|
I know I saw a similar thread a couple months ago but, what is the general attitude towards this situation?
Here's the situation:
BBEG is surrounded by three PCs and an animal companion. One character is very hurt the others are moderately hurt. This is tier 8-9.
The BBEG's turn comes. He has a claw/claw/bite attack routine.
Judge: Claw #1 hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: Okay, I'm down.
Judge: Claw #2 hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: Um, okay. I'm more down.
Judge: Bite hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: ...okay. I'm more down.
The very hurt character is obviously very dead. He is level 6. The others are 7, 8 and 8.
Has anyone else experienced a judge that ran their game like this? What would you do in this situation? Would you play with this judge again?
I know I saw a similar thread a couple months ago but, what is the general attitude towards this situation?
Here's the situation:
BBEG is surrounded by three PCs and an animal companion. One character is very hurt the others are moderately hurt. This is tier 8-9.
The BBEG's turn comes. He has a claw/claw/bite attack routine.
Judge: Claw #1 hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: Okay, I'm down.
Judge: Claw #2 hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: Um, okay. I'm more down.
Judge: Bite hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: ...okay. I'm more down.
The very hurt character is obviously very dead. He is level 6. The others are 7, 8 and 8.
Has anyone else experienced a judge that ran their game like this? What would you do in this situation? Would you play with this judge again?
It makes sense to focus all your attacks on one character. To play it any different is coddling. The BBEG should then focus the rest of his attacks on whoever he think is easiest to take down next. I would definitely play with such a judge or GM. I want to earn my victories, not have them handed to me.
I am not a PF judge yet, but it is something I consider looking into, but if I am expected to let people walk away alive then I may not do it.
|
Depends; has the downed PC shown any tendency to bounce back to his feet, via fast healing, or is there a cleric stood nearby keeping living PCs in the fight via positive Channels?
If not, I would have moved to a different opponent after the first one dropped, but some people like to make sure.
Maybe the GM was brought up in the style of 'you decide all your targets before you roll' (which I've seen a lot in the last 30 years). Maybe he actually thought he was being kind to the group; better to kill one PC and leave the others capable of winning, than split the attacks, and drop everyone before they can possibly beat him?
|
|
It makes sense to focus all your attacks on one character. To play it any different is coddling. The BBEG should then focus the rest of his attacks on whoever he think is easiest to take down next. I would definitely play with such a judge or GM. I want to earn my victories, not have them handed to me.
I am not a PF judge yet, but it is something I consider looking into, but if I am expected to let people walk away alive then I may not do it.
Well this was sort of a PFS specific question but any input is helpful.
You expect DMs to focus on one target until that target is definitely dead? If you do decide to pick up the PFS judge mantle I would suggest letting players at your table know that before they sit down.
It makes sense to focus all your attacks on one character. To play it any different is coddling. The BBEG should then focus the rest of his attacks on whoever he think is easiest to take down next. I would definitely play with such a judge or GM. I want to earn my victories, not have them handed to me.
I am not a PF judge yet, but it is something I consider looking into, but if I am expected to let people walk away alive then I may not do it.
Well this was sort of a PFS specific question but any input is helpful.
You expect DMs to focus on one target until that target is definitely dead? If you do decide to pick up the PFS judge mantle I would suggest letting players at your table know that before they sit down.
To be more specific it depends on the enemy I am using... After rereading your post I would have stopped after the character dropped. Attacking a downed character is wasting an attack roll that could go against a surviving and credible threat. It is also malicious, which is why I would not play an enemy that way unless the module specifically called for it.
|
|
Depends; has the downed PC shown any tendnency to bounce back to his feet, via fast healing, or is there a cleric stood nearby keeping living PCs in the fight via positive Channels?
Nope, the only healing any of the characters has used is a potion of Cure Light Wounds.
If not, I would have moved to a different opponent after the first one dropped, but some people like to make sure.Maybe the GM was brought up in the style of 'you decide all your targets before you roll' (which I've seen a lot in the last 30 years). Maybe he actually thought he was being kind to the group; better to kill one PC and leave the others capable of winning, than split the attacks, and drop everyone before they can possibly beat him?
No, the party was obviously going to win. The danger to the party overall was moderate at worst. The only thing focusing a downed character was going to accomplish was killing a character.
