One player got a bit cheeky and decided to juggle the skulls. He failed his acrobatics check and dropped one shattering it. The vengeful spirit of the dwarf appeared and attacked him and only him (he was the one who defiled his remains)
They killed the spirit off and then the player proceeded to drop another one...on purpose. Now another spirit is summoned with same intent: Kill the thing that defiled my remains.
Low on health the player decided to heal up....just kidding he decided to drop the last skull. Now two spirts are loose at the same time and both just trying to kill the creature that defiled their remains.
Player drops to 0 and the others miss their attacks. The two spirits attack the downed player and kill him.
Now was I a right in doing this? Should I have kept attacking him? In the situation I felt that is the way the spirits would have acted given the circumstances. I did feel a bit guilty afterwards and still do. I always feel guilty with PC deaths.
However I think I gave ample examples of cause/effect and that the player should see how it would play out if they continued to do what they did and ultimately thats what matters.
One player got a bit cheeky and decided to juggle the skulls. He failed his acrobatics check and dropped one shattering it. The vengeful spirit of the dwarf appeared and attacked him and only him (he was the one who defiled his remains)
They killed the spirit off and then the player proceeded to drop another one...on purpose. Now another spirit is summoned with same intent: Kill the thing that defiled my remains.
Low on health the player decided to heal up....just kidding he decided to drop the last skull. Now two spirts are loose at the same time and both just trying to kill the creature that defiled their remains.
Player drops to 0 and the others miss their attacks. The two spirits attack the downed player and kill him.
Now was I a right in doing this? Should I have kept attacking him? In the situation I felt that is the way the spirits would have acted given the circumstances. I did feel a bit guilty afterwards and still do. I always feel guilty with PC deaths.
However I think I gave ample examples of cause/effect and that the player should see how it would play out if they continued to do what they did and ultimately thats what matters.
Sounds fine to me; the spirits specifically went after a goofball PC who was intentionally summoning them by desecrating their remains. Their only purpose was to avenge the insult done to their skulls. Why would they attack anyone else?
I like the poll, I think it was a good idea, if I do say so myself.
34 votes cast, 14 for yes, 20 for no. I've had a great time watching it go from overwhelmingly "no" to more and more "yes" as time goes on. I should have paid more attention before. I have no idea what the numbers were. I wish they would show without having to mouse over them. A bit more than 40% for Yes, a bit less than 60% for No. It can't be long before 50-50 comes calling.
Specifically, in order to remain on topic, I voted for No, and I am not changing it. I think attacking downed player characters in general is a bad idea. (Yes, I would kill OptimusGrimus's idiot in a heartbeat. They brought it on themselves in spite of clear warnings and every effort the rest of the party took to try and save them. Still vote no.)
Depends on their intelligence and the situation. I had a bullywug down one of my lvl 1 pc's and ran into cover instead of attacking again because the rest of the party was either charging towards their friend or hurling whatever they could at it.
One player got a bit cheeky and decided to juggle the skulls. He failed his acrobatics check and dropped one shattering it. The vengeful spirit of the dwarf appeared and attacked him and only him (he was the one who defiled his remains)
They killed the spirit off and then the player proceeded to drop another one...on purpose. Now another spirit is summoned with same intent: Kill the thing that defiled my remains.
Low on health the player decided to heal up....just kidding he decided to drop the last skull. Now two spirts are loose at the same time and both just trying to kill the creature that defiled their remains.
Player drops to 0 and the others miss their attacks. The two spirits attack the downed player and kill him.
Now was I a right in doing this? Should I have kept attacking him? In the situation I felt that is the way the spirits would have acted given the circumstances. I did feel a bit guilty afterwards and still do. I always feel guilty with PC deaths.
However I think I gave ample examples of cause/effect and that the player should see how it would play out if they continued to do what they did and ultimately thats what matters.
Sounds fine to me; the spirits specifically went after a goofball PC who was intentionally summoning them by desecrating their remains. Their only purpose was to avenge the insult done to their skulls. Why would they attack anyone else?
Yeah its just an example of a time I felt that the creatures would be very vindictive and single minded that could reasonably exist in a game.
Likely I would not make such single minded creatures a lot but in this case that was the scenario. I will admit it feels good to hear others validate my thoughts on it because it does still give me some guilt but...thats when you know you made something good is that you care about it so much I guess? Not sure...but I will keep trying!
