I have always been bothered by this in my games. For a long time now, I have ran my game without having any sort of resurrection spell available to my players. I have been a lot more lenient about killing them, but if their character dies, he will not come back. I like this, personally, as I think that death should be something for the player to fear, and I think that a hero should be willing to sacrifice himself.
However, one of my players has been complaining recently, saying that he would like to play with resurrection spells available to him. I'm not sure if I want to do this or not. I don't really want it to be as easily available as the Player's Handbook makes it out to be, but I'm thinking about having resurrections in some way available.
I am curious as to how you other DM's out there handle character death. How do you keep death as a constant threat, without frustrating the players?
We run our games with resurection spells, but i have a long talk with the player who has decided to get his character raised. We add some psychological effects of the ordeal. for example one character came back with a pathological fear of spiders, since he was killed by one. It adds some extra effects to the experience to make the players think twice about it, and it is really funny to see a 300 puond dwarf panic at the sigth of some giant spiders.
I have sanity in my game and if a player dies they come back having lost a level and half nuts.
In addition to this they lose a point of Con permanently.
That is if they are lucky enough to be raised.
I also have a place called DUNGEONWORLD - kind of like a brutal limbo like dungeoney hell ( Some of you may have heard of it ) Where characters go when they die untill they complete a massive quest for the crazy keepers of the place...
If you die in Dungeonworld you are forever gone.
I play with Kids aged 12 -15 and they really love their characters.
When it looks like they are going to die there is alot of crying and terrified screaming and throwing dice accross the room and refusing to play.
Then once charcacter death has happened they usualy crawl under their beds and cry for an hour or so.
The dead character goes into the yellow folder with all the other dead charaters and I make a mark to tally how they died.
so far I have
Magic : 6
Monster : 9
Combat : 11
Undead : 5
Trap : 3
Own Weapon : 3
Dragon : 4
Falling : 2
Fishing : 1
Poison : 2
Geez, suck it up, kids. ;)
Just rub them out and start again. Why in my day...
|
I recently did the exact opposite. I told players that they HAD to get resurrected, because the campaign stopped making sense if you didn't go from 1 to 21. I used the temporary level loss rules for resurrection and lowered the cost of reincarnation by 75%. They knew of a local high level druid, and visited him QUITE a bit.
It didn't work THAT well. Mostly, allowing them to keep their favored class would have worked better, since they would have to keep reincarnating and turning down the body over and over until they got something with one of their classes as a favored class.
When I run again, I think I'll use about the same, but I'll allow newer characters in if I'm given a good reason why the old one can't come back.
NOTE: I felt I needed to do the above because in past games I had a player who killed his character off once per game just to try a newer one.
Don't do it. Resurrection causes all sorts of problems: Stops the adventure or a player has to sit out, removes the fear of death, burns the party resources. Leave it out of the game.
D&D though is too deadly not to have it and constantly bringing in new characters destroys the fun of a campaign. You need a way to make D&D less deadly. I added in Hero Points (call them whatever). Players get X per level and can cash in Y of them to avoid a death (X=1, Y=5 for me. Adjust as you see fit).
Revivify is your friend. There is an article in Dragon 342 about limiting Raise Dead and similar magics, and the article also has the Revivify spell in it (which also appears in the Miniatures Handbook and the Spell Compendium). Essentially if you cast Revivify on someone within one round of their death, they come back, no muss, no fuss, so long as they didn't die in a manner that requires a spell more powerful than Raise Dead.
Make the spell scarce so they have to travel miles with the body with the inherent problems and make the spell really expensive. It was funny seeing my players selling everything they had, even lending money to resurrect their partner.
I used to have a 'fool's life', which basically meant that you could die an extra time. Big mistake. Never use this! It's utterly disastrous, because the PCs no longer fear death. Be wary of it!
Well, for fun you could make a "death dungeon"; ie where the pc's go to the underworld and recue their fallen companion much like in the Greek or whatnot epics; might be fun change of scene, maybe everyone would get stuck there; lots of dangers; spells and magic work differently; or you could have the said dungeon be for the dead character to try to find his way back to his body for as long as the pc's use heal skills to try to keep his body alive; maybe others could burn inscense and light candles to help him find his way back - all of this could be guided by a spirit medium like a cat or the wizzy familiar or something; death doesnt have to be final; have fun with it; maybe the death quest would leave a certain death aura on him; or perhaps some spirit helps out only to bind itself to the pc and cohabitate the pc's body; lots of fun stuff could happen. I have used a lot of these ideas and lots lots more to thrill my pc's.
It didn't work THAT well. Mostly, allowing them to keep their favored class would have worked better, since they would have to keep reincarnating and turning down the body over and over until they got something with one of their classes as a favored class.
Wow, that's strict DMing! You made them take on the favored class of their new form? Though that may be a technically correct reading of RAW, I think favored class is related to a character's attitude and conditioning rather than his physical characteristics. It is okay to break the rules sometimes, when they just don't make sense. Although maybe you were running an intentionally silly game?
If my players die they die. I guess I am not that deadly of a DM but my players know to be careful or bad things will happen. Raising of the dead is rare and difficult to do.
We actually talk about this fairly regularly because we want death to be an important (read "scary") part of the game but if you play the same character for a year and then he dies but everyone else survives it inevitably causes issues.
Goo
|
|
Wow, that's strict DMing! You made them take on the favored class of their new form? Though that may be a technically correct reading of RAW, I think favored class is related to a character's attitude and conditioning rather than his physical characteristics. It is okay to break the rules sometimes, when they just don't make sense. Although maybe you were running an intentionally silly game?
Nope, not silly at all, and it wasn't taken to be silly. Age of Worms actually. I mostly used the supplemental rules for Savage Species and made it so that when they reincarnated, they took on all aspects of the race. And it works, to tell you the truth. Except for favored class.
