2 Ways to Deal with Upset D&D Players When They Die

How to handle upset D&D players when their PCs die. BECOME A PATRON - Get Lair Magazine (5e adventures, VTT maps, puzzles, traps, new monsters, and more), play D&D with me, and other perks ▶▶ / thedmlair
Dungeons & Dragons is a game that involves a fair bit of combat. Swords slice the air; arrows fly about; fireballs are cast with impunity. And yet somehow, D&D players sometimes seem to believe that death will never come to their characters. It's as if they believe, despite the wanton destruction and death about them, their dear precious PCs should somehow be immune and invincible. At times it seems a blatant denial of the type of game D&D often is: one of great heroics but also great loses. In this video, we discuss how dungeon masters might handle D&D players who get pissed off when their characters die.
LAIRS & LEGENDS KICKSTARTER preorders ▶▶ www.kickstarte...
LAIR CON 2022 October 7, 8, and 9 in Pensacola, Florida ▶▶ www.thedmlair....
DISCORD - Join a fast-growing community of helpful and welcoming game masters ▶▶ / discord
DMLAIR.COM - Get free D&D 5e adventures and DM resources ▶▶ www.thedmlair....
NEWSLETTER - Get free D&D resources and special offers in your email ▶▶ thedmlair.getr...
STORE - Get back issues of Lair Magazine, my 5e module Into the Fey, map packs, 5e adventures, and other DM resources ▶▶ the-dm-lair.my...
-----------------------------OTHER LINKS-----------------------------
Watch my D&D games here ▶▶ / thedmlairstreams
Get DM Lair shirts, hoodies, and other merch ▶▶ teespring.com/...
D&D products I use and recommend ▶▶ www.amazon.com...
Video gear I use ▶▶ www.amazon.com...
-----------------------------CREDITS/DISCLAIMERS---------------------------------------------
Editing ▶▶ Zack Newman
Art ▶▶ Adobe Stock & Wizards of the Coast
Music and Sound Effects ▶▶ Epidemic Sound
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Some videos on this channel are unofficial Fan Content permitted under the Fan Content Policy. Not approved/endorsed by Wizards. Portions of the materials used are property of Wizards of the Coast. ©Wizards of the Coast LLC.
#dnd #dnd5e #dungeonsanddragons #dungeonmaster #gamemaster

[@theDMLair]

𝗕𝗘𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗘 𝗔 𝗗𝗠 𝗟𝗔𝗜𝗥 𝗣𝗔𝗧𝗥𝗢𝗡- Get Lair Magazine (5e adventures, VTT maps, puzzles, traps, new monsters, and more), play D&D with me, and other perks ▶▶ www.patreon.com/thedmlair 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗗𝗠 𝗟𝗔𝗜𝗥 𝗦𝗧𝗢𝗥𝗘 - Get Into the Fey, back issues of Lair Magazine, map packs, 5e adventures, and other DM resources ▶▶ the-dm-lair.myshopify.com/ 𝗟𝗔𝗜𝗥 𝗖𝗢𝗡 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟮 October 7, 8, and 9 in Pensacola, Florida ▶▶ www.thedmlair.com/lair-con/

[@samnault716]

I ask my players for really detailed backstories, descriptions, and roleplay for their characters. They’ve put a lot of work in bringing these characters to life: giving them pasts, relationships, ambitions, personalities, etc. We haven’t had a PC death yet, but we’ve had some close calls that I could tell genuinely stressed them out. I wouldn’t blame them at all for being upset

[@Venslor]

Same. I asked at session zero how they felt, did they want the monsters and enemies to be smart, or did they want them to present a challenge. They said they wanted a challenge. So, when the harpies threw a charmed sorceress off a cliff, that's what they asked for (she survived). But I definitely don't blame people for getting upset that their characters died after investing time and emotional energy into them.

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

Sounds like a mistake. Character creation should take 5 minutes and death expected.

[@achimsinn6189]

I agree there. Many players put a lot of work into their characters and seeing all of that being gone because of one failed diceroll can really suck. And having a DM being like "grow up, it's a game" about that might just lead to players turn to just play a generic soldier fighter or loner ranger instead of investing much energy into creating a character who might just die next session anyways.

[@eternal7912]

@@Don_Ratski Even if he dropped the back story, you couldn't make a character in five minutes, even with D&D Beyond. At least not a decent one. And I play 3.5e in which character creation can take hours without the backstory side of things (which I tend to put a lot of thought into).

[@priestesslucy]

@@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself that sounds like a boring game to me. No resonance

[@DnDandVideoGames]

I want my players to be more invested in their characters. I never had players get angry at me for their PC dying because this or that reason. I have the opposite issue where players really don't care about their characters and they just throw their characters into the meat grinder over and over and it gets annoying...

[@darktimesatrockymountainhi4046]

It's the proverbial double-edge sword. Players who are only marginally invested in their characters aren't much fun to play with, while old-school players like me, severely invested to the point of interacting with the entire broad setting & trying to accomplish things therein, seem to be too much of a burden on other players' credulity.

[@blackwolfe638]

for every new game I run this is a session zero discussion. "Do you prefer a safety net on character death or not" "safety net" is, unless the player does something super stupid unavoidable I as DM am not "trying" to kill the characters. Characters still drop to zero and drop unconscious but the NPCs do not confirm kills and there is always a great chance the other PCs can rescue or save or complete the combat without losing a member to perma death. YES this requires a lot of DM nerfing scenes if the players aren't great at tactics and gauging the combats. BUT it's up to the players on whether or not I do this. If the "safety net" is off, (which is most players choice) then the dice fall as they fall and characters can and will die.

[@salvadorsagrado8270]

Players getting attached is one of the most beautiful things. Yes, characters should die if it is agreed at session 0. They still get to be sad. Not to be assholes, but being sentimental is valid.

[@alexandraelizabeth8522]

"I have zero empathy" Having watched many of your videos, that definitely seems true.

[@Plague-speaker]

I will be honest. If a player’s character dies and they are upset, I consider that a normal human reaction. When my first character died, I cried. I do understand that in the end, it was just a stock edgelord, but it was a stock edgelord I made and played every week for almost 8 months. If the player gets upset at the DM, that is a problem

[@johnevans5782]

Is Edgelord a 3rd Party Subclass? I haven't seen them. Sounds like it might be interesting to play.

[@Plague-speaker]

@@johnevans5782 the subclass was an asssassin, edgelord was just the personality

[@johnevans5782]

@@Plague-speaker Edgelord was the personality??? You lost me there.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

@@johnevans5782 That's a YOU problem. "Edgelord" is a pretty clearly defined personality type. First time on the internet?

[@johnevans5782]

@@robinmohamedally7587 OK.. Unlike you. I answer as politely as I can. I am not familiar with the term. I had not heard it before, yet it clearly seems like it could be one of those 3rd party creations. I have had an online presence since BEFORE the modern internet, thank you very much. That does not mean that I know every single current buzzword. Nor without context, can one be sure that any definition from the internet can be the one being applied. I once had someone rudely tell me to google something. So I did. I then responded to him with the complete text of every single one of the 52 variant definitions of the term found online, and asked if he could advise me of which one applied to his discussion, as I had no way of knowing... which was true. The onus of explaining oneself always lies with the speaker or writer, if they wish to be accurately understood. I can assume that you are discussing some sort of Urban dictionary definition... however I do not ascribe to such. This conversation was over a year ago. The original poster obviously decided that what they said was not important enough to explain. Therefore, I decided that it was not important enough to give any further consideration, until you decided to denigrate me for being unfamiliar with a term. Good day to you.

[@kevinfelton689]

I gotta agree with your player because if the spell description says a target is reduced to zero hp, then they're not dead. They're unconscious and unstable, unless you're going to rule out death saves all together.

[@pedrogarcia8706]

You say that players who don't like your DM style should leave your game, but if a player says they don't like your DM style and are going to leave, you get mad?

[@robinmohamedally7587]

Where did he say he was getting mad? He was just getting mad at their threats, not that they'd leave. Two completely different things.

[@Streamweaver]

Generally good advice. At the same time, it's probably fair to give a placer a hot minute to feel however they do as long as they aren't acting out. It's usually like 10 minutes before they turn around and start getting excited about their next character concept.