I can certainly see occasions where attacking downed PCs would be appropriate (a predator with no other threats, an assassin, the angry Dwarf spirits above) but in general I don't think it is a good idea. This came up recently in a game I'm playing in, in our case the DM did attack downed PCs and we (the players) did not take that well. We were engaging some very challenging enemies, I had just killed one and two of the other party members were engaging a different one. I took the turn to heal (since I was nearly dead and I knew the AOE attack they had would finish me if it hit) and verbally taunted the remaining enemy to encourage him to engage me instead (since the other two were also almost dead). The enemy declined my challenge, used its AOE and knocked out both PCs, the DM then had it make its second AOE attack on the downed characters. This left them with only one death save left, fortunately they both made their save on their turns and on my turn I got a crit and rolled maximum damage, unexpected finishing off the other enemy. Only to find out they explode when they die.
We were all a little shocked, the DM hadn't intended to kill their characters (though he made choices that allowed that to happen) and the players (particularly those whose characters had just been killed) were not happy about it. The DM quickly came up with justification for a Resurrection spell in a game where bringing the dead back to life is ostensibly prohibited, it ended up being a nice RP beat for me but I suspect the DM won't be hitting characters when they're down in the future.
Yeah, AOE'ing multiple downed characters is pretty extreme, as a GM.
Heck, I didn't have villains generally attack downed heroes in Champions, most of the time, and in that game you're usually just unconscious. It could potentially be tactically beneficial, because being from 0 to -10 STUN means you can recover on each phase (turn), and most heroes would be back in the fight fairly quickly. Also, attacking them and damaging them prevents them from taking the recovery. And with them being down and their defenses likely off, one shot of a character at -5 or something, will take them to -25 and that is "once per minute" recovery, i.e., completely out of the battle. Usually this wouldn't kill anyone. But even so, not just me, but almost no GM ever had a villain attack a downed character. It's the GM equivalent of a "low blow."
Might it be in character for the villain to do it? Perhaps. But it's not very sporting of the GM, and this is not a novel, it is a game -- and the players on the other side of the screen came to play it, not to watch everyone else play while they sat there with an unconscious PC. So in Champions, I always let the 0 to -10 PCs have a chance to wake up and recover. If they stayed on the ground, feigning unconsciousness, and kept recovering (because it's kind of stupid to end your turn by standing up with only 3 or 4 STUN, since you will get KO'ed again the next time you get hit), I would let them continue recovering, and get back into the fight. Maybe it's not "realistic," but it's sure as hell more engaging for the player and it is super fun for the table when the guy you thought was down wakes up, and gets the KO'ing shot on the big bad villain from behind, when everyone thought he was out of the fight.
Again, this is a game. It needs to be fun. Being attacked while downed, is not fun. This is not to say no character should ever die, and there may be limited circumstances under which it is appropriate to attack a downed character... Once or twice I had a villain attack a standing hero with an AOE or Explosion power and the downed guy got caught in the radius. Oh well, that's luck and it happens. But I would not purposely go after downed characters. It's unsporting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BioWizard
I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Yeah, AOE'ing multiple downed characters is pretty extreme, as a GM.
Though there's the edge case of 'downed characters as collateral damage'; it's not that you're trying to hit them, it's just that you're not trying to not hit them.
Yes, I did mention that this happened a few times in Champions, when an AOE or Explosion centered on another character also happened to hit a downed character in the radius. But as you say it is pretty rare.
In the example stated above, though, the DM purposely AOE attacked the downed characters, after they were downed, because they were downed. And did it knowing that when the NPC died it would explode and do damage to the downed characters again. That's pretty extreme.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BioWizard
I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I can certainly see occasions where attacking downed PCs would be appropriate (a predator with no other threats, an assassin, the angry Dwarf spirits above) but in general I don't think it is a good idea. This came up recently in a game I'm playing in, in our case the DM did attack downed PCs and we (the players) did not take that well. We were engaging some very challenging enemies, I had just killed one and two of the other party members were engaging a different one. I took the turn to heal (since I was nearly dead and I knew the AOE attack they had would finish me if it hit) and verbally taunted the remaining enemy to encourage him to engage me instead (since the other two were also almost dead). The enemy declined my challenge, used its AOE and knocked out both PCs, the DM then had it make its second AOE attack on the downed characters. This left them with only one death save left, fortunately they both made their save on their turns and on my turn I got a crit and rolled maximum damage, unexpected finishing off the other enemy. Only to find out they explode when they die.
