Post/Author/DateTime	Post
VladTheInstaller 01-23-06, 02:57 AM	EDIT2: See my third post for a more accurate set of questions. Hello everyone. Recently some friends and I decided to start playing DnD on a (somewhat fragmented) regular basis. I was the elected DM (probably since this was mostly my idea), but so far we've had one guest DMed game (which was neat since I had yet to expirience being a PC). The first couple of games went fairly smoothly, although shortcommings are starting to be seen more clearly. First of all, the party has no casters. That's right folks: the party does not have a single caster class in it. Nor does it have any characters with UMD. I haven't quite figured out if this is some sort of inside joke on me when they were all picking classes, or if this is accidental. Sure the ranger and paladin can technically cast, but with the curent one spell per day from either of them things are looking bleak. In reflection, I realise it was a bad move on my party not to require at least one caster but I'm not sure how I feel about making even one of them change now (they just collectively hit level 4). That isn't where my real problems lies. I'm a big fan of giving alternates to combat, in fact I try to make sure such an option always exists. But when they do get into combat, they have no way of healing. Without a Cleric, or even an arcane caster they are hopelessly up the river without a paddle. No use giving them a wand of CLW, there's no UMDer. Nor does an NPC Adept work, it couldn't keep up with their somewhat grueling pace. No, unfortunately at one point Tymorra is going to stop smiling (we use the FR Dieties for convenience since everyone in our group is familiar with them) and someone's going to be taking the long dirt nap. Which is really the point of this post. I'm looking for opinions and solutions for a party that seems infinately destine to bite the big one. Part of me really wants to see a couple of them die off, so as to get the rest of them to wise up. In truth a Total Party Kill has crossed my mind once or twice, just to be rid of this horrorshow of a party. But the rest of me sees this as a challenge, to craft a story and world where dead is a very grim reality (they're well aware of how close they teeter on the brink) and the players themselves get so completely wrapped up in saving their skins because when it comes right down to it they know how frail they are. Knowing you have no way of healing as you march down to confront the vile Hydra that has been terrorizing Village X for months inspires real fear, real emotional attatchment to your character, even if you do realise it's just a game. So the question is: how far do I let them go? How long do I allow them to cheat Death and, perhaps just as importantly, what do I do when Death catches up with one or more of them? EDIT: Phew this is getting long, but I might as well get this all done in one go. There is one character that I am especially worried about, beause he seems to frail by comparion. It's a monk, and his stats are very far from phenominal. To the point where his highest roll was 14 (albeit in triplicate), and his AC is 14. He always seems to end up in the very centre of any combat, normally with most of the creatures either chasing or encircling him. I could send them off to attack the other party members (and indeed do, to a degree) but I can't bloody well have them run away can I? If he wants to drive the poor monk straight into combat like some zealous loonie (and don't Zealous Loonies get Heavy Armour Proficiency?) then he should suffer as a result. But unfortunately so does the rest of the party. I'd like some ideas that don't involve throwing magic items at him and don't involve his death where possible (though I realise it may be the only way).
Setzertrancer 01-23-06, 03:18 AM	Hmm... Couldn't they buy healing potions and get other potions for other effects. Well I spose that wasn't the point I've never actually killed any characters although they've come close for example one of them got a 12 on his will save against a hag and the dc was 13 but then before I could decide what to do about he said "oh yeah I got a cloak of resistance +1" which he had practically forgot he had against other saves. Anyway they arn't to high a lvl why not kill one and allow them the start a new character from lvl 1 as he/she will eventually even lvl with the rest but your party will learn that death is a real possibility. I spose the monk would be a good candidate for this since that player will probably want to roll for better stats. hopefully the players will learn and replace the monk with a cleric. do it soon or they will winge more about being low lvl.
20goingon1232 01-23-06, 03:22 AM	Both the Ranger and the Paladin can use a Wand of CLW without any problems. They both have it on their spell lists. There is no reason not to give a few to them.
VladTheInstaller 01-23-06, 03:34 AM	True enough about the wand, that was an oversight on my part (as were the potions). Though given their current situation, it may be awhile before they make it to a town. I was aiming for a lowish magic world (one where the local dirt farmer isn't about to dispense potions to the group). I guess what I was really interested in was to what level people (as DMs) will go to preserve their group's PCs. Edit as a sidenote: what's the feasability of creating a campaign where healing really was a huge issue? Adding that level of realism, if you will.