Depends; has the downed PC shown any tendnency to bounce back to his feet, via fast healing, or is there a cleric stood nearby keeping living PCs in the fight via positive Channels?Nope, the only healing any of the characters has used is a potion of Cure Light Wounds.
No, the party was obviously going to win. The danger to the party overall was moderate at worst. The only thing focusing a downed character was going to accomplish was killing a character.
If not, I would have moved to a different opponent after the first one dropped, but some people like to make sure.Maybe the GM was brought up in the style of 'you decide all your targets before you roll' (which I've seen a lot in the last 30 years). Maybe he actually thought he was being kind to the group; better to kill one PC and leave the others capable of winning, than split the attacks, and drop everyone before they can possibly beat him?
The DM may have been upset that the BBEG got his butt handed to him. I can't really say without knowing the module though. I would try to find out if the villain would act in such as a manner as opposed to submit, even if the party would not give him quarter, before getting upset at the DM. I do understand losing a character is not a small thing, but it is a risk. Do you have any information on what the particular BBEG woul do? I am asking because the DM is supposed to run BBEG's with written to a great extent, as opposed to a home game, since every player is supposed to have the same experience.
Would you mind spoilering the title of the module?
|
I know I saw a similar thread a couple months ago but, what is the general attitude towards this situation?
To me it depends first on the tactics block of the monster in question. Sometimes it'll say something like 'turns his attention to another PC.' Sometimes there is nothing there to help and you really have to gauge the intelligence of the monster and the tactics of the situation.
And of course, sometimes GMs take unhealthy ownership of a monster and are just plain bloodthirsty.
I'd be interested to know the mod as well just to have a peek :)
|
I know I saw a similar thread a couple months ago but, what is the general attitude towards this situation?
Here's the situation:
BBEG is surrounded by three PCs and an animal companion. One character is very hurt the others are moderately hurt. This is tier 8-9.
The BBEG's turn comes. He has a claw/claw/bite attack routine.
Judge: Claw #1 hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: Okay, I'm down.
Judge: Claw #2 hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: Um, okay. I'm more down.
Judge: Bite hit AC XX for YY damage.
Very hurt character: ...okay. I'm more down.
The very hurt character is obviously very dead. He is level 6. The others are 7, 8 and 8.
Has anyone else experienced a judge that ran their game like this? What would you do in this situation? Would you play with this judge again?
Hmm. a few questions.
1) Previous to this particular point in time, had the DM been splitting attacks? Or were all iterative attacks generally against the same target? (I personally tend to roll all my iterative attacks at the same throw with multiple D20's, against one opponent, whether I'm playing a PC or as DM.)
2) From your description, you had a very hurt character who also happened to be somewhat out-of-subtier in melee against the BBEG. Given that it was the BBEG's swings, had that character had any opportunity to withdraw from melee on his own turn? If so, then why was he still in the fight? In fact, if you had 2 other PC's and an animal companion surrounding the BBEG, then why wasn't the lower level character protected by the party?
3) Did the very hurt lower level PC happen to be the owner of the animal companion? I know many DM's who will specifically target an animal companion's owner, especially with any monster that is intelligent or wise enough to evaluate the situation. In taking out the AC's owner, you also take out the AC. It's the much more efficient attack.
4) The party level is 29/4=7.25. This places you in the capability of playing either 5-6, or 8-9. The chances of player death while playing up are considerably higher than playing down. Did any conversation take place at the table about this possibility?
5) Given that the lowest player at the table was the one who died, did anyone offer to contribute to his Raise Dead? Or did the table just leave him hanging? If nobody at the table contributed, then I guess my question about the situation would be, if it were you, would you play with this group again?
General comments:
A) The monsters are trying to kill you. If they aren't then you are simply grinding through levels. You might as well be gold farming, or whatever.
B) If the tactics that you use leave you open to dying (being the lowest level character, very injured, and still in melee), then complaining about dying seems petty.
C) I recently had a character go from full hit points to fully dead in one iterative attack, while staying at the back of the party trying to stay out of melee. (BBEG came from behind and took me down.) I had an animal companion, and the best strategy for the BBEG was to take me out to take my formidable AC out as well. Given the 8-9 tier, I could pay for the Raise Dead from my treasure and still have a couple of gp left. (No, nobody offered to kick in. I accept that convention play is like that. At store play, I've kicked in on one player's raise dead.) I don't fault the DM for playing BBEG's as big and bad and EVIL.
