What is your opinion of this combat which resulted in 3 PC deaths?

[Zanos]

Reach is based on the creature's size, not the weapons. Oversized weapons provide no additional reach.

Additionally, I don't think there's a rule anywhere that says what happens to the reach of weapons with extra-long reach(like whips and rope darts) when the creature wielding them is larger than medium.

[PacMan2247]

"Good evening, chaps. We'd like to fight you to the death now, if it's convenient for you."
"Sounds good to us."
"We're all buffed and ready to go. Do you need a minute?"
"Nope, we're good."

I'd like to believe it didn't actually go down like that, but that's the general sense I've gotten thus far.

Like many other people here, my opinion of this combat is that it shouldn't have happened in the first place. I'm not saying the DM did anything wrong here: the players were uncommonly foolish in accepting a challenge in a time and place chosen by their adversaries- perhaps overconfidence bred of prior success? I don't know. I can't imagine doing it as a player, but as a DM I once had a group of PCs approach an alley, see their enemies, pause and acknowledge that it was a trap, and then enter the alley without buffing.

You described Blur well enough that they should have gotten it (you used the word, for crying out loud), half-dragons are distinctive creatures so I imagine they should have been able to anticipate a breath weapon...

I'm agreeing with a number of prior posters that Frankenstein's PC is probably better off out of its misery, and using the barbarian (as PC or NPC) to bring together a group to hunt down the NPC group makes good sense. The NPC idea might be the better choice; low-level play for a bit to give the players more time to figure out things like basic tactics and common sense is probably a good idea at this point.

[Bad Wolf]

Unless they roll a 7th-level character and another Elminster abomination.

Yeah, but that guy has 24 levels of Wizard and five of Archmage. His six other levels don't really matter.

[Zanos]

The enemy won intiative, so I'm not sure how much of an option running away really was. Presumably the enemy adventuring group was occupying the space closer to the entrance.

Did the PCs know who this group was?

[emeraldstreak]

Additionally, I don't think there's a rule anywhere that says what happens to the reach of weapons with extra-long reach(like whips and rope darts) when the creature wielding them is larger than medium.

You mean other than in the very "Reach weapons" entry in the PHB?

Most reach double the wielder’s natural
reach. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon
of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but
not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.

[animewatcha]

With whip and rope dart / meteor hammer being exceptions to the reach rule due to specificness in their entires. Large creature whip may have 30 foot reach, but doesn't threaten. Large creature rope dart / meteor hammer has 30 foot reach and all the language of spiked chain with it being flurryable, but is a lower damage step than spiked chain.

[Zanos]

You mean other than in the very "Reach weapons" entry in the PHB?

Most reach double the wielder’s natural
reach. A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon
of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but
not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.

Normal reach weapons are different from the weapons I was referring to, which don't work the same.

[emeraldstreak]

Normal reach weapons are different from the weapons I was referring to, which don't work the same.

OK, then I have the following questions for you:

1. What is the reach of a spiked chain when wielded by a Large creature? Is it 10-20, or 0-20?

2. Where does it say so?

[Zanos]

Neither, it's 15-20 but can strike adjacent targets, so you can't hit targets at 10ft.

Not that a spiked chain is a whip.

[emeraldstreak]

Neither, it's 15-20 but can strike adjacent targets, so you can't hit targets at 10ft.

Not that a spiked chain is a whip.

So you are claiming that a Large creature with a spiked chain can hit adjacent (1 square away) and 3 and 4 squares away, but not 2 squares away?

[Quertus]

The enemy won intiative, so I'm not sure how much of an option running away really was. Presumably the enemy adventuring group was occupying the space closer to the entrance.

Did the PCs know who this group was?

Always know your outs. Up the stairs, through the window, out the back door. Up the chimney. Heck, I doubt the walls could withstand a 2-handed power attack.

Although I am a little concerned that the barbarian - kinda an "ultimate meat shield" class - ran away so early in the fight. So maybe he's not the best candidate to teach teamwork & tactics...

And he also thought another party wouldn't loot their kills. He clearly needs to retake remedial adventuring.

So you are claiming that a Large creature with a spiked chain can hit adjacent (1 square away) and 3 and 4 squares away, but not 2 squares away?

RAW is a silly place.

