So I was running a 2nd edition game for my players online and they were a party of 3, A Rogue, a Sorcerer, and a Ranger which had an animal companion wolf, along with some NPC allies they had brought to come along into an assault into Boggard swamp village. I'd laid things out so that there was waves of enemies at each interval into the village with breaks laid in so the group could rest and recover.
I'd been running things with rolling the dice on my side without having the players see and narrating the results for them. But this last session they asked me to not hide my rolls for them to see. I said sure.
They were doing pretty good for the most part, a lot of bad rolls for the boggards, the stirges, and their crocodiles. But things got serious when an ambush from a pair of crocodiles and 3 Boggards came out of the swamp and killed one of their allies and seriously wounded the other one. One of the crocodiles tried to eat the sorcerer but missed. Also a lone stirge flew over and managed to attach itself on the Sorcerer.
The group had their remaining ally attack once then retreat, but they missed. The party stayed to defeat the boggards and the crocodiles. The Ranger and wolf tear apart 2 boggards. The rogue of the group finished off the first crocodile, misses the second one, and also decided to shoot a flaming arrow into the chieftain's hut in the center of the city. It caught fire and the party could hear cries of outrage and alarm from the hut.
The sorcerer stabs the crocodile with a dagger, hurting it but not killing it, then readied an action to throw a fireball against the chief, rather than dealing with the Stirge or crocodile on her turn. The next round the Chieftan came out with several more of his warriors. He was a Druid and was supposed to be a close match for the PCs. Readied fireball goes off, killing the Cheiftan's warriors but he survived. Then in return, he throws a 3rd level Acid Arrow at the Sorcerer and lands a Critical hit doing 47 damage.
She goes down with Dying 2 since it was a Crit and the chieftan was the first one to act before it was any of the other players turns. She now has persistent acid damage, a crocodile, and an attached stirge on her.
Oh, and she didn't have any hero points left.
TL/DR:
My online group asked me to reveal the results of the Dice Roller to them at the beginning of the session so I can't exactly fudge anything.
They pushed into an extended fight inciting another encounter with the boss who landed a spell crit with a 3rd level acid arrow which rolled 47 out of 48 damage.
And the sorcerer who had a stirge on her as well as a wounded, angry, crocodile in her face is down. Also, no hero points left.
I've never been happy with killing my player's characters when it doesn't necessarily serve the story, particularly when it's more of a side quest rather than a main or personal quest, but there's a lot working against them here and I don't think I have much of an option. Should I kill her off?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just a side note, you cannot ready a 2-action activity in PF2, so no readied Fireball.
Appart from that, I think you "have" to kill the Sorcerer. First, in current situation, all the players are pretty aware that there's not much that can be done to save the Sorcerer. Second, if you save the Sorcerer, they'll know they are invincible: it is, in my opinion, a bad feeling when you no more care about combats because you know the GM won't kill you.
Off course, there are 2 cases where you shouldn't kill the Sorcerer:
- Another player pull a trick to save her out of their hat. Play it as it has to be played, and be clear with your players about potential outcomes (more deaths, as it's common when people try whatever they can to save a party member to end up with a TPK).
- If your players really hate the concept of character death. It may ask for a quick chat with them. In that case, you end up in invincible mode, but everyone is aware of it. If that's what they prefer to play, nothing's wrong about it. But the fact that they wanted to see your dice make me feel that they want to feel the challenge.
Also, it's important to note that killing a character is not necessarily a bad thing. If everyone accepts it, it may be a defining moment for the party, a session you remember during the whole campaign. It may also increase the overall tension, as many GMs are reluctent to kill characters, now they'll know you're not such GM.
About the fact that it's a side quest, I'd personally increase the importance of this quest in the campaign. Make up connections between the boggards and the main quest line, maybe use the Chieftain as a recurrent enemy, whatever. Your boggards just gained +10 in Charisma, you should use it!
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Even beyond the question of whether death is or is not on the table, a valuable tool in your GM toolkit us the ability to admit that you never planned an encounter to be so deadly. Normally this is where fudging comes in to keep the ball rolling, but if the group prizes the feeling of authenticity from open rolls it may be worth being open about it. Conversely, a fight ending when one or both parties calls a ceasefire to ransom each others' wounded back to one another and go separate ways. Hostage negotiation is a useful tactic to get your players accustomed to because they can learn to recognise when a fight has gone lousy and think their own way out of a tense situation by offering the same trade. Unless the foes are mindless or hare the PCs for personal reasons, most won't risk further injury against a powerful enemy when they have something to bargain with.
