What is with the entitlement? (shadzar stay out)

[K]

Okay no. the DM can't just decide "Not to kill a PC" and fuck you for repeating that stupid fallacy. The dice rolls are killing the PCs, not the DM.

Lets say you have a battle with a single orc (CR 1) against a party of 4 1st level dudes. Not only is this not a deadly encounter, it's an easy encounter. Everyone rolls initiative and the orc wins. Now what does the DM have the orc do? Does it sit there and twiddle its thumbs waiting to die, or does it charge with its greataxe?

Okay, lets assume the DM wants to keep some measure of verisimilitude and has the orc charge the nearest PC. The orc rolls a natural 20, following by an 18 to confirm. Well given the orc has 17 strength, hes doing 1d12+4 damage, with an x3 critical. Even an average damage roll does 30 damage, so likely, someone is going to fucking die here. The encounter was fair, the monster was fair, and people just got unlucky.

So do you then stand up and start whining at the DM for picking you as the guy the orc attacked? Even though you know damn well the attack would have splattered any of your other companions?

How the fuck is this the DM's fault? Seriously dude.

IF you are going to choose an example, I'm going to be forced to make you look stupid in public.

First, the DM has already decided to dramatically increase the odds of killing the PCs because he changed the base orc entry to use a greatax with an average crit of 30 instead of the listed falchion with an average crit of 20 damage. That's huge because it's the difference between killing a Fighter with one hit and dropping one with one hit.

Second, he chose to not use the listed javelin.

Third, knowing that 1st level PCs are made out of glass he made the choice to not to use a less lethal weapon like a shortsword or a knife.

Fourth, he chose to use an orc when a less lethal monster would be appropriate. How about a goblin? They have a Str of 11 and their crits are lot less lethal for 1st levels.

Fifth, the orc didn't use nonlethal damage or choose to disarm the PC instead. He could have had any number of reasons to do so, but instead the DM chose to risk PC auto-death.

Sixth, he killed a PC and didn't then alter the narrative to bring that PC back. He could have had a noble lord or town mayor or angel or hero in the area hear about the epic orc battle and chose to resurrect the slain PC as a reward or to get the party to do a quest for them. He could have left a magic item that would bring the PC back in the orc's treasure. He could have had the PC rise again as an undead creature and have the eventual return to life earned somehow. He could have had any number of plot threads bring that PC back, but instead he chose to punish the PC for.... why again?

Are they being punished for not surviving an attack they couldn't survive? Good job blaming the victim.

The DM executed the PC for no reason, then told the player to man up and make another. Like a dick.

[TOZ]

If the only purpose of the rules is to check tyrannical GMing, then the rules are purposeless. I've played freeform no-GM games before and they worked just fine.

Even the freeform games I played had rules, even if they were just social expectations on how to handle two players who disagreed on what should happen next.

[Shadow Balls]

Right so you one shot every player you can as soon as the opportunity comes up? D&D, at least in the 3.X iteration that we discuss here, is sufficiently rocket taggy that you can almost always kill people in one round using run of the mill CR appropriate encounters. As the DM has much more information with which to be prepared that best tactics from the DM should turn into pretty per encounter deaths. If you're not you're holding back. So are you an asshole DM who kills his players at every opportunity or someone who actually bases his decisions not on what is the most tactically awesome and effect or on what will let your players continue to have fun?

Any character that dies in one round from an at level run of the mill enemy is incredibly weak. It most typically takes two rounds. And since this is D&D we are talking about, that is plenty of time to react.

And all of that ignores the possibility of optimizing, which if done right reduces the degree of rocket tag significantly as you have layered defenses against it.

[A Man In Black]

Well okay, you guys can have your tag-team on Swordslinger about "objective wargaming" if you want, even if it doesn't have a goddamned thing to do with anything, fuck it.

[Red_Rob]

First, the DM has already decided to dramatically increase the odds of killing the PCs because he changed the base orc entry to use a greatax with an average crit of 30 instead of the listed falchion with an average crit of 20 damage. That's huge because it's the difference between killing a Fighter with one hit and dropping one with one hit.

Second, he chose to not use the listed javelin.

Third, knowing that 1st level PCs are made out of glass he made the choice to not to use a less lethal weapon like a shortsword or a knife.