Evandar_TAybara 01-23-06, 03:41 AM	You should not kill off a character just so their player can replace it with something that you think fits the game more conveniently. I've never demanded that my players use particular character classes, and we've had some games where the spread of classes has been very unbalanced. But whatever classes the characters are, good roleplaying should make them able to confront any situation, no matter what their abilities (there's always the run away option if they come across something that they really can't cope with or they can always hire someone to fill the gap if needs be). I also have NPCs join with the group if I feel there is a gap missing, but would never force a player to take a certain character class - I want them to be happy with what they are playing, and a big part of that is the freedom for them to choose freely the kind of character they play. 20goingon1232 was right about CLW wands being usable by both the ranger and paladin. In fact, they could use wands for any spells on their spell lists. Perhaps this is a way of introducing more magical firepower (or at least some healing ability)? However, if the players are putting themselves in dangerous situations which they really can't cope with then have no qualms about killing off a character or two :) Just don't force their hand when they choose their new characters' classes. Evan.
Kitfox 01-23-06, 04:19 AM	Talk about players being munchkins and GM's complaining about them but you look like one of those munchkins who took up the GM hat. No offence but If you did not like the party you should have disalowed them the choices they made, but now its too late. It has begun. So find a way to deal with it. Sure we can talk about party needing a healer, tank, blaster and all sort of stereotypes but what you have is a group that really could enjoy the guidance of a good GM. Dont give them chalanges waay to hard. Allow them to rest more often. There are more alternative to combat and they might realise this and chose quests that are in their alley of expertise. So if you provide them with heavy impossible combat being the only available quests they will eventually die. How about NOT try and be DM vs Players and give them a fun adventure of exploring, role playing and few combats involved. If they get borred throw in few more combats eventually they may realise they need healing and ingame they may seek trainers to teach them techniques of healing (think RP way of multiclassing). Let them evolve on their own. But DO NOT try to teach them things by killing them off. Most GMs are hardstrapped of finding a underpowered bunch of people willing to give it a fair go. You are lucky you dont have many munchkins lurking arround..or not yet i guess. Dont lead them that way. Maybe they will be more team oriented and lucky/skillfull (blurred line) and not need alot of healing. Dont try anything and just wing it. Ad Hoc Campaigns are one of the most fun for the players and one of the coolest to run from GM side. Oppinions vary though.
MasterOfPsychic 01-23-06, 04:58 AM	OH YES! SO SMART! LET's JUST KILL THE PLAYERS FOR NOT BEING MUCHES WHO ONLY PLAY FOR POWER!!! LET THEM PLAY SOMETHING THEY DONT WANT TO PLAY, BECAUSE IT'S "BETTER"... Seriously, you could kill a player for beeing folish, or having bad luck (or you having good) BUT NEVER because you don't like the party. If they play what they want to play, then they don't want to play anything else.. (do'h)
nastynate 01-23-06, 04:59 AM	There is nothing wrong with a party who lacks certain archtypes. They are just a little weaker in some areas (where they lack a class), and stronger in others (where they double up). What you (and they) will both soon learn is that certain encounters designed to challenge a party of their level will be more difficult than others. I am totally against adjusting all encounters to suitable standards for the party. Sometimes they should run into things for which they have no direct answer; that's just realistic. If you've got nobody capable of finding/disarming traps it doesn't mean traps don't exist does it? You'll have to carefully temper your realism however, with fairness. Just because traps exist, doesn't mean every treasure chest and dungeon should be loaded with them either. Maybe with some recon, they'll learn (before they delve in and get skewered) that a particular tomb has an abundance of traps, but you'll conveniently provide access to a mercenary rogue for the occasion. Without a dedicated healer, or blaster you are going to find that any encounter with large numbers of enemies will be harder (no fireballs for you), and the party won't be able to sustain themselves through multiple encounters that can potentially inflict a large amount of damage upon them (no cleric either). However, the party should man-handle single powerful enemies (like an ogre) with an abundance of capable melee fighters. After a little while you'll get the idea of what they can and cannot