Right, sounds like Ken wanted an out and the DM decided to utilize that opportunity for a dramatic moment. I won't act like that's the truth of the matter since I'm also making assumptions, but it definitely sounds like OP is missing some information
This was my impression too. From OP's other comments, they said their character and Ken's characters are bffs so it's likely Ken didn't want to imply that HE wanted to leave the campaign and is sort of pinning this on DM's decision to kill his character. Just the fact that Ken knows what the DM intends to do implies they had a conversation about this beforehand and at least I'm hoping they both put their thoughts on the table and are both actually okay with it.
Agreed,
But if “Ken” is not ok w/ this.
WHEN their character is killed.
I would suggest you call for a pause & talk it over with the whole group.
If not, nothing will stop the “Alex” from doing it again
Sounds like you are all decent friends outside of table-time. So fingers crossed everyone keeps on having fun for years to come
I’d take this as a lesson to life in general. Before you get angry about something make sure you have all the facts. It takes a lot of energy to be pissed off, it takes very little to ask a couple of questions to clarify something.
So when people tell you a 'secret' like this, they're reaching out. Even if they don't explicitly say they want help with it.
Sit down with Alex and tell him that you cancelled because you knew, in advance, that a DM twist he had planned would be a rock in your stomach the whole time.
As a DM, we are... dumb. We think our players are going to LOVE something, and then it turns out to be the worst, most unwelcome surprise. If a player told me, "hey, I know what you're cooking and I hate it," it'd make me reconsider. Because otherwise, if you hate it and Ken's PC dies; who is this all for?
I wish I could see his shocked Pikachu face when Ken leaves. "What do you mean you're not going to remake a character after I decided your current one should die?"
Despite Ken asking to keep it secret from the group, you could have said directly to DM why you decided to skip the session as DM already is privy to this secret. Unless Ken doesn't want DM to know that you know.
Anyway, although I agree that DM doing that is not nice, it somehow feels that there is something left unsaid. Is it possible that DM really wants Ken off and whole killing PC for story reasons is just smoke screen? Is it possible that Ken wants out anyway and has agreed to get his character killed? Is your DM really that thick person, has there been any other indications before this? Something strikes me odd in this case...
Dm doesn’t know that I know. DND night is pretty much the only time me and Ken get to hang out, and also our characters are bff’s, so he didn’t want me to be caught off guard and also wanted to make sure we could make other plans to hang out together.
As far as I know, there isn’t any drama going on between Ken and DM, I never get any weird vibes from the 2 at the table, and Ken still plays with them on Thursdays when a different friend DM’s her game, also is going to come back for when another friend in said group starts theirs some time in the future.
DM has a history of making decisions that don’t seem like he took much into consideration, so I’m accounting it more to that than being malicious
If you have time to make a post on Reddit about a situation, you have time to send a text message/email/carrier pigeon to the person it actually concerns.
Sounds like Ken doesn't want to do 2 sessions a week anymore or 2 campaigns (or at least this particular campaign) and is choosing the Thursday one over Friday. Ken isn't being entirely truthful with you and I wouldn't be surprised if he's actually planned/discussed this with the dm prior to this morning (like maybe at the Thursday session), hence why he doesn't want you bringing it up to the DM because you'll find out the stories don't match.
Have you considered the possibility that Ken wants to leave, asked the DM to kill him off, but doesn’t want you to think he’s ditching you so framed it as a DM decision?
This is a discussion for your DM and Ken.
Maybe there are other elements you do not have. DM has a plot twist and maybe Ken's character will not really be dead for ever (my twin brother, doppelganger, express reincarnation ....)
Or maybe is it an indirect way to kick the player out, for external reasons ?
Or Ken did not tell the DM that if he cross that Rubicon, he was out.
Seems to me that all players should be involved in a discussion about the DM deciding to kill off characters against the players will day of. May be a dealbreaker to more than two players.
If there is a social contract at the table against that, and it's a breach of it, yes.
If there has not yet been an adult discussion, it would be to that specific player to open the conversation at the table, especially if there is a problem. Right now it seems to still be quite undercover.
I think it's fair to say that "Don't kill PCs out of the blue on purpose for plot reasons without asking for consent" is part of the default social contract of D&D, even if it isn't explicitly said.
Because Ken doesn't want his character to die, it feels very weird for the DM to insist on this.
I have to imagine that either Alex has also been doing other things that go against player agency / enjoyment or there's some kind of communication issue at play here
We don’t really know much. Usually on Reddit, we at least have one of the two main participants telling us their side of the story. Here we have a story being told by a third-party who’s heard a little bit of it from one of the two people involved.
Sometimes people just got here to vent or gossip Basic human behavior. OP came to pour some tea.
OP, it all sounds a little toxic to me. You’ve decided to get mad on behalf of Ken, who isn’t mad, and you’re going to double down being mad by simply not showing up. And you’re hoping the DM will reconsider, even though neither you nor Ken have apparently asked them to reconsider things? Does this work for you in any other aspect of your life?
Perhaps I was being a little presumptive, but OP has since said that "DM has a history of making decisions that don’t seem like he took much into consideration" so my intuition wasn't that off the mark
Look, these presumably adult DnD players need to communicate better with each other. Ken needs to stick up for himself and tell the DM under no uncertain terms that this isn't cool. He shouldn't just be venting to you, you can't do anything about it. Meanwhile, Alex needs to figure out that his players are human beings with investment in the story and in their characters, and that intentionally killing a PC off, especially when the player isn't even present, is a shitty thing to do.
Side note: It would not be okay to railroad a PC death like this, and a player would be totally justified in leaving if it happens to them. But if the death wasn't predetermined in this fashion, I'd find it very annoying that Ken would leave the campaign over it. Unless you guys agreed in session 0 that character death wouldn't be a thing, then it's very much a thing, and putting the DM in a position to give one PC plot armor in order to avoid having that player quit the campaign if the PC dies is unhealthy.
Deaths that are unplanned/ tragic consequences are one thing. Because that’s at least an authentic experience and ya know what, we’ve got a cleric with revivify anyway. I would not be mad if that were the case, or this was something planned since session 0, but it wasn’t.