[@priestesslucy]

*@The DM Lair:* Luke... If I couldn't 'get so attached to my character' I wouldn't want to be there at all. For me and others like me, roleplaying is an opportunity to step out of ourselves, to experience a world (be it Earth or something else) through someone else's eyes and heart. The game part of DnD, for us, is just a means of resolving conflict, rather than a game we come to throw discarnate game pieces at challenges to see if they survive. If my character dies with no hope of resurrection, *_it hurts_* because that character was a tiny piece of me and I wouldn't want it any other way. I'm not certainly not going to threaten a DM to get my way, and there is a very real chance I will stay with that group if I don't believe it was mean spirited or callous carelessness. That doesn't mean I'm going to be emotionally available to create another character right away. Depending on the connection I had to the character I might not be ready to attend a session one week thereafter. PS: thank you for all the advice you give us. Can't agree with your take here but in general I really respect you and appreciate everything you do for us 💞

[@michaeldavis7090]

I understand where the player is coming from. From a player perspective you changed the rules to kill his character, and depending on how well I knew everyone I might also consider quitting. Not because I was upset at the death but I wouldn’t want to play under a DM who it seemed would change the rules to kill my characters. I really appreciate DMs who will see the players point and change a ruling.

[@godofzombi]

This.

[@sirconstantine8329]

Not to mention that he actually lied about the situation to make himself look better.

[@goldensun441]

The irony of youtube- the sidebar recommending me a thumbnail of yours from 3 years ago, in which the text says "die sucka" The literal first sentence out of your mouth was: "Do you wish there were a way to make your players WAIL IN ANGUISH every time their characters died?" perhaps some self reflection is in order lol

[@johnevans5782]

One thing I don't understand...I have been at a game where a player wound up being completely taken out at the beginning of the night. I mean, we had left off at the end of the previous session ready to enter an ancient temple. In the first 10 minutes of play, this PC was turned to stone, no one was able to undo it, and in game we were weeks from any town. This place was remote. The Player wound up leaving and not attending until the entire dungeon was done 2 sessions later, because he thought his character was dead and then some, it made no sense to create an entire new character at that point of the game, as it would make no sense to have a new PC just appear our of thin air. So he asked the DM if they could just let him know when to come back and make a new PC when the group was starting a new adventure. If your PC gets killed during a session... why is it wrong for the player, who might not get to do anything else for hours or even multiple sessions... to decide to go home and wait to be called? I have died in a session, and then had to sit there for 4-5 hours watching everyone else play. It was bad enough losing a character.... which is never fun. But to be stuck sitting with nothing to do while others play for at least the majority of an entire session? Maybe even longer? It makes you feel trapped and worse than bored... left out.

[@KirstenBayes]

I think a rollback is fair enough. In other settings I have had characters catch a bullet, and it sucks but really is the game. A random house rule on magic killing characters instantly? Not a campaign I'd want to play in.

[@kidthegeek]

What do you mean by upset! I've had players who ended up very upset, not at me, but just upset their character died since they had grown very attached. I don't have an issue with that.

[@caeranerin4859]

I have to say that I find this video rather hostile. Being upset your character died and dealing with that in a mature way (but still being upset) and doing rude things because your character died and acting like an ass to your DM are two entirely different things and it comes across that you have a problem both. I cannot imagine ever not being upset when one of my characters died, I invest heavily in them - what I wouldn't do however is take it out on the DM if it happened. I'd be upset, but I'd roll up a new character and get on with it. However if I thought the death was unfair I would say something in a polite and civil manner. As a DM I'd be devastated if my players just went, 'Oh my character is dead, oh well. I don't care at all.'

[@wingviper]

Clearly Luke was talking about those players that are being an ass to the DM though. He never at all said that if a character dies, the player isn't allowed to be upset. It's when they lack the maturity and start throwing a childish tantrum that he clearly states it becomes a problem.

[@wingviper]

@@Don_Ratski Honestly it was abundantly clear to me that he was talking about the asses (because the rants are like 99% of the time about the asses and childish members of the community), because he talked amongst others about people literally threatening to insta-leave the entire campaign if their character died. Honestly that shows the immaturity in those people, and not in Luke for being annoyed with them. Certainly I would be annoyed with them 2 if I was DMing for such a person. I mean like I said, it's perfectly fine if you're upset if a character dies, but you don't have to be an ass about it. In one campaign I'm currently playing in, I'm on my third character. Was I upset the first 2 died? Yes. Was I threatening to leave the campaign or some other petulant act because of it? No. It's called accepting and moving on. Also calling Luke's position Authoritarian is a bit over the top. He's just clearly done with the nonsense so much of the community is just too accepting of as if it's meant to be part of the community. And honestly there's a lot of BS in the DnD community. Also No idea about the whole Thaco thing, so can't comment on that.

[@wingviper]

@@Don_Ratski Hold up, I think we are talking past each other here. The situation with that House rule of Luke's, was resolved by them talking about it like adults and coming to a resolution. It was an example of his where HE was (without realizing it) wrong and made a mistake, and not the player who was fully within their right to be upset, but after talking about it and realizing the issue, they resolved it in an adult manner as it should be and continued the campaign. This was IMO to contrast with the actual immature people like in your example who would throw a temper tantrum in a situation where the death of a character was warranted. Also the reason he talks from a position of authority, is specifically BECAUSE people come to him for advice on how to deal with certain issues they encounter. So it's not surprising he talks as if he knows better, because people specifically ask that from him. In his latest rant video for example, he talks about the issue of the players not taking any adventure/plot hooks, and the DM getting upset and not knowing what to do with that situation. While his response is kinda hostile, honestly if I was in that poor DM's situation you can bet I would eventually respond in a manner similar to how Luke did. Even if it's not nice, sometimes stuff like that is needed.

[@wingviper]

@@Don_Ratski Agreed. Let's agree to disagree on this one. Was a pleasure having this discussion with you as well. Have a nice day as well.

[@schwarzerritter5724]

Spontaneously houseruling to the disadvantage of the players is the second most hostile thing a DM can do. It makes it pretty much impossible to predict the consequences of their actions: "From now on, a natural 1 means you hit an ally; roll damage. Oh, hey, you knocked the healer out. Where are you going?"

[@samnault716]

Whenever I houserule something mid-game, whether it benefits the players or harms them, I pause the game to explain my thought process. Sometimes it can take a bit of time, but I’ve found that it keeps everything “in front of the screen” so to speak. I also try to be consistent with that new ruling going forward

[@minows1]

Remember getting angry once. That time at level one where we had an dmpc on our side and the enemies where so high level they show it attacking my pc the first round and straight killing him before I could do anything. The fight itself was the group on a corner seeing the DMPC doing all the work while doing close to nothing until it was over. Then the group looted my body. Not fun at all.

[@eclectic_nerd]

It seems odd to just write off people for being upset if they lose a character. It makes it sound like, as players, we shouldn't be invested in the characters, or the story that they are building as a party. Being upset isn't a bad thing, behaving poorly because you're upset is the problem.

[@nigeladams8321]

There's a split in the community about this. Some people want to still be playing advanced d&d with characters that are disposable crawling through dungeons, and they can't seem to grasp why not everyone would want that

[@forfaerghus8092]

Allow me to say that I must respectfully disagree with your first point. Let me preface with that I get it. I really do. Someone who gets upset to an unhealthy extent over a character death lacks maturity. However, I do NOT think it is invalid for a player to feel sad in general when a particular favorite character of theirs dies. Especially when they've been playing that character for a long time. They've seen that character start out as a fledgling, roleplayed how they grew in strength and bonded with others, both the other PCs and maybe some NPCs. Said character may be making plans for once they hang up their weapon/spellbook and live out an ordinary life once the campaign is over. When that is cut short from an enemy's blade, a monster's fangs, or a lich's withering magic, it hurts. A personal example of mine is my hexblade warlock. He started out as abrasive and untrusting (and probably too edgy), sticking with the party because he knew the strength in numbers principle and being cooperative with them means they'd willingly keep him around. However, he slowly warmed up to the party until he actually considered them friends. Romantic feelings even blossomed between himself and another PC, to the point where they were planning out their lives together after the adventure was over. They planned on buying a home in Neverwinter and he wanted to be an author once his adventuring days were over. However...his life was cut short, and I was quite sad because of all the PCs I've played, he was my absolute favorite and the one I most fervently wanted a happy ending for. Other PCs of mine I can shrug off their deaths more easily. However, did I blame the DM? No. I know it wasn't his fault, he just wanted to make a fun, yet challenging game. We're still friends to this day. Once I logged off Discord, did I need to go to my room and have an ugly cry in private? Definitely. Did I get over it eventually after a week or so? Yes. I'm not writing this to hate on Luke. I love his videos and his DMing advice. However, my bottom line on PC deaths is this: expecting your players just to give you a deadpan "oh well, here's my next character" is, in my opinion, expecting too much. If they aren't being toxic about it, let them feel sad.

[@eclectic_nerd]

I've killed a character as DM. I think I was possibly more upset than the player. I was so excited to expand on the backstory he had given me, and the plot hooks that would be connected to the main story... and then he died. We did however give him a burial ceremony, and I narrated what happened to his soul after he died, and I think the send off was quite meaningful to the player and the rest of the party.