[Zanos]

So you are claiming that a Large creature with a spiked chain can hit adjacent (1 square away) and 3 and 4 squares away, but not 2 squares away?

I'm not exactly speaking in tongues.

Always know your outs. Up the stairs, through the window, out the back door. Up the chimney. Heck, I doubt the walls could withstand a 2-handed power attack.

This pretty clearly isn't the most tactical of groups, I'm pretty sure they don't perform thorough examinations of every building.

[Efrate]

I just have to ask how well/did your party know these NPCs? You mentioned enemies, so I imagine they did, so if they had fought them before, or had any inkling, they should know about what they can do.

Let see tavern fight. Losing initiative sucks. Frankenclass died, that is fine. Cause frankenclass. It was like babysitting a commoner, it was bound to end badly.

Silence is very clearly spell craftable short of a silent/still one, which it wasn't (I assume) then a fireball for roughly 25 to 30 point of damage on average? Ok whatever. You have stairs to make into a killing field and the safety of the second floor; tables, chairs and the bar to provide varying degrees of cover, windows to escape or somesuch, and they politely asked you to fight not just ambushed and slit throats in the night.

Potshot at the caster, not great he is clearly buffed, but staying still, in silence, as a caster, and firing at a guy who is obviously hard to hit, the casters of the world are better without him. Take the shot, run upstairs/outside. Don't stand still and try to play ranged fighter.

Barbarian is Thog. Thog don't think anyone take stuff, cause Thog should have stuff. No stuff. Thog confused. Maybe smash fire people with axe? That he's the smart one is concerning.

Fighter lost to a save of suck, one of many problem with fighter. That he lasted that long with all his poor reflex and will save is credit to him. He also made an attempt to hit the same guy who he realized was magically protected after seeing that it didn't work. That is foolishness.

Your spellcaster charging INTO the enemies instead of retreating, after realizing that his magic wouldn't work here, and after wasting attacks, was doomed. You do not go in 1v4 and hope to live. Taking the time to drink the elixir was a mistake as well, taking all those AOs, retreat was an easy option.

No your PCs were idiots and deserved it. Go back to adventuring 101, and design encounters specifically that deal with mixed damage types, buffs, cover, AoOs, and all that kind of stuff, so maybe they will learn. Initiative loss sucked, but they all made fairly tragic mistakes and they paid for them. Good work. Maybe they'll learn this time. And for the love of all things unholy, don't let frankenclass happen unless you pull the PC aside and inform him that he is so useless they might as well hire a few low level warriors to replace his effectiveness.

[Dagroth]

Neither, it's 15-20 but can strike adjacent targets, so you can't hit targets at 10ft.

Not that a spiked chain is a whip.

So you are claiming that a Large creature with a spiked chain can hit adjacent (1 square away) and 3 and 4 squares away, but not 2 squares away?

I'm not exactly speaking in tongues.

Actually, a Spiked Chain (and a Rope Dart / Meteor Hammer) is a special reach weapon that can be used against adjacent targets.

But you, Zanos, are saying a Halfling's Small Spiked Chain has a reach of 10' (5' further than his regular reach) and a Titan's Gargantuan Spiked Chain has a reach of... 20' (5' further than his regular reach)?

You're saying that the 3'6" Halfling is wielding a weapon just as long as the 25' tall Titan?

[Lormador]

Rival adventuring parties are always among the most fearsome of opponents, especially around equal level. they can hit super hard, have excellent action economy, and can put together disparate items/spells/abilities for maximum effect. They are also all run by the DM, who usually has a coherent plan and plays out the encounter accordingly: the NPCs are always well-organized.

It's the action economy that's the most punishing part of these encounters. Things start at absolute equality, usually, but as soon as the first character is taken out of the fight their side's action economy drops like a rock and things quickly snowball out of control.

Your players weren't taking the game's challenge level seriously, which was either an baseless assumption on their part or a learned behavior. It's generally best to try and achieve a sense of danger without actual casualties, but it looks like that was necessary this time.

They made huge mistakes, from accepting a battle against obviously prebuffed opponents (instead of punishing those idiots for announcing their hostile intentions) to the barbarian's fleeing the scene instead of going all-in to bring an enemy down.