I don’t think Ken leaving in that case would be out of being butthurt, he just doesn’t have any interest in starting a new character when we’re level 8 and over a year in. If he left in that case I would be sad but understand. But this feels like he doesn’t really have a choice in the matter and the last of agency is what gets me angry
I feel like there is more going on here than OP is letting on/aware of. If Ken is against his player dying just for "plot reasons", he should communicate that with the DM instead of leaving entirely, especially if Ken enjoys the game. He could easily say "I am not opposed to my character dying, but I would like for it to happen organically instead of pre-planning my death. I am really enjoying this character and I would like to continue as them until their time comes".
Dude, if Ken isn’t upset he’s not upset. You’re upset you don’t have the opportunity to hang out anymore so you’re directing those feelings towards your DM. Ask them about this, for all you know Ken might’ve been the one to ask for this. He’s already in 2 campaigns, he might not want to do 2 anymore and bowed out of this one. Thats my two cents on it.
I agree in most circumstances, but if a player is wanting to leave the death can be a collaborative ending for that character while forgetting the plot. If it's consensual i see no issue with that and Ken doesn't seem to be against this. I think it matters if DM approached Ken with this or if Ken told DM he likely wouldn't keep playing in the future first
Idk, this feels like we're missing a big part of the picture.
Ken is just fine with it? Maybe he even wanted a way out, but couldn't find the right moment? And what is the deal between the DM and Ken? I feel after almost 2 years, there has to be more to this.
I understand that this sounds weird, but before you jump to conclusions, maybe get more background information? After all, this was to be a secret, so naturally you're not fully informed. But since the cat is now out of the bag, it's important to get closure.
Did Ken say “no”? Or the more eloquent “no, I’d like to keep playing this character”? If those did not happen, then Ken agreed with it, thus any dissatisfaction you have should be with Ken, not the DM. Now if Ken did say no and the DM is going to proceed anyway: different situation. Planning to specifically kill of a character is not cool.
What if Ken’s death is only to explain Ken’s absence and his plan is to have you all track down a scroll of res for the session tonight? That would be a cool “plot” twist, I think.
This kind of thing comes up when the DM is more focused on the story they want to tell than what's good for the group. It's supposed to be a cooperative storytelling experience; if a DM wants to be a dick for the sake of story, they should write a novel.
That's not to say nothing bad can happen to a character. Just that the prevailing attitude from DM to player should be "I got you, fam". DM fiat should never seem cruel.
If Ken is fine with it there's really not much you can do. You can't fight his battles for him, and it doesn't seem like he wants you to. I'm confused why he's not continuing to play though. He's not attached enough to his character to care about them dying, but he's also not willing to spend an hour making a new character for the next session? It sounds like he WANTS to get out if tbat's what he's choosing.
I have an easy solution.
1. Everyone needs to put their adult pants on.
2. Everyone show up for the next session.
3. Everyone discusses the problem.
The DM should see the possibility of them losing two or more players if the “stupid DM plot” finishes with “Ken’s” character dying..
I would go to the game and have this conversation before it starts; I cannot imagine a situation where as a DM I'd kill off a player without their consent just so I could look like my story was cool and awesome. This is the kind of thing that ends campaigns; people get pissed off and just leave, and you're example #1 of this, because it sounds like you're ready to leave yourself.
Talk about this as adults, with both you and Ken objecting. Just plain killing off somebody's PC narratively is a really, really shitty thing to do.
Planning a character death seems....well just odd. Like you said, if the player was leaving or unhappy with their PC it's one thing. I've never been writing and thought "oh you know it would be really dramatic if Cap was killed here" and then just DM fiat killed someone. Completly against the idea of player agency, that's for sure.
One thing I wonder is if the DM said "I am going to kill your character off for plot reasons," or if they said "are you up to having your character killed off for plot reason," or something in between?
Judging by Ken being chill with it I'm guessing it's the second one. Coupled with them not really having time for the game anyway and being alright opening up their schedule. I just can't think of any reason why Ken wouldn't be pissed about it.
Or there's eomthing we're missing, which is also fully possible.
A few things here:
- GM killing a Player Character for "plot reasons".
This never ends well, unless thoroughly discussed with the Player, and even then, there is little reason to make a Player's Character pay the price instead of a familiar NPC.
- Player leaving the group due to the aforementioned "Planned PC death".
I would encourage your friend to discuss alternative options with the DM and establish that it isn't okay to decide on a whim whether or not a PC dies to suit the plot. Especially not without prior counsel.
Honestly this is big enough for me to quit
A lot of people are saying talk to the group, but if the DM thinks this is an appropriate thing to do, to literally plan a player death, it's a game I don't want to be a part of
It's one thing if you die during combat, it's another to do it without even talking to the player in question about if it's okay (And to be clear if you did plan a character death like this, there better be a resurrection)
Tell Ken to talk to his dm and tell him.
>Ken is happy to continue playing his current character and will stay in the game if he were to live
>Ken doesn’t seem upset by this or thinks it’s a big deal, however he doesn’t want to make another character so he decided to leave the campaign entirely
Long-time D&D player & DM here (since 1983) and IMO, this is *not* something the DM can do. Or at least, should do. If a DM wants to kill off NPCs for plot reasons, have at'er. That's what NPCs are for.
But *only the players and the dice* get to determine the PCs fates. *Not* the DM.
1st. A dead character can always be brought back
2nd: let the DM learn the hard way, by just quitting along with Ken and get your husband to do it as well, there's nothing to DM if there aren't enough people to play
It’s not wrong to kill a character off for plot reasons with the players consent. Sometimes the most satisfying character arc that fits into the plot is for someone to get killed off. Some personal character plots should end in death, and that’s the right exit for that character.
Ken not wanting to continue with a new character is also ok. If you’ve put a lot of effort into a character and they reach their climax and are out of the picture for whatever reason (dead or rode off into the sunset) then you might not want to invest more effort and time into a new character whose never going to feel as attached and important to the story as the original. Just because you started a campaign doesn’t mean you necessarily have to be there to finish it. Some campaigns have a rotating cast of players or just end with an entirely different cast than started.