handle, and realize the challenge itself won't always match the challenge rating assigned in the monster manual, when placed in relation to the abilities of your party. It's tricky at first, but you'll get the hang of it. DO NOT KILL A CHARACTER just because you want to replace them with a class more sensible to the mechanics of the group. The players hate when the DM kills off their characters, especially when it isn't because of anything within their control. Sometimes PCs die, but don't use a character fatality to railroad them into another class; that's cruel. In the future try suggesting particular classes that are noticably absent during character generation, and you may avoid this conundrum. However there will be times that even with your advice, they just don't want to play a certain class. Them's the breaks; just remind them that sometimes things may be difficult without a cleric, and allow them to do their own thing. D&D is a very flexible game, and if you put your mind to it, you could run a great story for a party composed entirely of bards...minstrels and playwrights perhaps, who travel from city to city entertaining noble courts, deeply involved in political intrigue, romance, and perhaps even diplomacy, with far fewer physical battles. Good luck and have fun. :D
Nevynxxx 01-23-06, 07:16 AM	Shouldn't that title be *Character* Death...Why not? This is how dnd gets a bad reputation, you can't just kill your players on a whim, the Police don't like it! :)
Cantankerous 01-23-06, 08:17 AM	Player Death: why not? Character death I can do... but player death may be a bit too much for me. I hate getting blood out of my clothes. Isshia edit: Oh fine Nevyn, just beat me too it. steal my thunder. ;)
MacsBug 01-23-06, 08:28 AM	I'd recommend against modifying any of your encounters due to the class makeup of the group. It gives the impression that it's your responsibility to ensure the party can handle anything you throw at them, not theirs. Balance all your encounters versus a standard party (mage, cleric, fighter, rogue) of equivalent level and let the problem sort itself out - either they will find a way to overcome their inherent shortcomings or they will die.
MagicPrime 01-23-06, 08:38 AM	Also remember, the Paladin has Lay on Hands - which although it can be quite useless at low levels, a Paladin of 12th lvl with a Basic Cha Score of 16(+3) and say a magic item that increases that ability by 2 to 18(+4) can heal 48hp per day at his leisure. Im not saying he can act as the party's main healer with that - because you would die... but technically he can stabilize 48 people a day. lol, and can bring 4 people back from -9 per day into the postivies by 1 or 2. That mixed with the wands, and potions, even Divine Scrolls which can both be used by the ranger and the pally can let them manage as a group. Although i forsee one player getting shoved into the "healer" roll - which they may not appreciate if they don't want to be there. P.S. - Even a lvl 4 Paladin with a Decent Charisma score has enough Lay on Hands ability to save one or two people from the brink of death every day - which is not to shabby.
starfire311 01-23-06, 08:54 AM	I think it is rather simple, do nothing. Play the enemies correctly, play them well, and let the dice fall where they may, if someone dies someone dies, if they all manage to use good tactics to cover each others butts, then more power to them. By playing them correctly I mean lpay them to their intelligince, don't have intelligent foes attack randomly, there should be a method to their attacks. But, make sure that you aren't playing uinitelligent foes the same way, one time a DM had a gray ooze, a dire bear, and a purple worm lay one of the nastiest traps ever for my party, I didn't think it was right playing those 3 creatures using flawless tactics.
strcpy 01-23-06, 09:34 AM	Having played in a game that consisted of two fighters, one barbarian and a monk I can say that it was the best game I have played in. No healing, no magic. We had brute strength, we killed things fast. And if you can kill things fast you take little bits of damage. We were good at range as well mind you. We all had crossbows, bows, and shurikens for the monk. The monk was the anti mage element, and doubled up as the theif and distraction character. Also equipment was a big thing. We spent a lot of gp on useful equipment like ropes of climbing, immovable rods, nets, dust of apperance, tangle foot bags. What a game, :evillaugh
SamirTrollslayer 01-23-06, 10:06 AM	I agree I played in a group with 1 Ftr/rog, 1 Ftr/Rgr, 1 Ftr/Brb, and 1 Ftr and it was a blast. Nothin is funner than entering fights with 14 hp, at 4 lvl, and being the highest. It makes you sweat and think and is alot of fun. I have less enjoyment in groups with spell power cause fights are over way to fats just my 2cents.
rldavis622 01-23-06, 10:40 AM	Well, similar to the invest in equipment idea, the characters could use some of that hard earned gold and hire a priest/mage.
