If that's the case then you can go ahead and do it... have a good, solid, thorough, very clear session 0. Make sure all of them are on board and understand that in this campaign, unlike the previous ones, they will be playing without a net.
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.
DEFINITELY warn them ahead of time that it is going to be dangerous. Let them know that there is a chance, when it goes down (and they'll *know* when it goes down) that not all of them will survive the night. Then...
Don't make them lose, make them *choose*. This has been touched on before. Put them in situations where they have to choose which fight, or who to rescue or rest vs going out again.
But bottom line, they will either get on board, or they won't. There is nothing wrong with finding new players.
Incidentally, the opening adventure for Hoard of the Dragon Queen could be exactly what you are after.
Take a small break from your campaign and play a one-shot where all of the players play as orcs & goblinoids. At the end of the one-shot, absolutely DESTROY them with their own characters. Not only do they feel the consequences of failure without consequence, but they also get to realize the brutality of their own characters. This should be a wake-up call and show them exactly how much their choices affect others.
Once, my players attempted to coerce a cook into poisoning his master's dinner. They had snuck into a villain's lair, essentially, and thought this would be a clever way to take him out without facing him directly. Little did they know he had a young daughter (and his wife) staying there as well.
Once, my players attempted to "hero character" their way through an investigation with the usual "we're the PCs so of course everyone should listen to us, and if they don't let us get our way then they're probably the bad guys." It resulted in them not trusting an NPC that was basically designed specifically to help them, which resulted in said NPC not trusting them, which ultimately resulted in them being too late to save a lot of people from a grisly fate.
Once, my players decided to try and strong-arm the admiral of a powerful faction. They ended up kicked off his ship rathe than him helping them like he was originally going to do.
----
Ultimately, a lot of what you will do is based on your players. I know my group well enough to know that while it might frustrate them a bit to pay the price for their attempts to treat the game like a game, they trust me to create a compelling and immersive experience despite that. We've passed the three year mark on one of my campaigns and are approaching it on the other, and so far I haven't driven any of them to rage quit on me. Instead, we just had an hour long discussion after a different person's game (which a few of us play in) where they talked to another player about how worried there were for some NPCs they're escorting, how they've known them for like two years now and if any of them died they'd never forgive themselves. So I'd say the "imparting real-world consequences" went well.
But again, this is all down to your group. Some groups simply aren't built for that kind of game and they WANT to be the group of main characters with plot immunity. That said, you also have to decide if you want to run that kind of game, and if you want something different from your players, well... You're also a player regardless of your title at the table, and you, too, should have fun considering you're putting in a lot of work.
I think there's another element of "Game Age". I'm playing with a group of relatively new players who are of the mind that DND is whatever it happens to be at the table; they are not coming with too many preconceived notions about plot immunity, how people should treat them, or how often characters should die. On the other hand, I've been around way longer than I should be so happy to admit and I DO have ideas of what I like and don't like when it comes to things like hearing a DM say "you should have known that Soandso woiuld have helped you if you had been nice him" or "yep.. that's 20 hp damage, and you're into death saves even though this is a random encounter".
As others said it is communication so your players understand. I did a lot of work with my players before the campaign started to build up an attachment, but your players must want that kind of game.
To help them understand your campaign you could work with them when it comes to character backstory. Don't just accept what they give you. If a player says his family was killed by bandits so he went off and killed the bandits and that's how he became a fighter, then talk to them to adjust it, they couldn't find the bandits, the bandits beat them and left them for dead, or they understood they had to get stronger. Emphasise that they are not heroes yet, that is part of the journey to come, the story yet to be told, and it won't happen at level 1.
Help them develop characters they are attached to. A town under attack, could it be from someones backstory. An NPC in danger, from someones backstory. This will give your players a reason to take the 'save an NPC option' over the 'face off an army.' Rather than forcing them to like/ally to an NPC in just a few sessions, those friendships and trusts can then build up more naturally over time. It is not always to kill off elements of their backstory, but to use them as hooks to set the serious tone of the choice set before them.
This in turn gives you more flavour for your world. From towns and organisations to allies and enemies. It can help add an element of attachment to the world if their backstory has had an impact on it's creation. It can mean side quests can be linked to backstories rather than just a random monster/bad guy hunt.
Ultimately it is about having fun. That means you as a DM as well, otherwise you will lose your motivation to continue the campaign. If the players are a type whose style doesn't fit what you had in mind, then let one of the others DM and you be a player.
I favor the wave after wave of easy enemies as the front line gets closer depleting the player resources and the numbers don't stop shouldn't take long for the players to realize they need to run and or hide. from shining beacons of light, they have now become wanted guerilla style fighters where they cant trust anyone too long or the enemy will find them and the hurt they will bring down on the commoners..
If that's the case then you can go ahead and do it... have a good, solid, thorough, very clear session 0. Make sure all of them are on board and understand that in this campaign, unlike the previous ones, they will be playing without a net.
