RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
shadows kill by draining strength [quote: Strength damage(su): A shadow's touch deals 1d6 points of strength damage to a living creature. This is a negative energy effect. Acreature dies if this strength damage equals or exceeds its actual strength score]
RCW was a very nice GM and spared his pally player... bad GM :P
Going to have to remember this next time, considering how many times shadows show up. The bad thing was is that I actually had the creatures printed out in front of me at the time. More PCs have probably survived because trying to remember all the little things.
I need to get me an assistant GM. You know, to check the rules for me and get me snacks.
This is honestly a great thing to have in some games. During my game of Eyes we had someone sitting out assist with combat, math, and resource finding throughout the game. They were a great help in the more complicated fights, as well as looking up obscure spells, rule interactions, and monster statistics.
I've replicated something similar with some of my senior players during games, promoting them to Pathfinder Buddies when I have newer players. I've also seen similar things take place at multitable gaming events, where assistants helped relay information to a head GM (what PFS would call an overseer), that accelerated an 18 participant combat greatly.
I also think that having budding GMs sit behind the screen of those more experienced would be a great way to both learn how it's done and help out with the game.
Actually, now that I've said all this, I think I'll institute a pilot program like this in my area and see how it goes.
|
This is honestly a great thing to have in some games. During my game of Eyes we had someone sitting out assist with combat, math, and resource finding throughout the game. They were a great help in the more complicated fights, as well as looking up obscure spells, rule interactions, and monster statistics.
I need to get me an assistant GM. You know, to check the rules for me and get me snacks.
I have only one PC death in the 20+ tables I've run, but it was early in the scenario, so I invited him over to the other side of the screen (metaphorically, since I don't use a screen). He was great in looking up rules for me, and I asked him to choose which spells enemy spellcasters would cast from time to time.
|
|
As 1 star GM I have have 3 deaths, 1-in-4 on average. 1 during rise of the runelords (poor rogue), 1 during confirmation (I fudged the dice number way down, but crit hits from that large battle axe hurt 1st level players), and 1 during mask of the living god(that barbarian razimiran priest just decided to murder a ranger.)
|
I remember 3 individual and 1 TPK (+4) in around 190+ tables. I did prevent 1 TPK by allowing a perception check to find a secret door during the last encounter and to go 0PA and run instead of fight on (the secret door actually is there but part of the 'development' after the fight).
I once had someone live through a wrong ruling - Thornkeep - level 1 don't survive even of they make the fortitude check. I once killed a PC but reinstated him due to an error on my side (didn't realize the downside of one of the 21 buffs active on a BBEG).
It is possible I forget one or two.
The low kill rate is:
A) I discourage playing up very much
B) I have changed scenarios GMed last minute when I felt a group would end in disaster
C) I do encourage to flee instead of getting wiped
D) trying to have groups rather at the higher end of the APL - so 1.6 for tier 1-2 etc.
E) much more low level as high level play
I don't fudge dice - albeit I admit I once got close when I critted a new first players level character and rolled 12 with 2d6 on the initial damage - knowing I had to roll 5 or lower with the second roll. This was surprise round from invisibility.
I once had a player thanking me for 'the epic death' after the game. A lot is the how you kill / how you react - not just the numbers.
|
|
After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
|
|
Death is part of the game. Some monsters and encounters are just unavoidably brutal. Player characters die, get KO'd and pick up interesting tropical maladies etc.
It's only when the whole scenario is out to get the PCs, and your GM dice are hot as hell THEN softball is back in the game. Otherwise I follow tactics to the letter until the combat ends or they are no longer valid.
Edit: Welp, that sounded grognardy. Of course I try to make the situation fun or at least bearable if the players actually are miserable. :D
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
Yeah, at no point do I aggressively target PC's, marking them for death. I roll out in the open so my players can see when I crit them, I really did crit them and yes I did just roll a 12,8,9 for damage with that great axe from the barbarian. But I at least will give them a heroic, albeit graphic sometimes, description of how this Barbarian just charged and cleaved the front-liner bard into 3 pieces.
I've seen people die in the first encounter of the night and rather than sit and pout or mope around they stay active, checking rules and assisting in any way they can. Having fun isn't based on whether a character lives or dies, its what they make of the adventure.