Bruunwald 01-23-06, 12:50 PM	Lots of people play low-magic games where spells are a rarity. Take a cue from your players and make healing a rarity. Nothing wrong with that. As for wands and potions, they don't need to go back to town to get them. You just stick them among the belongings of your villains, or in treasure hoards. Here's the cool thing: if you keep magic rare, then your normal, everyday wand of cure light wounds takes on special significance as a valuable treasure, rather than a cheap tool. On the other hand, if your players don't want low magic, and you don't make healing available, or if you decide to off somebody to teach them a lesson (the worst idea in the history of the game), then we'll keep an eye out for the complaints of your players over on the What's A Player To Do? board.
goldjas 01-23-06, 02:07 PM	To answer the OP, I have many games where my players don't want to play the Cleric/Druid, because people HATE being the healer (and way to many players like being barbarians/samurai cuz they hit hard adn look cool doing it, but i digress...). One good thing that comes of this is that, since Druids and Clerics are by far the most overpowered classes (in general) I don't have to worry about it as much. However, it is a very easy problem to solve, just gives lots of Cure X wounds potions (or wands if your characters can use them) for a large portion of the treasure that the enemies drop, it kind of does make since for every orc or rogue or even goblins (well, I'm not sure if a normal goblin can have enough gold to be carrying a cure light wounds potion, but the point still stands) to carry around a potion of Cure light wounds or two, especially in a high magic campaign.
VladTheInstaller 01-23-06, 06:44 PM	First off I'm not a combat junkie; I'm a writer. Nor am I by any means uber, cheesy, or a munchkin when it comes to PC design. I realise that I should have voiced any concerns about the party's composition and asked what they thought (had I done so and had them reply that they were fine, that would have been the end of it. It's no fun to play a character someone else's character). That I didn't it my own fault and as a result I shouldn't complain. I get it, loud and clear. This has nothing to do with any wants or wishes to change or restrict the way the party can choose to operate. It has everything to do with the rammifications of poor judgement and as a result the obligations of a DM to step in and keep the game moving (and in the process getting them out of a tough jam that they really shouldn't have gotten themselves into in the first place). It is a question of to what extent you as a DM feel the responsability to go to insure the party doesn't suffer a TPK. Look I wasn't looking for an OK to kill off a player, I was wondering to what degree should I save them from their bad choices (and no, I don't mean in character selection, or any of the game's mechanical aspects. I mean flat out "yes we realise we can't take on Task X because we lack the proper feats/skills/abilities/talents/whatever, but we're going to try anyways in the hopes you won't kill us"). goldjas: While this may in the end be the route I take, I'm hoping for a less magical/ more practical solution to try first. Bruunwald: As per above. And hey! I'm not trying to get any of them killed intentionally here. MasterOfPsychic: I never said I was going to force any PC type on any of the players. This post has more to do with the role of a DM in party preservation when things are looking grim, and less to do with "Wah wah wah, they don't have a 'perfect' party". rldavis622: They did, he died. I don't think giving them an endless amount of NPC cannonfodder is the right idea. strcpy: You give me hope, as this is akin to what I've started to see in my mind. More thinking, less risk. Reward good planning accordingly. I guess I should reword this in a more suitable manner: To what level should a DM intervene when players are being Chaotic Stupid with their PCs? At what point do you give up and let them die?
Golgomox 01-23-06, 07:27 PM	Give them all random magical powers gained by some freak explosion. Or kill them with some terrible beast and stress how magic probably would have saved them when they're rolling up new characters.