[Aimeryan]

Actually, a Spiked Chain (and a Rope Dart / Meteor Hammer) is a special reach weapon that can be used against adjacent targets.

But you, Zanos, are saying a Halfling's Small Spiked Chain has a reach of 10' (5' further than his regular reach) and a Titan's Gargantuan Spiked Chain has a reach of... 20' (5' further than his regular reach)?

You're saying that the 3'6" Halfling is wielding a weapon just as long as the 25' tall Titan?

Creatures have a natural reach that is dependent on their size (the weapon size doesn't matter). So a medium has a 5' reach. A large has a 10' reach. Huge has 15' reach.

Reach weapons double the natural reach, but you can't hit within natural reach. So medium hits at 10' but not 5'. Large hits at 15' and 20' but not 5' or 10'. Huge hits at 20', 25', and 30' but not 5', 10', or 15'.

Spiked Chain says: "In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, it can be used against an adjacent foe." Unfortunately this is very badly worded; what does "adjacent" here mean? The likely answer is that it means "within natural reach", but it could also mean within 5' (because 3.5e is played on 5' squares).

If you take the latter then you come across two issues:
1) Huge can hit at 5', 20', 25', and 30'. Why not 10' and 15'?
2) Tiny (and smaller) can naturally only hit at 0' (they have to be in the same square), and so reach weapons don't help (2*0' = 0'). However, with a Spiked Chain they can now hit at 5' too.

If you take the former then it all works out fine. So, yeah.

[Rerednaw]

A half-dragon Commoner 5 would've been just as disastrous with the opposing party protected against fire damage.

Cracking open good old d20 encounter calculator, the PCs have an average party level of 9.3. This is an optimistic calculation, as the human Rogue 1 / Scout 1 / Paladin of freedom 1 / Barbarian 1 / Wizard 1 (divination) / Cloistered cleric 3 of Olidammara is built like Elminster so it's most likely useless in combat. That puts the party somewhere around level 8.5. The opposition are 3 CR 8 and a CR 7, which makes for an EL of 12. I know people say the CR system is busted, but this alone should give you the idea that there's a high chance that the encounter is going to be a massacre. Add to that the fact that pre-buffs should be counted when calculating EL and you'll at least end up with an encounter level of 13, which is fairly nuts especially considering it's basically 3 versus 4...
However, ambushes do sucks. Silence is fair I think, especially because you can see it coming with a Spellcraft check.

^^This.

That said, it sounds like the party was more Justice League (every one for themselves) than X-Men (analyze, coordinate, identify weakness, teamwork.) No teamwork, no coordination is death at low levels. Much less in an EL+5 fight. And when it became obvious they were outclassed...did they withdraw to fight another day? Nope...it was feet-first into the wood-chipper. Save for the Barbarian who oddly showed the best sense by running away.

Since I do not have the context of the campaign, the players or the DM...if I saw this cold it sounds like everyone (DM and Players) wanted a campaign reset.

[Zanos]

Actually, a Spiked Chain (and a Rope Dart / Meteor Hammer) is a special reach weapon that can be used against adjacent targets.

Yeah...? That's what I said.

Creatures have a natural reach that is dependent on their size (the weapon size doesn't matter). So a medium has a 5' reach. A large has a 10' reach. Huge has 15' reach.

Reach weapons double the natural reach, but you can't hit within natural reach. So medium hits at 10' but not 5'. Large hits at 15' and 20' but not 5' or 10'. Huge hits at 20', 25', and 30' but not 5', 10', or 15'.

Spiked Chain says: "In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, it can be used against an adjacent foe." Unfortunately this is very badly worded; what does "adjacent" here mean? The likely answer is that it means "within natural reach", but it could also mean within 5' (because 3.5e is played on 5' squares).

If you take the latter then you come across two issues:
1) Huge can hit at 5', 20', 25', and 30'. Why not 10' and 15'?
2) Tiny (and smaller) can naturally only hit at 0' (they have to be in the same square), and so reach weapons don't help (2*0' = 0'). However, with a Spiked Chain they can now hit at 5' too.

If you take the former then it all works out fine. So, yeah.

You win the reading comprehension prize!

PHB 113 implies that "natural reach" and "adjacent" are not the same, though:

A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.

