You Should Have Your PCs Get Captured More

Art by Douglas Shuler

There's been much debate among certain circles in the TRPG world about how to handle PC mortality, and there are good arguments as to both sides. A game in which the main characters can't ever die or be in serious danger runs the risk of becoming boring if there are no consequences that feel like they matter, and if the decisions of players can't impact the narrative and the setting it ceases to be a game. On the other hand, many players can find it frustrating to put work into making a character and having them unceremoniously killed off, especially if it's due to a few unlucky rolls - and if the DM has their own plans for what they want to have happen to a character, they can be disappointed if the dice ruled they would die before their time.

There's one solution I find makes for a good middle ground in between the two extremes, and as an added bonus, it has its own potential that character death doesn't. I don't think enough DMs do it. When PCs hit 0 HP (or the equivalent), consider having them be captured instead of killed.

There are a number of reasons this is appealing:

1. It provides risk without being overly punishing

As I've outlined earlier, there are good arguments for and against high-mortality gameplay. Endangering the life or wellbeing of the PCs helps create a sense of stakes and makes players feel like their decisions matter, but if characters are dying left and right, it can become more tedious than engaging. Obviously, different groups will have different opinions on this. There might be some groups who don't mind a lot of character death, especially if the process of making a new character is quick and simple in the system they're using, or if they have others as backups so that they can resume playing on short notice. However, if your players aren't as willing to let their characters die so freely, having their enemies capture them instead is a good alternative.

This might be a bit excessive, though

Capturing a defeated PC has consequences. They're taken out of the action. They're unable to complete their current task, as long as they're imprisoned. They may be severely restricted if they lose access to their gear or abilities. They may still face execution at a later date, depending on the situation. However, unlike death, imprisonment isn't permanent. A player can go back to using their captured PC after they're freed (or even before - see below). It carries the best of both worlds without the drawbacks.

2. It's more realistic

Well, sometimes it's more realistic. This is obviously going to depend on the situation. A PC who fell into a pit of molten lava obviously isn't going to be a viable captive, and if you're struck down by wild beasts you're more likely to be eaten on the spot. But if you're facing intelligent foes, like a tribe of orcs - or better yet, intelligent foes that have reasons to take you alive, like the guards of a castle you're breaking into - it might even make more sense to have defeated PCs captured as opposed to killing them.

Think about what enemies you're using in the scenario, and what they want. Perhaps the PCs have (or may be suspected to have) information that their opponents would stand to benefit from, making them more valuable if they're around to interrogate. Perhaps they're out for cash, and they feel that the rest of the party would be willing to pay for their comrades' release.

In medieval Europe, many enemies - nobles, especially - were seen as worth more alive than dead, as if they were captured on the battlefield they could be held for ransom. At certain times, this was an even greater source of revenue for armies than looting enemy treasure was. You may find that in certain situations in your games, the same could hold true; it could even be an opportunity for worldbuilding if you use it to expand on the culture behind ransoms and hostage-taking and how it works in your setting. Even more so if there are different factors that can impact the role of ransoming - certain factions may have such hatred for others that they would see no worth in bargaining with them, or they may refuse ransom, as in the case of the Knights Templar, who believed that dying at the hands of enemy captors was more honorable than being bought - and thus, were more likely to be executed because their captors knew ransoming wouldn't work. Perhaps certain paladins could be the same way.

For that matter, this helps you expand on the motivations and morals of the enemies. Do they have something to gain from ransoming? Are they opposed to killing, for whatever reason? Considering such things about enemy factions makes them seem more deep and realistic instead of just a bunch of assorted statblocks to kill.

3. It allows for rescue missions

Take a moment to think about your favorite stories, and consider how many of them use rescuing a captured ally as a plot point. Some of the most iconic movies focus on this, from Star Wars to Saving Private Ryan. The trope of the brave knight saving the princess from a tower is firmly entrenched in fairy tales and folklore. Practically every video game in the 80s dealt with this in some way or another. But, for whatever reason, in my experience this isn't very common in TRPGs.

Who hasn't wanted to do this?

Yes, you could have an NPC captured and send the party on a quest to rescue them. But if it's some random NPC, the players might not have much reason to care. It's a different matter entirely if it's their trusted companion they're fighting to save! If you want your players to experience the thrill of sneaking behind enemy lines, executing a daring rescue, and escaping with their quarry in tow, it can add an entirely new dimension of personal investment and interest if the party knows the victim well - it can even allow you, as a DM, to build on relationships between the PCs, or exploit them for drama if they've already formed.

Of course, DMs should use caution with this one. Not all players are going to enjoy their character being sidelined and not being able to do much about it. Which brings me to my next point...

4. It allows for escapes

Suppose a PC has been kidnapped by their opponent after being bested in combat. They wake up locked in a cell without their equipment, perhaps with a jailer taunting them on the way by. What are they to do now? Maybe the rest of the party is trying to rescue them - but that doesn't preclude them trying to get out on their own, either.

Allowing a PC to escape capture can be a lot of fun. If their captors are smart, they're not going to let them keep weapons, armor, or other items, and they may even restrict the use of magic, too. That offers a lot of opportunities for creative thinking - you can now challenge your players to think about how they'd escape such a situation, without falling back on the stuff on their character sheets. If you have players who have trouble thinking outside the box, this can be a good way to challenge them, as well as to showcase the potential of an open-ended RPG. It can also force the characters to operate alone if they don't have their fellow party members around to bail them out, adding an extra complication.

The Crimson Room

There's plenty of puzzles to solve and challenges to overcome that can fit in a single-room setting. Look at the popularity of escape rooms, or the adventure games that inspired them. If you have a PC get captured, you can effectively design your own escape room to challenge the player with. But don't get locked down in designing a single way out, as many escape rooms use. Your players will often surprise you with the solutions they come up with, and that's something I like to reward.

For extra fun, you can combine this with the previous point. Perhaps a PC is breaking out of their cell at the same time their allies are on the way to rescue them, and they end up running into each other halfway!

Overall, I think there's a lot of arguments that can be made as to the potential of having PCs be captured rather than killed. Next time you run a game, you may want to give them some thought.