Nerin 01-23-06, 07:35 PM	If you have it, the DMG2 has some nice ways to get around the party having no healer. Companion spirits are easy to do and fun. On the other hand, if your monk is nearly getting himself killed all the time, stop trying to save his life and just kill him. Then let him re-roll, but tell him that a druid or cleric would help the party the most. He wouldn't have to only heal, a druid is very nasty once it gets wildshape and even before that. A cleric can also do a lot more than just heal. I don't want to get into a debate about druids and clerics, but a druid would be rather good for your party. It's got great spells, great melee and great healing. If he doesn't want to go a druid or cleric, then you could have clerics in the towns/villages they go to. let them buy the healing, be it potions or scrolls or wands. Still ... if you really don't want to kill anyone off, read up on companion spirits and see if your group would like that.
jagraham 01-23-06, 08:00 PM	My current campaign started with 4 PCs and no clerics, so I added an NPC cleric. I control leveling up, spell selection, etc, but in combat, control of the cleric rotates between the players, so that if your PC is down or not present. The NPC gets a share of the XP and treasure, there is a cost to the party for his services. After reaching 3rd level, I started cutting the NPCs XP in half, because I don't want him getting too powerful, just lots of 1st and 2nd to patch up the party.
Cathon 01-23-06, 09:30 PM	I think Wands of CLW should work fine for the moment, you could suggest the Paladin take leadership at level 6 and pick up a cleric cohort to give the party a little more healing ability (one of my parties did that to take some of the burden off of my druid). Augment healing is a nice feat for divine casters who want more bang for their buck on healing spells, too. But ultimately it is mostly up to them to adapt to their shortcomings. I will note that if you look at the quick NPCs in the DMG, all of them have a few potions in their suggested loot, so throwing more NPC opponents at the party can help. (I think at one point after a lot of standard NPC encounters my party had 11 CLW potions each, but they had a cleric and a bard in the party so they didn't need them too often.) And really, what intelligent monster wouldn't keep a few potions around for emergencies if they could? There are alternate systems in UA that work in these kind of games as well, reserve points and the like, but ultimately you can get by fairly well with just potions and the like. My PCs in my very low magic world are getting by OK with some spells from a bard, and some healing salves (which heal d4 each). But most of their opponents have been NPCs, who carry healing salves as well. It is amusing how mad they get when one of their opponents wastes a salve by using it on themselves!
Arrowhen 01-23-06, 09:42 PM	It is a question of to what extent you as a DM feel the responsability to go to insure the party doesn't suffer a TPK. It's my responsibility to provide the PCs with appropriate consequences for their actions. It's also my responsibility to ensure that the players are made aware of the potential dangers of their actions. I don't have any responsibility to "save" the PCs from their mistakes, as long as the mistakes are truly their own.
Molitor 01-23-06, 10:48 PM	VladTheInstaller(love that name): Are you having fun? Are your players having fun? As a DM I will let characters die only if the dice, the critters, or poor choices are to blame and if it is somehow heroic, the death that is. Watching a character die because he falls down a flight of stairs is stupid to me. Letting a character get torn to bits by wolves because he allowed himself to be seperated from the party is totally acceptable. Dice, critters, poor choices. DMs used to be impartial. Although WoTC doesn't stress that any longer.
VladTheInstaller 01-23-06, 11:20 PM	Yes, we've all had a blast playing. And that's what counts (Thanks, I love the name too). Thanks to everyone who took the time to reply to this post. I now feel a bit more assured that it's ok to have a PC die by their own actions, and that it is not the end of the world. I also love the idea of adding lower or more "primative" forms of healing (ie 1d4 salves), and have plans to create a modified table for using the Heal skill (that is, once I have a bit more expirience under my belt). All and all, I think I've taken a lot from what's been said here, and as a result both myself and my players will benefit. Of course I'd always love more opinions on the matter, so feel free to continue posting your thoughts on the matter.
Grier 01-24-06, 12:33 AM	Ditto. I'm also a new DM with a Cleric-less group. I'm currently DMPCing a Cleric; he is supposed to be the character of our fourth member, but he hasn't made it to any meetings and may give up on trying to come. The NPC Cleric is working OK, but I keep forgetting about him, so he gets left behind whenever they're at an inn...