[@priestesslucy]

Allow me to add: Immersion and Resonance are not a reflection of an immature player. Some players may be upset for immature reasons, being upset about 'losing' or whatnot, but that's only one type of player. There are many players, myself included, who strive to immerse themselves in the character, to resonate with them as a person and experience the GM's world through their eyes and through their heart. That character isn't just a game piece, it's a piece of me. If I wasn't able to feel something, to resonate, I wouldn't even want to be there at the game in the first place. I want to feel, to care. To experience wonder and joy and love and sorrow and all aspects of the spectrum. Losing a character hurts because that's the loss of someone precious, an amazing (fictional) person who had goals, dreams, friends, a family. It's a small piece of my heart that dies every time a character dies, and it takes some time for that to heal. If it's a character I've had time to build a sufficiently strong resonance with, I won't have any interest in making a new character for days. Just sit quietly at the table and let the tears wash away the pain.

[@naruto94ish]

If you put a lot of work in your Character backstory and truly try to immerse yourself in the game and role play any sane person would be upset if that Character died for the simple fact of how much time and energy you put in. Not saying you should rage and quit the game but if you just like oh well then you probably didn't care for your Character to begin with.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

I ran a 3.5 game recently, and the two 5th edition players of the group, got upset with me when they blundered into an, admittedly on their own part, obvious trap and nearly died. One called me a "killer DM", in so many words. Mind you, NONE of them actually died. Pussies. 5th is a pussy edition.

[@Twosocks42]

I tend to disagree with the assumption that someone being upset they lost a character means they are mentally immature. If they invested time, energy, and story into that character and became attached, I would expect some kind of feeling of disappointment when they go. Yes, it is a game, and yes, they may have to make a new character, but giving them a little time and space to process it is not only fine, but something I think a good DM should do. Now, if they have a total blow-up, sling insults, threaten to quit, etc--that's not cool. But if they need some time, or hell want to go out sometime after and debrief and decompress, I am all for it.

[@klimptone9700]

Honestly, I only clicked on this video bc I was planning on unsubscribing, and this video is a perfect encapsulation of why I wanted to unsub in the first place. No hate on Luke, but we have wildly different philosophies when it comes to TTRPGs and DMing, and it just wouldn't help my game to follow his advice, because of that. I want my players to be upset if their character dies, I want my players to be so invested in the game that they feel strongly about the fate of their characters, I would never be angry at a player for being upset at a character's death. When a character dies in my campaigns, I always stop and ask my players how they want to proceed, whether it would be more fun for them to roll back the death (usually with a narrative justification & added stakes) or if they think it would be better to let the death stick. I also give them time to make the decision. I play TTRPGs for the storytelling potential, and I actively want to dissuade players from viewing their characters as disposable or replaceable. This gripe at players for being upset at the death of their characters is so alien to me, I just can't imagine how dissimilar our games must be. Good luck on the rest of your content! I don't think this is the channel for me lol

[@priestesslucy]

A lot of his advice is neutral regarding this element, but yeah, I was shocked to hear this take as well. The entire reason I roleplay is resonance. To experience the world through someone else's eyes and heart. To invest a legitimate piece of myself into the character and share their lives with them. Obviously the only 'realness' they have is what comes from me, but it's still a tiny piece of myself that dies with them and it takes time to heal those spiritual wounds. And I wouldn't want it any other way.

[@littlegiantj8761]

[Writes "jr." At the end of the name] "I'm here to avenge my father's death"

[@forfaerghus8092]

Pulling an Infinity Blade. I like it

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

Classic.

[@deathsheir2035]

I will always get upset when one of my characters die. If the character dies in a manner I feel "too early" it'll be because "I haven't gotten to see this character's potential on full display." If the character is like lvl 10, and we started at lvl 1, it would be "I grew a bit too attached to the character and just wasn't prepared for the death." I'll be more than happy to create a new character, but the death will always be upsetting. If lvl 15+ (and started at a lower lvl) I would surprisingly be so invested in my character that I want an interesting death, be it end of campaign happy ending death, or a death during combat against a superior enemy. I will even accept a death involving a series of bad luck, hitting extra hard... "you are running away from , and didn't realize the path turned sharply. You come to a stop, but barely, teetering on the very edge of the cliff, a long drop down. The person behind you didn't hit the brakes in time, forcing you over the edge. They reach out to try and grab you, but only managed to grab your clothing, which tears. As you fall, you have time to contemplate your death and accept the hand fate has dealt you this day. You hit the ground, and die instantly upon impact." Yeah, it would suck, but if that kind of bad luck happens, I'm totally down for it. Would still be upsetting, because I am attached to the character, but hey, that's an awesome death scene. What isn't an awesome death scene: "you tripped and hit your head." No amount of window dressing, like the cliff example above, would ever make "you tripped and hit your head" interesting.

[@mikitta47]

my level 7 warlock got knocked off a cliff from a cannon blast. I failed every single saving throw the DM could think of to give me a chance to not die. most of them I critically failed. I hit the ground and succeeded the first death save with a 20. then I failed 2 in succession. my last death save, I rolled a 1. at least it was epic and I rerolled a druid at the ame level the warlockcwas when she bit the dust.

[@mikitta47]

i think he gave me so many chances because the whole combat was directly the fault of another player who had decided to attack the pirates on the flying pirate ship even though we had already parlaged for safe passage.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

@@mikitta47 wow, an actual player who isn't a candyass. Rare, given the comments on this video. I like the cut of your jib. There's a middle ground between Luke's callous lack of empathy, and people threatening to quit if their character dies. Because it's not a game if there are no stakes, and if there are no stakes, eventually the players will get bored and drift away. Human nature 101.

[@foujiz]

I'm a "storyteller" player. Not finishing a character arc because it got killed off against a random enemy is probably one of the thing I abhor the most in D&D

[@robinmohamedally7587]

Only YOU give a shit about your character's "aRc", lol

[@brandongiles7205]

Have to say I get where the player was coming from. If they would get death saves from taking physical damage to zero HP, they should get death saves from magical damage taking them to zero HP unless the spell explicitly states otherwise. Just rule that they become a zombie if they fail their death saves.

[@animalunleashed3812]

Complete misrepresentation of the Curse of Strahd situation. Firstly, Luke forgets to tell you that the player in question had his original character "taken away" by Strahd during a battle in the previous session, thus he had to roll a new character for this session. Then, as this was going to be a very long session/battle (in which his new character died) he didn't want to just sit around for hours, not being able to play, and said he'd just leave. (It happened about halfway of a 4 hour session) He didn't threaten to leave the campaign, or quit, he just didn't want to sit around for 2 hours not being able to actually play.

[@sirconstantine8329]

Exactly. A pity more folks don't bring this up more often.

[@calvinskye]

What are you meaning by 'upset'? Cause isn't it natural to be upset if you loose a character. If only because of the time you spent playing with them. Even more if you've crafted a backstory, given them plans for the future, maybe even bought an expensive mini for them. Now, screaming and shouting is of course not okay, and threatening to leave the game is pretty bad too. But being sad that a key part of your immersion in the game has gone? How can you have no sympathy for that?

[@nnil3843]

I think the key part in your comment is the question of: What he means when he says 'upset'? The term is too wide to really make a Point about reactions being suitable or not.

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

He was clear that unreasonably upset meant to the point of making threats.

[@O4C209]

Sorry, I'm going to disagree with you here. If a player isn't upset, then they probably don't care much. I follow Matt Colville's advice here of let them be upset for 30 minutes. Also, I think you on the fly deciding a spell insta kills is definitely you at fault. The reason we play with predetermined rules from books is so no one is blindsided by a ruling.

[@1bonebreaker1]

honestly i think the problem is with the spell discription... untill now i actually thought that finger of death was a instant kill spell... i mean its called finger of death and raise the player as a zombie the next round if it kills the player...

[@ADT1995]

@@1bonebreaker1 I legitimately thought it outright killed a player because of the zombie thing as well (actually I thought you had one round to heal). And there are spells that do like disintegrate... Wait... Does disintegrate? I'm questioning myself now, and I've read those spell descriptions dozens of times... Thankfully I've never actually killed someone with those spells (not through lack of trying)

[@2g33ksgamingttv3]

​@ADT1995 disintegrate does because if you hit 0 you become dust(well technically Crawford has said that you CAN survive it, but only if you have a way of living that doesn't require a physical body)

[@BubblingBrooke]

I don't understand not having empathy for a player's character dying. It comes off as very detached. When the player only has their one character that they control and they put a lot of work into it, its not emotional immaturity to be upset when that character dies. I've only met 1 person who was flippant and didn't care when their character died and immediately moved on to the next one. When my wizard died in ToA I cried. I knew the dm had something up his sleeve and she ended up being res'ed but the shock of it happening still affected me. I didn't throw a tantrum but it still upset me and that's natural. A campaign being challenging is fine. Knowing that character death can happen if you're not playing smart is fine, it doesn't take the sting out of losing a pc though. The dm shouldn't be attached to their things because the players can screw up plans at any moment, but it is not the same for the player side of the table. Otherwise why make a character and play dnd?