Fourth, he chose to use an orc when a less lethal monster would be appropriate. How about a goblin? They have a Str of 11 and their crits are lot less lethal for 1st levels.

Fifth, the orc didn't use nonlethal damage or choose to disarm the PC instead. He could have had any number of reasons to do so, but instead the DM chose to risk PC auto-death.

Sixth, he killed a PC and didn't then alter the narrative to bring that PC back. He could have had a noble lord or town mayor or angel or hero in the area hear about the epic orc battle and chose to resurrect the slain PC as a reward or to get the party to do a quest for them. He could have left a magic item that would bring the PC back in the orc's treasure. He could have had the PC rise again as an undead creature and have the eventual return to life earned somehow. He could have had any number of plot threads bring that PC back, but instead he chose to punish the PC for.... why again?

Are they being punished for not surviving an attack they couldn't survive? Good job blaming the victim.

The DM executed the PC for no reason, then told the player to man up and make another. Like a dick.

So your epic fantasy game has our four heroes ganging up on an Orc with a knife? But wait, that might be too dangerous, better make it a single goblin? Wow, thrilling tales of derring do must be ten a penny in such a campaign.

The major problem I have with this approach is that in a tactical combat game there are usually good moves, which take you towards winning the encounter, and bad moves that achieve nothing. If the players are in any way savvy, as soon as you start having the monsters make bad moves the players can tell, and it cheapens the whole encounter. The players can see that the bad guys are not trying to beat them, and their victory becomes hollow and meaningless.

The same happens when Raise Dead scrolls only drop as treasure when a character dies, or "mysterious angels" start appearing. Players can spot that shit, and it lays bare the whole charade. The players know that they were playing with a safety net the whole time.

Player death is inconvenient and can derail interesting stories, but in a game rooted in heroic deeds and bloodthirsty monsters the alternative is much worse. This is definitely a case of the cure being worse than the disease.

[Swordslinger]

IF you are going to choose an example, I'm going to be forced to make you look stupid in public.

Okay, lets see.

First, the DM has already decided to dramatically increase the odds of killing the PCs because he changed the base orc entry to use a greatax with an average crit of 30 instead of the listed falchion with an average crit of 20 damage. That's huge because it's the difference between killing a Fighter with one hit and dropping one with one hit.

So I can't arm an orc with a normal off the shelf greataxe or battleaxe? What the fuck? Seriously dude...

Third, knowing that 1st level PCs are made out of glass he made the choice to not to use a less lethal weapon like a shortsword or a knife.

Wow... why don't we just arm him with a nerf bat while we're at it. How are your players feeling heroic again? Not only is 4 on 1 not good enough for you... but you have to gimp your monsters by giving them crap weapons too? What are you running? The special Olympics of D&D?

Fourth, he chose to use an orc when a less lethal monster would be appropriate. How about a goblin? They have a Str of 11 and their crits are lot less lethal for 1st levels.

It's CR 1 dude. That's not even a hard fight.

Fifth, the orc didn't use nonlethal damage or choose to disarm the PC instead. He could have had any number of reasons to do so, but instead the DM chose to risk PC auto-death.

Yeah because when you're confronted with a 4-on-1, you totally think, "I'm gonna take all these dudes alive, I don't mind the -4 penalty to my attack rolls!"

Sixth, he killed a PC and didn't then alter the narrative to bring that PC back. He could have had a noble lord or town mayor or angel or hero in the area hear about the epic orc battle and chose to resurrect the slain PC as a reward or to get the party to do a quest for them.

Ahahahaha... dude are you trying to be a fuckin comedian here, cause you got me cracking up with that. The epic orc battle?! Seriously dude. Seriously?! You mean the four heroes on one orc gangbang where he got killed in the opening round? Yeah, that's really going to impress the mayor or an angel enough to burn 5000 gold to bring back a level 1 hero. Why not just have Elminster appear while you're at it. Cause really, when you're that much of a hero of legend, big names are going to take notice!

omfg, that is the funniest thing I have heard all day. You suck as a DM, but that's great comedy.

You're telling me bullshit about lone orcs with raise dead scrolls in their treasure pile and about angels coming down from heaven to raise first level characters who died in a trivial fight. At this point, any credibility you had at telling good stories is now out the window.