Also, my original point was about weapons with 15ft reach not having RAW that says what the reach of a large creature is with them, I wasn't saying anything about spiked chains.

[Aimeryan]

PHB 113 implies that "natural reach" and "adjacent" are not the same:

A typical Large character wielding a reach weapon of the appropriate size can attack a creature 15 or 20 feet away, but not adjacent creatures or creatures up to 10 feet away.

Again, depends on how you read it; that or is not exclusive - it could be just another way of saying the same thing. Like this: The grass is green or not not green.

[Zanos]

I could get into a long tirade about how the books are meant to be read by humans and if adjacent includes natural reach the "or 10 feet" bit is redundant and nonsensical, or I could just quote RC pg. 16:

Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.

[Aimeryan]

I could get into a long tirade about how the books are meant to be read by humans and if adjacent includes natural reach the "or 10 feet" bit is redundant and nonsensical, or I could just quote RC pg. 16:

Again, not exclusive. The sentence would have to read: "Only opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you." As an example, if I said: "Grass are considered plants." you wouldn't then say, "oh, well dandelions aren't therefore plants".

Also, nonsensical? Adjacent is a relative term. Is the Moon adjacent to the Earth? Is the river flowing 30ft away from a mountain considered adjacent to the mountain? If I am looking to build a sports stadium next to the mountain then, yes, I would say so. While, is a piece of cheese 5 feet away from a dust mite considered adjacent? No; that distance is like many thousands of times the size of the mite.

It makes sense that as the reach increases what is considered adjacent would increase too - and if it makes sense then it is not nonsensical.

[dhasenan]

Did your players want to reroll characters? If not, killing their characters was probably a bad idea. It doesn't drive plot for three of them. It doesn't create drama. It doesn't create new objectives. It doesn't give anyone a sense of accomplishment.

It does underscore the danger in the world, but given that one person died in the first round, one other person seemed pretty useless, and the third only managed to get one effective attack in, it makes that danger seem overwhelming and arbitrary. The "you don't walk into the room, you walk into ORCUS!" variety.

Suppressing spellcasting in an area, when the party isn't used to it, is a puzzle. You don't add a puzzle on top of hard enemies that start combat within a few squares of the party if you want your characters to survive. You give them breathing room. You give them space for a tactical retreat. You give them a chokepoint. You give them a bunch of low-level mooks.

As for the bodies already being looted, that's insult to injury. At least let the survivor recover mementos.

I don't see how this encounter accomplished anything worthwhile, aside from forcing two characters to roll hopefully more effective characters. Which you could have suggested to them after a session, either handwaving it or working it into the continuity.

A variation that would have been better:

• You run the encounter mostly as described, but you don't actually decapitate the dwarf.
• The enemy adventuring group stabilizes everyone with Heal checks. (Maybe someone points out that the town would consider it murder if someone died here, and they have at least moderate respect for the law.) They're pissed.
• "Death's too good for them" sort of pissed.
• Probably some maiming. An eye or an ear or a nose each.
• They drag off the three defeated party members in chains, intending to sell them to the salt mines of Nakol. Which are run by drow.
• The barbarian has to chase them down before it's too late.
• The captured party members have to try to escape.

This drives the plot, creates drama, creates new objectives, underscores the danger of the world with dire consequences, and doesn't deal out immediate death to anyone.

[Zanos]

The rules don't operate that way. "Wizards cast spells" doesn't mean that only wizards cast spells, but in the absence of text that says "Clerics cast spells", the game only provides rules for wizards casting spells. Fighters can't (natively) cast spells because the rules don't say that they can.

So if the RC says an adjacent opponent is one within 5ft of you, you would have to provide text elsewhere that says there are other conditions in which the opponent is considered adjacent. Otherwise the games only provided condition for adjacent is within 5ft. It's fine houserule if you want larger creatures with spiked chains to be able to strike opponents within their natural reach, but it isn't RAW and trying to twist the definition of adjacent with "the rules don't say I can't" isn't going to make it any more RAW.

And secondly, as you know, I was referring to language, not argument, when I used the term nonsensical. It's completely needless to say "adjacent or within 10 feet" if adjacent is meant to include 10 feet.