[@batchthirteen4324]

Totally. You must not be a DM that needs to control every aspect of their players appreciation. You probably don’t mention bacon all the time, either.

[@BubblingBrooke]

@@batchthirteen4324 Appreciation is a weird word to use but I guess? I care about my players' feelings and experience? I'm not one to prevent my players from dying, but if stuff happens stuff happens? I just don't understand getting mad at a player getting upset over an upsetting thing happening?

[@Rayslasagne]

As a DM who tends to run games where death is almost always permanent, I also don't understand not having any empathy for characters dying. My players spend a lot of time and effort on building their characters, and it's great when they get really invested in the game. If my players were completely nonchalant about potentially losing characters, it wouldn't be as enjoyable for us. I understand it if it's only against players who throw tantrums or threaten to quit the game if their characters die, I wouldn't put up with that either. But the 'I have no empathy' comment really does feel aimed at anyone who feels bad at all about having a character die.

[@MisterDiceGuy]

I see two issues with threat to leave made by a player to their DM. 1. Discussion is a better solution than an ultimatum. This is not likely the person's first major problem, and they've been seething on some things, it was a last straw and it typically doesn't need to go there because feelings might be able to be resolved beforehand. 2. If a person feels that the DM isn't doing well or they just aren't gelling well with the DM or group, and discussions result in more hurt feelings or no progress, the person should have left already and not been dramatic. I understand attachment to a character, but don't let a character or game for that matter be what holds you in a undesirable situation. Find a new game with a DM that works better with you. It doesn't even have to be that you dislike the people, just that the enjoyment isn't there.

[@LeChaosRampant]

Feeling like you don't want to continue playing in a campaign under certain conditions is nothing to be ashamed of. And expressing that feeling is not either. As a DM, you also have to understand that people expressing their feelings is not necessarily a "threat", and that maybe you shouldn't take it as such and be a little more mature yourself. Me thinks.

[@MisterDiceGuy]

@@Don_Ratski Threatening to leave as a stick versus doing what you need to do are different things. You definitely needed to leave after being ignored, you didn't do it just to force someone's hand to overturn a decision.

[@ValoriYT]

@@LeChaosRampant I agree with this. I thought it was pretty immature that it was considered a "threat" for someone to want to leave if they no longer enjoy the game. There is a big difference between "threatening" to leave and expressing that you want to leave. If someone can't find enjoyment in the campaign anymore because of something that happened, it's completely OK for them to leave.

[@priestesslucy]

Yeah threatening to leave is inappropriate. You communicate with your GM, express your feelings honestly but don't reveal that you'll leave if your character dies. If it does, and you can't bear to continue, you respectfully extract yourself and say your goodbyes.

[@alanmark12345]

@@LeChaosRampant Totally agree. Honestly that entire story in the video is a giant redflag to me. I don't play dnd to get upset at my friends. I found the idea that the player is mad and the dm is mad to be a really toxic waste of my free time and frankly poor manners for the others at the table. If a redo or retcon will fix the problem then do it. Its immature to prioritize "the game" over people's actual enjoyment of it.

[@brettdreedm6742]

Inventing new effects for spells simply based on the spell name? Really? Might as well do it for all spells with weird names like making chill touch a melee spell.

[@godofzombi]

And change it's damage from necrotic to cold. 😆 And he wondered why his player got upset.

[@Daexusnol]

I don’t run 5e as a GM, but, after reading that spell description I gotta agree with the player about the death being unfair. I think instant death should avoided outside of rare and extreme situations; like falling off a skyscraper or something. Still though, threatening to leave a game is something I don’t take well to as a GM either. I kicked out a problematic player who threatened to leave for far less than a character death.

[@agsilverradio2225]

If a player is going to leave a game, doing so when their pc dies seems like a logical time to do so, in terms of the natitive.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

they can easily roll a new one. Bunch of deep thinkers in this comment section.

[@kevinduke8928]

We play in a high lethal campaign and rotate out DMs. All of us have had characters die. I lead the group and I’ve had 3 of them die. It’s part of the GAME. We tell all new players, and we have a lot in our group (pick up) that death is a real possibility. If PC death is too much for you, then we are not the group for you. We don’t try to kill characters (DM vs player is a no go… all DMs are told never to go there) but the monsters will play appropriately. Dumb monsters are dumb and smart monsters are smart. We don’t optimize our monsters but we do try to challenge the players. Sometimes bad decisions kill them. Sometimes, it’s just the dice. If it’s clearly unfair, that’s another matter. But we rarely role things back. It has to be pretty egregious or the result of a misruling. Death happens. It’s part of the game. Make a new character.

[@reson8]

That sounds like souless dnd. Do you tell new group members to bring backup characters and not to get emotionally attached to their avatars?

[@kevinduke8928]

@@reson8 backups? no. We don’t tell them to but most have at least an idea of what they want if need be. That said, It’s not like PCs die every session and some games are more brutal than others. Some modules are deadlier than others. Frostmaiden for example is one. Even scaling some things back making sure TPKs don’t happen, we still have had a lot of dead PCs. TPK is a no go unless the party does something absolutely stupid with plenty of warning given. This has never happened. Should never happen. DMs need a “way out” of TPKs. However, The current party for frostmaiden (CH6 now) has none of the original party members in it. Emotions get going at times but no one loses there cool. Afterwards we all laugh. I have the players constantly hounding me to run “the next session”. I’m the same way when they run. I never tell them not to be invested in their characters. Please do. But don’t get attached to someone that doesn’t exist. He/she can die. Again, it’s never the goal and DMs are never gunning for someone. We often give hints and suggestions like (your char notices X). And most monsters we rationalize not to just off down players. But that’s most monsters. Some are particularly insidious (I go down, you go with me) or are exceptionally tactical (they know adventurers don’t always stay down. Even then we foreshadow this. (The villain looks exceptionally insidious and seems to have an air of that nothing matters more to him than making sure he kills as many of you as he can, not even saving his own life). Translated: this boss is going down in the fight and does not care to negotiate. Moreover, he will play dirty and you need keep that in mind and work together. Usually this works for them (they min/max so that helps too). But it doesn’t always work that way. Take the REAL potential of losing out and you are no longer playing a game. You are just storytelling. Which is fine if that’s what you like. But it’s not a game. We do like storytelling (a good amount of RP in our games) but we like playing the game even more. If you never tried something like that, it takes emotional maturity, then I suggest trying it. You might be surprised. Char death is not fun at the time, but paradoxically, in our experience, it makes the game exponentially more fun for everyone in the long run (including those who lost characters). It makes great stories afterwards and it feels more rewarding when you pull something off and know y’all did it and the DM didn’t “let it happen”.

[@Hereisdavidold]

I'll admit that the only time I've had a character die I ended up leaving the table. It was a case though where i felt it was an unfair call and that my character's death wasn't given the respect it deserved. Essentially I was killed by friendly fire by the party's 'wacky' wild sorceror, rolling doubles on a chaos bolt. Now, I pointed out both that I was a wizard on very low hp, and that he could choose who the secondary attack targeted (he was rolling for lol randomness). Anyway, I died from this friendly fire and the party basically didnt stop for a moment other than to loot my body. Regardless, I think this attitude of 0 empathy towards players dying is pretty toxic. The whole point is to get invested in the story, and for players a large part of that is their personal character. While I don''t agree with ultimatums I also think that some allowance should be made. I also think that many character deaths will seem fair to the dm, but unfair to the player, so its worth treading on the side of caution.

[@jimmyhjt]

New to the DND game. Got a mini, painted it. Wrote and cool back story that I'm real proud of. Been having a lot of fun with the over all creative aspect so much. DM is walking me through how the game works. Played a few sessions. Finally read far enough to understand permanent death in this game. Speaking as a brand new player, I think this is a dumb rule. Imagine people doing art together. We all sit down and start drawing. The first person to use an eraser has someone snatch up the artistic expression they've made and light it on fire. Yeah f that. The rules seem to be you just insta reroll a new character and it's the level your original character died at and gets normal gear. How is that a making death "real"? So the penalty of death is erasing what the player brought to the game, not the characters ability to play. Death is stupid for this reason cause you aren't dead you're just forced to flush your contribution down the toilet. I'm playing Classic Wow. Will not be playing Classic WoW Hardcore. I enjoy investing time into my character in WoW and having set backs but having the ability to keep building on this character. I do progression raiding. If we wipe in a raid we got back and try again. We practice and keep investing cause there's rewards to not give up. I think this DnD rule of perma death is not for someone like me and I might not play this game. Furthermore, toxic people like you are absolutely one of the reasons I think I'm making the right choice. Came here to see what the community thinks of sessions where you can keep a character you really like. Some of us have lives that are not amazing, we're doing rough and depressed. We might just want some nice gentle escapism fiction that's like Shrek where there is some kind of adventure and conflict but nothing to bad to make us depressed. You acting like a condescending prick and not trying to understand where some people might be coming from is so telling about this community. Get fucked shit head. You're an ass.