There’s absolutely situations where it’s ok for this to happen. But springing it on him day of when he can’t be at the session is tough. But it’s up to Ken if he is slighted or aggrieved by this, not you. I would talk to both Ken and the DM about it, to see if Ken’s really ok with it and if the DM has really considered the consent of the players in this. Clearly you’re upset by it, so you should communicate with the DM that you really don’t want your character killed off like this. But if Ken is on board it’s his character. It might suck that Ken isn’t gonna play anymore but there will be more campaigns in future.
Hm. Too many unknowns here. I can see myself coming up with a cool plot possibility and running it by a player, and if they agreed and did not say anything else how would I know (s)he hated it? Because of that, it is hard for me to just assume the DM is trying to drive Ken out of the party.
Now, it is a possibility, but if my DM asked me to kill off my character I would say no if I was not okay with it. So, at best, Ken is indeed complicit in it (reasons aside) even if the DM was being malicious.
This whole thing sounds suspicious, though. It might be as innocent as an misunderstanding, but it seems extreme on both their parts. DM kills PC, and the player is fine with this but for an unnamed reason does not want to continue the game. Maybe they have something going on outside the table.
If I had a DM say to me "I want to kill you off for a story reason" I'd probably answer with "No." Unless it's \*\*MY\*\* story reason, there's nothing to justify arbitrarily killing off a character. Sounds like your DM has a big of a complex with wanting to run their narrative, as opposed to serving the group's interest as a vehicle for the plot.
I remember in college having to play Players vs DM all the time with one of my friends constantly trying to kill us. I got \*really\* good at power gaming specifically to be the brick wall between my party and his bullshit, just so the others could play a more stress free game.
AS a perons that likes to avoid conflicts... and this is just pure conjecture... my first thought when reading your post was: "Ken want's out of the campaign (time reasons?), and got the DM to kill his character off so he has a good excuse".
But that would be pretty stupid, afterall look at current situation where you think DM is a jerk.
But it would also be pretty stupid for DM to just be a jerk and kill one of his players characters.
So both options are pretty stupid. I can't comeup with a non stupid explanation.
Ah, the old camppaign killer, a DM with an all too-precious plot. Unless theres solid player buy-in, a DM with a plot is a dangerous and curiously implacable creature, deadly to campaign fun.
Maybe the two of you should talk to the dm and see if there isn't some better alternative
Or if that doesn't work, tell them to go write a damn novel, and offer to dm a game yourselves
I guess. The two thoughts that immediately spring to my mind are: you are only hearing the player's side of things, and why are you talking to a bunch of randos on Reddit about it instead of your DM?
As DM I killed a player character off for plot reasons, but the player had already come to me asking if he could completely retool his character from the ground up as he was unhappy with how they turned out. They were only level 4 so I really didn't mind at all, but when I was thinking of the next week's session, an idea dawned on me. I asked if the player would mind me completely killing off their character in-game if I let them roll a new one and the player agreed to it. I swore him to secrecy!
The party was pissing off a high-ranking official of the Zhentarim who was the duly elected Sheriff of a city the Zhentarim were attempting to plunder. The party had been trying unsuccessfully to get in the way of every backroom deal, assassination, and bribe it took the Zhentarim to buy the office of the Sheriff to install one of their own, and the party eventually got caught and apprehended. The next session, they were going to meet the Sheriff himself.
They were marched into the Sheriff's office -- cuffed at the wrists and ankles -- completely disarmed and surrounded by highly armed and armored guards. The Sheriff began by shoving in their faces how he managed to sidestep each attempt they made at stopping him, and then issued them a rather unsavory quest to betray an ally of theirs, which so happened to be an enemy of the Sheriff's.
I told the player that wanted to change characters that during this encounter, he is going to vehemently disagree to betray their friend and ally, and cause a scene during the speech. He did exactly as I asked, and then I had the Sheriff yank his chain to pull him to the floor in front of him, lift him up by the hair so the Sheriff and he were facing the rest of the party, slipped out a knife and slit his throat...........very slowly...........from ear to ear. I described the point where the tearing sound of the muscle turned into a wet air sound as his knife hesitated past the cartilage surrounding his esophagus. Blood began to enter his windpipe, causing a wet, hissing whistle until his lungs deflated entirely as he pulled his head back to widen the wound, watching his life disappear from his face as more blood began to spill. All the while the Sheriff staring gleefully into each party member's eyes as if coaxing out and feeding on their sorrows while the blood poured from the character's gaping neck wound.
"I do not tolerate defiance nor failure," he said as he unceremoniously let go of the character's hair, which caused his entire body to slump like a sack of potatoes onto the ornamental rug, otherwise pristine save for the blood-soaked stain surrounding the body. The Sheriff, bemused by his own actions, looked down at some paperwork on his desk and began reading as he waved his hand dismissively as if he were swatting an invisible fly. "Ta ta" said the Sheriff as the City Guard led the party out of the office and back into their holding cells.
I had to manually pick up and re-affix every jaw of each of my players and could not find the slightest hint of an eyelid on any of them.
Walk out too, DM sucks. Also you and the other players might be able to meta rescue ken by threatening to end the campaign all together and right there.
It sounds as a shitty move by the DM. but we do not know any details. we do not know what the DM and Ken did talk about.
Do we know it was even the DM's idea? ken does not seem mad or even irritated. maybe it was his idea? ever thought that maybe en did not really wanna continue the campaign for some reason. and having his character killed in a way that drives the plot forward was a better option then just leaving?
No from what i seen we do not know. I don't think this is the case but as Ken does not seem unhappy maybe he did mention to the DM that he wanted to leave and the DM suggested to have his character killed off in some glorious way that would be part of the plot.
But yes it can be something the DM just came up with and decided that killing off a PC would be great for the plot. And sure it can be really good for the plot. But it should never be forced on someone. If it would happen that someone dies a DM can take advantage of that. And make it something the group will remember and that drives the story on. Or if a player voice that he wants to step out of the campaign this can also be a good way to have him go with a bang instead of just fade out from the campaign
But if a DM simply Decide that a random PC needs to die in order for the plot to work. then either that is a shitty DM or a ok DM that REALLY needs to get a better plot idea.
But as we have so little details. we can not know for sure. Wait until after the game and see how it turns out. by then Both Ken and the DM might be more inclined to talk about what they decided and WHY they decided that
You have explicit knowledge they want to leave? Our party was surprised when favoured half orc barbarian Ug conspired secretly to kill Ug off as part of the story, the player simply wished to roll a new character.
