Last session my group started, Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. When the Party encountered the Grand Master the Wild Mage immediately attacked. in the first round the Grand Master scored a critical hit on the Wild Mage. According to the module the Grand Master's claws act like a vorpal blade. Instead of automatic decapitation, I had the character make a Dexterity Save (DC 16) to avoid decapitation, and take extra damage in its place.
Do they have, or have access to, Resurrection magic? If not, are you prepared to have them quest to find someone who can bring their headless friend back to life?
Are you OK killing a Player Character?
Are you Players aware of the possibility of Character death?
Were they any clues in the unfolding adventure to date as to just how dangerous the Grand Master is?
If you Party is aware that Character death is a real possibility, and there had been clues in their adventure as to just how dangerous the Grand Master is, I would have decapitated the Character. Either the Character can remain dead, or there can be an entire other adventure to get someone to resurrect them.
If the Players hadn't really grasped the possibility of Character death ( or you are downplaying the possibilities of Character death, as part of your session zero agreements ) - or there was no possibility of them learning how dangerous the Grand Master was - then I would have pulled the punch as you did - although I may have seriously asked myself if I had failed to provide the clues that they needed in the adventure ( of course, it's a totally different thing if I provided the opportunities for them to learn all about the Grand Master, and they ignored or bypassed those opportunities ).
Hope that helps.
EDIT: I'm not as kind as DMThac0below :) Instead of " ... beyond a shadow of a doubt that the players knew ... " I would have drawn the line at ...whether or not the Characters had been provided with reasonable opportunity to learn ...
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
As Vedexent put it, it really depends on how much the players knew before going in to this fight.
A recent session I had put 3 of my players' characters at risk of death, one of them actually died. I had given them information that the choice they made was dangerous, first by having NPCs hurt, second by having one player severely injured, and lastly by reiterating what the players wanted to do, just to give them a chance to change their minds. Had they gone in to this action without any information about the dangers of their choice I would have found a way to show them the dangers without killing anyone. I believe it's only fair to give your players a freebie when the information was not easily available. I also believe that, if your players ignore the obvious, they should reap the consequences of their actions.
If the players didn't do anything to learn about the dangers of this Grand Master when it was easily found, they made the mistake. If the players ignored any NPCs, hints, blatant warning signs, or other information that you gave them about the Grand Master, it's their mistake. If, however, you failed to give them the information then it's on you. Failure to give them the information is easy to do because we, as DMs, feel that our hints and nudges are obvious and apparent, they aren't. Due to the fact that every player and DM understands information differently it's imperative that there be at least 2-3 blatant bits of information for them to acquire, otherwise they'll feel like they weren't warned properly.
As was said earlier, if you can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the players knew what they were getting into, then you could have let the attack go as described. If, on the other hand, you feel that there could have been more set up and that there could be a lack of information from your side of the screen, you handled it just fine.
This is why every party needs a divination wizard. Of course this would happen the day the wizard miraculously rolled two (or three?) nat 20s for his divination ability.
The Party itself doesn't have direct access to resurrection magic. They do have contacts with access to same.
I have no problem with characters dying in my campaigns. At session zero I always inform them that actions have consequences, sometimes fatal.
No clues per say as how dangerous the Grand Master could be in this adventure. However, in a previous adventure the Party recklessly entered a troll warren without proper preparation and lost a party member. I had hoped that the experience with the trolls would have cooled their heels. Unfortunately, one player learned nothing.
Character death is always a possibility, though I don't usually try to go for it.
If I felt the decapitation would have been to sudden (ie early in battle or character at high health), I would have still opted for dismemberment at least.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Last session my group started, Lost Laboratory of Kwalish. When the Party encountered the Grand Master the Wild Mage immediately attacked. in the first round the Grand Master scored a critical hit on the Wild Mage. According to the module the Grand Master's claws act like a vorpal blade. Instead of automatic decapitation, I had the character make a Dexterity Save (DC 16) to avoid decapitation, and take extra damage in its place.
How would you guys have handled the situation?
That depends on a number of factors:
If you Party is aware that Character death is a real possibility, and there had been clues in their adventure as to just how dangerous the Grand Master is, I would have decapitated the Character. Either the Character can remain dead, or there can be an entire other adventure to get someone to resurrect them.
If the Players hadn't really grasped the possibility of Character death ( or you are downplaying the possibilities of Character death, as part of your session zero agreements ) - or there was no possibility of them learning how dangerous the Grand Master was - then I would have pulled the punch as you did - although I may have seriously asked myself if I had failed to provide the clues that they needed in the adventure ( of course, it's a totally different thing if I provided the opportunities for them to learn all about the Grand Master, and they ignored or bypassed those opportunities ).
Hope that helps.
EDIT: I'm not as kind as DMThac0 below :) Instead of " ... beyond a shadow of a doubt that the players knew ... " I would have drawn the line at ...whether or not the Characters had been provided with reasonable opportunity to learn ...
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
As Vedexent put it, it really depends on how much the players knew before going in to this fight.
A recent session I had put 3 of my players' characters at risk of death, one of them actually died. I had given them information that the choice they made was dangerous, first by having NPCs hurt, second by having one player severely injured, and lastly by reiterating what the players wanted to do, just to give them a chance to change their minds. Had they gone in to this action without any information about the dangers of their choice I would have found a way to show them the dangers without killing anyone. I believe it's only fair to give your players a freebie when the information was not easily available. I also believe that, if your players ignore the obvious, they should reap the consequences of their actions.
If the players didn't do anything to learn about the dangers of this Grand Master when it was easily found, they made the mistake. If the players ignored any NPCs, hints, blatant warning signs, or other information that you gave them about the Grand Master, it's their mistake. If, however, you failed to give them the information then it's on you. Failure to give them the information is easy to do because we, as DMs, feel that our hints and nudges are obvious and apparent, they aren't. Due to the fact that every player and DM understands information differently it's imperative that there be at least 2-3 blatant bits of information for them to acquire, otherwise they'll feel like they weren't warned properly.
As was said earlier, if you can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that the players knew what they were getting into, then you could have let the attack go as described. If, on the other hand, you feel that there could have been more set up and that there could be a lack of information from your side of the screen, you handled it just fine.
This is why every party needs a divination wizard. Of course this would happen the day the wizard miraculously rolled two (or three?) nat 20s for his divination ability.
APL is 5th.
The Party itself doesn't have direct access to resurrection magic. They do have contacts with access to same.
I have no problem with characters dying in my campaigns. At session zero I always inform them that actions have consequences, sometimes fatal.
No clues per say as how dangerous the Grand Master could be in this adventure. However, in a previous adventure the Party recklessly entered a troll warren without proper preparation and lost a party member. I had hoped that the experience with the trolls would have cooled their heels. Unfortunately, one player learned nothing.
Character death is always a possibility, though I don't usually try to go for it.
If I felt the decapitation would have been to sudden (ie early in battle or character at high health), I would have still opted for dismemberment at least.