[@Rocks_Fall_Everyone_Dice]

I feel ya bud. It's also my button. I've had 4 players in my time, at different times, at different tables threaten to quit if I didn't let their character win, I've always called them on their bluff and let the door hit them on the way out.

[@reson8]

Isn't the point of the game for the characters to 'win'?

[@Rocks_Fall_Everyone_Dice]

Players win and lose battles, they will more than likely win the war; but you can't die on every hill.

[@reson8]

@@Rocks_Fall_Everyone_Dice True; the game is an evolving story and sometimes PC's come and go. The question then becomes "Is it worth continuing?" if the other players become disenfranchised?

[@Rocks_Fall_Everyone_Dice]

@@reson8 my reply is in regards to a person and not a table. It's a different story if it's the table. Your adding context outside the reply or the video bud :😜

[@reson8]

@@Rocks_Fall_Everyone_Dice You were the one who mentioned tables in your OP, so there's that...

[@thesuspiciousace715]

Players' feelings and attachment to their characters are valid and not to be dismissed or viewed as immature or problematic (in most cases). They put a lot of time, thought, and emotion into building and developing their characters and their connections to the world and other characters in it (both other PCs and important NPCs or places). Losing all of that and watching helplessly as their characters face defeat is quite disheartening, especially when it comes to the finality of death (and yes, I know that in higher level games death is almost never final, but still). Also, in most cases when a player says "if you don't do x, I'm leaving the game," it should be taken as genuine feedback. It doesn't necessarily mean you need to act on it, but it is feedback that shows your player is actively engaged in the game. One of your players is not able to enjoy what should be an escape, a fantasy, a group storytelling game. Something needs to change and they recognize that, even if their emotions are clouding their judgement in the moment.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

nah, never give in to threats. That's weakness. And encourages bad behavior. The little narcissist shit should have phrased his misgivings better than an ultimatum. Rewarding bad behavior just encourages it. This isn't rocket science.

[@thesuspiciousace715]

@@robinmohamedally7587 I understand your point, but I am not suggesting you should "give in" to anything. Only that you should try to keep communications open and nonhostile if at all possible. Be empathetic, but firm. Try to reach the root of the issue and solve it. If this cannot be effectively done in such a way that everyone can enjoy the game, they are welcome to leave. If they won't allow a rational discussion, you may even have to invite them to leave (and perhaps even ban them if the issue is serious). Unless it is a repeated or overly exasperated issue, I tend to blame poor communication rather than immediately jumping to the idea that the player is the problem.

[@plixeon]

My main goal at my tables is the 3E (Enjoyment, Entertainment, Engagement). If a ruling (even RAW or RAI) disrupts that, I tend to change the ruling in favor of the 3Es. This is a game, no matter how deadly an encounter is. That said, legit character death is hard to achieve in this game.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

if there are no stakes, the players will eventually stop taking the game seriously, get bored, and drift away from it. Cannot have it both ways.

[@baobhan9094]

Yeah, i dunno, i think your first opinion on having no sympathy for a persons feeling because their character dying makes them upset is kind-of an asshole thing to say. I know for a fact I get heavily invested in my characters and their stories. You cannot get excited for things that are going to happen in the future without 'risking' disappointment if/when those things don't occur, the more you put into something, the more you get out of it. DnD 'is' a game, but its a roleplaying game, where you are taking the role of a character you create. This isn't connect four. This gets far more extreme when LARPing, we call it bleed, where your emotions and a characters emotions end up blurring because you're acting out the character in real life, it happens all the time, and its something that we as people who run the game care for. A person is allowed to be upset when their character dies, some people are just more emotional people, and some people, like me, put a load of work, effort, feeling and planning into a character and WANT to see their story play out to its conclusion. Without that drive to want things to happen, sounds like a really boring game to me. :/ I want players to be so into a game they'll get upset when something bad happens. I want players to cry when their friend dies and to howl in success when they edge out narrow victories. And as a DM, its part of your job in cultivating that experience to deal with the occasional upset player. Now, there is a 'within reason' clause here. Obviously there is a point where someone is unreasonably upset. I'm pissed for about 5-10mins, and then i want to talk about what happened, get some closure, and then I'll move on to thinking about my new character and pour my heart and soul into them. And I think many of us are the same. If someone goes beyond that, takes it out on others or threatens to quit the game, thats' too much, and they should be told so. But saying you have no sympathy for a persons' dead character and their feelings comes across as mockery and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

[@fhuber7507]

Player threatens to leave if XXX... XXX will happen.

[@NigeltheLucky]

Never say you want to leave in my game because I’ll try to talk you into leaving because I don’t want anyone to be there that doesn’t want to be that shit is contagious. I don’t get mad about it but I’m gonna encourage you

[@pgb8000]

Hey Luke, really interesting topic. I actually listened to that CoS episode a week or two ago. I think that the player was partly upset because it was the second PC of his that just outright died within 1-2 sessions. In both instances, it was because the DM specifically chose to target his player with an insta-death effect. It could seem like the DM was just trying to kill his players off. (I did not think that was the case, having listened to the sessions. It was just chance that both times it was his player who was in the wrong place at the wrong time). I think insta-death events in 5E are quite rare, and always harder for players to take. I thought you handled it really calmly - I was shocked when the player said they were going home. I also thought your later analysis (next session?) that the party had Revivify available, so there was a high chance his PC would be up in 1-2 rounds was spot on. If you had thought to say that at the time (I know - too much to think about as DM), it may have given the other players the means to defuse the situation without needing to pander to one player's petulance. I'm an inexperienced DM, so listening to your sessions has been very helpful on seeing how an experienced DM includes their group in dealing with the rule interpretation discussions - e.g. how calm emotions could be used to reduce insanity. You do have a very reasonable set of players though, which really helps. And sounds like most have DM'ed in their time, which also helps them be a bit more balanced!

[@reson8]

If your character dies and there is no mention of a revive, what's the point in that player being there? That's a toxic (and i use that word sparingly) environment and i think the player was right to leave.

[@robinmohamedally7587]

@@reson8 They can easily roll up a new one while there, and either join in there, or leave and join in at the next game. Not at all toxic. Only toxic if he isn't allowed to do so, and the DM wants him to just sit there. Too many soft ass baby pussies in this hobby, now that kid-gloves 5th edition is out, and everyone is a special delicate flower who must be handled with the utmost care.

[@reson8]

@@robinmohamedally7587 If things like this are made clear at session 0 then that's fine, but that's not the impression i get. It's about managing expectations, and in both of those cases that was a DM fail. Besides, if ur having to make a new char every session it completely breaks continuity and player investment in their characters. There's a fine line between making players feel threatened and going over that line to just nuke them with no chance of recovery.

[@LeChaosRampant]

Not understanding players getting upset at losing their character seems a little counter-intuitive to me. Isn't the point of playing in a campaign to get attached to your characters and the world and adventure around? And if you are invested in your character, why shouldn't you be upset at their death? Do you have to throw a fit if you're upset at your character's death? No. But again, if that's what you're at emotionally, is it something to be ashamed of? I don't think so. And I think the DM should probably, if they can, be the mature one, and try and help their player through that moment.

[@thaisteezy]

4:44 cat

[@SakraIgor0qNomoko]

I generally don't have players threaten to leave: they just leave. I've had one TPK, and all the players left the campaign after that. I've had one case of a single player dying, and they left the campaign right after. And it wasn't an unfair death, either. They wanted to build a character that went unconscious often but kept coming back. They put a 6 in CON, relentlessly attacked a protesting barkeep they knew to be a retired mage, and got a cone of cold to the face for insta-death by massive damage. And they had already died before (intentionally) and come back with a level in warlock, so there wasn't a soul to bargain for. I said that they could do a new build or the same build if they wanted, coming back as that character's brother or cousin or whatever, but their character was definitely dead. They left, end of that.

[@mbrsart]

The only time I ever felt it was unfair that my character died was when the DM railroaded me into it. This was a new DM who felt railroaded by the module (Hoard of the Dragon Queen), and they felt bad about it too.