We were all a little shocked, the DM hadn't intended to kill their characters (though he made choices that allowed that to happen) and the players (particularly those whose characters had just been killed) were not happy about it. The DM quickly came up with justification for a Resurrection spell in a game where bringing the dead back to life is ostensibly prohibited, it ended up being a nice RP beat for me but I suspect the DM won't be hitting characters when they're down in the future.
Honestly I think your DM played it correctly. This powerful villain was not distracted by your attempt (I would have allowed a performance check if you hadn’t used your action already) and proceeded to blast the other two with his AOE, following with what the villain though and hoped would be a killing blow of another blast as they fell. (Queue the evil cackle)
You see the thing to keep in mind is: “The monsters want to win.”
That is a quote from Matt Colville, a great GM and YouTuber.
The DM should play their monsters like this, and the players shouldn’t get angry about it. Not to say they should unrealistically target downed players just to be mean, but in this case it made perfect sense.
Yeah, AOE'ing multiple downed characters is pretty extreme, as a GM.
Heck, I didn't have villains generally attack downed heroes in Champions, most of the time, and in that game you're usually just unconscious. It could potentially be tactically beneficial, because being from 0 to -10 STUN means you can recover on each phase (turn), and most heroes would be back in the fight fairly quickly. Also, attacking them and damaging them prevents them from taking the recovery. And with them being down and their defenses likely off, one shot of a character at -5 or something, will take them to -25 and that is "once per minute" recovery, i.e., completely out of the battle. Usually this wouldn't kill anyone. But even so, not just me, but almost no GM ever had a villain attack a downed character. It's the GM equivalent of a "low blow."
Been a while since I ran Champions, but it really didn't have the issues that make it appealing in 5e. Sure, you could go down and get back up again, but you lost a minimum of one phase doing it, and you weren't likely to to it more than once per fight because if you stood up with five stun and got punched again you were probably down for the count.
You see the thing to keep in mind is: “The monsters want to win.”
That is a quote from Matt Colville, a great GM and YouTuber.
Right. And Matt also talked about how he will have the villain NOT kill downed characters but instead let them live and have the villain say some line about "Live with the knowledge of your failure, and that you were defeated, and know that next time, I will kill you." He admits it's kind of cheesy and unrealistic but is preferable to killing downed characters.
The monsters may want to win, but the DM should be a good sport about it. And attacking downed characters, in most cases, isn't very sporting. Being realistic and in character is all well and good, but only as long as everyone is having fun. And being wiped while unconscious isn't generally fun for most people.
Been a while since I ran Champions, but it really didn't have the issues that make it appealing in 5e. Sure, you could go down and get back up again, but you lost a minimum of one phase doing it, and you weren't likely to to it more than once per fight because if you stood up with five stun and got punched again you were probably down for the count.
That's why I said that smart players would recover to 4 or 5 STUN and then say, "I stay on the ground and play dead," and then next phase recover to 18 or so and THEN get up.
As a GM, I generally allowed it, and generally did not bother to have villains attempt to make Perception rolls vs. the downed guy to see if he was getting up because, well, that wouldn't have been any fun for the player. They already lost a couple of phases being unconscious. No need to take them out for what is left of the battle.
Again, I was not the only one. I am not aware of any GM in our group that had the villains attack the PCs while they were downed as a matter of course.
Now, there was one guy I had, named Executioner, who was a homicidal maniac and wanted to kill as many people as possible, including heroes. He *would* attack a downed character and try to kill them, but I made sure the players all knew it, and if someone went down in front of him, the whole team went into overdrive trying to get Executioner either out, or the eff away from that downed character (not hard to do in Champions, thanks to the Knockback rules).
One player got a bit cheeky and decided to juggle the skulls. He failed his acrobatics check and dropped one shattering it. The vengeful spirit of the dwarf appeared and attacked him and only him (he was the one who defiled his remains)
They killed the spirit off and then the player proceeded to drop another one...on purpose. Now another spirit is summoned with same intent: Kill the thing that defiled my remains.
