I have been playing 2024 lmop with a party of 6 members for about 3 months now, using discord. This was a very homebrew edition of the module, with a "very competitive" DM who would throw big enemy numbers and sometimes overleveled npcs at us. I was playing a wizard, the rest of the party was mostly composed of melee characters and we had no cleric, so, to compensate, I took magic initiate (cleric) to be able to cast healing word and spare the dying.
Due to backstory reasons (my pc was a wiz who was kind of bad at magic) DM offered to apply a homebrew mechanic called "dangerous magic" which added a chance to harm myself whenever I cast a spell. It felt bland, but I took it since it made sense for backstory reasons and I demanded no buffs in change.
Over the course of the campaign, there where several times the party almost got wiped out. My character often ended up wasting his slots casting healing word, acting as a cleric, or stabilizing incapacitated teammates. We ended up surviving, since the enemies never attacked downed teamamtes. This felt like a precedent set by the DM, and the rest of the party members never cared to aid downed teammates since it is was implicit that they would get aid after the combat ended. I guess you can see now where this is going.
Fast forward to the final battle with BBEG. This was a heavely modified BBEG with invisibility, legendary actions, fireball, spider summons, non concentration spider climbing and such. At this point I was heavly invested in the campaign and the character, and the master had said that he intented to continue with the icespire peak module after finishing and we would be able to continue with our characters if we wanted to.
BBEG casted a fireball at us and my PC barely made it alive with 1 hp. I casted fly on one of the melee party members so he could get him down (he was climing above us, out of melee reach). In the next turn I casted lighing bolt and used one of my portent rolls to make him fail the save
The spiders focused me, and I went down, while the main baddie was being now focused by the rest of the party. In his next turn, he ordered the spiders to eat my character while he was incapacitated. I had passed the first death saving throw, but with two attacks, I was instantly kiled. No chance to give last words, or maybe make a last action. The fight just went on
I feel targeted and I believe this DM wanted my pc out, or he killed him just to make a point to the rest of the party members, or create drama. There was silence when it happened and the fight went on and I left the voice chat when I saw they were about to reach the ending without me.
Next day the DM sent me the ending and he had my pc revived by some deus ex machina. It felt cheap. He said BBEG targeted me because I was a mage (same as he) and thus knew my capabilities. I decided to leave the table. Accepting the deus ex resurrection would make my character feel bland, and I don't think I could play a new character. The ilussion was broken, for me at least.
I'll have to sit with this to give my thoughts on the rest, but I did want to start with one thing:
I have no data to back this up, but I imagine many DMs who bother with plot armor for their PCs tend to remove it towards the last battle. It's the final battle, after all and, win or lose, the end of the story.
Of course, that's cheapened by the DM saying that you could use your characters in the next campaign, and perhaps that's what they were thinking when they revived you... You died in the last battle, completing that arc, but wanting to play that character in the next one forced a Deus Ex GM resurrection so that you could.
Everything about this suggests to me a fairly inexperienced DM, at least when it comes to character death.
First, there was the decision to avoid attacking downed players - a lot of newer DMs, or DMs with more introductory skill levels, tend to shy away from killing players out of concern for the players. That is not to say there are not experienced DMs who do the same thing (I would argue to the detriment of the game, but acknowledge this is a point reasonable people can disagree on) - but with the other data points in this post, I suspect that is part of their problem in pulling punches.
Second, is not the fact that they targeted you - NPCs should base targeting on their knowledge, so a mage might target a mage. Their second issue was switching lethality using a monster that was negligent enough to target - a more experienced DM making thy transition to a more deadly game would know they had to make it a bit more neutral the first time.
Third, they clearly regretted their choices and tried to undo them in the kind of ham fisted way that novice DMs often use when things do not exactly go their way.
Based on all that, I think you have every right to be disappointed… but you should still forgive the DM and give it another go. Frankly, your reaction of leaving and saying “I don’t think I can play a new character” strikes me as a sign of relative inexperience with character death - perhaps take this as a learning opportunity yourself.
Now, how to move forward? I think you should talk to your DM about how you feel and how you felt things were a bit heavy handed - not in an accusatory way, but just a “let’s both learn from this” kind of way.
Second, you have a choice to make.
If you want to play the same character, but regain some of the verisimilitude, talk to the DM about having actual consequences to the death. Class change to Warlock, Paladin, or Cleric, as you are now bound to a higher authority in exchange for a second life. Species change to Reborn. A curse with mechanical penalty. A debt to a higher power that must be paid. Plenty of ways to make return by deus ex DM feel a bit more meaningful.
Or you could roll up a new character and tell the DM “I’d rather the death stand, since it would feel cheep otherwise.” Both fine options.
TL;DR: This was not handled well by the DM, but it also looks like your reaction was a bit excessive and unfair and unforgiving to the DM for making common mistakes. Rather than let this ruin your enjoyment and time with your friends, you both should learn from this and move on.
It's kind of an unwritten rule that DMs will pull their punches somewhat during the campaign so your characters can see have their arc, but stop in the BBEG fight. At that point, your character has had their arcs, and gets to cap it off by becoming victorious over the BBEG...or die trying. Certainly when my Party comes to face Strahd...Strahd will be looking to kill them, and will not hold back. That's part of what makes Boss Fights so epic - everyone is going at it hammer and tongs, that's what creates the drama and the tension.