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.
DEFINITELY warn them ahead of time that it is going to be dangerous. Let them know that there is a chance, when it goes down (and they'll *know* when it goes down) that not all of them will survive the night. Then...
Don't make them lose, make them *choose*. This has been touched on before. Put them in situations where they have to choose which fight, or who to rescue or rest vs going out again.
But bottom line, they will either get on board, or they won't. There is nothing wrong with finding new players.
Incidentally, the opening adventure for Hoard of the Dragon Queen could be exactly what you are after.
Take a small break from your campaign and play a one-shot where all of the players play as orcs & goblinoids. At the end of the one-shot, absolutely DESTROY them with their own characters. Not only do they feel the consequences of failure without consequence, but they also get to realize the brutality of their own characters. This should be a wake-up call and show them exactly how much their choices affect others.
Once, my players attempted to coerce a cook into poisoning his master's dinner. They had snuck into a villain's lair, essentially, and thought this would be a clever way to take him out without facing him directly. Little did they know he had a young daughter (and his wife) staying there as well.
Once, my players attempted to "hero character" their way through an investigation with the usual "we're the PCs so of course everyone should listen to us, and if they don't let us get our way then they're probably the bad guys." It resulted in them not trusting an NPC that was basically designed specifically to help them, which resulted in said NPC not trusting them, which ultimately resulted in them being too late to save a lot of people from a grisly fate.
Once, my players decided to try and strong-arm the admiral of a powerful faction. They ended up kicked off his ship rathe than him helping them like he was originally going to do.
----
Ultimately, a lot of what you will do is based on your players. I know my group well enough to know that while it might frustrate them a bit to pay the price for their attempts to treat the game like a game, they trust me to create a compelling and immersive experience despite that. We've passed the three year mark on one of my campaigns and are approaching it on the other, and so far I haven't driven any of them to rage quit on me. Instead, we just had an hour long discussion after a different person's game (which a few of us play in) where they talked to another player about how worried there were for some NPCs they're escorting, how they've known them for like two years now and if any of them died they'd never forgive themselves. So I'd say the "imparting real-world consequences" went well.
But again, this is all down to your group. Some groups simply aren't built for that kind of game and they WANT to be the group of main characters with plot immunity. That said, you also have to decide if you want to run that kind of game, and if you want something different from your players, well... You're also a player regardless of your title at the table, and you, too, should have fun considering you're putting in a lot of work.
Adding in to the above:
I think there's another element of "Game Age". I'm playing with a group of relatively new players who are of the mind that DND is whatever it happens to be at the table; they are not coming with too many preconceived notions about plot immunity, how people should treat them, or how often characters should die. On the other hand, I've been around way longer than I should be so happy to admit and I DO have ideas of what I like and don't like when it comes to things like hearing a DM say "you should have known that Soandso woiuld have helped you if you had been nice him" or "yep.. that's 20 hp damage, and you're into death saves even though this is a random encounter".
"Teller of tales, dreamer of dreams"
Tips, Tricks, Maps: Lantern Noir Presents
**Streams hosted at at twitch.tv/LaternNoir
As others said it is communication so your players understand. I did a lot of work with my players before the campaign started to build up an attachment, but your players must want that kind of game.
To help them understand your campaign you could work with them when it comes to character backstory. Don't just accept what they give you. If a player says his family was killed by bandits so he went off and killed the bandits and that's how he became a fighter, then talk to them to adjust it, they couldn't find the bandits, the bandits beat them and left them for dead, or they understood they had to get stronger. Emphasise that they are not heroes yet, that is part of the journey to come, the story yet to be told, and it won't happen at level 1.
Help them develop characters they are attached to. A town under attack, could it be from someones backstory. An NPC in danger, from someones backstory. This will give your players a reason to take the 'save an NPC option' over the 'face off an army.' Rather than forcing them to like/ally to an NPC in just a few sessions, those friendships and trusts can then build up more naturally over time. It is not always to kill off elements of their backstory, but to use them as hooks to set the serious tone of the choice set before them.
This in turn gives you more flavour for your world. From towns and organisations to allies and enemies. It can help add an element of attachment to the world if their backstory has had an impact on it's creation. It can mean side quests can be linked to backstories rather than just a random monster/bad guy hunt.
Ultimately it is about having fun. That means you as a DM as well, otherwise you will lose your motivation to continue the campaign. If the players are a type whose style doesn't fit what you had in mind, then let one of the others DM and you be a player.
I favor the wave after wave of easy enemies as the front line gets closer depleting the player resources and the numbers don't stop shouldn't take long for the players to realize they need to run and or hide. from shining beacons of light, they have now become wanted guerilla style fighters where they cant trust anyone too long or the enemy will find them and the hurt they will bring down on the commoners..
I think your idea is awesome.
https://www.latorra.org/2012/05/15/a-16-hp-dragon/