Low on health the player decided to heal up....just kidding he decided to drop the last skull. Now two spirts are loose at the same time and both just trying to kill the creature that defiled their remains.
Player drops to 0 and the others miss their attacks. The two spirits attack the downed player and kill him.
Now was I a right in doing this? Should I have kept attacking him? In the situation I felt that is the way the spirits would have acted given the circumstances. I did feel a bit guilty afterwards and still do. I always feel guilty with PC deaths.
However I think I gave ample examples of cause/effect and that the player should see how it would play out if they continued to do what they did and ultimately thats what matters.
He had it coming. Defiling remains is bad enough, but evil AND stupid? That’s worthy of death.
Now for some edge cases I'd be curious how people feel about:
Two stirges attack a PC, and the second one drops him. If they wait until draining 10 points of blood each, the PC is dead.
A Giant Toad swallows a PC and reduces him to 0 hp, so dead unless someone kills the toad fast. Does it change the situation if the toad, being no longer hungry, runs away after swallowing someone?
A Fire Elemental reduces a PC to 0 hp, and also sets him on fire. Will the fire go out on its own, or is he dead without assistance? Bonus question: do you roll death saves before or after the fire damage? Makes a difference if he rolls a 20 on a death save, as if done after he will be instantly dropped back to 0.
An evil warlock casts Hunger of Hadar and a PC is dropped by the initial cold damage (meaning he automatically takes the acid damage for an automatic failed death check). If the PC is still in the zone one round later, he's dead (since it does damage twice per round, it's two automatic fails per round). And of course the spell blocks vision so no Healing Word.
You see the thing to keep in mind is: “The monsters want to win.”
That is a quote from Matt Colville, a great GM and YouTuber.
Right. And Matt also talked about how he will have the villain NOT kill downed characters but instead let them live and have the villain say some line about "Live with the knowledge of your failure, and that you were defeated, and know that next time, I will kill you." He admits it's kind of cheesy and unrealistic but is preferable to killing downed characters.
The monsters may want to win, but the DM should be a good sport about it. And attacking downed characters, in most cases, isn't very sporting. Being realistic and in character is all well and good, but only as long as everyone is having fun. And being wiped while unconscious isn't generally fun for most people.
Been a while since I ran Champions, but it really didn't have the issues that make it appealing in 5e. Sure, you could go down and get back up again, but you lost a minimum of one phase doing it, and you weren't likely to to it more than once per fight because if you stood up with five stun and got punched again you were probably down for the count.
That's why I said that smart players would recover to 4 or 5 STUN and then say, "I stay on the ground and play dead," and then next phase recover to 18 or so and THEN get up.
As a GM, I generally allowed it, and generally did not bother to have villains attempt to make Perception rolls vs. the downed guy to see if he was getting up because, well, that wouldn't have been any fun for the player. They already lost a couple of phases being unconscious. No need to take them out for what is left of the battle.
Again, I was not the only one. I am not aware of any GM in our group that had the villains attack the PCs while they were downed as a matter of course.
Now, there was one guy I had, named Executioner, who was a homicidal maniac and wanted to kill as many people as possible, including heroes. He *would* attack a downed character and try to kill them, but I made sure the players all knew it, and if someone went down in front of him, the whole team went into overdrive trying to get Executioner either out, or the eff away from that downed character (not hard to do in Champions, thanks to the Knockback rules).
There is no mechanic in 5e that allows for lasting effects, but it would be nice to have some kind of effect in between 0HP/ unconscious and "dead dead."
There is no mechanic in 5e that allows for lasting effects, but it would be nice to have some kind of effect in between 0HP/ unconscious and "dead dead."
There are a few monsters such as the giant spider that trigger effects on being reduced to 0 hp that are incapacitating but not fatal. Certainly possible to add more. Of course, then there's the monsters that just kill you if you hit zero hp.
Now for some edge cases I'd be curious how people feel about:
Two stirges attack a PC, and the second one drops him. If they wait until draining 10 points of blood each, the PC is dead.
A Giant Toad swallows a PC and reduces him to 0 hp, so dead unless someone kills the toad fast. Does it change the situation if the toad, being no longer hungry, runs away after swallowing someone?
