I love turning combats into hostage situations when a PC is downed. Rather than instantly kill him, it lets me wring some drama out of the situation, and it makes sense for the enemies too.

The problem I've noticed is that 99% of the time the players will just ignore however much danger there is for the hostage and try to bulldoze the other side and get their friend back.

Well, I guess my first question is: IS that a problem?

If they do that, should I just roll with it, or go ahead and kill the hostage?

In D&D 5e you have the additional problem that "attacking" someone who is at 0 hp still requires an attack roll, AND they need to fail saving throws, so you end up in the absurd situation where an orc has a knife to the unconscious character's throat and somehow misses the attempt to slit his neck open. Or he does it but the guy still has one more saving throw so it made no difference, really, that he was being held hostage, and the players can assume they have some time to free him.

That seems to undermine the tension of what the situation is supposed to be. In those cases, is it right to say the PC instantly dies? But I know people would get upset by that probably too since it's circumventing the traditional rule.

How do you handle these situations? Have you ever had a PC die because of a hostage situation? Do you let them get rescued? What do you do?

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;976908The problem I've noticed is that 99% of the time the players will just ignore however much danger there is for the hostage and try to bulldoze the other side and get their friend back.

They probably bulldoze because that's always a successful course of action for them. There's never been a consequence from this strategy. If it works, because either the DM "lets" the rescue happen or the rules limit a coup de grace, then why not do it every time?

QuoteWell, I guess my first question is: IS that a problem? If they do that, should I just roll with it, or go ahead and kill the hostage?

Depends on the GM. It seems to be a problem for you.

QuoteIn D&D 5e you have the additional problem that "attacking" someone who is at 0 hp still requires an attack roll, AND they need to fail saving throws, so you end up in the absurd situation where an orc has a knife to the unconscious character's throat and somehow misses the attempt to slit his neck open. Or he does it but the guy still has one more saving throw so it made no difference, really, that he was being held hostage, and the players can assume they have some time to free him.

I'm surprised that 5e doesn't have better coup de grace rules (if that is the case). Other editions, and Pathfinder, rule that attacking a helpless target is an automatic critical hit, and requires a saving throw to avoid death - even if the damage isn't enough to normally kill the character.

If you're unconscious in 5e, the only benefit the attacker gets is Advantage.

It leads to hilarious situations like an enemy with 2 attacks making a combined 4 rolls against an unconscious target and missing all four of them.

Furthermore, even if you hit with a melee attack, it IS a critical hit - but that only means 2 out of the 3 death saving throws. They still have an extra save so it doesn't do anything in a hostage type situation unless the entire mob all use their turns to attack the guy before the party does anything.

This is not a problem. These are the circumstances of the game. Play the ball where it lands - and let consequences be the game, as it should be. If you're investing your own narrative into the situation on how the PC's actions SHOULD unfold... you're not GMing - you're storytiming. That is the Dark Side!!!! Beware!

As for the mechanics issue - that's you being chained to mechanics-as-the-game. You need to make the call as the GM, or use a different system that suits your inner-sensibilities. Or throw your hands up in the air and let the rules mock you relentlessly with their inconsistencies, heh.

If you're going to be the rules' bitch, this will happen.

Though before next session you probably want to tell everybody "I'm changing the rules.  A coup de grace on a helpless opponent is an instant kill, period."

Rather than just springing it on them.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;976908I love turning combats into hostage situations when a PC is downed. Rather than instantly kill him, it lets me wring some drama out of the situation, and it makes sense for the enemies too.

The problem I've noticed is that 99% of the time the players will just ignore however much danger there is for the hostage and try to bulldoze the other side and get their friend back.

Well, I guess my first question is: IS that a problem?

If they do that, should I just roll with it, or go ahead and kill the hostage?

In D&D 5e you have the additional problem that "attacking" someone who is at 0 hp still requires an attack roll, AND they need to fail saving throws, so you end up in the absurd situation where an orc has a knife to the unconscious character's throat and somehow misses the attempt to slit his neck open. Or he does it but the guy still has one more saving throw so it made no difference, really, that he was being held hostage, and the players can assume they have some time to free him.

That seems to undermine the tension of what the situation is supposed to be. In those cases, is it right to say the PC instantly dies? But I know people would get upset by that probably too since it's circumventing the traditional rule.

How do you handle these situations? Have you ever had a PC die because of a hostage situation? Do you let them get rescued? What do you do?

Well it depends on how the Orc has him hostage.  Is the PC conscious, awake and standing with the Orc behind him arm wrapped around his neck, the Orc holding head/hair, etc?  If so, then the Orc has advantage.  If the PC is on the ground hardly able to move, then it might be worse.  Is the Orc willing to kill at the drop of a hat, or is he more likely to stall and try and negotiate or wait for reinforcements because he really doesn't want to fight the rest of the PCs.  The mindset of the hostage-taker matters too.