[@adamwoolston253]

There’s a difference between players being upset that their character died, and being upset AT THE DM that their character died. Very different things. I expect some emotion when your character dies. You made them, you’ve been roleplaying them for months, you’ve crafted a backstory and personality for this character. It should be devastating when they die. You should also have the maturity to recognize that it is a game and death is a factor, and there’s no reason to be mad at the DM

[@SkullyManGaming]

Hey Luke, I love ya, but I have to disagree about being upset over a character death. Now, making a scene and throwing a tantrum over a character death, that's unacceptable (which is most likely the type of player you're referring to, but you did not specifically say so. You kinda just generalized). But these characters are often created over the course of hours. So you are invested in the character. On top of that, when you play the character for more than one session, attachment is inevitable. After all, you're not just playing the character. You're learning who the character is. Their likes and dislikes, you're feeling the highs and lows of the character, and you're reveling in their accomplishments and wallowing in their failures (assuming you're not just playing a straight tactical battle game with no rping). So losing the character can be very upsetting and frustrating. So unless the player is throwing a fit about their death, let them be upset over the loss. They'll get over it soon enough and be ready to make a new one :)

[@SkullyManGaming]

@@Don_Ratski I dont have much pull, but like I said before, I think he was referring to people throwing tantrums over it. But I wanted to let anyone who saw this video and this comment know (especially new players, or hell, potential players) that it's OK to get attached. As long as you don't actively ruin the game for others if the character dies. I have had characters die before, and it can be upsetting. It almost feels like you're losing a friend.

[@SkullyManGaming]

@@Don_Ratski that's fair, I think most people do that, even if they don't realize it

[@SkullyManGaming]

@@Don_Ratski not just dnd characters, but characters for any ttrpg.

[@SkullyManGaming]

@@Don_Ratski that sucks, dnd is actually one of my least favorite systems tbh. Hope they decide to try something new at some point :)

[@TE-hy7bj]

I'm really sorry it's "just a game" for you. You're really missing out.

[@benniediek7347]

Of course players get upset when their characters dies thats normal. If you are upset for a week but then be exited to build a new character thats not a problem

[@LeMayJoseph]

In my opinion, I don’t think I’d be happy at your table either if you just decided on the spot that Finger of Death works differently than printed, and didn’t tell me until after it had dropped me to 0HP. Certainly not if you weren’t willing to walk it back and have the discussion it sounds like you had.

[@BrickInTheHead]

Being real I think it's absolutely reasonable for a player to say that they're going to leave a game (SESSION, not campaign) over a homebrew call clearly contrary to RAW that results in a character death. But there's important context missing. Did anyone have revivify? Obvi it also depends on timing - are we 1hr into a 3-4hr session, or right at the end? Forcing someone to sit there and do nothing for literal hours over homebrew that you gave no advance warning on is kinda bull hockey. I also think Luke here is downplaying how much the player's "threat" is actually what convinced him to change his mind. I think he didn't realize how much it would suck to insta-die to a spell, and that if the player didn't vocalize how much that was a problem by going as far as threatening to leave, Luke would've stuck to his guns. The cool calm collected logic of it wouldn't have been effective, because you can default to "reasonable minds disagree, but I'm the DM and it's my role to make those calls." The player had to pull that gun and stick it on the table, and it worked. Overall I agree that players threatening to leave a campaign over a DM ruling is bad form. But leaving a session when they're dead? That's fine. Next time just use power word kill or disintegrate. Then there's no debate to be had.

[@thebeatles9]

Hopefully he'll read some of the comments and understand that patients understanding and empathy are the three biggest assets that any dungeon master can have Because the real skill is keeping a group of people together and staying friends throughout the difficult times

[@Blandy8521]

There was a player my dm dropped was someone who refused to play with risk of character death to the point he was suggesting being a lich that didn't use souls to survive. We were level 3

[@godofzombi]

I can sorta see that. I wonder if they'd be cool playing a Reborn. Your character has already died once, so what do you have to worry about?

[@Blandy8521]

@@godofzombi he refused to play if there was a chance of death

[@mattysti947]

@@Blandy8521 I think that player was a massive jerk, why bothering playing d&d if there are dosens of TTRGP with wayyyyy less fighting and risk of death than d&d?

[@nigeladams8321]

​@@mattysti947maybe because they like dnd? God forbid someone want to play a different way than you

[@mattysti947]

@@nigeladams8321 What? Player can kills DM Monsters and bosses all the time (even Monsters which DM passes entire afternoons in order to creates and balance them),and it's fine,but DM Monsters/bosses cannot kill player characters,even with bad dice luck, otherwise the DM Is and asshole and players becomes entitled Karens?

[@SleepySeal121]

Geez, this guy is… wow. I don’t think this channel is for me.

[@thajocoth]

In my games, I modify Finger of Death slightly. If it drops a PC to 0 HP, they start their next turn as a zombie under the caster's control. On the PC's turn, they'll have a zombie's stats, have a goal to obey (usually to attack other party members), and at the end of the turn, they'll roll their death saving throw (with their character's usual stats). They will do all of the zombie's moving and rolling, roleplaying their new form against the party. If another PC damages them as a zombie, that's damage to them while they're dying. That's one automatic failed death saving throw (two if it's a crit). Since their body is up and moving though, I don't have them double the damage dice for non-crits. If a PC gets a natural 20 on a death save while they're a zombie, they get control back of their body as a zombie, no longer bound to obey, and the zombie form's HP acts more like Temp HP. I treat this similarly to a polymorph. Enough damage to their zombie form reverts them back to their normal self and normal stats (which now has 1 hit point). If a PC gets 3 death save failures while they're a zombie, then that's just a zombie now. If they get 3 successes without taking more damage, then they don't need to continue to roll death saves, and killing the spell's caster will cause them to be a stable corpse again. I do something like this for any spell that explicitly says it does something when it kills a target without stating that it causes immediate death at 0 HP. It's more fun than waiting around for a bunch of death saves and having them immediately healed out of the effect by another party member.

[@ericpeirce5598]

Finger of Death would only work that way if the Massive Damage rules would apply. If reduced to zero HP and the remaining damage exceeds the PC's max HP, then they would die instantly. If the remaining damage did not exceed the PC's max HP, then the normal dying rules would apply and death saves would take place.

[@erc1971erc1971]

Our group enjoys a low PC death count. IIRC it has been 15 years since a PC perma-died at our table (and he stopped Manhattan from being nuked in the process in that Cyberpunk game). We do not play for the thrill of feeling like we beat a difficult fight, etc. For us, the game is about watching the story unfold, how the PC's interact with the story, (and for a couple of the players) watching their characters grow and change over time. We enjoy heavily weaving the PC's and their backstories into the plot, prophecies, etc. A high death count works against our goals for the game. Luke is right when he said his game would not be right for us, and I know from watching his videos he would not enjoy our games. And that is OK, everyone likes different things, and there are thousands of different groups out there for you to find one that works for you. If I ended up in a game like Luke's and I found myself dying alot, I would discuss it with him, I would not threaten to leave, but I think we would calmly come to the conclusion that we want different things out of the game, and we would be better served if I found a group that fit my playstyle more than the way he DM's.

[@luiken3]

I didn't realize Finger of Death didn't autokill anything it brought to 0. I guess I just assumed it worked that way.

[@matthewhamlin392]

I been trying to die in my game session. I've been rocking under 20 hp for 3 sessions. No we haven't long rested yet and I don't want a long rest. I'm trying to get this DM to actually kill a PC.

[@jaxsonfanta5420]

We had a dm who literally told us that someone will die this session. That’s the kind of moments that are BS. Also: there are some very unfair spells that, if you have been playing a character for years, and round 1 get power word killed, then I would expect someone to be mad

[@soldierbreed]

I don't think its necessarily a threat. A campaign is a huge commitment and you have lines that you feel this is too much for me. Honestly i would have felt the need to leave to if my DM was just like "no I decided this kills you " with no pre warning.

[@RobertWF42]

The best solution to player death is resurrection - the other players find a cleric or druid who can bring the player back to life.

[@Calebgoblin]

Honestly in the finger of death story I really get where that player was coming from and I may have done the same thing but I think it was ruled fairly in the end. It wasn't really about "play the game my way or the highway", he showed up expecting that the game would be played by the written rules unless specified otherwise.

[@reson8]

I think you're really wrong on this; if you want your players to be invested in their characters rather than YOUR GAME then don't be dismissive when they are upset because you killed them.