[Starbuck_II]

The PCs had earned the enmity of a rival NPC adventurer party. When the PCs were resting in a tavern, the NPC group came in and demanded to fight the PCs right there (no civilians/innocent by-standers were present). They started the fight right away. Everyone was fully geared and battle ready, but the NPC had some fire protection spells and minor buffs on them.

PCs were:
Human Battle sorcerer 10/Fighter 1
Dwarf Fighter 8
Human Barbarian 9
Human Rogue 1 / Scout 1 / Paladin of freedom 1 / Barbarian 1 / Wizard 1 (divination) / Cloistered cleric 3 of Olidammara

NPCs:
Human Favored Soul of Io 8
Half-dragon (Gold) Monk 5
Elf Sorcerer 6/Dragon Disciple 2
Human Fighter 8

The fight went like this.
The favored soul silenced most of the tavern (i.e. the part where the PCs were). The multiclass human died without getting a chance to act as the elf's fireball and the monk's breath weapon were too much for him. The (silenced) battle sorcerer fired a few greater-psionic-shot-loaded arrows with his flaming composite longbow at the elf, but her blur foiled a couple of the shots (including a confirmed critical hit) and she was protected against fire. The dwarf and the monk dueled for a moment. The barbarian exchanged a couple of blows with the human fighter (who took a lot of damage) and then he retreated to the stairs leading to the upper floor. He fired a couple of arrows at the favored soul, who was severely wounded, so he spent most of the combat healing himself and the elf. The elf blasted the barbarian with a fireball and the stairs suffered extensive damage, so the barbarian went upstairs and retired.

The dwarf disengaged from combat with the monk and tried to kill the elf with his axe, but the blur got one his attacks. The favored soul supported the elf with healing. The monk, elf's flaming sphere (cast just before she had blasted the stairs) and the human fighter surrounded the isolated battle sorcerer, who applied Stone Salve on himself while luckily avoiding AoOs. Then he ran through the AoOs and got to the favored soul, because he had understood that they weren't within the silence circle since they were casting all the time. Then he cast Stinking Cloud that insta-killed the monk and harmed the human fighter. The elf blasted the battle sorcerer with a fireball (I think it was her 4th fireball) which killed him. The favored cast Hold Person on the dwarf and the elf decapitated him with her longsword.

The barbarian came to loot the bodies after the battle was over, but he was sorely disappointed to see that the bodies had already been looted. Then he left the village.

Well, why were the PCs different levels?
Did they have a few deaths before?

Why not get a chance to buff before fighting since clearly blur was used.
Seeing as it was a 1/2 dragon, fire was a tactic known to buff against, (they visible Gold dragons and all).

Weird that a 1/2 gold dragon killed people like this actually...

[Deophaun]

PCs were:
Human Battle sorcerer 10/Fighter 1

Wait wait wait wait... am I misremembering, or is this the battle sorcerer that fed his last party to a hellcat? Basically does nothing during combat except is very well optimized at running away, which was the reason he outleveled everyone else?

You... killed him?

Congratulations!

I seem to remember a character that was a horrible grabbag of random classes that time, too.

Edit: Ah, this was the replacement character. He died ineffectually as we all knew he would.

[Aimeryan]

The rules don't operate that way.

Except, they obviously do in many many cases of 3.5e material. The books are not meant to be rule-lawyer perfect; common English and phrasing is to be expected.

As for redundancy, with Spiked Chain we have this:

A spiked chain has reach, so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it.

That seems redundant, no? I mean, we know that a "reach weapon" (or a weapon that has "reach") is defined as being allowed to strike at double natural reach; so why state "so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it"? Completely, 100%, redundant. Yet they did it. Furthermore, "so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it" is in many cases wrong, right? If the creature has a natural reach of less than 5' then that is not the case. So is it RAW to say Tiny creatures now can hit at 10' if the weapon has reach? Only for Spiked Chain, because that is where it said it?

So we can now strike with a Spike Chain, if we are Huge, at:

5' (adjacent, yes?), 10' (it just said so!), 20', 25', and 30'.

RAW, without context is going to be silly. If you apply context then we can apply context to "adjacent" to mean "natural reach" when referring to reach weapons.

[Zanos]

So... isn't redundant, it's elaborative. Or is not used in elaboration.

If RC doesn't establish exclusivity, is there any distance at which I can say a creature is not adjacent?