D) As I said before, I generally roll my iterative attacks all at once against a single opponent. I wouldn't fault anyone else for doing so. If the DM was rolling separate attacks and splitting them previously, and for this one attack sequence deliberately kept hitting you after you were down, then I would ask the DM privately what might have sparked a change in his normal behavior.
|
...there is no reason to be an ass as a judge and keep killing a "dead" character
...*unless* the character in question is a gnome, then by the Supreme Will of the Posters on these Boards, said gnome should be continued to be beat upon until and dead again...and then continued to be beat upon.
In essence, the Judge should treat said gnome like these forums treat the topic of "replay", shown no mercy, and beaten to un-life.
YMMV.
-Pain
|
|
I know I saw a similar thread a couple months ago but, what is the general attitude towards this situation?To me it depends first on the tactics block of the monster in question. Sometimes it'll say something like 'turns his attention to another PC.' Sometimes there is nothing there to help and you really have to gauge the intelligence of the monster and the tactics of the situation.
And of course, sometimes GMs take unhealthy ownership of a monster and are just plain bloodthirsty.
I'd be interested to know the mod as well just to have a peek :)
I add to this. Animals have different tactics than intelligent monsters, etc... An intelligent monster may focus on the threat at hand, moving from the downed player to the next in an effort to eliminate the most threats. where as a rabid animal may continue to maul the downed character. without spoiling there is an encounter that gives the tactics for a group of wild animals to attack the weakest PC in a party level 4-6 encounter. this would be a level one caster 90% of the time. the animals could easily with initiative run past the warriors and down the wizard or priest in light armor on the first round. said tactics could really hinder a party fast especially since this was the opening encounter. but it is what they would do. one instance of player kill does not make a bad gm. it happens.
that said, if i as a coordinator saw a lot of angry dead players over several sessions. I would probably have a talk with said GM to find out if there was any way he could tone down the lethality a bit. angry players do not fill future tables.
|
I would not play an enemy that way unless the module specifically called for it.
I agree. The only time that I make monsters continue to attack is if they are mindless and are only there to get food. Then they may continue to hit the downed guy or possibly grapple and attempt to carry off, that sort of thing. As mentioned, any attacks on a downed character is less attacks on viable threats.
I have another question that is similiar.
How do most of you handle the following.
Character A is the only PC in range of the BBEG.
The BBEG has 3 attacks. He knocks the PC unconscious on his first attack, would most of you continue to use his two remaining attacks on the unconscious PC because no one else is in range?
Personally, I've always just stopped attacking a character once he drops to the ground.
|
|
I have another question that is similiar.
How do most of you handle the following.
Character A is the only PC in range of the BBEG.
The BBEG has 3 attacks. He knocks the PC unconscious on his first attack, would most of you continue to use his two remaining attacks on the unconscious PC because no one else is in range?
Personally, I've always just stopped attacking a character once he drops to the ground.
Unless the monster is unintelligent, I would probably move him into a better tactical position. If unintelligent and something that would eat the PC, I have them try and drag the PC off. It definitely ups the stress level to see one of your fellow PC's being dragged off to be lunch for some monster. :)
I have another question that is similiar.
How do most of you handle the following.
Character A is the only PC in range of the BBEG.
The BBEG has 3 attacks. He knocks the PC unconscious on his first attack, would most of you continue to use his two remaining attacks on the unconscious PC because no one else is in range?
Personally, I've always just stopped attacking a character once he drops to the ground.
If I am playing an intelligent enemy I stop swinging and use my move action to close on the next target. If I am using a zombie or other mindless enemy I have no way to know if the target is dead or not so I keep swinging.
PS:I don't do this all the time. Every once in a while I throw the players a bone, but mostly if it is for the story in some way such as the boss fight is around the corner, and I don't want the party to be down a member when they fight the boss.
If it was a summoned demon and it was sure of losing this battle, I am pretty sure I would drag one down with me.
Also it seems all the attack were made at once and the DM didn't convert the rest of the attacks in automatic hits, so it seems the dm was of the opinion the attacks all happening more or less at the same time.