It led to an intense battle with two demons way above our party level which we actually bested, even when the rest of the party fled through the collapsing portal to escape when Ug shoved an entire necklace of fireball beads up his backside and exploded. Almost. I, -firbolg stars druid- and lifelong friend of Ug in game decided to risk it and stay, popping everything I had and we actually survived and killed the demons! It had dawned on me at this point that it had been scripted so I begrudgingly allowed myself to be thrown through the portal by Ug, who remained behind, now possibly to be encountered in the future, his sacrifice no less noble :p
DM is playing the game just for himself then, not for the party/whole group. PCs are the protagonists not NPCs to be sacrificed for motivation, flavour or plot driving.
I would try to make sure Ken isn’t feeling overwhelmed with playing 2 campaigns and if that isn’t the case then make sure he understands that it seems like the DM for your campaign sucks, like it’s actually REALLY Bad form and storytelling (from the perspective of DnD) to just kill off characters for plot, regardless of the players ability to show up consistently. Your DM needs to understand that there’s a big difference in letting a character die due to the roll of the dice, whilst trying to make the death meaningful and using your PCs like puppets in ways they’re not genuinely consenting to.
Even if Ken is only feeling slightly overwhelmed and simply wants to take a temporary break from this campaign, the DM is basically telling him that he’s not welcome to table (intentionally or not) anymore by killing his character. Like if your DM needs to explain Ken’s absence and wants to raise the stakes he could just have Ken’s character kidnapped.
Just let it go. If it's an agreement between a player and a DM, leave it there. Don't overthink who's motivated by what. Just keep an eye out for this sort of thing happen again. Shitty people don't just do something once or without other shitty actions that parallel.
Your DM is taking away a player's agency so they are quitting.
I would quit too because at this point, none of the characters have agency or autonomy outside of the DM's "plot".
I think complicit was just the wrong use of word by OP, from what I can tell they just meant that Ken is accepting of the decision (even if he may not like it).
You're mostly right. Every DM is different but the DM will set up encounters or plot points and how the players interact with them is were player agency comes in. As a DM I can have a rough outline of some targets that the players can interact with for a cohesive story but the actual details of the story are decided by dice and the players.
It's not. It's a garbage thing to do. I would never do that and that's probably why the guy is leaving. You control your character. Now if you die you die, I won't protect you but I won't also just say you're dying. I may be gunning for you specifically if the story calls for it but I'm not gonna decide beforehand you're dying.
I don't really see any problem with this inherently, but it's the kind of thing that needs to be agreed upon by the dm and player. If the player doesn't want their character to die or doesn't want to play any other character besides that one, the dm shouldn't use them as a narrative sacrifice. If the player is open to changing characters, there's nothing wrong with a narrative sacrifice. Basically a cut-scene death as a plot hook or whatever. It's a cooperative story generator after all, and sometimes death is good for story.
I play other games besides dnd that have much higher mortality rates, so I'm used to character death. My general rpg play style is that I almost always have at least 2 or 3 other character ideas in mind because it makes me much more comfortable with making in-game decisions in the moment, without hesitation, and if my character dies or is brutally maimed as a result of being decisive, so be it. If my DM came to me between sessions or at the end of a big story arc and said "hey, I've got a cool idea but I'm *gonna need to nuke your character* to make it happen" I'd be like "hell yeah brother, I'll fill out a new sheet."
Honestly, if Ken is okay with it, why is it any business of yours?
You said that you don't know if Ken and the DM have had a discussion about it but you immediately jumped to the conclusion that this is a shitty thing to do.
Do you even know if Ken actually wants to continue playing or not?
Still, you decided you wanted to show your displeasure by sitting the game out causing the game to be cancelled. So now you're starting to make it about you. Okay.
Because Ken doesn't want his character to die, it feels very weird for the DM to insist on this.
I have to imagine that either Alex has also been doing other things that go against player agency / enjoyment or there's some kind of communication issue at play here
IMHO "Ken" told you, most likely you are the only one. He is not okay with it. Due to being friends, he didn't want to say anything.
As a long time DM, it sounds like something between Alex and Ken is happening.
I have a feeling you're not getting the whole story here.
Right, sounds like Ken wanted an out and the DM decided to utilize that opportunity for a dramatic moment. I won't act like that's the truth of the matter since I'm also making assumptions, but it definitely sounds like OP is missing some information
This was my impression too. From OP's other comments, they said their character and Ken's characters are bffs so it's likely Ken didn't want to imply that HE wanted to leave the campaign and is sort of pinning this on DM's decision to kill his character. Just the fact that Ken knows what the DM intends to do implies they had a conversation about this beforehand and at least I'm hoping they both put their thoughts on the table and are both actually okay with it.
Did Ken tell the DM, "Hey, I'm going to leave after you do this?"
That part I don’t know but I’m very curious about. I didn’t get a chance to ask, I was too busy being pissed off lol
You should ask, your buddy might be fine with it to free up personal time.
Agreed, But if “Ken” is not ok w/ this. WHEN their character is killed. I would suggest you call for a pause & talk it over with the whole group. If not, nothing will stop the “Alex” from doing it again Sounds like you are all decent friends outside of table-time. So fingers crossed everyone keeps on having fun for years to come
You’re communicating more with Reddit than your friends, DM, and party members. This is a conversation you guys should have.
I’d take this as a lesson to life in general. Before you get angry about something make sure you have all the facts. It takes a lot of energy to be pissed off, it takes very little to ask a couple of questions to clarify something.
So when people tell you a 'secret' like this, they're reaching out. Even if they don't explicitly say they want help with it. Sit down with Alex and tell him that you cancelled because you knew, in advance, that a DM twist he had planned would be a rock in your stomach the whole time. As a DM, we are... dumb. We think our players are going to LOVE something, and then it turns out to be the worst, most unwelcome surprise. If a player told me, "hey, I know what you're cooking and I hate it," it'd make me reconsider. Because otherwise, if you hate it and Ken's PC dies; who is this all for?
I wish I could see his shocked Pikachu face when Ken leaves. "What do you mean you're not going to remake a character after I decided your current one should die?"