A Fire Elemental reduces a PC to 0 hp, and also sets him on fire. Will the fire go out on its own, or is he dead without assistance? Bonus question: do you roll death saves before or after the fire damage? Makes a difference if he rolls a 20 on a death save, as if done after he will be instantly dropped back to 0.
An evil warlock casts Hunger of Hadar and a PC is dropped by the initial cold damage (meaning he automatically takes the acid damage for an automatic failed death check). If the PC is still in the zone one round later, he's dead (since it does damage twice per round, it's two automatic fails per round). And of course the spell blocks vision so no Healing Word.
"Two stirges attack a PC, and the second one drops him. If they wait until draining 10 points of blood each, the PC is dead."
Yup. Given that anyone in the party could remove a stirge automatically with an action, it is unlikely this would occur - but if it does, it does. The Stirge isn't going to stop feeding just because the target drops unconscious. If anything, an unconscious target is more appealing as it would be less risk.
"A Giant Toad swallows a PC and reduces him to 0 hp, so dead unless someone kills the toad fast. Does it change the situation if the toad, being no longer hungry, runs away after swallowing someone?"
I would only have the toad run away if it was starting to get hurt a lot - not many creatures stick around if they're getting too hurt and have a chance to escape. So if the toad's had his meal and getting hurt too much - he'll be taking his leave. Even if that means taking the swallowed character with him.
"A Fire Elemental reduces a PC to 0 hp, and also sets him on fire. Will the fire go out on its own, or is he dead without assistance? Bonus question: do you roll death saves before or after the fire damage? Makes a difference if he rolls a 20 on a death save, as if done after he will be instantly dropped back to 0."
The fire doesn't go out on its own. As for the start of turn - if nobody can get to the character, they're dead no matter which is first. But if there's a chance somebody can get to them, rolling first seems best. If they roll first and succeed, then they get a success and a failure. If the roll first and fail, they get two failures. If they roll second and succeed they get one success and one fail, and if they roll second and fail they get two failures. If they roll first and get three successes in a row the third automatic fire damage will undo it, bring them back to dying but stabilising means they've reset those death saves and that damage would not count as an autofail. Whereas if they roll second that 3rd autofail will kill them before they have a chance to stabilise.
So rolling second, guarantees death in 3 turns. Rolling first gives a chance to prolong things and therefore more chance for somebody to come douse the flames. But, there is no chance to ever stay stable and get up. It's a loop that only ends with failure or keeps cycling with success -- and I'm not a fan of playing out this loop especially when it gets beyond unrealistic.
If there's nobody else around I wouldn't bother making them roll. Nobody can burn for minutes to hours on end and survive, and this is beyond the mechanics of a "combat" the death saves were for. So, I'd consider the circumstance : can the party get to the person within 30 seconds? If yes, we'll say the person survived just long enough to be saved. If not, then it would require a miracle: rain if outside, a random NPC, etc. So I'd have them roll a 1d20. On a 20 something happens to douse the flames and stabilise them. On a 2 to 19 they die but end up a charred corpse - which can be revived or brought back with raise dead or resurrection. On a 1, they are ash alone and only a True Resurrection would bring them back.
"An evil warlock casts Hunger of Hadar and a PC is dropped by the initial cold damage (meaning he automatically takes the acid damage for an automatic failed death check). If the PC is still in the zone one round later, he's dead (since it does damage twice per round, it's two automatic fails per round). And of course the spell blocks vision so no Healing Word."
Yup. But, again, I would have them roll death save first - if they get a Nat 20 they get the chance to possibly do something to save themselves.
I like the poll, I think it was a good idea, if I do say so myself.
34 votes cast, 14 for yes, 20 for no. I've had a great time watching it go from overwhelmingly "no" to more and more "yes" as time goes on. I should have paid more attention before. I have no idea what the numbers were. I wish they would show without having to mouse over them. A bit more than 40% for Yes, a bit less than 60% for No. It can't be long before 50-50 comes calling.
I specifically voted NO only because of the "In General" part of the question.
There will always be occasions where a creature WOULD hit a downed PC, such as the Revenant-style spirits mentioned above.