In terms of attacking you while you're down...I generally don't do that. My monsters aren't (generally) interested in killing you in a fight. They're interested in obtaining the artifact and escaping, winning the fight so they can eat you on peace, KOing you so they can loot you, they have real motives with real tactics and reactions that flow from such motives...attacking you when you're out of the fight is generally a waste of resources better spent on subduing the rest of the Party. Of course, if you become a Healing Yo-Yo, that might attract unwanted attention and a desire to ensure you don't get back up again, but generally, unless you're playing adversarially (where the DM is looking to inflict the most harm to you, rather than what makes sense for their characters to do), then downed players should be ignored. It's far better for the wolf to use its opportunity to bite on the Paladin swinging his flail around than the unconscious Warlock who isn't going anywhere.
Apparently your DM doesn't share the same philosophy, either because they haven't had chance to think it through or just because they think differently. It seems the former though. You're both learning and finding your feet. Be patient with them as they figure out what it is to be a good DM.
I'd also point out that players not caring about downed characters because of what is essentially metagaming (my DM won't kill them!) is actually generally a bad dynamic to have. If someone goes down, that should be a cue for the Party to rally around them and try to save them. I would probably give a warning to them before actually attacking if I sensed that dynamic developing, I'd definitely be seeking to disrupt it (in fact it happened last session - I sensed the "it's ok" dynamic developing when the Warlock went down and everyone ignored him to carry on the fight, so I mused out loud who should I attack, the Rogue on his last legs, the healthy Fighter or finish off the downed Warlock, it got the message across).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Thanks everyone, I talked to the DM and rejected the offer to resurrect the character, I asked him to retcom that and keep him dead.
I explained that dying while incapacitated with no chance given to the party to intervene and with no final words was anticlimactic for me at least and felt unfair. The resurrection while I was out of the game felt forced and bland, and it removed all my agency, if there was any at that point.
I also rejected the possibility to create a new pc because I feel I would play a character just to survive and not what I want to play. I would play defensively and the party has enough tanks already.
I provided positive feedback to him about other aspects of the campaign and said that I didn't want to keep playing. Also said goodbye from the group chat and affirmed that my pc died in that last fight and they could keep his things and move forward
Thanks everyone, I talked to the DM and rejected the offer to resurrect the character, I asked him to retcom that and keep him dead.
I explained that dying while incapacitated with no chance given to the party to intervene and with no final words was anticlimactic for me at least and felt unfair. The resurrection while I was out of the game felt forced and bland, and it removed all my agency, if there was any at that point.
I also rejected the possibility to create a new pc because I feel I would play a character just to survive and not what I want to play. I would play defensively and the party has enough tanks already.
I provided positive feedback to him about other aspects of the campaign and said that I didn't want to keep playing. Also said goodbye from the group chat and affirmed that my pc died in that last fight and they could keep his things and move forward
You came here asking for advice and feedback - and sometimes that means hearing candid feedback that you do not want to hear. I alluded to this feedback in my prior post, but I think it needs to be said a bit more clearly.
This is the worst possible response to your situation. You never really indicated you had any problems with the majority of the game - and, even above, indicated you gave positive feedback about the rest of the game. If you had indicated those things, this post would be different. But you did not. Yes, it ended in anti-climax. Yes, it ended in the DM making a terrible set of mistakes that kind of ruined the campaign for you.
But as multiple people here have indicated - and as you seem to have ignored - your DM made a very common set of mistakes. This very likely was not intentional, it was likely not targeted at you. It was a common error by a DM who clearly did not know how to land the metaphorical plane on a campaign - frankly, even do experienced DMs it is hard to make final fights feel climactic, different, and epic. Your DM might have marred your experience of the entire campaign, but they almost certainly did so unintentionally.
You intentionally ruined the experience not only of your DM, but of all the other players in the group. Your reaction is essentially telling them “Hey, we might have had fun together for a while, but the DM made a mistake, and you all are not fun enough for me to forgive one common mistake.” This is made so much worse by the fact that you did not make this decision right after the game in a fit of passion - you sat on it, thought about it, made a long forum thread on it, got feedback saying “maybe cut the DM some slack, this is common” and then still chose to abandon all your happy times with the party rather than forgive a single common mistake.
What your DM did to you was bad, but unintentionally so. Your intentional an premeditated lack of forgiveness and willingness to throw aside other people over a simple mistake is far worse than what the DM did to you.
Think about that - think of the fun you had (and do not just dwell on negatives to try and find justifications for your poor behavior - if there were any real justifications, you likely would have mentioned the in your long post - your hints on “competitive” an “bland abilities” do not seem to reflect the reality of their not finishing players off, or the fact that they took the time to make you a custom ability as the sole spellcaster)… and then ask yourself if you want to be the kind of person who will let a single mistake define your enjoyment or if you want to be the kind of person who can forgive mistakes, recognize mistakes and character death sometimes happen, and who continues to have fun with your friends?
Thanks everyone, I talked to the DM and rejected the offer to resurrect the character, I asked him to retcom that and keep him dead.
I explained that dying while incapacitated with no chance given to the party to intervene and with no final words was anticlimactic for me at least and felt unfair. The resurrection while I was out of the game felt forced and bland, and it removed all my agency, if there was any at that point.
I also rejected the possibility to create a new pc because I feel I would play a character just to survive and not what I want to play. I would play defensively and the party has enough tanks already.
I provided positive feedback to him about other aspects of the campaign and said that I didn't want to keep playing. Also said goodbye from the group chat and affirmed that my pc died in that last fight and they could keep his things and move forward
You intentionally ruined the experience not only of your DM, but of all the other players in the group. Your reaction is essentially telling them “Hey, we might have had fun together for a while, but the DM made a mistake, and you all are not fun enough for me to forgive one common mistake.” This is made so much worse by the fact that you did not make this decision right after the game in a fit of passion - you sat on it, thought about it, made a long forum thread on it, got feedback saying “maybe cut the DM some slack, this is common” and then still chose to abandon all your happy times with the party rather than forgive a single common mistake.
