if the minion gets a lucky crit and max damage. That would drop most 1st level and many 2nd level PC's.
|
|
It would have been meta-gamey. Tyrth is a fighter and wouldn't delay his action to see whatever bad mojo the witch had brewing. Although, if the party had a quick thinking caster who identified the spell and announced it, this action might make some sense. For all he knew it was a defensive spell, a buff, or perhaps a summons. In any case, his job is to hack through the witch's bodyguards so she can be engaged directly. The issue mostly came down to the fact that this was a low-tier game where a single die roll is live or die. The defensive nature of the witch is clearly smart tactically and you cannot predict how many PC's will miss/make the save. But it could be just as bad if the minion gets a lucky crit and max damage. That would drop most 1st level and many 2nd level PC's.
Thanks! And it gives me some perspective.
Btw, in response to something said way upthread, 1st and 2nd level characters dying is to be expected! That's part of the thrill of starting off relatively weak, longing to get more powerful. I wouldn't have it any other way! :)
I think what a few people are forgetting here is that the DM *role-plays* the PC's opponents in line with what they would do.
Just because the NPC uses lethal tactics, it doesn't mean the DM's a douche, it means that the NPC is intelligent.
If you come up against an animal (or low intelligence npc's), then obviously they won't use such tactics.
One final note, in the OP it was said that the party bunched up, even tho the OP advised against it. Sometimes you just have to suffer the consequences of bad tactics. Best way to learn IME.
P.S. My characters have been CdG'd in the past, repeatedly. You take it on the chin. And i learnt not to make Wis a dump stat!