When i DM, most creatures attack character that still pose an immediate threat to them. Only the most raveneous creature will attack unconscious character in combat as opposed to threatening ones. I often have intelligent creatures attacking downed character though, especially if it witness them being revived and it fights to death.
This is a good thread. I usually let creatures focus on the live characters, because they pose a real threat. But there's a thing I really look forward to try... What if the villains have a precise order to KILL the adventurers? Maybe setting a lower CR for the encounter but playing the monsters viciously and recklessly...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I had an encounter that killed a player recently:
They were solving a puzzle with dwarf skulls.
One player got a bit cheeky and decided to juggle the skulls. He failed his acrobatics check and dropped one shattering it. The vengeful spirit of the dwarf appeared and attacked him and only him (he was the one who defiled his remains)
They killed the spirit off and then the player proceeded to drop another one...on purpose. Now another spirit is summoned with same intent: Kill the thing that defiled my remains.
Low on health the player decided to heal up....just kidding he decided to drop the last skull. Now two spirts are loose at the same time and both just trying to kill the creature that defiled their remains.
Player drops to 0 and the others miss their attacks. The two spirits attack the downed player and kill him.
Now was I a right in doing this? Should I have kept attacking him? In the situation I felt that is the way the spirits would have acted given the circumstances. I did feel a bit guilty afterwards and still do. I always feel guilty with PC deaths.
However I think I gave ample examples of cause/effect and that the player should see how it would play out if they continued to do what they did and ultimately thats what matters.
Sounds fine to me; the spirits specifically went after a goofball PC who was intentionally summoning them by desecrating their remains. Their only purpose was to avenge the insult done to their skulls. Why would they attack anyone else?
I like the poll, I think it was a good idea, if I do say so myself.
34 votes cast, 14 for yes, 20 for no. I've had a great time watching it go from overwhelmingly "no" to more and more "yes" as time goes on. I should have paid more attention before. I have no idea what the numbers were. I wish they would show without having to mouse over them. A bit more than 40% for Yes, a bit less than 60% for No. It can't be long before 50-50 comes calling.
Specifically, in order to remain on topic, I voted for No, and I am not changing it. I think attacking downed player characters in general is a bad idea. (Yes, I would kill OptimusGrimus's idiot in a heartbeat. They brought it on themselves in spite of clear warnings and every effort the rest of the party took to try and save them. Still vote no.)
<Insert clever signature here>
Depends on their intelligence and the situation. I had a bullywug down one of my lvl 1 pc's and ran into cover instead of attacking again because the rest of the party was either charging towards their friend or hurling whatever they could at it.
Yeah its just an example of a time I felt that the creatures would be very vindictive and single minded that could reasonably exist in a game.
Likely I would not make such single minded creatures a lot but in this case that was the scenario. I will admit it feels good to hear others validate my thoughts on it because it does still give me some guilt but...thats when you know you made something good is that you care about it so much I guess? Not sure...but I will keep trying!
I can certainly see occasions where attacking downed PCs would be appropriate (a predator with no other threats, an assassin, the angry Dwarf spirits above) but in general I don't think it is a good idea. This came up recently in a game I'm playing in, in our case the DM did attack downed PCs and we (the players) did not take that well. We were engaging some very challenging enemies, I had just killed one and two of the other party members were engaging a different one. I took the turn to heal (since I was nearly dead and I knew the AOE attack they had would finish me if it hit) and verbally taunted the remaining enemy to encourage him to engage me instead (since the other two were also almost dead). The enemy declined my challenge, used its AOE and knocked out both PCs, the DM then had it make its second AOE attack on the downed characters. This left them with only one death save left, fortunately they both made their save on their turns and on my turn I got a crit and rolled maximum damage, unexpected finishing off the other enemy. Only to find out they explode when they die.
We were all a little shocked, the DM hadn't intended to kill their characters (though he made choices that allowed that to happen) and the players (particularly those whose characters had just been killed) were not happy about it. The DM quickly came up with justification for a Resurrection spell in a game where bringing the dead back to life is ostensibly prohibited, it ended up being a nice RP beat for me but I suspect the DM won't be hitting characters when they're down in the future.
Yeah, AOE'ing multiple downed characters is pretty extreme, as a GM.
