Hi, I am a GM for weekly Curse of Strahd game. Recently my lvl 4 players (usually creative and smart) made lots of mistakes which led them directly to TPK.
They just opened without checking Esmeralda’s wagon end exploded themselves while being lvl 4. Then they took a nap near the tower and 9 wolves + 6 werewolves came to check what was the reason of explosion (this outcome is stated in the module).
They barely survived this attack and didn’t tried to run away at all (even while having an opportunity to hide.
So like... I saw my players who have spent lots of time on their character creation trying to find any possible way of surviving and so I nerfed this encounter without them noticing.
This is possibly the third time I do so and it starts worrying me. My players need to know that they have an opportunity of having a TPK if they do stupid stuff. But I can’t just kill their characters. It is so hard mentally idk.
So how can I overcome myself and do I need to? (and thanx for reading this complains)
You could just start by telling them they got lucky a few times already. Before changing anything, always make sure to roll one or a couple of dice. Make it appear the severity of what happened next depended on the outcome of those rolls (in some modules this is the case). Let them know things could have been a lot worse and that they might want to be more careful - CoS is, particularly early on, not exactly kid gloving encounters. Just tell them, guys, this could have been a half a dozen werewolves and a pack of wolves as well if you’d been a little less lucky and that would have been pretty grim. Also, don’t change encounters too much: if you think it would kill them, there should still be a decent chance it could after your adjustments. Take it too far and you’re just digging a hole for yourself.
All that said and done, at some point you may just have to bite the bullet. Yes, you may need to overcome this hangup. I know it sucks. All I can say is, it’s probably not going to be fun if you keep protecting them from themselves either. They’re not going to learn, they’re going to keep playing carelessly and sloppily, and you’re going to want to bang your head against the wall every few sessions whenever something like this comes up. It’s also going to be easier next time, I promise. Especially with the same group. Hopefully there won’t be a next time of course, but it’s something every DM is likely to eventually have to go through if they stay at it long enough.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I used to do this sometimes...until I made the lucky mistake of telling one of my players, who got rightfully upset. He wanted to be sure that the game had risk, that the characters could suffer for their stupidity (and therefore that being smart would make a difference). So remember that, while you might find it hard to kill a character, and the player who loses one might be a bit miffed, in the long run, your players WANT you to kill their characters! You can’t do it for yourself, so do it for them.
Plus, remind them that especially in Barovia, running away is a valid option if things go awry! It’s often the difference between losing one character and a TPK. TPKs stink, but one character death is much better.
I've never nerfed an encounter. I did once get close to a TPK with a banshee and a party that refused to back off. But in 5e, characters are pretty difficult to kill even if the players do stupid things. A good way to break them in, would be to make sure that when you have an enemy creature able to execute a coup de grace on a PC, they take it. Also remember to have your bad guys run away when things are going badly for them and hope your players take the hint that they should sometimes do the same.
Remember that the point of the game is to have fun. If everyone is enjoying themselves, including you, then you might not need to change what you are doing. I would probably have a talk with the players and let them know that several times they came close to a TPK, and see how they feel about that. I had a player recently tell me they were looking for a heroic death for their PC so they could play a different one. It was a good conversation, and led to an outcome that let everyone know there was danger, gave that player what they wanted, and everyone still had a good time. If your players are grateful for your leniency and say they are enjoying the game, but you are not happy nerfing some encounters, perhaps have a conversation about "It's okay to run and hide sometimes." Not all players realize this. If a player is okay with their PC dying, let it happen and make it interesting and exciting. If all the players tell you they're okay with an occasional TPK, go for it.
Communication and sometimes tough conversations are the way to go when something doesn't feel right at the table.
Although I agree with Naivara, that a D&D game is better if there is a risk of character death, and that most players will thank you for running a game that has consequences -- not all players will thank you. I would say be very, VERY sure your players are willing to accept a lethal game before you start letting them die due to their own actions. You might end up with people quitting the game.
Matt Colville tells a story, and he is a veteran DM, about a time when he felt the situation demanded that he kill his friend Phil's character. So he did, and I agree with him, that is what the situation called for, it is the logical consequence. Phil got up, and walked out, frustrated. He was gone for about 20 minutes. They were at their workplace, and Phil just started pacing the halls, fuming. People came up to him asking how D&D was going, and Phil said, he didn't want to talk about it. Meanwhile, the rest of the players at the table, mostly new to D&D, were back in the game room cleaning up their dice and character sheets. Matt, the DM, was trying to talk them out of quitting D&D entirely, when Phil, now calmer, walked back into the room. He saw people cleaning up and said, "What are you guys doing?" They said they were quitting D&D because Phil's character had been killed off. Phil then had to side with Matt to calm them down and explain that death happens in D&D, and although he was not thrilled just then to have his character die, you don't quit D&D because of it. You just make up a new character. After some more cajoling, together he and Matt managed to get the players to start playing again.