But yeah, by all means, keep responding in this thread. I really don't see how you can make yourself sound more ridiculous, but go for it.

[K]

Ahahahaha... dude are you trying to be a fuckin comedian here, cause you got me cracking up with that. The epic orc battle?! Seriously dude. Seriously?! You mean the four heroes on one orc gangbang where he got killed in the opening round? Yeah, that's really going to impress the mayor or an angel enough to burn 5000 gold to bring back a level 1 hero. Why not just have Elminster appear while you're at it. Cause really, when you're that much of a hero of legend, big names are going to take notice!

Clearly, it was an epic tale and not a ganbang because the orc executed a PC before you could bring him down. Clearly it was not an EL one encounter because you equipped the monster with a better weapon that can one-shot kill characters instead of it's normal weapon. Clearly, it has to be an epic fight because otherwise the PC death would be completely pointless and ruin the story for no reason other than to please a sadistic DM.

I mean, run the same scenario at higher level. Superman, Batman, The Flash, and Green Lantern attack a forehead alien and the guy kills Superman permanently in one hit almost instantly, but the other three manage to take the guy down. Is that an epic fight?

The worst part of trying to pretend the game is objective and railroading PCs literally to death is just how shitty the result is. I mean, if 1st level characters are not considered heroes and they have to be summarily executed because it makes the DM feel better, why even pretend that anyone is a hero? I mean, no matter how many levels they get, the DM is just going to execute their character and no one is going to get a heroic story anyway, right?

Finding a reason to bring a PC back is just as contrived as adding a new PC to the party, but resurrection preserves the illusion that PCs are important to the cooperative narrative being told in the story.

I get it though. If you can't hide behind the illusion of objective adversarial gaming, then people realize you are a sadistic dick that enjoys ruining heroic RPGing for other people.

[tussock]

If you're not you're holding back.

Want some numbers? I see about one character death per player per 6 levels.

So are you an asshole DM who kills his players at every opportunity, or someone who actually bases his decisions not on what is the most tactically awesome and effective, but on what will let your players continue to have fun?

Again with the do it my way or you're a giant dick thing. This place is better than that.

But yes, the monsters use tactical optimisation within the limits of their knowledge and ability to try and kill the PCs (where that's culturally appropriate), because I find that helps the players have fun. I have never killed any actual players. LOL.

But yeh, we've already been around here, and you still think coddling the little dears and killing characters when you think it dramatic will make them happier. More power to you, I just disagree.


Edit: As to the Orc thing, it's got all the wrong assumptions I corrected a few pages back. The PCs get to choose what they fight, not me. They want to chase down an Orc warrior, that's on them. They walk into tight confines likely knowing he's in there, and probably knowing he might be an axe user. So what? 1 in 1000 odds of not even getting an action? Yeh, that's the game we play.

[Dr_Noface]

I'm with K on this example. Over the years I've seen about half a dozen new players get their 1st level character take a critical hit and die. Its pretty discouraging, especially when said new players spent a couple hours typing up a backstory and are finally getting into roleplaying their character.

I'm all for making low level play less deadly. There should be many ways to do this without breaking verisimilitude. Hell, its 3.5, just give players the option to take a feat called "Luck of the Gods/Fucked by the Sex Nymphs" (that rerolls saves, lets them downgrade a critical, etc) and warn them how deadly D&D is. And let them retrain the feat if they get used to the crazy.

As for the orc in the example, if I was the DM I might retroactively make him some badass low-level villain. Low level chumps typically don't gib the heroes.

[K]

I think the most interesting thing about this conversation is just how defensive the wargamers get when they ruin other people's fun.

That's the real entitlement.

I mean, they are like "hey, my PCs love it when I kill them off permanently" when the answer from the PCs is probably something like "yeh, sometimes he kills us and we hate it, but he's super defensive about it so we just suck it up and humor him because he's the only person we know who wants to run a game."

[K]

I'm with K on this example. Over the years I've seen about half a dozen new players get their 1st level character take a critical hit and die. Its pretty discouraging, especially when said new players spent a couple hours typing up a backstory and are finally getting into roleplaying their character.