[@zoberraz]

I don't know if in your vernacular upset = sad. I don't ask for my players to craft a character, develop backstories, and not expect investment in the character when I push for things to be immersive. I assume that a modicum of due consideration for the investment is given if the character does die. As for fairness, I did suffer what I felt was an unfair death in the past. In 2E, our quest lead us to fight against an hag whom spent the fight going invisible, doing her claw attacks, entangle, unloading with an Acid Arrow. She had us on the ropes, but we were getting some damage in - the fight could go either way. Then she casts Cloud Kill, and pretty much makes it so that the spell encapsulates only my 4th-level fighter. 2nd edition Cloud Kill will slay anything under 4+1 HD automatically. So, I died. The Hag could have cast Cone of Cold, and then it would have been a number of dices rolled and a saving throw would have been involved. Scrolls exist after all. But the DM deciding that the Hag used a spell that seemed out of the scope of the encounter so far, single me out, and that the way the spell worked gave no chance of survival made it feel like an execution. I didn't know what brought this about. At the time, the RAW for Cloud Kill was what was brought up as justification, but I was mostly sitting in stunned silence for awhile. After the game, when I brought this up with the DM, he pretty much dug his heels on the hag's actions and capabilities, while spinning a yarn on her being able to cast a smaller but equally potent Cloud Kill spell. I kept looking for what had triggered this (had my participation somehow become undesirable at that table?), but I was invited to create a new character afterwards so... he probably didn't dislike me? I rolled with the punches, made up a new 1st-level half-elf wizard to play with the other PCs whom were now 5th level (and pilfered my previous character's gear and gave him no burial despite succeeding at killing the hag) and went along with it. But let's say I wasn't too impressed at the time with the DM's encounter design.

[@forfaerghus8092]

Yes, this! People who've invested time, blood, sweat, tears, and emotion into a character have a right to express their grief as long as it's in a healthy manner.

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

Upset =/= sad. Sad at character death is normal and good. In this context, upset = making threats, throwing a childish tantrum, and making ultimatums.

[@jacobtamisari8570]

how dare a player be upset when a character they had invested ages, possibly years of time playing as, and giving personality to, and having hopes for, and dreaming up possibilities for dies. truly shameful. how dare they? disgraceful

[@godofzombi]

The real spitefull thing to do when your PC dies is making a new character possessed by the insane and angry spirit of your dead character and have it become a walking curse upon the land, occacionally taking over and killing innocent npcs. Or in other words: go full effin murderhobo. "Hey DM: You killed my character? Well I'm gonna kill yours!"

[@paullambert9720]

Given how invested people become in tiny plastic houses and bits of worthless paper when they play Monopoly, I would fully expect players to be substantially more invested in a game where they have spent time creating back stories, personalities and even visual designs for their characters. As long as they don't engage in anti social or inappropriate behaviour when they lose their character, I would empathise with them being upset to a fair degree.

[@DygoKnight]

Hold on, doesn't Finger of Death turn the target into a zombie if it's reduced to 0 hp?

[@KevinVideo]

It's weirdly written. "A humanoid killed by this spell rises at the start of your next turn as a zombie" The "killed" part is the ambiguity, unlike disintegrate which straight up says if it reduces the PC to 0 hp, you're dust. Being reduced to 0 hp doesn't immediately kill you as you get death saves. It's wording kept from older editions.

[@scottwalker6947]

A truck load of HP, Healing Word, and 3 (very easy) Death Saves...How do characters die in 5E?

[@KevinVideo]

Pretty much just disintegrate and power word kill.

[@goliathcleric]

I think there's a perception that playing the character ENDS when the character dies. It doesn't have to; players can roleplay that character in the early stages of the afterlife. They suddenly wake up on the fugue plane and have to discover where they are and what's happening. Perhaps it's a chance for them to meet their deity, reflect on their life, or maybe it's time for the contract with the devil to come due. If you know their going to be revivified it can be done as a quick, 6 second snippet during combat; the upside to that is the PC being dead doesn't mean the player can't play the game for the rest of the fight. If it's a sort of death that they're not going to be revivified and they'll need a new PC, explaining the characters situation and asking the player to describe what they're doing in that situation (perhaps out of game as appropriate) works as well. The idea is establishing that playing the character doesn't end because they're dead, unless the player wants it to.

[@grandmothergoose]

Oh dear, you've just inspired me to create an afterlife campaign for deceased characters! I never would have thought of the idea of roleplaying the afterlife of a character. Thank you!

[@goliathcleric]

@@grandmothergoose of course! I've actually done it three times in one of my current campaigns already. The most recent was yesterday; I cast power word kill on a PC with 83 hit points, so the next round she woke up on the shore of the Rivver Styx in Stygia and played there for a few rounds until she was revivified.

[@priestesslucy]

@@grandmothergoose Bangsian fantasy is it's own genre of fiction. Heck even Dragonball did it lol

[@demonteddybear3510]

If my character dies because I did something stupid I can accept it. What got me to quit playing the game when I was 16 was when my Barbarian Helga the Serpent Tongue died because the party wizard talked the warlock (my brother) into teleporting my Barbarian into the center of a orc army and then teleport themselves out leaving me there to fight and die. When I protested the idea the Wizard player would make loud noises to drown me out. The DM allowed it (later saying he didn't know I didn't agree to being teleported) and promptly had the Big Bad Guy appear and kill me with no saving throw when I was rolling too well in combat trying to survive. When asked to at least be resurrecting since it wasn't my choice to be put in that situation the DM said I had to make a new character since Helga was in Valhalla (censored) Odin. All because I got my first magic weapon a +2 sword (everyone else already had two or more magic items) that the Wizard wanted to add to his collection held in his bag of holding. The DM tried to get me to come back to the game as well as my brother, but after that I was done. I like the idea of the game, and maybe one day I will return when I have time. Though it's been so long since Advanced DND that I am pretty much a noob again.

[@DannyH7923]

My table has never had an issue with a character death BUT they do at times have a nonchalant attitude about it because they typically have 2-3 other characters rolled up already. I call it videogame mentality but maybe I'm wrong in thinking that way.

[@Jwright65]

I'd be careful about being too annoyed at your player - it does seem like they had a point. A DM is the arbiter of the rules and enforcer, but they also need to be fair. It is not fair to change the ruleset midgame with dire consequences. Any homebrew should be discussed at session zero at best, or out of session or before the session - not dropped mid game when the consequences would be the absolute worst. Sure they could have handled it better with their emotional response, but you could have handled it better as well. You've found something you thought was daft in the rules - the best action would be to change it next session, but if you had to this session then take the approach "hey guys, this spell doesn't work the way I think it should, it does X but I think it should do Y, we'll keep it as X for this instance but is everyone cool if it does Y going forward?". This become way more important when the consequence is severe. It is not unreasonable to not wish to participate in a game where rules are changed on the DM's whim - which this was. Players put time/effort into understanding the DMs world and creating PCs for it with backstories - they trust the DM with their creations. When something like this happens the player will feel betrayed, hurt and trust damaged - this results in an emotional response not a logical one. Its not as simple as my PC died, be mature move on - this will feel more personal and most people will react emotionally. Double check that you're annoyance at them wasn't more that they challenged your DM authority which damaged the old ego. It happens to all of us at one point of another.

[@Qutut]

Players who threaten to leave the game when their characters die get a very simple response for me: "Cool, then leave."

[@the_hoppean8461]

Quite literally one of the stupidest thing I’ve heard. People put a ton of time into their character backstory and character development in game. Some spend years playing with the same character. And to say you can’t be upset when that all is suddenly thrown away is simply illogical.

[@nabra97]

I wasn't, like, for-real upset when my PC died (had it once till now, completely my fault), but I can understand people who can't handle D&D death because of some IRL issues. Yet if you have out-of-game issues with the topic of death, I guess you should decide how to handle it before the campaign start.

[@geoffreyperrin4347]

That spell can be iffy. +90% of the time if a player drops a monster to 0 HP the monster dies. However, players get death saves by default rules. This means a monster drop to 0 HP by finger of death died, but a PC dropped to 0 HP by finger of death technically didn't die. The spell says you become a zombie if you die by the spell. I personally rule it that a PC does if dropped to 0 HP by the spell, but that also means I tend not to use it as a killing blow

[@seanmorgan2257]

I still at this point not played or dm'd a game of dnd but surely if I had a character die would just say oops that didn't work won't try that again

[@keithulhu]

If I had a character that died in your game I wouldn't like it, but I would feel reassured given your policy of bringing a new character into the game as quickly as possible.

[@nigeladams8321]

The kind of seems like it would lead to very rushed characters without much thought put into them beyond basic setup

[@keithulhu]

If you make backup characters beforehand, it's not such a big deal.

[@jaxsonfanta5420]

I also agree that being bullied as a DM is uncool

[@PaladinHotshot]

Honestly, to avoid this situation completely, this is why as a DM I try my best to make some encounters challenging that sometimes drop some of the PC'S to 0 HP...but never hard enough to where any of them actually die. Which I know sounds crazy, but after all they are the main characters in the story and we're all getting together to play DND and hangout and have fun. If their PC'S die and that person can't come by and play anymore, than moving forward the game is just not the same. And usually for the worse. Person may not wanna play anymore, team's not as strong, etc. So what I would suggest is that if your gonna kill off one of your players, maybe have something in your back pocket to possibly bring them back to life. Maybe their soul is in the Underworld and the PC'S can venture to the deepest darkest plains of the Abyss to bring them back (Which would make for an AWESOME Dungeon). Or maybe give one of your PC'S a Wish scroll so that if one of them dies, they can be brought back to life. That way they can still die, but still somehow be reborn and the person can still come back and play. Everyone wins. Just a suggestion.