From a cinematic point of view I often make all my attacks at once especially with a brutal aggresive opponent, I will describe it like the character goes down in a single swing of it's mighty claw.
I would not have a problem with a DM playing without kiddy gloves as long as it doesn't appear to be happening out off spite or illogical.
|
I know I saw a similar thread a couple months ago but, what is the general attitude towards this situation?To me it depends first on the tactics block of the monster in question. Sometimes it'll say something like 'turns his attention to another PC.' Sometimes there is nothing there to help and you really have to gauge the intelligence of the monster and the tactics of the situation.
And of course, sometimes GMs take unhealthy ownership of a monster and are just plain bloodthirsty.
I'd be interested to know the mod as well just to have a peek :)
I agree with Mark, for me it very much depends on the creature itself and what types of tactics seem plausible.
If the BBEG is a rather unintelligent animal, like a wolf or owlbear, once the target has stopped moving (and the "threat" ended) it would turn its remaining attacks to another percieved threat.
If the BBEG is highly intelligent and tactically oriented,say perhaps a devil, then sometimes it makes sense to make sure the downed hero, STAYS down.
And sometimes the creatures are just vindictive. For example, if the heroes are fighting orcs who have an especially strong reason for hating dwarves (perhaps theres a war going on), then the orcs may be especially cruel against Dwarven PC's.
For me its all about the creature and its motivations.
I admit through, Sometimes it can be coddling. I tend to wear "kids gloves" when Dm'ing new players, especially at Pathfinder events. I want them to have a fun and exciting time, so they enjoy themselves and return. Having a goblin run around and slit the throats of unconscious and dying low level PC's is definitely not a good way to get return players.
|
|
Call me lazy, but I don't have the time right now to read this whole thread. I'm going to guess and say this was Heresy of Man part 2? If it is, then yes, the GM was playing the creature correctly.
There are very specific creatures that exist with motives beyond just self preservation. In the case of ghuls and ghouls, every creature they kill comes back as another ghul or ghoul. If it's a greater ghul, then the ghul's he creatures become his new minions, so it's in the greater ghul's interest to kill, not knock unconcious.
Additionally, you have to consider that your character is living in a world with positive energy channeling and spells that can bring creatures back from the brink of death. If the creature is intelligent, then why wouldn't they finish the job with one threat before moving on to the next. It's not like the creature is going to do a heal check before making its next attack.
Yes there are times where it makes sense to take your iterative attacks on the next standing creature. Yes there are times as a GM that I've taken pity on a character and not used my iterative attacks to finish the job.
But I have to ask the question: If you didn't want to get killed by the claw/claw/bite(and rend) of this creature, why go toe-to-toe with it? Why give it a full attack?
That bone-headed strategy kills more players than any spell in the game. In a tier 8-9 game, you should never stay base to base with anything (except the gnome sorcerer).
|
|
[I tend to wear "kids gloves" when Dm'ing new players, especially at Pathfinder events. I want them to have a fun and exciting time, so they enjoy themselves and return. Having a goblin run around and slit the throats of unconscious and dying low level PC's is definitely not a good way to get return players.
I find myself often doing the same thing, but one has to wonder if it's kids gloves that leads to these higher level problems? All too often I find players playing the level 7+ stuff and dying because they don't learn that it's not a good idea to just run up and swing your sword. Or they're surprised that their empowered scorching ray isn't enough to bring the creature down (or even take it past half its hit points).
I'm a firm believer that the kids gloves mixed with a heavy dose of poor/easy going GM's, leads to a lot of frustration at higher levels with a GM that refuses to wear the same gloves for a level 8 character.
|
|
If I am playing an intelligent enemy I stop swinging and use my move action to close on the next target.
But not if you've already decided to take a full attack action, right?
I see this happen a lot too. Someone decides to full attack something, kills it with the first swing, and then wants to do a move action.
|
|
Unless the monster is unintelligent, I would probably move him into a better tactical position. If unintelligent and something that would eat the PC, I have them try and drag the PC off. It definitely ups the stress level to see one of your fellow PC's being dragged off to be lunch for some monster. :)I have another question that is similiar.
How do most of you handle the following.
Character A is the only PC in range of the BBEG.