I'm all for making low level play less deadly. There should be many ways to do this without breaking verisimilitude. Hell, its 3.5, just give players the option to take a feat called "Luck of the Gods/Fucked by the Sex Nymphs" (that rerolls saves, lets them downgrade a critical, etc) and warn them how deadly D&D is. And let them retrain the feat if they get used to the crazy.

As for the orc in the example, if I was the DM I might retroactively make him some badass low-level villain. Low level chumps typically don't gib the heroes.

For the record, I'm taking the feat Fucked By The Sex Nymphs regardless of what the mechanics are or what it does. Call me a basketweaver if you must.

[Shadow Balls]

Ahahaha. Oh wow...

IF you are going to choose an example, I'm going to be forced to make you look stupid in public.

First, the DM has already decided to dramatically increase the odds of killing the PCs because he changed the base orc entry to use a greatax with an average crit of 30 instead of the listed falchion with an average crit of 20 damage. That's huge because it's the difference between killing a Fighter with one hit and dropping one with one hit.

Fighter from full HP to dead = 22 damage, so an above average roll does it instantly still, AND it happens 3 times more often. By using a Greataxe, it is actually LESS dangerous. But thank you for proving once again you have no idea what you are talking about.

Second, he chose to not use the listed javelin.

Yes, generally enemies use their melee weapons when in melee range.

Third, knowing that 1st level PCs are made out of glass he made the choice to not to use a less lethal weapon like a shortsword or a knife.

Here is where you start doubling down on the derp. An Orc using a shortsword or a knife. Even ignoring the mechanics, that's fucking retarded.

Fourth, he chose to use an orc when a less lethal monster would be appropriate. How about a goblin? They have a Str of 11 and their crits are lot less lethal for 1st levels.

Fifth, the orc didn't use nonlethal damage or choose to disarm the PC instead. He could have had any number of reasons to do so, but instead the DM chose to risk PC auto-death.

Ah yes, the heroic story of four Murdering Hobos beating down a single goblin, or fighting the evil marauding orc that wants to not kill people in the name of his slaughter god and instead wants to provoke AoOs and suicide itself!

Sixth, he killed a PC and didn't then alter the narrative to bring that PC back. He could have had a noble lord or town mayor or angel or hero in the area hear about the epic orc battle and chose to resurrect the slain PC as a reward or to get the party to do a quest for them. He could have left a magic item that would bring the PC back in the orc's treasure. He could have had the PC rise again as an undead creature and have the eventual return to life earned somehow. He could have had any number of plot threads bring that PC back, but instead he chose to punish the PC for.... why again?

Ah yes, the epic orc battle in which the devotee of a fucking slaughter god wants to not kill people, and goes well out of his way to not kill people. The one in which you and three of your buddies ganged up on one orc. Truly that is an epic one for the ages. I'll just crack open my Kundarak account and write out 5k to you right now!

Or ooh, I know, let's give random nobody orcs rez items!

Jesus H Fucking Christ. You're hyperboling and strawmanning yourself.

The DM executed the PC for no reason, then told the player to man up and make another. Like a dick.

You've just went full crazytrain.

For the record, I'm taking the feat Fucked By The Sex Nymphs regardless of what the mechanics are or what it does. Call me a basketweaver if you must.

Fucking basket weaver.

Now I'll grant you level 1 (and 2) are really fucked up, to the point where randomness makes more of a difference than decisions, and until you hit 3 you're just hoping to survive. The solution to that though isn't to turn the game into a total joke, it is to skip the levels that do not work and play at the levels that do work.

[Chamomile]

I said, "The rules exist to facilitate the weaving together of the stories and plot threads and minimize the tyranny of single-author fiction. They also add randomness to the outcome of trivial events, putting some of the load of storytelling onto arbitrary rules and outcomes."

Yeah, okay, and all of that is still aptly covered by "no godmodding" because people actually know how to tell stories without a chart to help them and social pressures do just fine in preventing single-author fiction when the rules do not explicitly grant one player significantly more power. As for adding randomness to trivial events...If they're trivial, why do we spend fully half of the average session on them? Keep in mind all combats are to be considered largely trivial in this scenario, so shouldn't super-extra-ultra rules lite be the goal? If each player has to roll more than once for a trivial decision, we're wasting time.

[K]

Ah yes, the epic orc battle in which the devotee of a fucking slaughter god wants to not kill people, and goes well out of his way to not kill people. The one in which you and three of your buddies ganged up on one orc. Truly that is an epic one for the ages. I'll just crack open my Kundarak account and write out 5k to you right now!

Or ooh, I know, let's give random nobody orcs rez items!

What a perfect self-contradiction. Totally worth taking you off ignore for a post.

If the orc is a random nobody, then he shouldn't have a battleax and should have a club or something and he should run away when four heroes attack him. The very idea that a random nobody should even think he can win should be laughable. The fact that he should be specially statted to kill players is retarded.

But, if he's some badass bloodthirsty cultist who is supposed to be auto-killing PCs and willing to fight against impossible odds, then there is no reason why he can't have a raise scroll or his death might be the reason for a big reward. Obviously, he's an epic fight for 1st level PCs and they deserve to be compensated for that.

So which option will you take? There is no third option where he gets to be a random nobody for some purposes and a bloodthirsty important badass for others.

Protip: You are wrong either way.

Protip:Since it's 2d4 +3 times 2 on a crit, it's actually an average of 16 damage from the orc in the MM who crits. (The orc in the MM has a typo where he gets an extra point of damage with a falchion because I think someone thinks a STR 17 is a +4 and not the +3 that it really is.... don't let that throw you off even if I missed it the first time).

A 1st level fighter should have a Con of 14-16 and HP of 12-13, so 16 points of damage should drop a 1st level Fighter to -3 to -4.

[Gx1080]

Something that bothers me about all this mess:

The "hurr durr munchikin wargamers" strawman that K is pushing is ridiculous beyond belief. Besides that no actual wargamers are on this discussion (except me on this post), is a derpy argument.

Here's the deal. Most people see D&D monsters as videogame monsters. That being, pre-programmed attack patterns, you execute the requiered strategy + have enough numbers and you win. Next.

Now, the "pro-death" camp has a valid argument. They CAN fail to do the requiered strategy or not have enough numbers and lose. Which is perfectly fine, because videogames are build to be beatable and they failed at that.

The above approach is anathema to a "roleplayer" because they are used to use stuff like diplomacy or clever use of abilities to defeat obstacles. In other words, they are used to be able to avoid the basic mechanics and go straight to "story-based powers". Which DO are in complete control of the DM.

So, those are two completely different views. And I don't see how they are supposed to go on an agreement. But we all know that is not the point, the point is arguing for the sake of arguing. So please, continue.

[Swordslinger]

Clearly, it was an epic tale and not a ganbang because the orc executed a PC before you could bring him down.

Or the PC just... sucked? You see a village militia taken down by an orc, you don't think that guy was a total badass and the next challenger to Sauron. And that certainly isn't going to attract anyone to want to put 5000 gold down on someone that can't even take on a nameless orc. This ain't even an elite Uruk-hai here. This is your garden variety orc warrior.

You're kidding yourself if you want to call an epic tale. I believe the word you're looking for is probably tragic, not epic. Some adventurer left town full of stories of riches and fame and had his career cut short, unready for the dangers of a life of combat.

Clearly it was not an EL one encounter because you equipped the monster with a better weapon that can one-shot kill characters instead of it's normal weapon.

The default falchion can one shot too. That's 2d4+4 (yes it's using its weapon two handed in the MM, since it has no shield) That's an average of 18 damage and the possibility of doing up to 24, easily enough to one shot a PC. The falchion can also crit on an 18 or a 19. Not to mention that falchion is more likely to one shot anyone who isn't a fighter, because it's three times as likely to get a crit, and toss down a 2d4+4/x2 crit on a rogue, a mage or even a cleric, and he's probably gone.

As a PC, I'd probably rather face against the greataxe. At the very least the crit only happens on a natural 20.

I mean, run the same scenario at higher level. Superman, Batman, The Flash, and Green Lantern attack a forehead alien and the guy kills Superman permanently in one hit almost instantly, but the other three manage to take the guy down. Is that an epic fight?

Yes, because the people involved are epic. 1st level characters aren't epic. They're nobodies that get beat by nobodies. Angels don't come down to save them, Mayors don't throw down 5000 gold to bring them back. 1st level characters are a dime a dozen. This 1st level dude hasn't done jack shit. He's not a hero yet, he's still a nobody.