My point here is, the players definitely knew there were consequences in this world, but when they saw a character death happen they were really unhappy. If Phil had agreed with them and quit the game too, the whole thing would have fallen apart. On what can only be described as a "pro" DM.
I strongly suggest having a "session 0" sort of talk with your players. Explain to them -- but don't use any details -- that they are doing things that if you ran the adventure exactly according to the book, could very well get some or all of the PCs killed. Do they want to run a game like this? Remind them as Naivara said, this is Strahd, and the game is deadly if you don't watch out. If they are OK with such a game, then don't pull punches. If they are not OK with such a game, you will have to decide - you keep neutering the adventure, or you switch to a different, less lethal, setting.
One final point though -- if you really want players to stop taking stupid chances, you have to enforce consequences. As long as you keep saving their butts by neutering the encounters, they will keep taking foolish risks thinking everything is fine. One TPK, heck one character death, will cure the careless behavior. You just want to be sure it's not also going to cure them of wanting to play in your campaign first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I wouldn't have a lethality conversation with the players. If they say they don't want a lethal game, it encourages stupid actions. They will "know" that they can't really suffer much or die.
Now from your side, it's totally ok to nerf encounters. But if you feel you really need to teach them a lesson, have the monsters drag off a PC, and kill them off screen. You don't have to do a TPK. As the game is set in Barovia, you can then have the party encounter the dead PC as an undead enemy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
They just opened without checking Esmeralda’s wagon end exploded themselves while being lvl 4. Then they took a nap near the tower and 9 wolves + 6 werewolves came to check what was the reason of explosion (this outcome is stated in the module).
They barely survived this attack and didn’t tried to run away at all (even while having an opportunity to hide).
It's okay to be clear when the party is outmatched. Play up the description of the enemies and follow with something like, "you think you may need to retreat if you want to live another day."
And if even that fails you just stop the game for a minute and say, "Look guys. You will die if you don't run so just run."
Some DMs don't like to do this, but I prefer it to either fudging the game so that they win when they shouldn't or TPKing the party due to miscommunication.
One other thing that may help is to sprinkle in stories/evidence of other adventurers - just as strong as them - being wiped out. Show that death happens to their peers and they may consider it a more realistic threat.
Hi, I am a GM for weekly Curse of Strahd game. Recently my lvl 4 players (usually creative and smart) made lots of mistakes which led them directly to TPK.
They just opened without checking Esmeralda’s wagon end exploded themselves while being lvl 4. Then they took a nap near the tower and 9 wolves + 6 werewolves came to check what was the reason of explosion (this outcome is stated in the module).
They barely survived this attack and didn’t tried to run away at all (even while having an opportunity to hide.
So like... I saw my players who have spent lots of time on their character creation trying to find any possible way of surviving and so I nerfed this encounter without them noticing.
This is possibly the third time I do so and it starts worrying me. My players need to know that they have an opportunity of having a TPK if they do stupid stuff. But I can’t just kill their characters. It is so hard mentally idk.
So how can I overcome myself and do I need to? (and thanx for reading this complains)
You could just start by telling them they got lucky a few times already. Before changing anything, always make sure to roll one or a couple of dice. Make it appear the severity of what happened next depended on the outcome of those rolls (in some modules this is the case). Let them know things could have been a lot worse and that they might want to be more careful - CoS is, particularly early on, not exactly kid gloving encounters. Just tell them, guys, this could have been a half a dozen werewolves and a pack of wolves as well if you’d been a little less lucky and that would have been pretty grim. Also, don’t change encounters too much: if you think it would kill them, there should still be a decent chance it could after your adjustments. Take it too far and you’re just digging a hole for yourself.
All that said and done, at some point you may just have to bite the bullet. Yes, you may need to overcome this hangup. I know it sucks. All I can say is, it’s probably not going to be fun if you keep protecting them from themselves either. They’re not going to learn, they’re going to keep playing carelessly and sloppily, and you’re going to want to bang your head against the wall every few sessions whenever something like this comes up. It’s also going to be easier next time, I promise. Especially with the same group. Hopefully there won’t be a next time of course, but it’s something every DM is likely to eventually have to go through if they stay at it long enough.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I used to do this sometimes...until I made the lucky mistake of telling one of my players, who got rightfully upset. He wanted to be sure that the game had risk, that the characters could suffer for their stupidity (and therefore that being smart would make a difference). So remember that, while you might find it hard to kill a character, and the player who loses one might be a bit miffed, in the long run, your players WANT you to kill their characters! You can’t do it for yourself, so do it for them.