Even if you do kill the sorcerer, it doesn't necessarily have to be the final end of her. I don't know what level the PCs are, but even if they're too low-level to raise her on their own, you've got options. Maybe an associate of the PCs offers to raise her in exchange for a favor later. Maybe one of her family members finds the party to work with them until they can bring her back. Maybe she returns to life without knowing how, but now has these strange dreams every so often...
There are a lot of ways to make dying a complication rather than the absolute end of a character's story, which is what my table generally goes with. Of course, this depends on whether the player wants to bring the character back, so it's worth having a chat with the table about how they want to handle the situation.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I read A Temp. Agent's post aloud to my wife, who is a tactical mastermind who comes up with schemes to save party members all the time. She has stated, "This sorcerer earned her death." The key points are:
1) The NPC allies retreated. This is typically a signal from the GM that the party should retreat, too.
2) The rogue, instead of saving the sorcerer from the stirge or second crocodile, shot a flaming arrow at the Chieftain's hut, triggering the next encounter before the current encounter was finished. In my wife's online multiplayer games, this is known as "pulling in the adds [additional enemies]" which increases the difficulty of combat.
3) The sorcerer herself, instead of using all her actions against the stirge or second crocodile, readied a fireball against the new adversary (and SuperBidi is correct: you cannot ready a fireball in PF2). This meant that when the Chieftain selected a target for his acid arrow spell, the sorcerer was the one he immediately saw as a threat.
My players don't risk character death like A Temp. Agent's players did. They do take extreme risks, but their survival in those extreme situations requires constant tactical actions to guard their teammates.
Plausibly, the GM could decide that the stirge will detach because of the persistent acid damage souring the taste of the sorcerer. Then both party members rush over to the sorcerer, one to feed her a healing potion and the other to kill the crocodile. Then they Assist Recovery against the persistent acid damage. The Chieftain might stick to ranged spells while searching for warriors that he could save with his Medicine skill (give him training in Medicine and healer's tools if he lacks them). If he finds one, then he could tend his fallen companions rather than give chase while the party runs away. Note that the survival of the sorcerer should depend on all her teammates making her survival a priority. That is a good lesson to teach the party.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's cheesy but assuming you have not killed the PC yet, and you are between sessions, the Hero Points rule states: At the start of a game session, you give out 1 Hero Point to each player character.
So when you guys meet next, the player should get 1 hero Point, and thus can avoid death.
By the situation described here, you cannot let this PC live without shattering the imersion of the game with a sledgehammer; with that said if your players are more interested in being Big Damn Heroes™ and aren't the type to worry much about verissimilitude maybe ask them before the game if they wouldn't take this badly (You literally rolled in front of their eyes, so they can't accuse you of bad intent, really).
If you DO end up finishing this PC off and the player still had plans for them make it the subject of a sidequest to bring them back to life, maybe getting the favor of a local bishop, or in exchange for a hefty donation, turn tragedy into (storytelling) opportunity. In the meantime the PC's player could take control of one of their associates or maybe even a surviving NPC that was in awe at the sorcerer's courage and now feels they owe them this much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By the situation described here, you cannot let this PC live without shattering the imersion of the game with a sledgehammer.
I think these actually a bit more nuance here--or at least maybe immersion is maybe not the right word. For many players, immersion depends on investment in their character, so whatever damage is done by saving their character from near certain death (and there have been several good examples here of reasonable ways for this character to barely survive), it pales in comparison to having their character killed off due to a random tactical blunder.
It would depend on the group which is more prized, the tactical verisimilitude or the narrative cohesiveness. One is more damage by a character surviving no-win scenario, while the other is more damaged by random and meaningless character death. As always it's a talk it out with the group kind of question.
By the situation described here, you cannot let this PC live without shattering the imersion of the game with a sledgehammer.I think these actually a bit more nuance here--or at least maybe immersion is maybe not the right word. For many players, immersion depends on investment in their character, so whatever damage is done by saving their character from near certain death (and there have been several good examples here of reasonable ways for this character to barely survive), it pales in comparison to having their character killed off due to a random tactical blunder.
It would depend on the group which is more prized, the tactical verisimilitude or the narrative cohesiveness. One is more damage by a character surviving no-win scenario, while the other is more damaged by random and meaningless character death. As always it's a talk it out with the group kind of question.
I agree, but with some caveats. Sure sometimes the mechanics can get in the way of storytelling, but the players chose to face this challenge as a game, to the point of wanting to see how the gears were turning (the GM's dicerolls), and one of the gears (although in a very unlikely manner) flew out and hit them in the face; it's hardly an extrapolation to "see this through" to its logic conclusion; with that said, OP seems reluctant to proceed because they didn't plan this to be a deadly encounter, but how many great plothooks didn't start from a sidequest? Amp up this Druid to be a bigger figure in the campaign's narrative, build up from this one blunder into a full-fledged rivalry, this is a fantasy game, death isn't the be-all end-all it is in the real world.
As for the narrative cohesineveness, accidents happen every day, great heroes have fallen in nameless battles (and a vile attack from a Druidic chieftain is hardly being killed by a goblin goon), but I know firsthand how attached players can get to their characters, so just leaving them for dead in the mud isn't a pretty solution, as always consulting with them before taking any further steps into places players could be possibly uncomfortable with (I imagine from the post's wording this campaign hasn't had a death yet) is advised. So yes, talking with the players is vital to see how they envision this game (maybe they just want to blow off some steam after a long week of work, then having their character die instantly to a lucky shot might be just piling on more stress) and how to proceed forward to align with this vision for both players and GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You aren't killing the sorcerer, the monsters and dangers are. For the world to feel real, the players have to see death is real possibility. Let it happen. It is what should occur.
|
I feel the sorcerer wanted to protect her teammates from the encounter to come before trying to protect herself from the immediate danger.
Check with the player if they are okay for their sorcerer character to die heroically or not. If not, choose one of the solutions above. Or the following proposal : the druid calls the animals to their aid, which forces them to leave the downed sorcerer alone and attack enemies that are still standing.
And while the animals and the persistent damage on their fallen comrade keep the PCs busy, the druid flees and disappears in the wilderness.
If the players asked you to show your dice rolls, I think that indicates a concern that they might have that the danger to their characters in encounters isn't authentic because you might fudge things to save their characters.
At the end of the day, combat uses hit points and dying rules and dice rolls because the risk of a character dying is what gives combat dramatic tension.
As a player, I don't want to bother playing through a combat if there isn't any dramatic tension. The risk of losing a character if things go bad is what makes the whole thing exciting, and I actually explicitly tell anyone who GMs for me that I don't want them to fudge anything or pull their punches in combat - I personally don't ask them to make their rolls public, as I feel that if I can't trust my GM enough that they don't need that transparency then there isn't any point playing with them , but if players are asking for that, it could indicate that they want to avoid fudging (or they think their gm might be cheating, but that is a different issue).
If the players asked you to show your dice rolls, I think that indicates a concern that they might have that the danger to their characters in encounters isn't authentic because you might fudge things to save their characters.
At the end of the day, combat uses hit points and dying rules and dice rolls because the risk of a character dying is what gives combat dramatic tension.
As a player, I don't want to bother playing through a combat if there isn't any dramatic tension. The risk of losing a character if things go bad is what makes the whole thing exciting, and I actually explicitly tell anyone who GMs for me that I don't want them to fudge anything or pull their punches in combat - I personally don't ask them to make their rolls public, as I feel that if I can't trust my GM enough that they don't need that transparency then there isn't any point playing with them , but if players are asking for that, it could indicate that they want to avoid fudging (or they think their gm might be cheating, but that is a different issue).
I highly agree. I don't think the tension of being able to die has anything to do with tactical verisimilitude like Sibelius says. You don't need to be a tactical genius to understand the most basic rules (in that case, critical hits and being surrounded by enemies).
As a side note, I highly encourage GMs to roll in front of players for tough rolls. First, because it adds a lot of tension and second because it gives the players the feeling that the outcome of the fight is fair (in opposition to a choice of the GM).
|
|
... Oh, and she didn't have any hero points left..
Yup, they're toast. Lucky or unlucky, they spent their free Hero Point for the session and weren't granted another one during the course of the game, that's a dead PC right there.
GG no re: It may seem harsh but maybe it will encourage them to save their Hero Points on their next Character so they can be used for their primary function.
|
|
This group seems to have alot of trust issues with you being the gm if they are demanding to see your dice rolls. If my group demanded that of me i would tell them to stop being children and trust me to do my duty as a gm fairly.
To your question, it sounds like your sorcerer suffered an 18 carat run of bad luck. so bite the bullet and kill em.
Base rule is that secret rolls should not be rolled in the open and that's it. Of course, the GM can decide to make all their rolls secret. But it is not the base assumption.
Sharing AC and attack bonus isn't a big deal but rolling saves openly has tactical implications.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you for all of the feedback. You've given me a lot to consider and also a rule clarification I'd overlooked. I particularly like the idea of making the Druid Boggard more important to the plot than as a one-off. He is 5th level.
My players are 6th level.
I suppose I have become a bit gun shy when it comes to killing off characters since I've had some bad backlash in the past. But there's a lot of good points about death being a part of the game and one that shouldn't be avoided at the expense of tension.
But I'll also speak with my players about this before next session.