Arrowhen 01-24-06, 05:48 AM	You might want to take a look at the Reserve Points system, found in Unearthed Arcana and reprinted here (http://d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/reservePoints.htm). It's a good compromise for parties who lack a cleric; it doesn't help in an individual battle (thus, the decision not to bring a cleric along still has consequences), but it does extend their range a bit, so you're not stuck trying to move the session along when the party wants to rest after every single encounter.
strcpy 01-24-06, 07:31 AM	In one of my game I included an alchemist item. I got the idea from another forum site, don't remember who it was. But basically it's a little pill you keep in your mouth. As a free action you can bite it and recieve 1 hp of healing. I set them at 50 gp a pop. Nice for when you need just that one hp to get up off the floor.
pmurray@bigpond.com 01-25-06, 07:24 PM	We played a game without a cleric. As the end of the big encounter for the night, a mystical cleric would "orb in" from out of knowhere, heal the party, and then just **** off to whatever dimension he came from. We never asked him his name or anything. It was a relaxed group of adults, meeting on Friday nights. Beer was drunk. Eventually, someone came onboard as the cleric and things proceeded in a more "realistic" way. It was actually the prior DM - played an earth domain cleric who summoned monsters. This year, I'm the cleric. Low Int, but with an insatiable lust ... for righteousness! Amen! Just feeeel the healin' powah of Paylor! Gloray to gahd!
pmurray@bigpond.com 01-25-06, 07:27 PM	I also love the idea of adding lower or more "primative" forms of healing (ie 1d4 salves) Consider magical healing done as items of food. Even magical fruits (cultivated by certain druids) that neutralise poison. Of course, they're not so potent in their dried form, but that's ok.
Frodo Lives 01-27-06, 10:14 PM	I played in a game where there were four 1st level characters, a paladin, a wizard, a barbarian, and a rogue. No healing in sight. At first level we also had no magic, no potions, nothing for healing. It stunk, after every fight we had to rest for days at a time because almost everyone was at half or less of normal hps and another encounter would kill us off. This was in a game whose plot hook was time based! We were trying to recover a magic item that the rival of the wizard was also looking for. It didn't take long for me to talk to the DM and tell him to kill off my paladin so I could make up a cleric. Renewable healing, especially at lower levels is almost a must for any party to survive. It can be done without it, but it is tough. Bottom line is, the players knew that they didn't have a healer when the party was formed and were OK with it. Don't be overly harsh because they don't, but don't coddle them either.
pmurray@bigpond.com 01-27-06, 11:03 PM	Played our first game last night. Our big-gun fighter was reduced to neg HP twice. I have run out of healing - we'll have to rest. BTW: what can you do with the "heal" skill? AFAIK, you can stabilize, double natural overnight healing, and allow someone to avoid additional damage from poison. And that's about it.
VladTheInstaller 01-28-06, 02:41 AM	I used a trial rule where players may use up one of their heal kit uses to aid another PC. Roll a d20 + their ranks in Heal. The result is the hp gained by the target. Worked well, especilly since they can't take 10 or 20 during combat with it. We'll see how well it goes as they gain ranks in it though.
Cantankerous 01-28-06, 04:12 AM	Played our first game last night. Our big-gun fighter was reduced to neg HP twice. I have run out of healing - we'll have to rest. BTW: what can you do with the "heal" skill? AFAIK, you can stabilize, double natural overnight healing, and allow someone to avoid additional damage from poison. And that's about it. THIS (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/skills/heal.htm) is what you can do with the Heal Skill, no more, no less, unless house rules modify it. Isshia
Father Tim 01-28-06, 11:55 AM	Watch some classic historical-fiction TV and movies: Robin Hood, Conan, Xena, Hercules, Beastmaster, etc. All those cheesey '70s classics feature heroes who battle evil all day (frequently by sneaking around and *gasp* roleplaying first), and feast all night, with only the occasional, plot-driven 'wound' to worry about. In a low-magic world, where the party has no healers or blasters, a hearty feast and a good night's rest in a comfortable inn, castle, or temple can 'heal' the party of twenty, thirty, or even fifty-odd hit points. Just be sure to remind everyone that hit points aren't literally damage, they mostly represent "luck, experience, stamina and battle-savvy" such that even though the players are down 60% of their hit points, really they're just tired, hungry, and sporting a few bruises after battling the hydra, but that is nothing a fresh bath, hot meal, and soft bed can't 'cure' overnight. You'll still need to keep an eye on the CR of encounters created with expectation that PCs will have battle-healing, but that's not too hard. If the PC's ignore a bad guy as soon as it drops (and with Cleave, who doesn't?), it's easy enough to have the bad guys ignore the PCs the same way. Thus they're odds of survival go up dramatically. Even hungry monsters can be cat-like in their focus on moving pray 'in the bush' ratehr than the limp PC 'in hand'.