Plus, remind them that especially in Barovia, running away is a valid option if things go awry! It’s often the difference between losing one character and a TPK. TPKs stink, but one character death is much better.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
I've never nerfed an encounter. I did once get close to a TPK with a banshee and a party that refused to back off. But in 5e, characters are pretty difficult to kill even if the players do stupid things. A good way to break them in, would be to make sure that when you have an enemy creature able to execute a coup de grace on a PC, they take it. Also remember to have your bad guys run away when things are going badly for them and hope your players take the hint that they should sometimes do the same.
Remember that the point of the game is to have fun. If everyone is enjoying themselves, including you, then you might not need to change what you are doing. I would probably have a talk with the players and let them know that several times they came close to a TPK, and see how they feel about that. I had a player recently tell me they were looking for a heroic death for their PC so they could play a different one. It was a good conversation, and led to an outcome that let everyone know there was danger, gave that player what they wanted, and everyone still had a good time. If your players are grateful for your leniency and say they are enjoying the game, but you are not happy nerfing some encounters, perhaps have a conversation about "It's okay to run and hide sometimes." Not all players realize this. If a player is okay with their PC dying, let it happen and make it interesting and exciting. If all the players tell you they're okay with an occasional TPK, go for it.
Communication and sometimes tough conversations are the way to go when something doesn't feel right at the table.
Although I agree with Naivara, that a D&D game is better if there is a risk of character death, and that most players will thank you for running a game that has consequences -- not all players will thank you. I would say be very, VERY sure your players are willing to accept a lethal game before you start letting them die due to their own actions. You might end up with people quitting the game.
Matt Colville tells a story, and he is a veteran DM, about a time when he felt the situation demanded that he kill his friend Phil's character. So he did, and I agree with him, that is what the situation called for, it is the logical consequence. Phil got up, and walked out, frustrated. He was gone for about 20 minutes. They were at their workplace, and Phil just started pacing the halls, fuming. People came up to him asking how D&D was going, and Phil said, he didn't want to talk about it. Meanwhile, the rest of the players at the table, mostly new to D&D, were back in the game room cleaning up their dice and character sheets. Matt, the DM, was trying to talk them out of quitting D&D entirely, when Phil, now calmer, walked back into the room. He saw people cleaning up and said, "What are you guys doing?" They said they were quitting D&D because Phil's character had been killed off. Phil then had to side with Matt to calm them down and explain that death happens in D&D, and although he was not thrilled just then to have his character die, you don't quit D&D because of it. You just make up a new character. After some more cajoling, together he and Matt managed to get the players to start playing again.
My point here is, the players definitely knew there were consequences in this world, but when they saw a character death happen they were really unhappy. If Phil had agreed with them and quit the game too, the whole thing would have fallen apart. On what can only be described as a "pro" DM.
I strongly suggest having a "session 0" sort of talk with your players. Explain to them -- but don't use any details -- that they are doing things that if you ran the adventure exactly according to the book, could very well get some or all of the PCs killed. Do they want to run a game like this? Remind them as Naivara said, this is Strahd, and the game is deadly if you don't watch out. If they are OK with such a game, then don't pull punches. If they are not OK with such a game, you will have to decide - you keep neutering the adventure, or you switch to a different, less lethal, setting.
One final point though -- if you really want players to stop taking stupid chances, you have to enforce consequences. As long as you keep saving their butts by neutering the encounters, they will keep taking foolish risks thinking everything is fine. One TPK, heck one character death, will cure the careless behavior. You just want to be sure it's not also going to cure them of wanting to play in your campaign first.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I wouldn't have a lethality conversation with the players. If they say they don't want a lethal game, it encourages stupid actions. They will "know" that they can't really suffer much or die.
Now from your side, it's totally ok to nerf encounters. But if you feel you really need to teach them a lesson, have the monsters drag off a PC, and kill them off screen. You don't have to do a TPK. As the game is set in Barovia, you can then have the party encounter the dead PC as an undead enemy.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I guess you are all right about this. Thanks for your answers. I really appreciate the amount of time you've spent on typing this.
It's okay to be clear when the party is outmatched. Play up the description of the enemies and follow with something like, "you think you may need to retreat if you want to live another day."
And if even that fails you just stop the game for a minute and say, "Look guys. You will die if you don't run so just run."
Some DMs don't like to do this, but I prefer it to either fudging the game so that they win when they shouldn't or TPKing the party due to miscommunication.
One other thing that may help is to sprinkle in stories/evidence of other adventurers - just as strong as them - being wiped out. Show that death happens to their peers and they may consider it a more realistic threat.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm