"TPK!" Topic

Apologies if this topic has already been beaten to death.
The last D&D game we played ended with a TPK -- Total party kill -- which I think is pretty unusual for 4th edition but we kind of had it coming, and were being totally overconfident, looting a room after some foes ran away (they came back with several ettercaps that immobilized the meat shields and took out all the strikers and leader at their leisure).

Anyway I wonder if TPKs are less common in 4th ed than they were in earlier editions of D&D (since their seems to be a lot more healing available in 4th ed. and DMs are strongly encouraged to make encounters "balanced" so that the PCs can reasonably expect to be able to stand an fight most of the time)?

Anyone want to share their own stories of glorious TPKs? (I have written a short account of my party's TPK but it would take a lot of editing to be made fit for print in a family forum…also a lot of in-jokes that probably wouldn't translate well)

Hmm, the very first game we played of 4E we lost two players pretty fast. I'm not so sure that there is more healing available in 4E. sure, a lot of characters can take "second winds" but in the party I ran with on the Cleric really had ANY real healing abilities. And when he got taken out it was very tough on the rest of the group to keep going.

I don't know. In 25 years of gaming I was only in one TPK prior to the 3.5 game I am in now which is about to end that way. The first time the GM was being a dick. We entered the caverns and a dragon ate us in the first room. This time (different GM) I'd like to give him the benefit of doubt, but I'm finding it difficult. We have vastly overwhelmed 1st lvl characters. The GM is supposed to make the game fun and playable, not screw everyone.

Players should only die because of their own greed or stupidity. Any DM/GM that is a party killer isn't worth the title.

It isn't 4E that is more lethal, it is the unfamiliarity of that first game when the mechanics are so completely different. Even kobolds are a threat to 1st Edition PCs.

Now, whether the unfamiliarity is on the players' or DM's part – or both – is a different question.

Wyatt

I don't remember the site anymore, but someone had done a study of an average 1st level fighter with a long sword, chainmail, and shield against a basic goblin from each edition of D&D/AD&D. He used the average stats generated from the recommended stat generation for each edition. He ran a simulation pitting the fighter against an unending stream of goblins. The fighter kept fighting goblins until he was killed. He kept track of how many goblins the fighter killed before he was killed and then ran the simulation 1,000 times for each edition. The results he got were quite interesting. In red box D&D it was something like 5 or 6 goblins killed before he was killed. Each edition the number of goblins killed increased until in D&D 3.5 it was something like 25 goblins killed.

I think this goes a long way towards showing TPKs are rarer now. This is not to say all 3.5 campaign settings are equal. I experienced my first TPK when I was playing in a 3.5 game using the Midnight setting. A group of 1st level characters against 3 Orcs! We couldn't roll to save our lives and were quickly wiped out.

The sample scenario for the 4E preview day was aimed at TPK as far as I could tell.

"Players should only die because of their own greed or stupidity. Any DM/GM that is a party killer isn't worth the title."
I only agree partly with that. The risk of PCs dying in any fight adds a lot to a game. Games where it takes major mistakes/stupidity to die aren't as fun for me. I've played in games where character death was really uncommon and I didn't stay…
But I do agree that the DM shouldn't be out to get the party either. I can't really think of any games I've been in like that. The DM should spare the party (or individual PCs) when they have otherwise been heroic, but I don't think evil PCs should get any mercy. On the other one of the absolute best games I was ever a player in had one character die horribly (he was a Norman knight, and a major Viking bad guywas besieging the town, and he challenged the Viking to single combat, and was dismembered while the restof the party watched helplessly) but it certainly made the game better (more dramatic, and the players all really got into planning how to defeat the bad guy). I know some players get really upset when their characters die, and I don't love it either, but apart from TPKs it is almost always a good thing for the campaign to have some PC deaths.

I'm not sure I've played enough 4th ed to know for sure, but you can almost always heal up completely between encounters, and our party usually had 1-2 leaders out of 5-6 players, so that may make a difference; also one of our fighters was a dwarf that seemed to heal himself without help.

"I don't remember the site anymore, but someone had done a study of an average 1st level fighter with a long sword, chainmail, and shield against a basic goblin from each edition of D&D/AD&D."

found it

hackslash.net/?p=220

Re that site, the use of minions for 4th seems flawed.

He shouldn't have used minions in his example. The other editions had nothing like that. If he'd used goblin warriors, a more accurate analog to a 1 HD goblin in the other editions, the fighter would get maybe 2 before getting killed.

Exactly using minions as the sole monster is just silly – that's not what they're there for.

They are _minions_, not a monster to stand on their own, but to fill out the ranks.

It's like figuring out how many gauls a roman legionary can kill by pitting them against youths armed with pointed sticks.

Players should only die because of their own greed or stupidity. Any DM/GM that is a party killer isn't worth the title.

Actually, one of our parties had to die to further the plot. As it was the party with my absolute favorite character, I was not best pleased until the GM did the individual communication with players to clarify what happened and why.

Since the GM was my husband, I knew before the rest of the party. It still made for a rather unhappy night after the game.

They trusted skaven. What can I say?

Nice peaceful rat dudes approach the party, which has been exploring the underdark. There is a big mean lich and he raids our peace-loving village and steals our children and kicks our pet rats, the rat dudes explain. We will show you his lair and if you kill him you can have all his treasure and we will also give you shiny things, the entirely honest and trust-worthy-looking rat dudes say.

Off the party goes, and whacks the lich and his henchlings. Nasty fight, about a third of the party die and the rest are banged up. The moment the lich is skragged, the party survivors find themselves swarmed by treacherous rat dudes before anyone can heal up. Oooops.

If they'd only cast "Know Alignment" when first talking to the rat dudes…

The risk of PCs dying in any fight adds a lot to a game.

True, but that is a PC's decision and not one that should be forced upon him/her by the DM/GM.

On the other one of the absolute best games I was ever a player in had one character die horribly (he was a Norman knight, and a major Viking bad guywas besieging the town, and he challenged the Viking to single combat, and was dismembered while the restof the party watched helplessly) but it certainly made the game better (more dramatic, and the players all really got into planning how to defeat the bad guy).

This was of his own free will.

Actually, one of our parties had to die to further the plot. As it was the party with my absolute favorite character, I was not best pleased until the GM did the individual communication with players to clarify what happened and why.

I have done this with the cooperation of the PCs involved to further plot lines, but would've discarded it if they had an objection. In both cases, the characters returned to further some evil with an offer at the chance of redemption.