I play my character knowing that what we do is a dangerous profession, its why we make the big bucks. If anything this thread has shown me that Player Death is really quite common and often for the same reasons, bad tactics, bad rolls or on the GM's side a hot streak of 20's.
|
|
One interesting note: PCs die in my PFS games *way* more than in my normal home group. I've killed two PCs in about 65 tables of PFS, and in my home run of Rise of the Runelords, I killed two PCs in about 2 1/2 years of weekly sessions.
Interestingly, my ratios are almost completely the opposite. Only one PC death in PFS, and many, many poor dead PCs in my home games.
|
|
After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
A GM who ignores tactics and forces the villains to make arbitrary moves for reason is as much cheating the players as a GM who ignores tactics and has mindless undead with no skills lay an ambush and ready actions or switches a Nightskitter's poison from Cha to Con damage (yes, I have seen both of those happen).
|
|
One interesting note: PCs die in my PFS games *way* more than in my normal home group. I've killed two PCs in about 65 tables of PFS, and in my home run of Rise of the Runelords, I killed two PCs in about 2 1/2 years of weekly sessions.Interestingly, my ratios are almost completely the opposite. Only on PC death in PFS, and many, many poor dead PCs in my home games.
Yeah, I have only around a 1 in 5 kill rate for PFS like many on this thread, but I must have killed 20+ characters in Rise of the Runelords. Then again, there were a lot of sessions of that, and the ones near the end they had plenty of funds to bring back...
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
Just to show how one sided your arguement. I hate/abhor/detest/laothe games that the dms adjust games to make them easier. The worst games I have played is where GMs have rewinded fights to avoid killing PCs. FOllowed by games where the enemies are kill themselves with AoOs walking back and forth between high health PCs.
I am here to have fun and the fair challenge is what is fun to me.
I DM games how I would appreciate playing them. I play the monsters with the skills and tactics written and that I see them having.
When I kill a player I roll the dice open on the table and will often show the PCs the monster's block to let them know I am running it as it is given to me.
I think it unfair to run a high level enemy stupidly against PC, because they would have never gotten high level being stupid.
|
|
Just to show how one sided your arguement. I hate/abhor/detest/laothe games that the dms adjust games to make them easier. The worst games I have played is where GMs have rewinded fights to avoid killing PCs.After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
I actually rewound the fight by one round to avoid killing the rogue who eventually perma-died when he remembered that his Mobility feat added +4 to his CMD against Trip so he would not have been tripped and stuck inside a wall spell that killed him. However, because of that, he died to a death effect, and he could have afforded the raise for the other death but realized after the session he was 1 short of resurrection (and he doesn't want to have the others help him split the gp cost). If I can load the state of the game from my head, I will happily rewind a bit if a player discovers a miscalculation that caused their death. But I think the thing you're saying you dislike is when the GM just rewinds for no other reason than to take back the killng blow?
|
|
I always go over things again if there is a character death on the line. I am also always happy to retcon things in a fight if mistakes were made due to a misunderstanding of mechanics or tactics of the monster.
If a mistake was made because a player realized last turn that maybe they should have five foot stepped at the end of their turn I usually don't let them change that.
|
|
A GM who ignores tactics and forces the villains to make arbitrary moves for reason is as much cheating the players as a GM who ignores tactics and has mindless undead with no skills lay an ambush and ready actions or switches a Nightskitter's poison from Cha to Con damage (yes, I have seen both of those happen).After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
I am not advocating ignoring tactics that are written into the scenario, as we all know scenarios must be run as written. I am referring more to your ladder example.
|
|
After reading all these posts, all I have to say is WOW! I can't believe the mortality rates so many people are reporting. I have run nearly 30 sessions and played at least twice that many and have never been present for a PC death or a TPK in PFS.
I would encourage people to remember that having a PC die is a pretty miserable experience (especially when the player lacks the resources to resurrect them) and PC deaths can usually be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. Everyone is here to have fun.
Just to show how one sided your arguement. I hate/abhor/detest/laothe games that the dms adjust games to make them easier. The worst games I have played is where GMs have rewinded fights to avoid killing PCs. FOllowed by games where the enemies are kill themselves with AoOs walking back and forth between high health PCs.