The BBEG has 3 attacks. He knocks the PC unconscious on his first attack, would most of you continue to use his two remaining attacks on the unconscious PC because no one else is in range?
Personally, I've always just stopped attacking a character once he drops to the ground.
I want to repeat this one, you can not move more than 5-ft after taking a full attack action, even if you kill the creature on your first swing.
In this specific case, you could also switch to non-lethal for the 2nd and 3rd attacks. That would make it harder for them to come back from the dead, but would also keep you from killing the character.
|
|
Call me lazy, but I don't have the time right now to read this whole thread. I'm going to guess and say this was Heresy of Man part 2? If it is, then yes, the GM was playing the creature correctly.
Nope. Wrong module.
Yes, previously the creature was splitting its attacks.
The creature in question was insane and thought itself immortal.
Just a comment: I've also been in a situation in a PFS game where the bad guy was obviously going to lose, so he tried to take a helpless PC with him (out of spite -- whether the GM's spite or the NPC's spite is up for debate). There was a significant amount of grumbling at the table over that one. Fortunately, he provoked an AoO from his coup de grace attempt and was taken down before he could kill the PC, so a potential player revolt was quelled.
I have mixed feelings on the issue.
|
|
I have another question that is similiar.
How do most of you handle the following.
Character A is the only PC in range of the BBEG.
The BBEG has 3 attacks. He knocks the PC unconscious on his first attack, would most of you continue to use his two remaining attacks on the unconscious PC because no one else is in range?
Personally, I've always just stopped attacking a character once he drops to the ground.
I would use the two remaining attacks on the PC if I declared that I was already doing a full-round attack, especially if there is no one else there.
|
I want to repeat this one, you can not move more than 5-ft after taking a full attack action, even if you kill the creature on your first swing
This is true, but does not mean you are required to take all of those attacks, even after the target goes down. IMO, there are very few instances, in scenarios, where it makes sense to continue to beat the snot out of a PC after it goes down.
|
|
Something for everyone to keep in mind here, is that yes, it's often left up to the GM's opinion of how that creature or NPC would handle that situation.
I agree and think that a GM should rarely, if ever get questioned on his in-game decisions, unless they violate a known PF rules or PFS guidelines. However, I still think that, in most instances, it is a bad experience for a player when they die from what appears to be GM vindictiveness. Despite having died twice myself, I do not hold the GM's responsible.
|
|
IMO, there are very few instances, in scenarios, where it makes sense to continue to beat the snot out of a PC after it goes down.Something for everyone to keep in mind here, is that yes, it's often left up to the GM's opinion of how that creature or NPC would handle that situation.
Kyle, I'm reading this and am confused on a couple of points .. given that some monsters are intelligent -- but would they still know or have knowlege of channel healing? What intelligence level would one assign to an NPC to have them be intelligent enuf to consider a PC still a threat after they have gone down.
The way I look at it, is once the PC falls, they no longer present a clear and present danger to the NPC and so the NPC would exlude them from the realm of the attackable.
|
|
I want to repeat this one, you can not move more than 5-ft after taking a full attack action, even if you kill the creature on your first swing.
This is NOT true. Page 187 of the Core Rulebook under the Full Attack section states that "After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending
on how the first attack turns out ..."|
|
Kyle, I'm reading this and am confused on a couple of points .. given that some monsters are intelligent -- but would they still know or have knowlege of channel healing? What intelligence level would one assign to an NPC to have them be intelligent enuf to consider a PC still a threat after they have gone down.
The way I look at it, is once the PC falls, they no longer present a clear and present danger to the NPC and so the NPC would exlude them from the realm of the attackable.
What DC knowledge religion check would you assign to a player to know about the existance of healing spells, including channeling positive energy? 5? 10? It's about as common knowing there exist magic users who can throw around fireballs.
As an intelligent BBEG, you should assume that a band of adventurers crashing your party has these things available to them.
With regards to the threat of an unconcious but possibly dead character, it's situational. That's the best I can say without specific, in the moment, examples.
For example, I'm a BBEG surrounded by three fighter types. One of them is doing significantly more damage than the rest who can barely even hit me. Yes, I'm going to make sure the heavy damage dealer doesn't get back up.
If they're all hitting about the same, then it's more likely that I'll move on to the next one, but even that is dependent on the tactics the party has already used or the tactics presented in the stat block.
|
|
This is NOT true. Page 187 of the Core Rulebook under the Full Attack section states that "After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out ..."