[@Boss-_]

Wow, and here I considered myself a brutal DM. When my players' characters died, I just had them make another, but you went the extra mile and straight up banned them from the game. I respect that kind of commitment to permadeath.

[@PaladinHotshot]

@@Boss-_ No, that's what I'm trying to say. I've never made it hard enough to the point where any of them actually die. But if I did, I'd at least introduce some sort of method to get their character back. The whole creating a new character thing though...I mean idk. I struggle personally with how to have that make sense from a story perspective unless it's implemented someway at the beginning of the campaign. But that's just me. I'd be open to suggestions on how to incorporate that though as I'm always eager to learn how to be a better DM.

[@canaryinacoalmine1759]

That sounds extremely unfun. The notion that players can't get attached to their characters if they die is completely wrong. Death being a real thing is the only way they can actually get attached to their character.

[@PaladinHotshot]

@@canaryinacoalmine1759 Well that's your opinion and I respect it. Not everyone enjoys the same playstyle. So I disagree, but I respect your opinion.

[@beardlessdragon]

I'm on board with not whining about PC death, but I disagree about not getting attached to characters. That's a huge part of the fun of D&D imo. You get to make whatever character you want and HOPEFULLY you love them and feel excited about playing them (if not, you should probably make a diff character.) But yes, you should also accept that death is a part of D&D and you very well may lose them. Combat has no stakes if you know you're not in danger. But I'm also a masochist and want to get attached so that it hurts more if they do die lol

[@gillcaz]

It does seem weird to "threaten" leaving. If a player tried to manipulate me like that, I'd very likely agree that they should leave. If i personally am having a such bad time that I'm considering leaving, it's not a threat, it's self care, and it doesn't have much to do with you in the end

[@gulfcoastwargamer2873]

Man at least it only took me about 2 minutes to determine that your table isnt for me. Lol. Why invest so much time and effort into a character if I should just go "eh, oh well. Lets roll up another one." When they die? I get not freaking out about it, but being invested in your character and kind of upset when they die isnt a bad thing.

[@TheKillaShow]

I dont mind dying, but I get pissed if it was to some railroady BS that nobody could have prevented.

[@mattysti947]

True

[@mentalrebllion1270]

I always plan around my characters possibly dying. Do I want them to? Nope, but I work with my dm on contingencies should they die and check in with them throughout the campaign on what I would like them to do with my character if they feel it suits the narrative. Dying isn’t the worst thing. It can serve an important narrative even if that character’s time is up. I don’t enjoy it of course. I’m of course upset and demotivated for a time but I create multiple characters for a campaign and discuss it at the beginning with my dm so that we can work to fill a gap in the storyline. I play for the story, not to live vicariously through my character and I feel that’s the big difference. One of my current characters is set up for throwing a mini boss battle in should she die before completing the mission of her patron. This is supposed to add a high stakes element to the campaign and have the party take over her mission in her stead. The goal would be to sooth the wrath of the patron by taking on said mission. So far it hasn’t been used, yet, but that’s if my character dies and I don’t see it happening just yet. The game she is part of is more low stakes in battle though, far more rp oriented with more social interactions to help the party solve an ancient mystery. Honestly, the only reason this part of my character is such a large part of the campaign is because I was telling my friends about this character I created and they agreed to have a dnd campaign about it because they found her interesting. But I heard so many horror stories on such a type of character dying early that I knew I had to plan for what to do in case the worst happened since the campaign was too tightly designed that way. So yeah, I discussed it with my dm so my character could still be honored but still be allowed to die should that happen. I don’t want some “miracle” to happen that keeps her alive. No protagonist halo for me please. I think it will work out and my dm likes my back up characters and thinks they will work. We have some plans in the mean time. Obviously I leave most of that planning in the hands of my dm but I try to make sure to ok stuff with them, and they with me, where appropriate. I don’t like dying though. I just am the kind of person who plans contingencies is all, especially for stories where it makes more sense to kill off a character to serve a wider narrative purpose that helps with character arcs or overall storyline. Plus, that character’s main point was being the magpie bridge between the lovers that are her patron and deity (she’s also a cleric). The idea of what happens to the figurative cowherd and the weaver without their figurative magpie bridge is interesting to me too. I don’t know, I always try to spin it so there is an interesting story out of things.

[@The-0ni]

I actually had a player with the first case who was the wife of one of my good buddies. Color me genuinely surprised when she is suggesting behind another players back in front me that they wouldn’t mind it if this PC died and I kicked them from the game to recruit someone else. You would think someone who is soooo attached to their character wouldnt be the one advocating for another characters death… The PC she was trying to kill was a younger lady’s character who actually idolized her and she was one of those older women (20 year age difference) who just does not like younger women…

[@jaakkosippola7191]

I can understand that someone get upset If there character dies. I have a problem If you can not get over it. It is like collville’s friend said: ”Do not try to change anything. Just let me be mad like 30 min and after that I will be excited for my new character”

[@ultimatewitcherfan6677]

I have to agree that threatening to leave the game if your pc is killed is inappropriate. If you think your pc’s death was unfair, talk to your DM and tell him/her how you feel about it. BUT, don’t let your emotions take control of you. Just calmly talk to your DM. I understand being sad about your pc’s death, but you don’t have to be a jerk-wad, wailing about how unfair it was.

[@szegediadam8793]

Hehe... I was thinking: but hey. That's exactly how finger of death work. You do your 70 damage, and if he reduced to zero hit point he dies instantly... And after 1 minute of google search: yeah... That's how it works in pf2 XD

[@nigeltucker4202]

How i understand the details given, the damage took the player to 0 hp but you say it killed him. Did it bring him to 0 hp or reduce his HP total below his hp max? Since the spell description doesn't say reducing to 0 kills the target, the standard ruling for dropping to 0 hp would apply. Start making death saves, can be healed and brought back up. This is how the spell reads as other spells like Power Word Kill state specifically the target dies. I can understand the player being upset if he was brought to 0hp and told he was dead. If the player fails 3 death saves for whatever reason and dies, then the group would have to revivify the downed player before his next turn or the players character will rise as a zombie on the start of its 1st turn after failing its 3rd death save. RAW stops here. Not sure the official 5e ruling on becoming undead and being brought back to life. I would rule the party could kill the zombie of the player and would have to Raise Dead at that point, Revivify would no longer work. *edit* Also, casting Gentle Repose anytime after the player dropped to 0hp would also stop them from becoming a zombie, as the spell specifically is designed to do this.

[@agsilverradio2225]

Personally, leaving a bad game should allways be an option.

[@unnefer001]

Exactly, Luke is being pretty childish here too. It was s shit ruling and the player was understandably frustrated. I don't think I'd ever want to play with Luke.

[@erc1971erc1971]

@@unnefer001 If I had to point out what I think Luke's biggest weakness is a DM...it would be that he seems too confrontational sometimes (or as you put it, childish). He could benefit from being a bit more laid back and less in your face. Luke and I have vastly different DM styles and what we want out of a game. Neither of us would enjoy gaming with the other, and that is fine, there are plenty of people we work with better out there.

[@agsilverradio2225]

@@erc1971erc1971 To be fair, being an agreeable pushover can be a weakness too. ... When I first started playing, I would have been the player who threatened to leave over such a ruling. Today, I would probly roll with it, rolled with it, but expected the same ruling to apply if the rolls were reversed.

[@erc1971erc1971]

@@agsilverradio2225 I agree, you want to find the middle ground, where you are agreeable but don't let people walk all over you.

[@MarlonShakes]

I retconned a death because in ToA the death was just impossible to dodge or stop if you failed 1 skill check. Decided it was a BS death and so we retconned.

[@dieterhinzmann5559]

I wouldn't consider being upset a problem per se, actually i kind of hope for something like that. I would rather be worried if their characters death would leave them completely indifferent. Now getting ANGRY... thats a huge No-Go! But with everything else i do agree. 😁

[@artistpoet5253]

Yeah it feels bad when you loose a PC especially if you've invested all these ideas into it. Then again, what about the BBEG that gets one-turned-wiped? If the DMs 'flipped a table' each time one of their NPCs got killed you think players would be willing to join them at the table? D&D is a cooperative game. It always has been. Those that take a me vs. you stance should just go play Magic: the Gathering.

[@mikitta47]

i don't have an issue with in game death, so long as I don't have to reroll a level 1 character to try and survive with the level 7 party. THAT is just asking me to die over and over again for your amusement and THAT will lead me to walk out of your game.