I am here to have fun and the fair challenge is what is fun to me.
I DM games how I would appreciate playing them. I play the monsters with the skills and tactics written and that I see them having.
When I kill a player I roll the dice open on the table and will often show the PCs the monster's block to let them know I am running it as it is given to me.
I think it unfair to run a high level enemy stupidly against PC, because they would have never gotten high level being stupid.
I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.
|
|
I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.
Adjusting tactics in what way? Should I play the devil with an 18 intellect as some dumb henchman that will just stand there and trade blows with a barbarian when I could be using SLA's to cripple the Barbarian or allow me to move onto the squishier targets?
If there is an ambush in the streets are the shifty rogues going to ignore the folks walking around in robes and attack that full plate, tower shield dwarf that looks more like a moving boulder than a person? The writers give us tactics, why deviate from that unless the intelligence of the creature would dictate changing its approach because of the way players react.
Someone tries to have a wolf coup de grace in the middle of combat, taking numerous AoO's I'd protest pretty loudly, someone wants a ghoul to coup de grace me I'd nod my head in agreement as I lay there being eaten.
|
|
I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.
It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
I have the Glabrezu toss reverse gravity on the one with the images, so on his next turn the tanky PC can do nothing but watch as I rip the savagely wounded PC to shreds... >.>
|
|
I have the Glabrezu toss reverse gravity on the one with the images, so on his next turn the tanky PC can do nothing but watch as I rip the savagely wounded PC to shreds... >.>I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
How did you do that? You're in the middle of adjudicating a full attack, having followed the tactics to go into melee.
|
|
How did you do that? You're in the middle of adjudicating a full attack, having followed the tactics to go into melee.I have the Glabrezu toss reverse gravity on the one with the images, so on his next turn the tanky PC can do nothing but watch as I rip the savagely wounded PC to shreds... >.>I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
Mark,
I think you hit the nail on the head with your example. The other possibility is of course that I am operating under false assumption and one or more other variables are directly responsible for the discrepancy between the kills rates different GMs are reporting (which I admit is entirely possible). I also agree that the internet seems to have a wonderful way of making even the most passive statements seem malicious = )Walter,
I couldn't help but LOL at that one!
|
|
It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
Either way, I think we can all wonder why someone with that low of HP is standing shoulder to shoulder with what is clearly the intended tank in this scenario. If one full attack from a Glabrezu is going to kill a character, I don't understand why that character was positioning itself as a target. This goes back to often its player error that often leads to death.
In this instance I would look at the Glabrezu's Int, 16, and realize that he knows what full plate is and can see that their are 6 images bobbing and weaving and that's confusing so he is just gonna pincer the target he already hit.
Edit: For reference to story.
|
|
How did you do that? You're in the middle of adjudicating a full attack, having followed the tactics to go into melee.I have the Glabrezu toss reverse gravity on the one with the images, so on his next turn the tanky PC can do nothing but watch as I rip the savagely wounded PC to shreds... >.>I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
Mark,
I think you hit the nail on the head with your example. The other possibility is of course that I am operating under false assumption and one or more other variables are directly responsible for the discrepancy between the kills...
So I'm confused now. Are you saying you would have it switch targets with the second pincer attack? Because I know a lot of players who would be sorely upset if a GM did that. It's massively metagaming and makes absolutely no sense for the NPC to do, and it's so blatant that it is likely to leave a hollow feeling with everyone at the table who feels that way. I know if that was happening to my PC, I would try to get the GM to target the pincer back to kill me, and if they wouldn't, I would probably never be able to play that character again without it feeling tainted (to be fair, the same thing happens in the reverse direction too--I had serious trouble playing my character who was killed after time was called by the "Con" poison for a year or more after that game).
|
|
...How did you do that? You're in the middle of adjudicating a full attack, having followed the tactics to go into melee.I have the Glabrezu toss reverse gravity on the one with the images, so on his next turn the tanky PC can do nothing but watch as I rip the savagely wounded PC to shreds... >.>I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
Mark,
I think you hit the nail on the head with your example. The other possibility is of course that I am operating under false assumption and one or more other variables are directly responsible for the
Let me answer your question with another question. In your example, said player got decimated by the glabrezu and is at -10 HP on the ground and is no longer a immediate threat. The tanky character is a threat but not an easy target. So next round does the glabrezu go after him or coup de grace the character on the floor?