Heck, I didn't have villains generally attack downed heroes in Champions, most of the time, and in that game you're usually just unconscious. It could potentially be tactically beneficial, because being from 0 to -10 STUN means you can recover on each phase (turn), and most heroes would be back in the fight fairly quickly. Also, attacking them and damaging them prevents them from taking the recovery. And with them being down and their defenses likely off, one shot of a character at -5 or something, will take them to -25 and that is "once per minute" recovery, i.e., completely out of the battle. Usually this wouldn't kill anyone. But even so, not just me, but almost no GM ever had a villain attack a downed character. It's the GM equivalent of a "low blow."
Might it be in character for the villain to do it? Perhaps. But it's not very sporting of the GM, and this is not a novel, it is a game -- and the players on the other side of the screen came to play it, not to watch everyone else play while they sat there with an unconscious PC. So in Champions, I always let the 0 to -10 PCs have a chance to wake up and recover. If they stayed on the ground, feigning unconsciousness, and kept recovering (because it's kind of stupid to end your turn by standing up with only 3 or 4 STUN, since you will get KO'ed again the next time you get hit), I would let them continue recovering, and get back into the fight. Maybe it's not "realistic," but it's sure as hell more engaging for the player and it is super fun for the table when the guy you thought was down wakes up, and gets the KO'ing shot on the big bad villain from behind, when everyone thought he was out of the fight.
Again, this is a game. It needs to be fun. Being attacked while downed, is not fun. This is not to say no character should ever die, and there may be limited circumstances under which it is appropriate to attack a downed character... Once or twice I had a villain attack a standing hero with an AOE or Explosion power and the downed guy got caught in the radius. Oh well, that's luck and it happens. But I would not purposely go after downed characters. It's unsporting.
BioWizard
I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Though there's the edge case of 'downed characters as collateral damage'; it's not that you're trying to hit them, it's just that you're not trying to not hit them.
Yes, I did mention that this happened a few times in Champions, when an AOE or Explosion centered on another character also happened to hit a downed character in the radius. But as you say it is pretty rare.
In the example stated above, though, the DM purposely AOE attacked the downed characters, after they were downed, because they were downed. And did it knowing that when the NPC died it would explode and do damage to the downed characters again. That's pretty extreme.
BioWizard
I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Honestly I think your DM played it correctly. This powerful villain was not distracted by your attempt (I would have allowed a performance check if you hadn’t used your action already) and proceeded to blast the other two with his AOE, following with what the villain though and hoped would be a killing blow of another blast as they fell. (Queue the evil cackle)
You see the thing to keep in mind is: “The monsters want to win.”
That is a quote from Matt Colville, a great GM and YouTuber.
The DM should play their monsters like this, and the players shouldn’t get angry about it. Not to say they should unrealistically target downed players just to be mean, but in this case it made perfect sense.
Been a while since I ran Champions, but it really didn't have the issues that make it appealing in 5e. Sure, you could go down and get back up again, but you lost a minimum of one phase doing it, and you weren't likely to to it more than once per fight because if you stood up with five stun and got punched again you were probably down for the count.
Right. And Matt also talked about how he will have the villain NOT kill downed characters but instead let them live and have the villain say some line about "Live with the knowledge of your failure, and that you were defeated, and know that next time, I will kill you." He admits it's kind of cheesy and unrealistic but is preferable to killing downed characters.
The monsters may want to win, but the DM should be a good sport about it. And attacking downed characters, in most cases, isn't very sporting. Being realistic and in character is all well and good, but only as long as everyone is having fun. And being wiped while unconscious isn't generally fun for most people.
That's why I said that smart players would recover to 4 or 5 STUN and then say, "I stay on the ground and play dead," and then next phase recover to 18 or so and THEN get up.
As a GM, I generally allowed it, and generally did not bother to have villains attempt to make Perception rolls vs. the downed guy to see if he was getting up because, well, that wouldn't have been any fun for the player. They already lost a couple of phases being unconscious. No need to take them out for what is left of the battle.
Again, I was not the only one. I am not aware of any GM in our group that had the villains attack the PCs while they were downed as a matter of course.
Now, there was one guy I had, named Executioner, who was a homicidal maniac and wanted to kill as many people as possible, including heroes. He *would* attack a downed character and try to kill them, but I made sure the players all knew it, and if someone went down in front of him, the whole team went into overdrive trying to get Executioner either out, or the eff away from that downed character (not hard to do in Champions, thanks to the Knockback rules).