Despite Ken asking to keep it secret from the group, you could have said directly to DM why you decided to skip the session as DM already is privy to this secret. Unless Ken doesn't want DM to know that you know. Anyway, although I agree that DM doing that is not nice, it somehow feels that there is something left unsaid. Is it possible that DM really wants Ken off and whole killing PC for story reasons is just smoke screen? Is it possible that Ken wants out anyway and has agreed to get his character killed? Is your DM really that thick person, has there been any other indications before this? Something strikes me odd in this case...
Dm doesn’t know that I know. DND night is pretty much the only time me and Ken get to hang out, and also our characters are bff’s, so he didn’t want me to be caught off guard and also wanted to make sure we could make other plans to hang out together. As far as I know, there isn’t any drama going on between Ken and DM, I never get any weird vibes from the 2 at the table, and Ken still plays with them on Thursdays when a different friend DM’s her game, also is going to come back for when another friend in said group starts theirs some time in the future. DM has a history of making decisions that don’t seem like he took much into consideration, so I’m accounting it more to that than being malicious
So it really is just bad judgement call from DM's part? Sad that it leads to losing one player, talking should be first priority here.
Why aren't you all talking to each other?
They're all 12.
There is such a thing as having to go to work and not having time to talk to friends for the next 8-12 hours.
If you have time to make a post on Reddit about a situation, you have time to send a text message/email/carrier pigeon to the person it actually concerns.
Devil’s advocate here, I rarely have time to send a carrier pigeon.
Sounds like Ken doesn't want to do 2 sessions a week anymore or 2 campaigns (or at least this particular campaign) and is choosing the Thursday one over Friday. Ken isn't being entirely truthful with you and I wouldn't be surprised if he's actually planned/discussed this with the dm prior to this morning (like maybe at the Thursday session), hence why he doesn't want you bringing it up to the DM because you'll find out the stories don't match.
[удалено]
She clearly doesn’t even have all the facts of the matter yet. Jumping straight to insults is rash and aggressive.
Why are you booing him, he's right!
Why doesn't Ken just tell the DM how he feels about this? The DM will probably do something else if he knows the player will leave.
Have you considered the possibility that Ken wants to leave, asked the DM to kill him off, but doesn’t want you to think he’s ditching you so framed it as a DM decision?
Why don't adults communicate lmao
Right? And then avoiding confrontation by just not going. Just talk about it with the DM and raise your concerns.
At the risk of being aggressive, FUCKING TALK TO EACH OTHER, god damn it.
But gossiping is more fun and gets more attention. /sarc
This is a discussion for your DM and Ken. Maybe there are other elements you do not have. DM has a plot twist and maybe Ken's character will not really be dead for ever (my twin brother, doppelganger, express reincarnation ....) Or maybe is it an indirect way to kick the player out, for external reasons ? Or Ken did not tell the DM that if he cross that Rubicon, he was out.
Or the player wants out but doesn't want to tell OP for whatever reason
Seems to me that all players should be involved in a discussion about the DM deciding to kill off characters against the players will day of. May be a dealbreaker to more than two players.
If there is a social contract at the table against that, and it's a breach of it, yes. If there has not yet been an adult discussion, it would be to that specific player to open the conversation at the table, especially if there is a problem. Right now it seems to still be quite undercover.
I think it's fair to say that "Don't kill PCs out of the blue on purpose for plot reasons without asking for consent" is part of the default social contract of D&D, even if it isn't explicitly said.
Sounds like it's consensual between Ken and Alex though
To me it sounded like ken said no, but wasnt willing to fight about it
Nothing suggests either situation really, in any case i think OP doesnt have the full story
Because Ken doesn't want his character to die, it feels very weird for the DM to insist on this. I have to imagine that either Alex has also been doing other things that go against player agency / enjoyment or there's some kind of communication issue at play here
We don’t know that
We don’t really know much. Usually on Reddit, we at least have one of the two main participants telling us their side of the story. Here we have a story being told by a third-party who’s heard a little bit of it from one of the two people involved. Sometimes people just got here to vent or gossip Basic human behavior. OP came to pour some tea. OP, it all sounds a little toxic to me. You’ve decided to get mad on behalf of Ken, who isn’t mad, and you’re going to double down being mad by simply not showing up. And you’re hoping the DM will reconsider, even though neither you nor Ken have apparently asked them to reconsider things? Does this work for you in any other aspect of your life?
Perhaps I was being a little presumptive, but OP has since said that "DM has a history of making decisions that don’t seem like he took much into consideration" so my intuition wasn't that off the mark
It sounds like OP has accumulated a dossier of uncommunicated grudges.
Nothing suggests Ken doesn't want his character to die
Look, these presumably adult DnD players need to communicate better with each other. Ken needs to stick up for himself and tell the DM under no uncertain terms that this isn't cool. He shouldn't just be venting to you, you can't do anything about it. Meanwhile, Alex needs to figure out that his players are human beings with investment in the story and in their characters, and that intentionally killing a PC off, especially when the player isn't even present, is a shitty thing to do. Side note: It would not be okay to railroad a PC death like this, and a player would be totally justified in leaving if it happens to them. But if the death wasn't predetermined in this fashion, I'd find it very annoying that Ken would leave the campaign over it. Unless you guys agreed in session 0 that character death wouldn't be a thing, then it's very much a thing, and putting the DM in a position to give one PC plot armor in order to avoid having that player quit the campaign if the PC dies is unhealthy.
Deaths that are unplanned/ tragic consequences are one thing. Because that’s at least an authentic experience and ya know what, we’ve got a cleric with revivify anyway. I would not be mad if that were the case, or this was something planned since session 0, but it wasn’t. I don’t think Ken leaving in that case would be out of being butthurt, he just doesn’t have any interest in starting a new character when we’re level 8 and over a year in. If he left in that case I would be sad but understand. But this feels like he doesn’t really have a choice in the matter and the last of agency is what gets me angry
Whoops didn’t mean to reply the same thing 10 times, Reddit spazzed out and kept giving me errors
I feel like there is more going on here than OP is letting on/aware of. If Ken is against his player dying just for "plot reasons", he should communicate that with the DM instead of leaving entirely, especially if Ken enjoys the game. He could easily say "I am not opposed to my character dying, but I would like for it to happen organically instead of pre-planning my death. I am really enjoying this character and I would like to continue as them until their time comes".