Let's quote the entire thing if we are going to quote.
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack:
After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the f irst attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
|
|
This is NOT trueHmmm, forgot about that myself. Got caught up in the discussion. Goes a long way to explaining why Kyle has the "killer GM" reputation he currently enjoys ;-)
Actually, the topic of Kyle as a "killer GM" came up with some of the folks at CONNooga this weekend. They scoffed at the idea of this reputation and exclaimed how Kyle has yet to kill them. I wait to be impressed with this title myself when I appear at Gencon this year.
I must say there was one person, though, who said they had gotten killed by Kyle.
Unless the monster is unintelligent, I would probably move him into a better tactical position. If unintelligent and something that would eat the PC, I have them try and drag the PC off. It definitely ups the stress level to see one of your fellow PC's being dragged off to be lunch for some monster. :)I have another question that is similiar.
How do most of you handle the following.
Character A is the only PC in range of the BBEG.
The BBEG has 3 attacks. He knocks the PC unconscious on his first attack, would most of you continue to use his two remaining attacks on the unconscious PC because no one else is in range?
Personally, I've always just stopped attacking a character once he drops to the ground.
I want to repeat this one, you can not move more than 5-ft after taking a full attack action, even if you kill the creature on your first swing.
In this specific case, you could also switch to non-lethal for the 2nd and 3rd attacks. That would make it harder for them to come back from the dead, but would also keep you from killing the character.
Has that changed ? in 3.5 I recall you could still decide wether you were going to take a full attack or not after the first attack.
page 187 of the core rule book:
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After
your first attack, you can decide to take a move action
instead of making your remaining attacks, depending
on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have
not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve
already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action
to move any distance, but you could still use a different
kind of move action.
|
|
From the sound of it the DM did wrong
IMO, the info to make that decision is not available. Just because there are other PC's, even if they are within reach, does not mean that a GM "did wrong" by ensuring the death of a potential enemy. While I tend to lean away from this tactic (in most cases), I am not going to question the GM's decision that it was the correct thing to do. Interpreting the motivations/tactics of enemies beyond what is listed in their stat block can be a tricky thing. Sometimes, the player's actions warrant such responses, especially by the BBEG. Heck, most BBEG use their underlings as cannon-fodder against the PC's. Why would they have any hesitation to take out a "do-gooder?"
If I am playing an intelligent enemy I stop swinging and use my move action to close on the next target.But not if you've already decided to take a full attack action, right?
I see this happen a lot too. Someone decides to full attack something, kills it with the first swing, and then wants to do a move action.
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
edit:I was ninja'd
This post is not a judgement of the GM in question, as I feel we do not have enough evidence to decide whether he was being vindictive or intentionally trying to kill off a character. However, I will say that I dislike greatly, and will not play with, those DMs/GMs/Storytellers/Referees/etc. who feel that the only way they can have fun is to try and kill the PCs or who feel that they have to "Win" the game and that it is GM versus PC, especially when they are running a published module or scenario and not something they personally wrote to match the way they run a game, and especially in an Organized Play environment. Scenarios for OP are supposed to be run as close to the way they are written as possible and not warped to match the way someone may normally run their home games, whether this would be more viciously or more kindly, though I think it would be better for the GM to err on the side of kindness rather than viciousness and vindictiveness if any deviation in needed.
|
|
Well, as someone who was at that table when it happened, I feel like I should comment. I think the OP is not just upset about the death. The judge didnt really know the rules in general and when called out on it(even when rulebook was consulted) just rule against the player since made the combat harder. That and the fact that the judge used a digital dice roller(tech version of rolling behind a screen) made for a frustrating game.
Its one thing to finish off an AC when it was the only creature in range(which the dm also did, claiming that i can always replace my AC). But when the BBEG had 3 other hurt PCs in range and chose to instead kill the downed/not a threat anymore pc, we were all a little upset. I appreciate it when people dm for me, but the fact that the dm didnt know the rules, was stubborn about it, and seemed like he/she was out for blood, that I do not appreciate. It wasn't even smart tactics neccesarily as there were other targets that were heavily injured by the creatures opening Horrid Wilting. It just seemed malicious