BioWizard
I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
He had it coming. Defiling remains is bad enough, but evil AND stupid? That’s worthy of death.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
Now for some edge cases I'd be curious how people feel about:
There is no mechanic in 5e that allows for lasting effects, but it would be nice to have some kind of effect in between 0HP/ unconscious and "dead dead."
There are a few monsters such as the giant spider that trigger effects on being reduced to 0 hp that are incapacitating but not fatal. Certainly possible to add more. Of course, then there's the monsters that just kill you if you hit zero hp.
"Two stirges attack a PC, and the second one drops him. If they wait until draining 10 points of blood each, the PC is dead."
Yup. Given that anyone in the party could remove a stirge automatically with an action, it is unlikely this would occur - but if it does, it does. The Stirge isn't going to stop feeding just because the target drops unconscious. If anything, an unconscious target is more appealing as it would be less risk.
"A Giant Toad swallows a PC and reduces him to 0 hp, so dead unless someone kills the toad fast. Does it change the situation if the toad, being no longer hungry, runs away after swallowing someone?"
I would only have the toad run away if it was starting to get hurt a lot - not many creatures stick around if they're getting too hurt and have a chance to escape. So if the toad's had his meal and getting hurt too much - he'll be taking his leave. Even if that means taking the swallowed character with him.
"A Fire Elemental reduces a PC to 0 hp, and also sets him on fire. Will the fire go out on its own, or is he dead without assistance? Bonus question: do you roll death saves before or after the fire damage? Makes a difference if he rolls a 20 on a death save, as if done after he will be instantly dropped back to 0."
The fire doesn't go out on its own. As for the start of turn - if nobody can get to the character, they're dead no matter which is first. But if there's a chance somebody can get to them, rolling first seems best. If they roll first and succeed, then they get a success and a failure. If the roll first and fail, they get two failures. If they roll second and succeed they get one success and one fail, and if they roll second and fail they get two failures. If they roll first and get three successes in a row the third automatic fire damage will undo it, bring them back to dying but stabilising means they've reset those death saves and that damage would not count as an autofail. Whereas if they roll second that 3rd autofail will kill them before they have a chance to stabilise.
So rolling second, guarantees death in 3 turns. Rolling first gives a chance to prolong things and therefore more chance for somebody to come douse the flames. But, there is no chance to ever stay stable and get up. It's a loop that only ends with failure or keeps cycling with success -- and I'm not a fan of playing out this loop especially when it gets beyond unrealistic.
If there's nobody else around I wouldn't bother making them roll. Nobody can burn for minutes to hours on end and survive, and this is beyond the mechanics of a "combat" the death saves were for. So, I'd consider the circumstance : can the party get to the person within 30 seconds? If yes, we'll say the person survived just long enough to be saved. If not, then it would require a miracle: rain if outside, a random NPC, etc. So I'd have them roll a 1d20. On a 20 something happens to douse the flames and stabilise them. On a 2 to 19 they die but end up a charred corpse - which can be revived or brought back with raise dead or resurrection. On a 1, they are ash alone and only a True Resurrection would bring them back.
"An evil warlock casts Hunger of Hadar and a PC is dropped by the initial cold damage (meaning he automatically takes the acid damage for an automatic failed death check). If the PC is still in the zone one round later, he's dead (since it does damage twice per round, it's two automatic fails per round). And of course the spell blocks vision so no Healing Word."
Yup. But, again, I would have them roll death save first - if they get a Nat 20 they get the chance to possibly do something to save themselves.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
I specifically voted NO only because of the "In General" part of the question.
There will always be occasions where a creature WOULD hit a downed PC, such as the Revenant-style spirits mentioned above.
When i DM, most creatures attack character that still pose an immediate threat to them. Only the most raveneous creature will attack unconscious character in combat as opposed to threatening ones. I often have intelligent creatures attacking downed character though, especially if it witness them being revived and it fights to death.
This is a good thread. I usually let creatures focus on the live characters, because they pose a real threat. But there's a thing I really look forward to try... What if the villains have a precise order to KILL the adventurers? Maybe setting a lower CR for the encounter but playing the monsters viciously and recklessly...