[Aimeryan]

So... isn't redundant, it's elaborative. Or is not used in elaboration.

If RC doesn't establish exclusivity, is there any distance at which I can say a creature is not adjacent?

Since being adjacent in English is relative, and since the DM interprets the rules, then I would say it is up to the DM to interpret what is and what is not adjacent.

RC page 16 says this:

With a melee weapon, a natural weapon, or even a bare fist, you can strike any opponent within reach, which is normally 5 feet for Small and Medium creatures. Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you. Some weapons and creatures have longer reach.

It makes sense to interpret this as meaning opponents within 5' are considered adjacent to you because reach is normally 5'; the sentences are next to each other. With context we could, therefore, infer that a reach (natural) of greater than 5' would means a greater than 5' adjacency.

Still, maybe 3.5e does just consider "adjacent" to mean within a specific distance away, whereby a river is not adjacent to a mountain if they are 10' away from each other, and a Fine creature is adjacent to another Fine creature if they are 5' apart.

If you have three Fine creatures in a straight line, are the two end creatures adjacent to each other? Apparently so, apparently so.

[Dagroth]

Yeah...? That's what I said.


You win the reading comprehension prize!

So you agree with the idea that a Small Spiked Chain is the same length as a Gargantuan Spiked Chain.

PHB 113 implies that "natural reach" and "adjacent" are not the same, though:

Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.

Also, my original point was about weapons with 15ft reach not having RAW that says what the reach of a large creature is with them, I wasn't saying anything about spiked chains.

I suppose I should have been clearer... the wording for Rope Dart / Meteor Hammer indicates it can be used against anyone within the limit of its reach. Which, by that reading, would be 0'-30' for a Huge creature.

It's also able to be used with Flurry of Blows if you are proficient

Except, they obviously do in many many cases of 3.5e material. The books are not meant to be rule-lawyer perfect; common English and phrasing is to be expected.

As for redundancy, with Spiked Chain we have this:

A spiked chain has reach, so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it.

That seems redundant, no? I mean, we know that a "reach weapon" (or a weapon that has "reach") is defined as being allowed to strike at double natural reach; so why state "so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it"? Completely, 100%, redundant. Yet they did it. Furthermore, "so you can strike opponents 10 feet away with it" is in many cases wrong, right? If the creature has a natural reach of less than 5' then that is not the case. So is it RAW to say Tiny creatures now can hit at 10' if the weapon has reach? Only for Spiked Chain, because that is where it said it?

So we can now strike with a Spike Chain, if we are Huge, at:

5' (adjacent, yes?), 10' (it just said so!), 20', 25', and 30'.

RAW, without context is going to be silly. If you apply context then we can apply context to "adjacent" to mean "natural reach" when referring to reach weapons.

I want to quote this again... you say: "I mean, we know that a "reach weapon" (or a weapon that has "reach") is defined as being allowed to strike at double natural reach".

Well, after a bit of Google-Fu, I discovered that you are quoting the DMG, p.29 It can also be found here.

Further, to go along with your idea of "natural reach", the example given for a Large Creature wielding a Reach Weapon says that it couldn't be used on an opponent adjacent or 10' away (but yes for 15'-20' away).

So... isn't redundant, it's elaborative. Or is not used in elaboration.

If RC doesn't establish exclusivity, is there any distance at which I can say a creature is not adjacent?

So now you're agreeing that at Tiny Spiked Chain is just as long as a Gargantuan Spiked Chain?

[MesiDoomstalker]

Wait wait wait wait... am I misremembering, or is this the battle sorcerer that fed his last party to a hellcat? Basically does nothing during combat except is very well optimized at running away, which was the reason he outleveled everyone else?

You... killed him?

Congratulations!

I seem to remember a character that was a horrible grabbag of random classes that time, too.

Edit: Ah, this was the replacement character. He died ineffectually as we all knew he would.

This was my first thought too. I feel like there is still a lack of communication between PCs and DM on expectations. And basic gameplay. I regularly advise our new player (as the GM) on her possible course of actions. She's new, she doesn't know all of her options available, both in combat and in non-combat situations (shes new to RPing as well). If your group is full of newbies, its your job as the DM to acclimate them not only to the game's rules, but also things like genre conventions, group storytelling and basic tactics and party composition.