I am sorry but this is your opinion and you have no way of knowing that. You do not know me or the group. I decided to leave after I realized the play style didn't fit with me and I wouldn't expect them to change it just to appeal me. I left in good terms and they understood, the DM even asked me for feedback on other aspects of the campaigns. Force myselft to keep playing at his table when I didn't really feel it would have been worse for me and for them
Thanks everyone, I talked to the DM and rejected the offer to resurrect the character, I asked him to retcom that and keep him dead.
I explained that dying while incapacitated with no chance given to the party to intervene and with no final words was anticlimactic for me at least and felt unfair. The resurrection while I was out of the game felt forced and bland, and it removed all my agency, if there was any at that point.
I also rejected the possibility to create a new pc because I feel I would play a character just to survive and not what I want to play. I would play defensively and the party has enough tanks already.
I provided positive feedback to him about other aspects of the campaign and said that I didn't want to keep playing. Also said goodbye from the group chat and affirmed that my pc died in that last fight and they could keep his things and move forward
You intentionally ruined the experience not only of your DM, but of all the other players in the group. Your reaction is essentially telling them “Hey, we might have had fun together for a while, but the DM made a mistake, and you all are not fun enough for me to forgive one common mistake.” This is made so much worse by the fact that you did not make this decision right after the game in a fit of passion - you sat on it, thought about it, made a long forum thread on it, got feedback saying “maybe cut the DM some slack, this is common” and then still chose to abandon all your happy times with the party rather than forgive a single common mistake.
I am sorry but this is your opinion and you have no way of knowing that. You do not know me or the group. I decided to leave after I realized the play style didn't fit with me and I wouldn't expect them to change it just to appeal me. I left in good terms and they understood, the DM even asked me for feedback on other aspects of the campaigns. Force myselft to keep playing at his table when I didn't really feel it would have been worse for me and for them
You come off as passive agresive. Thanks anyway
We didn't know that because you didn't say that. You asked for advice and it was given based on the information you provided us. Also you asked for opinions with "How do you feel?"
Your wording is also passive aggressive with "Rejected" instead of "Declined" so it sounded like your feelings were still hurt, and so people kept trying to get you to work it out.
If you had said "Its all good, i declined the raise because the playstyle isn't one I enjoy." We would have known that our input was no longer needed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player. The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call To rise up in triumph should we all unite The spark for change is yours to ignite." Kalandra - The State of the World
Your right in the fact that your death feels a little cheap. But we have all gone through it a few times. Refusing to be resurrected is a characters/players right. I feel worse when my characters death was obvious but the Dm keeps me alive. Actually any character in party.
But refusing to play is not the way to fix anything. Everyone learns from playing, even the dm.
Get back in to the game. Things work out among friends.
Since D&D is a game rather than an epic fantasy novel or film, character deaths tend to be cheap when they happen. Older editions were cheap to the point of being unfair about it: look at a 2nd or 3rd Edition Monster Manual and notice how many monsters have abilities that are "saving throw or die instantly." If you don't like it, D&D may not be the best RPG for you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Since D&D is a game rather than an epic fantasy novel or film, character deaths tend to be cheap when they happen. Older editions were cheap to the point of being unfair about it: look at a 2nd or 3rd Edition Monster Manual and notice how many monsters have abilities that are "saving throw or die instantly." If you don't like it, D&D may not be the best RPG for you.
Or dont play 2nd ediition.
2024 monster manual has removed most of the insta-kill features. Some still remain. But most monsters just knock you hp to zero, you go unconscious, and start making death saves.
Mind flayer still has an instakill feature, but everyone hates mind flayers.
While 5E has removed most of the save-or-die mechanics of older editions, death is till more "whap, you're dead" rather than some sort of cool cinematic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
You intentionally ruined the experience not only of your DM, but of all the other players in the group.
Pretty sure the player knows their intentions far better than you do.
I started playing with 2nd edition. I think pretty much every campaign i played in for any decent amount of time, someone left the campaign for one reason or another. Job. School. Personal life got too busy. Dm makes a bunch of mistakes. I played in a campaign where 2 months in, the dm suddenly banned goodberry and a dozen other spells and said he might ban more spells on the spot. I left.
Players coming and going is a perfectly normal thing.
Now, it might be the dm or some of the other players might get bent out of shape about a player leaving. Maybe they take it as a personal insult. Thats on them if they do. Its not something the leaving player is responsible for.
If the player is friends with the dm or other players, the player can leave the game and continue to be friends outside the game. If the dm or other players makes being in the game a contingency for their friendship, those are some lousy friends.
"chose to abandon all your happy times with the party"
Leaving a dnd group is not on par with abandonment. The player didnt abandon their baby on someones doorstep. A player left a game. Happens all the time. Reframing perfectly normal and common behavior in demonizing terms doesnt help anyone.
While 5E has removed most of the save-or-die mechanics of older editions, death is till more "whap, you're dead" rather than some sort of cool cinematic.
You said "character deaths tend to be cheap when they happen" and "If you don't like it, D&D may not be the best RPG for you"
But dnd has evolved into a lot more options since first edition.
Dnd was originally wargaming on an individual level. Instead of moving armies on a map, players moved a single charavter. Dying was not a big deal, same as when a unit was destroyed in wargaming.
