I may have killed my game

[dragonfire8974]

so I started a DND zombie apocalypse game, and there was a small rebellion beforehand so the zombies could spread in the midst of the chaos

the party of 4 level 10 pcs against a level 12 2handed fighter who had higher stats than most (2 30s this is at the end of item and racial and stat increases due to levels) in an attempt to allow him to deal enough damage to be a threat and absorb enough damage to stay around a couple rounds.

pcs have max HP, gain a stat point every even level, and have an avg of 14-15 in their base stat sets without racial or item modifiers

what got them killed is that i had two non-threatening golems that two damage dealers attacked, the scout engaged the group without the rest of the party, and the tank attempted to hold off the bbeg, but 3 crits later and he was gone.

so what i'm asking is
1) should i attempt to continue the game? this is a zombie apocalypse and this specific type of zombie in the city is intelligent, so the pcs can come back reasonably

2) should i have fudged the combat? i'm really sad that this probably killed a game I really was going to enjoy running, but the characters should've been able to beat the baddie if they had actually attacked him instead of going one at a time. horrible tactics and bad decisions lead to a TPK, and that makes me think it needs to stand, but that's certainly going to kill my game after the first session. I don't know what to do

[TOZ]

I think you've got a great hook to continue with, having the party rise as intelligent zombies. It could take your game in a whole new direction.

I think if you wanted him to be tough, buffing his stats and the like, then it's only fair to accept he might kill the party. I think with the zombie angle it should be just fine.

[cranewings]

This is a matter of taste. Personally I despise games where the GM fudges roles so he gets the outcome he wants. The points of stats and dice is that you don't know what is going to happen. The ability to have a TPK during game one is a feature, not a bug. If you take that away, there is no game at all. All you are left with is a system of stats used to compare characters in theory, and a never needing attempt to trick your players into believing the stats matter.

If you saw a comic tomorrow that said Superman died? No? They kill characters too often, bring them back, and gave up their fear and credibility. The second your players think that their dice rolls don't matter because they know you will cheat to get the outcome you want, they won't care about the outcomes of individual actions.

Lots of people like games were stats and dice don't matter and you just tell one another what happens, but then why bother with all the stats and dice in the first place then?

[Shizzle69]

The bad tactics are most likely because this is the first game. They started at 10th level. There's a lot of damage and hitting going on there and they haven't really worked out their preferred way to avoid it. Roll up an even bigger baddie( maybe a zombie legend they've been hearing about) then have them all die. Wake from a dream holed up in some abandoned building and the guy who died first in the dream is on watch. I dunno tell them out of game to shape up and move on.

[st00ji]

this has happened from time to time in games i've played in. we typically laugh heartily at our retardation, and roll up new characters.

if they are new players as suggested above, then starting at level 10 is probably not ideal.

[Kastle28]

The best piece of advise i can give you is to go and talk with your players. The game is just as much theirs as it is yours. Get your party to make new characters, ones that were either family or friends to their now dead, and hopefully zombified bwhahahaha, counter parts. That way their new character have a motivation of revenge and/or justice plus it will allow them a great opportunity to role play out putting their old characters to rest. Which is a great hook as mentioned earlier! The biggest thing is to get them to sit back down and play again.

~kastle

[Twigs]

Are you satisfied with it? Has it reached a decent (if unexpected) conclusion? Would your players want to pick it up or would they prefer a change of pace/setting?

I think that latter one is important. You seem divided whether to take it or leave it, and you're bound to have fun either way. But ask yourselves if you'd rather pick up the pieces or embark on another grand adventure. Exotic markets, high seas scuffles, simple goblin troubles or a crusade into hell itself! The world (or tabletop) is your oyster!

My first (and still current) campaign has jumped all over the place. My GM runs about four games per year with different characters, each (supposedly) converging somewhere down the line. It's made for some fun times.

[dragonfire8974]

thanks y'all. i generally hate killing pcs so i feel especially guilty

but yeah, luckily my game is a filer for when one of our other gms is absent, so i have plenty of time to talk to those involved and check things out.

[Eldran]

dragonfire8974 wrote:

thanks y'all. i generally hate killing pcs so i feel especially guilty

but yeah, luckily my game is a filer for when one of our other gms is absent, so i have plenty of time to talk to those involved and check things out.

You could always turn the desaster into something positive. In this case the "death" could be the starting point for the real campaign. The characters are now zombies ... ok ... but intelligent ones.

A) Some special circumstances cause them to keep not only their wits but also most of their personalities. Now they can continue the campaign and thwart evil's plans from within (infiltrate the enemy and find out what the cause of the zombie infestation really is).

B) They can choose to change sides, play out their personality changes and be the vanguard of the zombie army in the fight against heroes, armies and all that stands in their way (or their masters... whoever those may be).