I think the point I was trying to get to is there are shades of gray between putting on the kiddy gloves and trying to get a body count. In my example I would have the glabrezu leave the player to bleed out on the floor and go after a more immediate threat. I have played (not in PFS) with GM's who would have the glabrezu deliver a killing blow on the following round when there are arguably better tactical decisions it could make.
|
|
I think in some instances it depends, sometimes the tactics indicate that whichever party member is carrying a certain "object" the tactics say to focus that one target, in that instance I would have my npcs die to kill that npc, thats the risk of carrying the object.
Again it really comes down to tactics, intelligence and often times morale.
Edit: too many quotes
|
|
...How did you do that? You're in the middle of adjudicating a full attack, having followed the tactics to go into melee.I have the Glabrezu toss reverse gravity on the one with the images, so on his next turn the tanky PC can do nothing but watch as I rip the savagely wounded PC to shreds... >.>I don't know that I made an argument, just personal observation that deaths can USUALLY (note: not always) be avoided by adjusting your NPC's tactics. I understand that deaths do happen, it is an inherent risk in the game. It just seemed the numbers being reported by some were out of proportion to me is all. Also I DO NOT advocate rewinding to avoid a death or enemies intentionally killing themselves, that would be on par with cheating.It's possible we all agree and are just confusing ourselves with wording issues (ah the internet!), so let me try to give an example:
Let's say the tactics say "The glabrezu heads directly into melee, slaughtering its foes with gleeful abandon"
Suppose you reach the point where you have two PCs in your reach, one of whom is at full health with 6 mirror images up and wearing full plate, while the other you just hit with your first pincer attack, bringing them down to 10 health.
Now, it doesn't tell you exactly how to direct each attack, so you could make the next attack against either of them without expressly violating the tactics block. However, you realize that glabrezus have rend on their pincers, so if you hit that low PC with the other pincer, it's a certain kill. Do you have the glabrezu arbitrarily attack the full health mirror image full plate guy with pincer #2, guaranteeing it can't get a rend?
Mark,
I think you hit the nail on the head with your example. The other possibility is of course that I am operating under false assumption and one or more other variables are
Sorry, not -10. 10 (I think that's what I said anyway, but it may have been lost over the tubes).
Conscious and active.
FWIW, I agree with your assessment for unconscious sorts unless there's some kind of healer bringing back the unconscious for more. I certainly wouldn't have glabby coup de grace the downed character in any case--if it was worried about people waking up the downed guy, it would be easier and more fruitful to just use an unholy blight with the downed character within the radius, also hurting the mirror guy.
|
|
If the Glabrezu was not in any danger, and knew the status of the heavily wounded character. I would have the Glabrezu split its attacks, one or two on the heavily wounded and the remainder on the plate wearing monster in front of him. The goal to pin the plate wearer, to remove that threat and then finish off the wounded one... the hopes being the damage does not kill the fallen.
Reasoning: Demons tend to love to torment mortals, especially Glabrezu, who knows perhaps one of the captured... that being the goal of the surviving mortals will make a deal with it... because they love making deals.
The arcane caster with the mirror images up, well... its true sighting sees right through that... and casters are weak types... so the next round the caster gets ripped to shreds instead, since he/she can likely escape. Perhaps that power word stun is in order?
|
Man, this thread is making me feel slightly inadequate as a GM. I'm approaching 40 tables run, and I haven't killed a PC yet. I've been close a few times. An Undead Sneak Attacking Dark Stalker nearly killed a melee Inquisitor in one round. Another time I had 3 of 4 low level characters paralyzed. A lucky crit from the only moving character saved a TPK. Another time a demon took a character playing up well I to negatives in a single round. Most of the deaths I've seen as a player have been from lucky hits by the enemy's (or Harpies), and mostly at low levels.