But since first edition, dnd and the people who play it have found other wsys to play the game. Wargaming is still an option. Players run disposable characters, live, die, repeat. But others have found roleplay is more interesting, exploration had become a thing. Characters have backgrounds and backstories, maybe they are searching for someone they lost and thr dm wesves that into the campaign.
So, id say if a dm treats charavters as disposable, and players are wargaming until they die, thats no longer dnd's only style. Instead, if you want something else, ask around, and find a dnd group that has a style that fits what youre looking for.
Your DM sounds clueless and I definitely support the idea of walking away from the game. Having NPCs target incapacitated PCs during a fight is very immersion breaking because it suggests the NPCs have an awareness of the DnD game mechanics, and don't want a collapsed and defeated character to succeed their death saves. The PCs are the main characters in the story, which is why they get death saves and NPCs typically don't. Just because PCs get death saves doesn't mean they "aren't defeated" when they collapse at 0 hp or less.
When you see one of the main characters in a movie (like Lord of the Rings) get flung into a wall by something like a cave troll and pass out unconscious, how many times have you seen one of the villains or monsters in the fight rushing over to the unconscious character to stab/maim them a few times while they're incapacitated for good measure? That's right: never.
May your next DM have a better understanding of the basics of DnD and treat your time investment (and everyone else's) with more respect.
Having NPCs target incapacitated PCs during a fight is very immersion breaking because it suggests the NPCs have an awareness of the DnD game mechanics, and don't want a collapsed and defeated character to succeed their death saves.
What you call “immersion breaking” is likely more accurate to reality than “I see someone go down and just assume they’re out of the picture, and do not make sure the job is done.” Particularly true in a land where magical healing exists.
Take, for example, real medieval combat. When fighting a knight, the entire goal was to knock them down, perhaps incapacitate them with blunt weapons… then walk over and finish them off. There was even specialized equipment built for this purpose, like the French misericorde (a thin dagger that could be slid between the eyes of a visor or other gaps in armor to deal fatal blows).
Or combat with wild beasts, who might continue attacking a downed body until signs of life have left it.
There are reasons a DM might not attack a downed character - “immersion breaking” is not one of them, and, frankly, reality suggests it is more immersion breaking not to have enemies try to finish characters off every now and then.
It's very easy when hearing a story about a game to make judgements on a player or DM as being 'bad', but rarely is this judgement fair or useful. In many ways the title of 'Bad DM/Player' is often hyperbolic and misplaced- choices and behavior can be 'bad', and even then might only be bad for a certain group. There are so many more factors involved that can be conveyed in a summary given by one party. A mistake does not a bad DM/Player maker.
Focus on the actual details given, explore and discuss those details, but do not cast quick and harsh judgement on any involved. This is not conductive to learning from a situation or keeping the discussion open and civil.
I have been playing 2024 lmop with a party of 6 members for about 3 months now, using discord. This was a very homebrew edition of the module, with a "very competitive" DM who would throw big enemy numbers and sometimes overleveled npcs at us. I was playing a wizard, the rest of the party was mostly composed of melee characters and we had no cleric, so, to compensate, I took magic initiate (cleric) to be able to cast healing word and spare the dying.
Due to backstory reasons (my pc was a wiz who was kind of bad at magic) DM offered to apply a homebrew mechanic called "dangerous magic" which added a chance to harm myself whenever I cast a spell. It felt bland, but I took it since it made sense for backstory reasons and I demanded no buffs in change.
Over the course of the campaign, there where several times the party almost got wiped out. My character often ended up wasting his slots casting healing word, acting as a cleric, or stabilizing incapacitated teammates. We ended up surviving, since the enemies never attacked downed teamamtes. This felt like a precedent set by the DM, and the rest of the party members never cared to aid downed teammates since it is was implicit that they would get aid after the combat ended. I guess you can see now where this is going.
Fast forward to the final battle with BBEG. This was a heavely modified BBEG with invisibility, legendary actions, fireball, spider summons, non concentration spider climbing and such. At this point I was heavly invested in the campaign and the character, and the master had said that he intented to continue with the icespire peak module after finishing and we would be able to continue with our characters if we wanted to.
BBEG casted a fireball at us and my PC barely made it alive with 1 hp. I casted fly on one of the melee party members so he could get him down (he was climing above us, out of melee reach). In the next turn I casted lighing bolt and used one of my portent rolls to make him fail the save
The spiders focused me, and I went down, while the main baddie was being now focused by the rest of the party. In his next turn, he ordered the spiders to eat my character while he was incapacitated. I had passed the first death saving throw, but with two attacks, I was instantly kiled. No chance to give last words, or maybe make a last action. The fight just went on
I feel targeted and I believe this DM wanted my pc out, or he killed him just to make a point to the rest of the party members, or create drama. There was silence when it happened and the fight went on and I left the voice chat when I saw they were about to reach the ending without me.
Next day the DM sent me the ending and he had my pc revived by some deus ex machina. It felt cheap. He said BBEG targeted me because I was a mage (same as he) and thus knew my capabilities. I decided to leave the table. Accepting the deus ex resurrection would make my character feel bland, and I don't think I could play a new character. The ilussion was broken, for me at least.
How would you feel?
A few things.
As Elgate pointed out, the term "bad DM" or "bad DMing" see's too much use. I can't imagine there are any DM's out there who go through all the trouble of running a game just to intentionally make it a miserable time for people. In my experience, there are DM's with different levels of experience, different philosophies on the game, and different views on fantasy as a whole. My point here is, don't take it personally, and don't be too hard on the guy.