Come on dude, don't even pretend to call this a battle between superheroes. This is the village blacksmith versus an orc. And if he dies, he dies. Nobody is coming down to resurrect him. They give him a funeral service and bury him. End of story.

Finding a reason to bring a PC back is just as contrived as adding a new PC to the party, but resurrection preserves the illusion that PCs are important to the cooperative narrative being told in the story.

Getting a new man to replace your lost guy is a lot more believable than fucking angels coming down to visit a nobody 1st level character who couldn't beat an orc 4-on-1. Or the town mayor shells out 5000 gold for a raise dead, which I might add is going to be way more than the reward for the entire 1st level quest. So clearly the mayors in your world are more likely to sink money into someone that fails at life as opposed to rewarding people who were actually successful. Cause that's usually what you do... right? Give all the money to the guy that failed miserably?

But yeah, hiring a new guy for your group, definitely less likely than either of those.

[PhoneLobster]

Or the PC just... sucked? You see a village militia taken down by an orc, you don't think that guy was a total badass and the next challenger to Sauron. ... I believe the word you're looking for is probably tragic, not epic.

The default falchion can one shot too.

Blah blah, 1 point of damage here or there. Whether or not BOTH weapon options fall into "bullshit player kill" or not is somewhat irrelevant to the larger discussion.

But since you don't seem to grasp that your tragic tales scenario is, well, retardedly bad for game play. It seems the quibbling is the only thing you can handle.

So lets point out that the Falchion is less likely to 2 shot kill PCs.

It is more likely to roll it's average, and less likely to roll its extremes at both ends, and has a lower maximum.

What this means is that the Falchion on it's first shot is less likely to roll low, and less likely to leave a character standing as a viable target with only 1 or 2 hit points remaining.

And if it DOES leave a viable 1 or 2 hit point target remaining, it is less likely to THEN roll high and kill them on the second hit.

The axe is MORE likely to two shot kill.

And this is in a scenario with no critical hits at all.

The harsh reality of it is that while the maths behind it can get quite complex the general outcome is simple and common.

In 3.x D&D if you could throw around in excess of 10 points of damage, on average or even frequently then you are highly likely to kill some sucker on low hit points.

This does not require critical hits at all.

This worsens the higher both your average your damage, AND the more variable your damage, so using a 2dice weapon is typically going to be less of a threat than a 1 dice weapon with a larger average AND potential maximum result.

And really as long as PCs are being lowered into the "defeat" range of hit points with similar frequency the actual total HP the PCs have is of relatively little importance, indeed in some scenarios starting with a low enough amount to make a 1 hit KO but not Kill more likely is LESS likely to kill you.

Of course all that really largely doesn't matter.

What matters is that at level whatever you told a stupid ass "Tragic Tale" of a "guy who isn't gonna amount ta nothing" who got killed by some stupid random orc for no particular raisin.

And that isn't a story the player wants to tell. It isn't a story many people even want to HEAR. Because that guy was supposed to amount to something. The orc was supposed to be a character building experience not a character and story ENDING experience.

Poverty and lack of power and skill is supposed to be a transitional phase in these games and these stories.

People want to tell the story of the street rat pick pocket who survived being kicked in the guts by ignoble defeats and then went on to learn wizardry, then killed a dragon then married the princess then became wizard emperor.

They do not especially care to tell the story of the Street rat pick pocket who DIED and was replaced by the guy who had already learned how to become a Wizard off screen, who then DIED and was replaced by a guy who just turned up with enough power to kill a dragon who then DIED and was replaced by a guy who was like already totally engaged to the princess who then DIED (probably along with the Princess) and was replaced by the guy who was already Wizard Emperor. Who then bloody well DIES.

And THAT is the story you tell when you play "Tragic Tales" and no one cares for it because it's kinda disjoint and there is no character continuity.

And really. You can pull any fairness, believability or "well I can't decide if Axes are Worse Than Falchions..." you like, because unless you can find a way to provide some actual narrative your preferred scenario and methodology is "The Tragic Tale of a series of increasingly powerful guys who all died" and it is objectively a failure as an RPG.