I always try to run the tactics as written. The only time I "let up" is when a character drops to negatives, an enemy still has attacks left, and there's another target they can get to with a 5' step. But a lot of the characters in my area are highly optimized, so the enemies don't usually survive long beyond their written tactics, which is when things seem to go south the most.
Venture-Agent, Australia—QLD—Brisbane
|
I have also had several Paladins use Heroic Defiance not to prevent falling unconscious but to prevent death (frequently ending up a few points short of conscious).
Playing a couple of weeks ago, my 12 Con Paladin used Hero's Defiance, and ended up on -9hp...glad I had it, or I would have contributed a kill to my GM ;)
|
|
I've got 81 tables of credit, and I think I've had around 20 PC deaths at my table.
Lower-level characters are of course more vulnerable. At low tiers, a bit of bad luck is all you need. Characters playing up are naturally another demographic at risk. The last PC death at my table was doing precisely that, in Secrets Stones Keep.
Amusingly (there may be some disagreement on that, when I got my Venture-Captainship, during the 30-day period before and after my promotion, 15 characters died at my table in just four sessions. Two of these were full TPKs, in A Voice in the Void and Mists of Mwangi. Masks of the Living God saw one character out of the five strong team survive, and in God's Market Gamble, the entire party was again laid low, but only one managed to die all the way. This event is popularly known as the Bloody Spring of 2012.
I've also seen deaths (I'd rather not say "I've killed PCs") in Murder on the Silken Caravan (twice), Hydra's Fang Incident (once), On Hostile Waters (once), Feast of Ravenmoor (once), and of course We Be Goblins! (thrice). I don't count that last one though.
In my experience, PC deaths at lower levels can result from bad luck, but after a certain level, it's nearly always because of bad tactics. Both my TPKs resulted from poor decisions ("Hey, we'll create a brand new party of four primary casters with no melee capability!" and "We all agree this is an obvious trap. I will now spring it."). Playing up and getting into melee is another popular one, and there was one memorable case letting a friend roast to death in a swarm that had been lit on fire. I will admit that the death in Hydra's Fang Incident was due to my error as a Game Master.
The times that my own characters have died have been once because of bad luck (3.5, high-damage longbow crit, dead from full hit points), twice because of really tough module (there's a reason Trouble with Secrets is no longer with us, I think), and once because of a bad tactical decision (being the first to charge the remorhaz). I have also noticed that my GM reward babies die easier since I haven't had the opportunity to learn how they work level by level. I no longer do GM reward babies.
Sometimes, of course, it's just because the scenario is tough. Murder on the Silken Caravan and Masks of the Living God can be really brutal, and I'm kinda wondering how come I never had anyone die in Black Waters back in the 3.5 era.
|
Venture-Agent, United Kingdom—England—Sheffield
|
Adjusting tactics in what way? Should I play the devil with an 18 intellect as some dumb henchman that will just stand there and trade blows with a barbarian when I could be using SLA's to cripple the Barbarian or allow me to move onto the squishier targets?
I don't adjust tactics (sometimes tactics seem intended to give PCs a fighting chance), but I often have villains do a less than optimal thing that I can justify.
Case in point: all the melee characters are unconscious and bleeding, the villain has spells left... but decides to attack the PC sorceress with her rapier (which might drop the PC) rather than casting Magic Missile (which WILL drop the PC). With hindsight it may have been the difference between PC victory and TPK.
|
|
So far I have killed three characters in PFS
1 level 11 ninja at the storval stiars final boss
1 level 11 sorc Rufge of Time at the final boss
1 level 10 rogue words of the ancients 2 Sphinx full attacks, 1 was pouncing. seven attacks hit an AC of 30.
Monday i am running the waking Rune... people seem to keep dropping it.. it seems fear has hit the masses.
|
|
For some reason lately, I've been getting the rep of being a tough GM. Probably because I spend too much time on prepping a scenario. Some of those maps take some time to draw out.
What I've noticed lately though is, that my regular players are getting more hesitant when their turns come around. The start second guessing decisions which tend to lead to some sub-optimal choices.
Now may stance is as a GM is total neutrality. The kids have said that they can't tell if I am going all out or soft-balling. I take that as a compliment, nothing better than a good poker face at the table.