One thing I would also point out is that, it's a game, characters die in it, and when they do, it rarely "feels good". Character death is generally a feel-bad moment at the table, but a few weeks from now its going to be a story of how your character got eaten by spiders that one time and you will have a laugh about it. I have been playing this game damn near 40 years, I have lost ungodly amounts of characters and I can't think of one that I'm still mad about today nor can I think of one that I wasn't mad about the moment they died. So this is a normal reaction. Those stories are always memorable and they age well, so while it sucks now, losing characters in the course of D&D is a kind of right of passage. I get the immediate reaction is to question the fairness, question the ruling, question the circumstances, etc... this is normal but again.. always remember it's a game, don't be upset with DM's I would say the overwhelming majority are doing there best to make the game fun for everyone.
When you start to complain, however, it quickly starts to sound less like an issue and more like a demand.. aka, "don't kill my character", is not a good precedent to set on the DM. You don't want a gun-shy DM who is unwilling to kill characters. I can tell you from years of experience that if it was not for the potential for character deaths, very few people still play this game. Its one of the most vital elements of D&D that characters can die... that risk is critical to the success of a game.
On that note, I would offer advice to the DM. As a general rule, there are a couple of ways to avoid character deaths that feel like punishments.
First, when a player puts a monster down, do they have "hit them again" to make sure they are dead? Rarely if ever. The general rule of thumb is that when something goes down, the default assumption is "they are dead". Mechanically speaking, there is a difference between "dead" and "dying", but that is meta information; people and monsters don't know they live in a game world, they don't know they are avatars in a game. From the perspective of combatants in a fight, down and unconscious is presumed dead.
Second, as a general rule, there are almost no living creatures known to man, that will stop to "eat" if they are still in a fight or flight response. Eating is something predators do when the battle is over. This is especially true in the world of insects, which run on pure instinct. A spider would quite literally never stop to eat someone while they are still threatened. That would require a pretty diabolical mind or a creature so fearsome that they are just showing off. Like a Dragon that eats someone to scare the crap out of everyone else in the fight or something like that. Generally, though, it's tough to justify.
Third and perhaps most importantly, a DM that appreciates his players and cares about the stories of the characters in his campaign will make sure that when they are going to punch a characters card, they do it in an awesome, memorable fashion. Make it shocking, make it horrific, make it memorable. The one thing you don't want it to be is anti-climatic.
Personally I would have had the spiders cacoon your character and drag them of into a dark hole and I would make everyone wait. Then I would write a cool story of the horrific last moments of that character between sessions, work with you on your next character and then tell the tale at the start of the next session. I would make that last moments of that character the stuff of nightmares, something everyone can talk about years later.
D&D is about making cool memories and that is one of the most important lessons every DM should learn.
One other very important thing to always remember as a player. Your character can't die because of mechanics, the only way for a character to die is when the DM decides your character dies. Its an illusion that mechanics control this. Its ALWAYS a DM call. So the DM decided that in that circumstance, your character should die. Accept it, respect it. They are running a story and in that story, circumstances will come up at some point and a DM will say "ok, I'm going to punch this ticket".
I have been playing 2024 lmop with a party of 6 members for about 3 months now, using discord. This was a very homebrew edition of the module, with a "very competitive" DM who would throw big enemy numbers and sometimes overleveled npcs at us. I was playing a wizard, the rest of the party was mostly composed of melee characters and we had no cleric, so, to compensate, I took magic initiate (cleric) to be able to cast healing word and spare the dying.
Due to backstory reasons (my pc was a wiz who was kind of bad at magic) DM offered to apply a homebrew mechanic called "dangerous magic" which added a chance to harm myself whenever I cast a spell. It felt bland, but I took it since it made sense for backstory reasons and I demanded no buffs in change.
Over the course of the campaign, there where several times the party almost got wiped out. My character often ended up wasting his slots casting healing word, acting as a cleric, or stabilizing incapacitated teammates. We ended up surviving, since the enemies never attacked downed teamamtes. This felt like a precedent set by the DM, and the rest of the party members never cared to aid downed teammates since it is was implicit that they would get aid after the combat ended. I guess you can see now where this is going.
Fast forward to the final battle with BBEG. This was a heavely modified BBEG with invisibility, legendary actions, fireball, spider summons, non concentration spider climbing and such. At this point I was heavly invested in the campaign and the character, and the master had said that he intented to continue with the icespire peak module after finishing and we would be able to continue with our characters if we wanted to.
BBEG casted a fireball at us and my PC barely made it alive with 1 hp. I casted fly on one of the melee party members so he could get him down (he was climing above us, out of melee reach). In the next turn I casted lighing bolt and used one of my portent rolls to make him fail the save
The spiders focused me, and I went down, while the main baddie was being now focused by the rest of the party. In his next turn, he ordered the spiders to eat my character while he was incapacitated. I had passed the first death saving throw, but with two attacks, I was instantly kiled. No chance to give last words, or maybe make a last action. The fight just went on
I feel targeted and I believe this DM wanted my pc out, or he killed him just to make a point to the rest of the party members, or create drama. There was silence when it happened and the fight went on and I left the voice chat when I saw they were about to reach the ending without me.
Next day the DM sent me the ending and he had my pc revived by some deus ex machina. It felt cheap. He said BBEG targeted me because I was a mage (same as he) and thus knew my capabilities. I decided to leave the table. Accepting the deus ex resurrection would make my character feel bland, and I don't think I could play a new character. The ilussion was broken, for me at least.
How would you feel?
I'll have to sit with this to give my thoughts on the rest, but I did want to start with one thing:
I have no data to back this up, but I imagine many DMs who bother with plot armor for their PCs tend to remove it towards the last battle. It's the final battle, after all and, win or lose, the end of the story.