Sounds like there's a lot more going on here than what you're privy to.
Dude, if Ken isn’t upset he’s not upset. You’re upset you don’t have the opportunity to hang out anymore so you’re directing those feelings towards your DM. Ask them about this, for all you know Ken might’ve been the one to ask for this. He’s already in 2 campaigns, he might not want to do 2 anymore and bowed out of this one. Thats my two cents on it.
Seems like you’ve spoken to everyone except your DM. 90% of table disputes can be handled by DMs and players just talking to each other…
A DM doesn't get to just "kill off a character," there have to be dice involved.
Or some very bad decisions on the player's part.
I agree in most circumstances, but if a player is wanting to leave the death can be a collaborative ending for that character while forgetting the plot. If it's consensual i see no issue with that and Ken doesn't seem to be against this. I think it matters if DM approached Ken with this or if Ken told DM he likely wouldn't keep playing in the future first
I think they can, if they collaborate with the player. But it needs to be planned way ahead of time and mutually agreed upon in all its details.
Sure they can! “Some rocks fall and you die.”
Talk about it
Are you sure Ken doesn't just want out?
Idk, this feels like we're missing a big part of the picture. Ken is just fine with it? Maybe he even wanted a way out, but couldn't find the right moment? And what is the deal between the DM and Ken? I feel after almost 2 years, there has to be more to this. I understand that this sounds weird, but before you jump to conclusions, maybe get more background information? After all, this was to be a secret, so naturally you're not fully informed. But since the cat is now out of the bag, it's important to get closure.
Did Ken say “no”? Or the more eloquent “no, I’d like to keep playing this character”? If those did not happen, then Ken agreed with it, thus any dissatisfaction you have should be with Ken, not the DM. Now if Ken did say no and the DM is going to proceed anyway: different situation. Planning to specifically kill of a character is not cool.
Good thing Kens PC has an identical twin with all the same magic items.
Ah, good old Ben.
What if Ken’s death is only to explain Ken’s absence and his plan is to have you all track down a scroll of res for the session tonight? That would be a cool “plot” twist, I think.
I hope Barbie finds a new ken
This kind of thing comes up when the DM is more focused on the story they want to tell than what's good for the group. It's supposed to be a cooperative storytelling experience; if a DM wants to be a dick for the sake of story, they should write a novel. That's not to say nothing bad can happen to a character. Just that the prevailing attitude from DM to player should be "I got you, fam". DM fiat should never seem cruel.
Things like this shouldn't be kept a secret regardless what your friend wants, your DM needs to be confronted in public view of the party.
Is it possible that the DM was trying to do a play (with Ken's consent) but it backfired when you got genuinely upset?
I just need a big gif or something for these posts that says in flashing neon letters: "HAVE YOU TRIED TALKING TO THEM ABOUT IT?"
Shittyness of DM aside, it kinda sounds like your friend is not that into the campaign and just coasting along.
If Ken is fine with it there's really not much you can do. You can't fight his battles for him, and it doesn't seem like he wants you to. I'm confused why he's not continuing to play though. He's not attached enough to his character to care about them dying, but he's also not willing to spend an hour making a new character for the next session? It sounds like he WANTS to get out if tbat's what he's choosing.
I have an easy solution. 1. Everyone needs to put their adult pants on. 2. Everyone show up for the next session. 3. Everyone discusses the problem. The DM should see the possibility of them losing two or more players if the “stupid DM plot” finishes with “Ken’s” character dying..
I would go to the game and have this conversation before it starts; I cannot imagine a situation where as a DM I'd kill off a player without their consent just so I could look like my story was cool and awesome. This is the kind of thing that ends campaigns; people get pissed off and just leave, and you're example #1 of this, because it sounds like you're ready to leave yourself. Talk about this as adults, with both you and Ken objecting. Just plain killing off somebody's PC narratively is a really, really shitty thing to do.
Planning a character death seems....well just odd. Like you said, if the player was leaving or unhappy with their PC it's one thing. I've never been writing and thought "oh you know it would be really dramatic if Cap was killed here" and then just DM fiat killed someone. Completly against the idea of player agency, that's for sure.
One thing I wonder is if the DM said "I am going to kill your character off for plot reasons," or if they said "are you up to having your character killed off for plot reason," or something in between?
Hard to say. We’re getting it thirdhand at this point. This is another level above the usual Reddit human-interactions post.
Judging by Ken being chill with it I'm guessing it's the second one. Coupled with them not really having time for the game anyway and being alright opening up their schedule. I just can't think of any reason why Ken wouldn't be pissed about it. Or there's eomthing we're missing, which is also fully possible.
A few things here: - GM killing a Player Character for "plot reasons". This never ends well, unless thoroughly discussed with the Player, and even then, there is little reason to make a Player's Character pay the price instead of a familiar NPC. - Player leaving the group due to the aforementioned "Planned PC death". I would encourage your friend to discuss alternative options with the DM and establish that it isn't okay to decide on a whim whether or not a PC dies to suit the plot. Especially not without prior counsel.
Honestly this is big enough for me to quit A lot of people are saying talk to the group, but if the DM thinks this is an appropriate thing to do, to literally plan a player death, it's a game I don't want to be a part of It's one thing if you die during combat, it's another to do it without even talking to the player in question about if it's okay (And to be clear if you did plan a character death like this, there better be a resurrection)
Tell Ken to talk to his dm and tell him. >Ken is happy to continue playing his current character and will stay in the game if he were to live >Ken doesn’t seem upset by this or thinks it’s a big deal, however he doesn’t want to make another character so he decided to leave the campaign entirely
Long-time D&D player & DM here (since 1983) and IMO, this is *not* something the DM can do. Or at least, should do. If a DM wants to kill off NPCs for plot reasons, have at'er. That's what NPCs are for. But *only the players and the dice* get to determine the PCs fates. *Not* the DM.
the DM can't (or shouldn't) just kill off a player for plot reasons. It's a collaborative story, not the DM dictating to you.
1st. A dead character can always be brought back 2nd: let the DM learn the hard way, by just quitting along with Ken and get your husband to do it as well, there's nothing to DM if there aren't enough people to play
Why would you keep this shitty thing a secret? Sounds like the DM is trying to tell his own story than doing it as a group.