[K]

I mean, run the same scenario at higher level. Superman, Batman, The Flash, and Green Lantern attack a forehead alien and the guy kills Superman permanently in one hit almost instantly, but the other three manage to take the guy down. Is that an epic fight?

Yes, because the people involved are epic. 1st level characters aren't epic. They're nobodies that get beat by nobodies. Angels don't come down to save them, Mayors don't throw down 5000 gold to bring them back. 1st level characters are a dime a dozen. This 1st level dude hasn't done jack shit. He's not a hero yet, he's still a nobody.

Come on dude, don't even pretend to call this a battle between superheroes. This is the village blacksmith versus an orc. And if he dies, he dies. Nobody is coming down to resurrect him. They give him a funeral service and bury him. End of story.

If it's a battle between nobodies that the PCs are supposed to steamroll over, then why arm the orc with a PC-killing weapon? Give him a club and move on with your life without the potential for a senseless PC one-shot.

That being said, if this is some serial killer orc who has been stalking the village and built up some fearsome legend and it's the culmination of an investigation story, then it makes perfect sense for the players to get a big reward and for the orc to have a player-killing weapon because it's a big deal for all involved.

If it's just some random orc in the woods, why even do the encounter? Do you hate PCs for feeling like heroes and so increase the difficulty for no reason?

Why even use an orc? Use a CR 1 creature like a medium monstrous spider and don't even risk auto-killing anyone.

PS. Like I said before, the orc listing has an error. It's 2d4 +3 damage on the orc. It's got an extra point of damage for no reason, so the actual average is 16 on a crit which is survivable for clerics and rogues if a little dicey.

It's still not great, but it's better than a battleax.

[Swordslinger]

PS. Like I said before, the orc listing has an error. It's 2d4 +3 damage on the orc. It's got an extra point of damage for no reason, so the actual average is 16 on a crit which is survivable for clerics and rogues if a little dicey.

It's not an error dude. The orc is using it two handed because he has no shield. 1.5x strength modifier to damage.

[K]

PS. Like I said before, the orc listing has an error. It's 2d4 +3 damage on the orc. It's got an extra point of damage for no reason, so the actual average is 16 on a crit which is survivable for clerics and rogues if a little dicey.

It's not an error dude. The orc is using it two handed because he has no shield. 1.5x strength modifier to damage.

Aaa, right. My bad.

[ModelCitizen]

A falchion's a two-handed weapon anyway. He's using it two handed because that is the only way to use it.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm

[Maj]

The players know that they were playing with a safety net the whole time.

I gotta tell you, despite the fact that most of the DMs I've had actively try to not kill the PCs, that hasn't made me any less nervous about dying. In fact, I'm so nervous about it that when the DM starts getting all descriptive about the scary stuff that's happening, my response to break the tension is "X disaster kills everyone. Roll up a new character."

Suspense is in the telling. I know Jason Bourne doesn't die at the end of the The Bourne Identity because there are [at least] two more books written in the series... But that didn't change the action going down one whit.

If you aren't feeling challenged or threatened in your games, it's because the DM doesn't know how to use adjectives.

[K]

The players know that they were playing with a safety net the whole time.

I gotta tell you, despite the fact that most of the DMs I've had actively try to not kill the PCs, that hasn't made me any less nervous about dying. In fact, I'm so nervous about it that when the DM starts getting all descriptive about the scary stuff that's happening, my response to break the tension is "X disaster kills everyone. Roll up a new character."

Suspense is in the telling. I know Jason Bourne doesn't die at the end of the The Bourne Identity because there are [at least] two more books written in the series... But that didn't change the action going down one whit.

If you aren't feeling challenged or threatened in your games, it's because the DM doesn't know how to use adjectives.

I have to agree with that.

I mean, I don't think any kind of safety net makes the game boring. Most days I'm worried what fresh new Hell the DM will inflict that will ruin our chance of completing the story goal or temporarily screw up my character.

[erik]

What's great about falchion-using-orcs early on is that they give you Falchions! 75 gp swords. Wheeee. Sometimes you cannot afford that as a starting weapon.

[tzor]

The really odd thing is that the more I read this thread the more I really want to GM a Parinoia game. The GM wants to kill your character; the other players want to kill your charactrer; heck you probably want to kill your character. Bring out the next clone.