Of course, that's cheapened by the DM saying that you could use your characters in the next campaign, and perhaps that's what they were thinking when they revived you... You died in the last battle, completing that arc, but wanting to play that character in the next one forced a Deus Ex GM resurrection so that you could.
Everything about this suggests to me a fairly inexperienced DM, at least when it comes to character death.
First, there was the decision to avoid attacking downed players - a lot of newer DMs, or DMs with more introductory skill levels, tend to shy away from killing players out of concern for the players. That is not to say there are not experienced DMs who do the same thing (I would argue to the detriment of the game, but acknowledge this is a point reasonable people can disagree on) - but with the other data points in this post, I suspect that is part of their problem in pulling punches.
Second, is not the fact that they targeted you - NPCs should base targeting on their knowledge, so a mage might target a mage. Their second issue was switching lethality using a monster that was negligent enough to target - a more experienced DM making thy transition to a more deadly game would know they had to make it a bit more neutral the first time.
Third, they clearly regretted their choices and tried to undo them in the kind of ham fisted way that novice DMs often use when things do not exactly go their way.
Based on all that, I think you have every right to be disappointed… but you should still forgive the DM and give it another go. Frankly, your reaction of leaving and saying “I don’t think I can play a new character” strikes me as a sign of relative inexperience with character death - perhaps take this as a learning opportunity yourself.
Now, how to move forward? I think you should talk to your DM about how you feel and how you felt things were a bit heavy handed - not in an accusatory way, but just a “let’s both learn from this” kind of way.
Second, you have a choice to make.
If you want to play the same character, but regain some of the verisimilitude, talk to the DM about having actual consequences to the death. Class change to Warlock, Paladin, or Cleric, as you are now bound to a higher authority in exchange for a second life. Species change to Reborn. A curse with mechanical penalty. A debt to a higher power that must be paid. Plenty of ways to make return by deus ex DM feel a bit more meaningful.
Or you could roll up a new character and tell the DM “I’d rather the death stand, since it would feel cheep otherwise.” Both fine options.
TL;DR: This was not handled well by the DM, but it also looks like your reaction was a bit excessive and unfair and unforgiving to the DM for making common mistakes. Rather than let this ruin your enjoyment and time with your friends, you both should learn from this and move on.
It's kind of an unwritten rule that DMs will pull their punches somewhat during the campaign so your characters can see have their arc, but stop in the BBEG fight. At that point, your character has had their arcs, and gets to cap it off by becoming victorious over the BBEG...or die trying. Certainly when my Party comes to face Strahd...Strahd will be looking to kill them, and will not hold back. That's part of what makes Boss Fights so epic - everyone is going at it hammer and tongs, that's what creates the drama and the tension.
In terms of attacking you while you're down...I generally don't do that. My monsters aren't (generally) interested in killing you in a fight. They're interested in obtaining the artifact and escaping, winning the fight so they can eat you on peace, KOing you so they can loot you, they have real motives with real tactics and reactions that flow from such motives...attacking you when you're out of the fight is generally a waste of resources better spent on subduing the rest of the Party. Of course, if you become a Healing Yo-Yo, that might attract unwanted attention and a desire to ensure you don't get back up again, but generally, unless you're playing adversarially (where the DM is looking to inflict the most harm to you, rather than what makes sense for their characters to do), then downed players should be ignored. It's far better for the wolf to use its opportunity to bite on the Paladin swinging his flail around than the unconscious Warlock who isn't going anywhere.
Apparently your DM doesn't share the same philosophy, either because they haven't had chance to think it through or just because they think differently. It seems the former though. You're both learning and finding your feet. Be patient with them as they figure out what it is to be a good DM.
I'd also point out that players not caring about downed characters because of what is essentially metagaming (my DM won't kill them!) is actually generally a bad dynamic to have. If someone goes down, that should be a cue for the Party to rally around them and try to save them. I would probably give a warning to them before actually attacking if I sensed that dynamic developing, I'd definitely be seeking to disrupt it (in fact it happened last session - I sensed the "it's ok" dynamic developing when the Warlock went down and everyone ignored him to carry on the fight, so I mused out loud who should I attack, the Rogue on his last legs, the healthy Fighter or finish off the downed Warlock, it got the message across).
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Thanks everyone, I talked to the DM and rejected the offer to resurrect the character, I asked him to retcom that and keep him dead.
I explained that dying while incapacitated with no chance given to the party to intervene and with no final words was anticlimactic for me at least and felt unfair. The resurrection while I was out of the game felt forced and bland, and it removed all my agency, if there was any at that point.
I also rejected the possibility to create a new pc because I feel I would play a character just to survive and not what I want to play. I would play defensively and the party has enough tanks already.
I provided positive feedback to him about other aspects of the campaign and said that I didn't want to keep playing. Also said goodbye from the group chat and affirmed that my pc died in that last fight and they could keep his things and move forward
You came here asking for advice and feedback - and sometimes that means hearing candid feedback that you do not want to hear. I alluded to this feedback in my prior post, but I think it needs to be said a bit more clearly.
This is the worst possible response to your situation. You never really indicated you had any problems with the majority of the game - and, even above, indicated you gave positive feedback about the rest of the game. If you had indicated those things, this post would be different. But you did not. Yes, it ended in anti-climax. Yes, it ended in the DM making a terrible set of mistakes that kind of ruined the campaign for you.