The best games are when you pull out a victory from the jaws of defeat.
|
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, just killed a PC tonight. Barbarian got reduced to -4, healed up to 8, and resumed charging the sorcerer throwing lightning bolts. The NPC went down the next round.
I felt a little guilty when I went home, so I double checked the stat block, and realized that:
His lightning bolts should have been doing 6 more HP damage each, killing her one round earlier.
Now I don't feel as guilty.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am just a narrator, telling the story and mediating the combat encounters. As such, I have never killed a single PC. Those pesky monsters and their evil NPC handlers, on the other hand, are brutal and seem to really enjoy killing as many of your innocent characters as possible. Its very troubling to be honest and I am considering a change of profession. Observing all this death and destruction is very depressing.
|
|
So, confession time: I have no idea how many times PCs have become objects on my tables.
I don't think it's a helpful thing to track. I'm more in Bob's position of telling the story and mediating combats. If the story is well-told, the players remember what happened, and were engaged both in combat and in story, then it's a good day.
I would disagree. When a character dies at my table as a GM or player it is usually an emotional experience and it carves into my memory. So to respect the emotions somone put into their character I will remember it.
I do feel slightly guilty, and I refuse to ever be proud of a characters death as a table I GM. I have seen people high five eachother over it. So I am glad I have not seen any of that here.
|
|
So, confession time: I have no idea how many times PCs have become objects on my tables.
I don't think it's a helpful thing to track. I'm more in Bob's position of telling the story and mediating combats. If the story is well-told, the players remember what happened, and were engaged both in combat and in story, then it's a good day.
I would disagree. When a character dies at my table as a GM or player it is usually an emotional experience and it carves into my memory. So to respect the emotions somone put into their character I will remember it.
I do feel slightly guilty, and I refuse to ever be proud of a characters death as a table I GM. I have seen people high five eachother over it. So I am glad I have not seen any of that here.
I always feel slightly guilty, and I even pause for a moment while we think of a quick run-through of possible errors or mistakes (particularly if I hit AC on the nose or they failed by a 1) and am willing to retcon a little if necessary.
But in the end of the day, the players generally appreciate knowing that their fates are in their hands. One player in particular is constantly going through every past battle and really lives for the ability to pick clever choices to pull through a close call.
This isn't everyone of course. I know there are a lot of players who just hate any situation where it's close or anyone is in any danger (I've seen a few posters come on the forums and talk about a friend who is like that). It's actually eternally troublesome for our hobby that we have both types of players that might be at the same table, since one type of player wants fudging to happen and the other type despises it.
|
|
I've also encountered the player who enjoys getting his PCs killed in the most unuaual ways. Often in rather ... senseless ways.
That sounds pretty horrible in a team game unless they tell you ahead of time and they approve, since getting oneself killed can easily kill others.
Story time of something like that--My characters tend to be extremely cautious with a lot of countermeasures, so I rarely see deaths as a player. One of the only times I did, we were sitting with some kind of grapple-and-tie-up-with+infinity-bonus monk. The character was well-built and well-optimized. But, perhaps to give himself more of a challenge, he liked to yell into the dungeon "Hi! I'm Bob!" whenever other party members were generally trying to be quiet. As a result, the last encounter of Storming the Diamond Gate really had its way on everyone (except me and Linda, who had to fight it by ourselves), and three people died.
|
|
Man, this thread is making me feel slightly inadequate as a GM. I'm approaching 40 tables run, and I haven't killed a PC yet.Don't sweat that. The best measure of a good GM isn't how many PC's die at your table - it's how much fun your players have at your table.
Lormyr, I agree with you, but I think character death or two kind of helps to validate a GM as genuinely fair. Especially if the player of the dead character still had fun and wants to continue playing with you as a GM.
One of my players' characters will die.... one day!
|
|
Man, this thread is making me feel slightly inadequate as a GM. I'm approaching 40 tables run, and I haven't killed a PC yet.Don't sweat that. The best measure of a good GM isn't how many PC's die at your table - it's how much fun your players have at your table.
I know. It was somewhat of a joke. Still, at times, with all of the optimized characters in my area, I wonder if there's more I can do (without changing tactics or anything else not PFS legal) to make the scenarios more challenging/fun for them.