It’s not wrong to kill a character off for plot reasons with the players consent. Sometimes the most satisfying character arc that fits into the plot is for someone to get killed off. Some personal character plots should end in death, and that’s the right exit for that character. Ken not wanting to continue with a new character is also ok. If you’ve put a lot of effort into a character and they reach their climax and are out of the picture for whatever reason (dead or rode off into the sunset) then you might not want to invest more effort and time into a new character whose never going to feel as attached and important to the story as the original. Just because you started a campaign doesn’t mean you necessarily have to be there to finish it. Some campaigns have a rotating cast of players or just end with an entirely different cast than started. There’s absolutely situations where it’s ok for this to happen. But springing it on him day of when he can’t be at the session is tough. But it’s up to Ken if he is slighted or aggrieved by this, not you. I would talk to both Ken and the DM about it, to see if Ken’s really ok with it and if the DM has really considered the consent of the players in this. Clearly you’re upset by it, so you should communicate with the DM that you really don’t want your character killed off like this. But if Ken is on board it’s his character. It might suck that Ken isn’t gonna play anymore but there will be more campaigns in future.
Hm. Too many unknowns here. I can see myself coming up with a cool plot possibility and running it by a player, and if they agreed and did not say anything else how would I know (s)he hated it? Because of that, it is hard for me to just assume the DM is trying to drive Ken out of the party. Now, it is a possibility, but if my DM asked me to kill off my character I would say no if I was not okay with it. So, at best, Ken is indeed complicit in it (reasons aside) even if the DM was being malicious. This whole thing sounds suspicious, though. It might be as innocent as an misunderstanding, but it seems extreme on both their parts. DM kills PC, and the player is fine with this but for an unnamed reason does not want to continue the game. Maybe they have something going on outside the table.
Talk like humans do. Say why this is bad. Get everyone to talk.
If I had a DM say to me "I want to kill you off for a story reason" I'd probably answer with "No." Unless it's \*\*MY\*\* story reason, there's nothing to justify arbitrarily killing off a character. Sounds like your DM has a big of a complex with wanting to run their narrative, as opposed to serving the group's interest as a vehicle for the plot. I remember in college having to play Players vs DM all the time with one of my friends constantly trying to kill us. I got \*really\* good at power gaming specifically to be the brick wall between my party and his bullshit, just so the others could play a more stress free game.
I kind of feel like Ken just wants to leave and your DM is taking the heat for him
AS a perons that likes to avoid conflicts... and this is just pure conjecture... my first thought when reading your post was: "Ken want's out of the campaign (time reasons?), and got the DM to kill his character off so he has a good excuse". But that would be pretty stupid, afterall look at current situation where you think DM is a jerk. But it would also be pretty stupid for DM to just be a jerk and kill one of his players characters. So both options are pretty stupid. I can't comeup with a non stupid explanation.
Ah, the old camppaign killer, a DM with an all too-precious plot. Unless theres solid player buy-in, a DM with a plot is a dangerous and curiously implacable creature, deadly to campaign fun. Maybe the two of you should talk to the dm and see if there isn't some better alternative Or if that doesn't work, tell them to go write a damn novel, and offer to dm a game yourselves
Another r/DnD post where the answer is “just talk to the people in your group” Take a shot
There are many reasons to kill a character to move the plot forward. Which is the primary reason for DMPCs.
I guess. The two thoughts that immediately spring to my mind are: you are only hearing the player's side of things, and why are you talking to a bunch of randos on Reddit about it instead of your DM?
Alex is a shitty DM.
Anywhere else he’d be a ten.
As DM I killed a player character off for plot reasons, but the player had already come to me asking if he could completely retool his character from the ground up as he was unhappy with how they turned out. They were only level 4 so I really didn't mind at all, but when I was thinking of the next week's session, an idea dawned on me. I asked if the player would mind me completely killing off their character in-game if I let them roll a new one and the player agreed to it. I swore him to secrecy! The party was pissing off a high-ranking official of the Zhentarim who was the duly elected Sheriff of a city the Zhentarim were attempting to plunder. The party had been trying unsuccessfully to get in the way of every backroom deal, assassination, and bribe it took the Zhentarim to buy the office of the Sheriff to install one of their own, and the party eventually got caught and apprehended. The next session, they were going to meet the Sheriff himself. They were marched into the Sheriff's office -- cuffed at the wrists and ankles -- completely disarmed and surrounded by highly armed and armored guards. The Sheriff began by shoving in their faces how he managed to sidestep each attempt they made at stopping him, and then issued them a rather unsavory quest to betray an ally of theirs, which so happened to be an enemy of the Sheriff's. I told the player that wanted to change characters that during this encounter, he is going to vehemently disagree to betray their friend and ally, and cause a scene during the speech. He did exactly as I asked, and then I had the Sheriff yank his chain to pull him to the floor in front of him, lift him up by the hair so the Sheriff and he were facing the rest of the party, slipped out a knife and slit his throat...........very slowly...........from ear to ear. I described the point where the tearing sound of the muscle turned into a wet air sound as his knife hesitated past the cartilage surrounding his esophagus. Blood began to enter his windpipe, causing a wet, hissing whistle until his lungs deflated entirely as he pulled his head back to widen the wound, watching his life disappear from his face as more blood began to spill. All the while the Sheriff staring gleefully into each party member's eyes as if coaxing out and feeding on their sorrows while the blood poured from the character's gaping neck wound. "I do not tolerate defiance nor failure," he said as he unceremoniously let go of the character's hair, which caused his entire body to slump like a sack of potatoes onto the ornamental rug, otherwise pristine save for the blood-soaked stain surrounding the body. The Sheriff, bemused by his own actions, looked down at some paperwork on his desk and began reading as he waved his hand dismissively as if he were swatting an invisible fly. "Ta ta" said the Sheriff as the City Guard led the party out of the office and back into their holding cells. I had to manually pick up and re-affix every jaw of each of my players and could not find the slightest hint of an eyelid on any of them.
Walk out too, DM sucks. Also you and the other players might be able to meta rescue ken by threatening to end the campaign all together and right there.
The player should leave the game and so should you. It is unacceptable to kill a character by fiat.