But as multiple people here have indicated - and as you seem to have ignored - your DM made a very common set of mistakes. This very likely was not intentional, it was likely not targeted at you. It was a common error by a DM who clearly did not know how to land the metaphorical plane on a campaign - frankly, even do experienced DMs it is hard to make final fights feel climactic, different, and epic. Your DM might have marred your experience of the entire campaign, but they almost certainly did so unintentionally.
You intentionally ruined the experience not only of your DM, but of all the other players in the group. Your reaction is essentially telling them “Hey, we might have had fun together for a while, but the DM made a mistake, and you all are not fun enough for me to forgive one common mistake.” This is made so much worse by the fact that you did not make this decision right after the game in a fit of passion - you sat on it, thought about it, made a long forum thread on it, got feedback saying “maybe cut the DM some slack, this is common” and then still chose to abandon all your happy times with the party rather than forgive a single common mistake.
What your DM did to you was bad, but unintentionally so. Your intentional an premeditated lack of forgiveness and willingness to throw aside other people over a simple mistake is far worse than what the DM did to you.
Think about that - think of the fun you had (and do not just dwell on negatives to try and find justifications for your poor behavior - if there were any real justifications, you likely would have mentioned the in your long post - your hints on “competitive” an “bland abilities” do not seem to reflect the reality of their not finishing players off, or the fact that they took the time to make you a custom ability as the sole spellcaster)… and then ask yourself if you want to be the kind of person who will let a single mistake define your enjoyment or if you want to be the kind of person who can forgive mistakes, recognize mistakes and character death sometimes happen, and who continues to have fun with your friends?
I am sorry but this is your opinion and you have no way of knowing that. You do not know me or the group. I decided to leave after I realized the play style didn't fit with me and I wouldn't expect them to change it just to appeal me. I left in good terms and they understood, the DM even asked me for feedback on other aspects of the campaigns. Force myselft to keep playing at his table when I didn't really feel it would have been worse for me and for them
You come off as passive agresive. Thanks anyway
We didn't know that because you didn't say that. You asked for advice and it was given based on the information you provided us.
Also you asked for opinions with "How do you feel?"
Your wording is also passive aggressive with "Rejected" instead of "Declined" so it sounded like your feelings were still hurt, and so people kept trying to get you to work it out.
If you had said "Its all good, i declined the raise because the playstyle isn't one I enjoy." We would have known that our input was no longer needed.
He/Him. Loooooooooong time Player.
The Dark days of the THAC0 system are behind us.
"Hope is a fire that burns in us all If only an ember, awaiting your call
To rise up in triumph should we all unite
The spark for change is yours to ignite."
Kalandra - The State of the World
New game New players New Dm New Problems.
No problem
Your right in the fact that your death feels a little cheap. But we have all gone through it a few times. Refusing to be resurrected is a characters/players right.
I feel worse when my characters death was obvious but the Dm keeps me alive. Actually any character in party.
But refusing to play is not the way to fix anything. Everyone learns from playing, even the dm.
Get back in to the game. Things work out among friends.
Life is too short to play with a bad dm.
Find one that creates the kind of world you want to invest in.
Since D&D is a game rather than an epic fantasy novel or film, character deaths tend to be cheap when they happen. Older editions were cheap to the point of being unfair about it: look at a 2nd or 3rd Edition Monster Manual and notice how many monsters have abilities that are "saving throw or die instantly." If you don't like it, D&D may not be the best RPG for you.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Or dont play 2nd ediition.
2024 monster manual has removed most of the insta-kill features. Some still remain. But most monsters just knock you hp to zero, you go unconscious, and start making death saves.
Mind flayer still has an instakill feature, but everyone hates mind flayers.
While 5E has removed most of the save-or-die mechanics of older editions, death is till more "whap, you're dead" rather than some sort of cool cinematic.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If that's how you play it, sure.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Pretty sure the player knows their intentions far better than you do.
I started playing with 2nd edition. I think pretty much every campaign i played in for any decent amount of time, someone left the campaign for one reason or another. Job. School. Personal life got too busy. Dm makes a bunch of mistakes. I played in a campaign where 2 months in, the dm suddenly banned goodberry and a dozen other spells and said he might ban more spells on the spot. I left.
Players coming and going is a perfectly normal thing.
Now, it might be the dm or some of the other players might get bent out of shape about a player leaving. Maybe they take it as a personal insult. Thats on them if they do. Its not something the leaving player is responsible for.
If the player is friends with the dm or other players, the player can leave the game and continue to be friends outside the game. If the dm or other players makes being in the game a contingency for their friendship, those are some lousy friends.
"chose to abandon all your happy times with the party"
Leaving a dnd group is not on par with abandonment. The player didnt abandon their baby on someones doorstep. A player left a game. Happens all the time. Reframing perfectly normal and common behavior in demonizing terms doesnt help anyone.
You said "character deaths tend to be cheap when they happen" and "If you don't like it, D&D may not be the best RPG for you"
But dnd has evolved into a lot more options since first edition.
Dnd was originally wargaming on an individual level. Instead of moving armies on a map, players moved a single charavter. Dying was not a big deal, same as when a unit was destroyed in wargaming.
But since first edition, dnd and the people who play it have found other wsys to play the game. Wargaming is still an option. Players run disposable characters, live, die, repeat. But others have found roleplay is more interesting, exploration had become a thing. Characters have backgrounds and backstories, maybe they are searching for someone they lost and thr dm wesves that into the campaign.
So, id say if a dm treats charavters as disposable, and players are wargaming until they die, thats no longer dnd's only style. Instead, if you want something else, ask around, and find a dnd group that has a style that fits what youre looking for.