If the hostage is unconscious, they're probably getting their throat slit, the PCs better win initiative.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;976908If they do that, should I just roll with it, or go ahead and kill the hostage?

Yes. Kill the hostage. Stupid decisions by PCs should have appropriate results.

Also, if someone if bound/tied and a hostage, killing the hostage shouldn't require any rolls or counting hit points or saving throws. At least I wouldn't bother with that as it makes no sense. If a PC with 100 hit points jumps off a 1,000-foot cliff, do you roll for damage to see if he dies?

Quote from: Dumarest;976940Yes. Kill the hostage. Stupid decisions by PCs should have appropriate results.

Also, if someone if bound/tied and a hostage, killing the hostage shouldn't require any rolls or counting hit points or saving throws. At least I wouldn't bother with that as it makes no sense. If a PC with 100 hit points jumps off a 1,000-foot cliff, do you roll for damage to see if he dies?

Exactly.  We're not 14 any more.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;976946Exactly.  We're not 14 any more.

That's right. We just argue like we are sometimes.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;976915If you're unconscious in 5e, the only benefit the attacker gets is Advantage.

It leads to hilarious situations like an enemy with 2 attacks making a combined 4 rolls against an unconscious target and missing all four of them.

Furthermore, even if you hit with a melee attack, it IS a critical hit - but that only means 2 out of the 3 death saving throws. They still have an extra save so it doesn't do anything in a hostage type situation unless the entire mob all use their turns to attack the guy before the party does anything.

Based on the first post, I was going to say to just play it by rules and let the players live with the results, but those are some terrible rules. Fix the rules, then let the players live with the rules in case like this. If you are going to cave and just let the players win every time they do something stupid, they are going to do something stupid every time.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;976908The problem I've noticed is that 99% of the time the players will just ignore however much danger there is for the hostage and try to bulldoze the other side and get their friend back.

How did players rescue princesses back in the '70s?

Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;976953How did players rescue princesses back in the '70s?

We killed the Princess, and her hostage-takers, and anything else that wasn't specifically part of the party in the immediate room. Looted their bodies, fought over the choices pieces of gear, looted the bodies of whomever didn't win that squabble, rinse/repeat until no one wanted to fight over loot. Then we went to the next room to do it all over again!!!

Ahh the 70's!!! Things were so simple then.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;976908I love turning combats into hostage situations when a PC is downed. Rather than instantly kill him, it lets me wring some drama out of the situation, and it makes sense for the enemies too.

The problem I've noticed is that 99% of the time the players will just ignore however much danger there is for the hostage and try to bulldoze the other side and get their friend back.

Sounds like typical player behavior to me.

QuoteWell, I guess my first question is: IS that a problem?


If they do that, should I just roll with it, or go ahead and kill the hostage?

Nope. If you give the players the freedom to make decisions, they are, sooner or later, going to make decisions that don't work.

In this case, I'd be generous in interpreting their plans, but follow through on the threat to the hostage. In other words, if the PCs can bulrush the hostage takers, then I'll give them that chance. If they fail, then the hostage taker will attempt to kill the hostage.

Their decision.

QuoteIn D&D 5e you have the additional problem that "attacking" someone who is at 0 hp still requires an attack roll, AND they need to fail saving throws, so you end up in the absurd situation where an orc has a knife to the unconscious character's throat and somehow misses the attempt to slit his neck open. Or he does it but the guy still has one more saving throw so it made no difference, really, that he was being held hostage, and the players can assume they have some time to free him.

That seems to undermine the tension of what the situation is supposed to be. In those cases, is it right to say the PC instantly dies? But I know people would get upset by that probably too since it's circumventing the traditional rule.

Hm. It's not like a predetermined story though. I would probably pass on the attack roll, maybe it fails on a fumble, due to the hostage taker being stressed out or surprised. But otherwise it should be an auto-hit if they don't fumble.

The save is OK. It's possible to survive getting your throat slit. Not very, but possible.

QuoteHow do you handle these situations? Have you ever had a PC die because of a hostage situation? Do you let them get rescued? What do you do?

You know, I tend to avoid these situations as a GM because I know players will usually charge ahead anyway. Your post convinced me to relax about it. Set up the situation, and the "rules", and let the player's decisions decide how it turns out.

Quote from: Dumarest;976947That's right. We just argue like we are sometimes.

Or were a gang hanging around at the pub bullshitting, not engaging in academic discourse, because at the end of the day we're talking about silly-ass games.

Which are different from silly ass-games.  Punctuation matters.

Quote from: tenbones;976954We killed the Princess, and her hostage-takers, and anything else that wasn't specifically part of the party in the immediate room. Looted their bodies, fought over the choices pieces of gear, looted the bodies of whomever didn't win that squabble, rinse/repeat until no one wanted to fight over loot. Then we went to the next room to do it all over again!!!

Ahh the 70's!!! Things were so simple then.

Gary Gygax is the reason the Lake Geneva Tactical Studies Association had a "No killing the princess!" rule.