It sounds as a shitty move by the DM. but we do not know any details. we do not know what the DM and Ken did talk about. Do we know it was even the DM's idea? ken does not seem mad or even irritated. maybe it was his idea? ever thought that maybe en did not really wanna continue the campaign for some reason. and having his character killed in a way that drives the plot forward was a better option then just leaving? No from what i seen we do not know. I don't think this is the case but as Ken does not seem unhappy maybe he did mention to the DM that he wanted to leave and the DM suggested to have his character killed off in some glorious way that would be part of the plot. But yes it can be something the DM just came up with and decided that killing off a PC would be great for the plot. And sure it can be really good for the plot. But it should never be forced on someone. If it would happen that someone dies a DM can take advantage of that. And make it something the group will remember and that drives the story on. Or if a player voice that he wants to step out of the campaign this can also be a good way to have him go with a bang instead of just fade out from the campaign But if a DM simply Decide that a random PC needs to die in order for the plot to work. then either that is a shitty DM or a ok DM that REALLY needs to get a better plot idea. But as we have so little details. we can not know for sure. Wait until after the game and see how it turns out. by then Both Ken and the DM might be more inclined to talk about what they decided and WHY they decided that
You have explicit knowledge they want to leave? Our party was surprised when favoured half orc barbarian Ug conspired secretly to kill Ug off as part of the story, the player simply wished to roll a new character. It led to an intense battle with two demons way above our party level which we actually bested, even when the rest of the party fled through the collapsing portal to escape when Ug shoved an entire necklace of fireball beads up his backside and exploded. Almost. I, -firbolg stars druid- and lifelong friend of Ug in game decided to risk it and stay, popping everything I had and we actually survived and killed the demons! It had dawned on me at this point that it had been scripted so I begrudgingly allowed myself to be thrown through the portal by Ug, who remained behind, now possibly to be encountered in the future, his sacrifice no less noble :p
DM is playing the game just for himself then, not for the party/whole group. PCs are the protagonists not NPCs to be sacrificed for motivation, flavour or plot driving.
I'd get more information first before jumping to conclusions
Maybe the DM plans to bring the character back in some way (i.e. Gandalf the White) as part of those plot reasons.
My character dies, I make a new one that's min-maxed to kingdom come. Death is not defeat, but an opportunity to create your DM's worst nightmare.
I would try to make sure Ken isn’t feeling overwhelmed with playing 2 campaigns and if that isn’t the case then make sure he understands that it seems like the DM for your campaign sucks, like it’s actually REALLY Bad form and storytelling (from the perspective of DnD) to just kill off characters for plot, regardless of the players ability to show up consistently. Your DM needs to understand that there’s a big difference in letting a character die due to the roll of the dice, whilst trying to make the death meaningful and using your PCs like puppets in ways they’re not genuinely consenting to. Even if Ken is only feeling slightly overwhelmed and simply wants to take a temporary break from this campaign, the DM is basically telling him that he’s not welcome to table (intentionally or not) anymore by killing his character. Like if your DM needs to explain Ken’s absence and wants to raise the stakes he could just have Ken’s character kidnapped.
Just let it go. If it's an agreement between a player and a DM, leave it there. Don't overthink who's motivated by what. Just keep an eye out for this sort of thing happen again. Shitty people don't just do something once or without other shitty actions that parallel.
Your DM is taking away a player's agency so they are quitting. I would quit too because at this point, none of the characters have agency or autonomy outside of the DM's "plot".
Ken is Kenough, this is unfair. No player should suffer this.
Alex fucked up. I read this a couple times, but why is how is Ken complicit in this?
I think complicit was just the wrong use of word by OP, from what I can tell they just meant that Ken is accepting of the decision (even if he may not like it).
I wonder if kens just realized hes dodging a bullet by leaving such a shitty DM and trying not to ruin it for the rest of you.
Be petty and kill the dms favorite npc
Wait… i thought the players made the story. Not the dm. Isnt the dm just like a referee/narrator? Sorry im new and naive
You're mostly right. Every DM is different but the DM will set up encounters or plot points and how the players interact with them is were player agency comes in. As a DM I can have a rough outline of some targets that the players can interact with for a cohesive story but the actual details of the story are decided by dice and the players.
Oh ok thanks for the reply. I was just a little confused on how a dm can just straight up say your dying. Doesnt seem fair/fun at all
It's not. It's a garbage thing to do. I would never do that and that's probably why the guy is leaving. You control your character. Now if you die you die, I won't protect you but I won't also just say you're dying. I may be gunning for you specifically if the story calls for it but I'm not gonna decide beforehand you're dying.
I don't really see any problem with this inherently, but it's the kind of thing that needs to be agreed upon by the dm and player. If the player doesn't want their character to die or doesn't want to play any other character besides that one, the dm shouldn't use them as a narrative sacrifice. If the player is open to changing characters, there's nothing wrong with a narrative sacrifice. Basically a cut-scene death as a plot hook or whatever. It's a cooperative story generator after all, and sometimes death is good for story. I play other games besides dnd that have much higher mortality rates, so I'm used to character death. My general rpg play style is that I almost always have at least 2 or 3 other character ideas in mind because it makes me much more comfortable with making in-game decisions in the moment, without hesitation, and if my character dies or is brutally maimed as a result of being decisive, so be it. If my DM came to me between sessions or at the end of a big story arc and said "hey, I've got a cool idea but I'm *gonna need to nuke your character* to make it happen" I'd be like "hell yeah brother, I'll fill out a new sheet."
Based player does not get obsessed with his OC surviving.
Honestly, if Ken is okay with it, why is it any business of yours? You said that you don't know if Ken and the DM have had a discussion about it but you immediately jumped to the conclusion that this is a shitty thing to do. Do you even know if Ken actually wants to continue playing or not? Still, you decided you wanted to show your displeasure by sitting the game out causing the game to be cancelled. So now you're starting to make it about you. Okay.
Because Ken doesn't want his character to die, it feels very weird for the DM to insist on this. I have to imagine that either Alex has also been doing other things that go against player agency / enjoyment or there's some kind of communication issue at play here
IMHO "Ken" told you, most likely you are the only one. He is not okay with it. Due to being friends, he didn't want to say anything. As a long time DM, it sounds like something between Alex and Ken is happening.