Your DM sounds clueless and I definitely support the idea of walking away from the game. Having NPCs target incapacitated PCs during a fight is very immersion breaking because it suggests the NPCs have an awareness of the DnD game mechanics, and don't want a collapsed and defeated character to succeed their death saves. The PCs are the main characters in the story, which is why they get death saves and NPCs typically don't. Just because PCs get death saves doesn't mean they "aren't defeated" when they collapse at 0 hp or less.
When you see one of the main characters in a movie (like Lord of the Rings) get flung into a wall by something like a cave troll and pass out unconscious, how many times have you seen one of the villains or monsters in the fight rushing over to the unconscious character to stab/maim them a few times while they're incapacitated for good measure? That's right: never.
May your next DM have a better understanding of the basics of DnD and treat your time investment (and everyone else's) with more respect.
What you call “immersion breaking” is likely more accurate to reality than “I see someone go down and just assume they’re out of the picture, and do not make sure the job is done.” Particularly true in a land where magical healing exists.
Take, for example, real medieval combat. When fighting a knight, the entire goal was to knock them down, perhaps incapacitate them with blunt weapons… then walk over and finish them off. There was even specialized equipment built for this purpose, like the French misericorde (a thin dagger that could be slid between the eyes of a visor or other gaps in armor to deal fatal blows).
Or combat with wild beasts, who might continue attacking a downed body until signs of life have left it.
There are reasons a DM might not attack a downed character - “immersion breaking” is not one of them, and, frankly, reality suggests it is more immersion breaking not to have enemies try to finish characters off every now and then.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorStepping in a little here folk.
It's very easy when hearing a story about a game to make judgements on a player or DM as being 'bad', but rarely is this judgement fair or useful. In many ways the title of 'Bad DM/Player' is often hyperbolic and misplaced- choices and behavior can be 'bad', and even then might only be bad for a certain group. There are so many more factors involved that can be conveyed in a summary given by one party. A mistake does not a bad DM/Player maker.
Focus on the actual details given, explore and discuss those details, but do not cast quick and harsh judgement on any involved. This is not conductive to learning from a situation or keeping the discussion open and civil.
D&D Beyond ToS || D&D Beyond Support
A few things.
As Elgate pointed out, the term "bad DM" or "bad DMing" see's too much use. I can't imagine there are any DM's out there who go through all the trouble of running a game just to intentionally make it a miserable time for people. In my experience, there are DM's with different levels of experience, different philosophies on the game, and different views on fantasy as a whole. My point here is, don't take it personally, and don't be too hard on the guy.
One thing I would also point out is that, it's a game, characters die in it, and when they do, it rarely "feels good". Character death is generally a feel-bad moment at the table, but a few weeks from now its going to be a story of how your character got eaten by spiders that one time and you will have a laugh about it. I have been playing this game damn near 40 years, I have lost ungodly amounts of characters and I can't think of one that I'm still mad about today nor can I think of one that I wasn't mad about the moment they died. So this is a normal reaction. Those stories are always memorable and they age well, so while it sucks now, losing characters in the course of D&D is a kind of right of passage. I get the immediate reaction is to question the fairness, question the ruling, question the circumstances, etc... this is normal but again.. always remember it's a game, don't be upset with DM's I would say the overwhelming majority are doing there best to make the game fun for everyone.
When you start to complain, however, it quickly starts to sound less like an issue and more like a demand.. aka, "don't kill my character", is not a good precedent to set on the DM. You don't want a gun-shy DM who is unwilling to kill characters. I can tell you from years of experience that if it was not for the potential for character deaths, very few people still play this game. Its one of the most vital elements of D&D that characters can die... that risk is critical to the success of a game.
On that note, I would offer advice to the DM. As a general rule, there are a couple of ways to avoid character deaths that feel like punishments.
First, when a player puts a monster down, do they have "hit them again" to make sure they are dead? Rarely if ever. The general rule of thumb is that when something goes down, the default assumption is "they are dead". Mechanically speaking, there is a difference between "dead" and "dying", but that is meta information; people and monsters don't know they live in a game world, they don't know they are avatars in a game. From the perspective of combatants in a fight, down and unconscious is presumed dead.
Second, as a general rule, there are almost no living creatures known to man, that will stop to "eat" if they are still in a fight or flight response. Eating is something predators do when the battle is over. This is especially true in the world of insects, which run on pure instinct. A spider would quite literally never stop to eat someone while they are still threatened. That would require a pretty diabolical mind or a creature so fearsome that they are just showing off. Like a Dragon that eats someone to scare the crap out of everyone else in the fight or something like that. Generally, though, it's tough to justify.
Third and perhaps most importantly, a DM that appreciates his players and cares about the stories of the characters in his campaign will make sure that when they are going to punch a characters card, they do it in an awesome, memorable fashion. Make it shocking, make it horrific, make it memorable. The one thing you don't want it to be is anti-climatic.
Personally I would have had the spiders cacoon your character and drag them of into a dark hole and I would make everyone wait. Then I would write a cool story of the horrific last moments of that character between sessions, work with you on your next character and then tell the tale at the start of the next session. I would make that last moments of that character the stuff of nightmares, something everyone can talk about years later.
D&D is about making cool memories and that is one of the most important lessons every DM should learn.
One other very important thing to always remember as a player. Your character can't die because of mechanics, the only way for a character to die is when the DM decides your character dies. Its an illusion that mechanics control this. Its ALWAYS a DM call. So the DM decided that in that circumstance, your character should die. Accept it, respect it. They are running a story and in that story, circumstances will come up at some point and a DM will say "ok, I'm going to punch this ticket".