The problem arises with things like LA, bonus' to mental skills, minus' to mental skills, extra skill points or feats from being human, etc. I worried that people would start as something with a bonus to Int, Cha or Wis or as a human, then die, come back as something that only gets bonus' to physical scores (Half-Orc). Voila. Half orc bonus to strength, bonus skill points from human, bonus feat, all favored class and Orc blood just in case the RP comes up. And I was right, as one of my characters tried to do that in the first session! He even wanted to go for Bugbear, allowing him to gain the equivalent of 3 levels!
(Which, by the way, is okay. Making yourself good is great. I just didn't want a loop hole making a god character)
Make the spell scarce so they have to travel miles with the body with the inherent problems and make the spell really expensive. It was funny seeing my players selling everything they had, even lending money to resurrect their partner.
That's a horrible idea. It ends the current adventure for a long time while they get the body raised and it requires the dead player to either sit out or do something else that entire time.
Making it expensive means that the players are either behind on the wealth curve, the DM has to Monte Haul them back to average, or a player is bitter because the other players didn't think his character was worth raising.
Either (a) don't kill the players (Revivify, Hero Points) or (b) kill them outright so that the adventure can continue and the player can immediately roll up a new character to jump back in.
One of the things I liked about Revivify is that, as a DM, you can see a PC go down, and you know that the encounter was tough, but the player's can still feel like they "almost" died, and the cleric just barely saved them.
One of the things I liked about Revivify is that, as a DM, you can see a PC go down, and you know that the encounter was tough, but the player's can still feel like they "almost" died, and the cleric just barely saved them.
Revivify is a good step but it has some problems: The cleric player has to lose a spell slot (2nd?) every day for something that likely won't happen. And what happens when 2, 3, 4 of the PCs die but the cleric only prepared one of them? And what happens when it's the cleric that dies?
Revivify is a good step but it has some problems: The cleric player has to lose a spell slot (2nd?) every day for something that likely won't happen. And what happens when 2, 3, 4 of the PCs die but the cleric only prepared one of them? And what happens when it's the cleric that dies?One of the things I liked about Revivify is that, as a DM, you can see a PC go down, and you know that the encounter was tough, but the player's can still feel like they "almost" died, and the cleric just barely saved them.
Well, it doesn't fix the "what if the cleric dies first" problem, but in my campaign, the cleric of Helm had one Revivify scroll for each of the characters in the group, and had a scroll case with only those scrolls in it, so he could draw one while moving.
Make the spell scarce so they have to travel miles with the body with the inherent problems and make the spell really expensive. It was funny seeing my players selling everything they had, even lending money to resurrect their partner.That's a horrible idea. It ends the current adventure for a long time while they get the body raised and it requires the dead player to either sit out or do something else that entire time.
Making it expensive means that the players are either behind on the wealth curve, the DM has to Monte Haul them back to average, or a player is bitter because the other players didn't think his character was worth raising.
Either (a) don't kill the players (Revivify, Hero Points) or (b) kill them outright so that the adventure can continue and the player can immediately roll up a new character to jump back in.
If you knew how my players delayed in creating their characters, you would think different. Make the player of the dead character roll another one would imply leave him out of the game to take the time to do so or stop the game to wait until he creates a new one. In either case the player of the dead character LOSE!!!
I've long prohibited the 'raising' of deceased characters, except in very extreme circumstances. I think it helps the game considerably. I recently allowed a more flexible policy in the AoW, and I was 'shown the error of my ways, many times over.'
I give myself 1000 extra XP if I make the player cry during the process.
So what level of DM are you now? ;)
Frankly I haven't ever really had the problems described here, or seen them as problems. A PC dies, if they want to come back and there is access to a spell and the money to do it, fine. Usually it is really expensive, or they lose a level. That is pretty much enough motivation for them to try and stay alive, that they don't really need me making any extra hoops for them to jump through.
I also allow the players to switch out characters if they get bored with one, so that they don't have to commit suicide to just get rid of a sucky PC. I haven't ever really had a problem where someone wanted to switch characters every week. I have had players say they had a few PC ideas in mind if the current one dies, but nobody usually tries to die.
Frankly, if the players aren't worrying about death, I would say the problem probably is they just aren't that interested in the story they are in.
|
So what level of DM are you now? ;)
7th level DM / 3rd Level N00bSlayer.
Rah!
On a more serious note. If a PC dies, they die. Depending on the type of campaign I'm running will determine the after effects. Some campaigns hae returning from the dead to be a total pain to accomplish. Others, not a huge deal to find one.
If a PC dies mid-session, I'll generally find a way to involve the player in other ways. Somereally love playing the critters for me for the rest of the session (revenge on their former party for chuckling at their death!)
Somereally love playing the critters for me for the rest of the session (revenge on their former party for chuckling at their death!)
Why have I never thought of that?! It also has the benefit that they still know what's going on, instead of having to have a 10 minute recap.
Well hopefully they give you a reduced rate on the insurance!
I truly think that the way a DM deals with death should be somewhat campaign-specific. For instance, in my Mythic Earth campaign, my Norse PCs realize that if one of them dies in battle with a valkyrie watching, Odin's not going to be too interested in giving back that fallen warrior. He sets a demand: if I release this one soul, I take one other from the people you know and love. The shaman of the group has told the others in the group that it'd take an incredible amount for him to consider possibly losing his own family or his wife for them. If they die ingloriously, then it'll be Hel they'll have to deal with, and her rates are even steeper...though it is possible to go into her realm and get the soul back physically (MUCH harder than casting a simple spell).
Contrasting that campaign to my previous campaign (Heroes Reborn), the cleric of the group had access to raise dead and eventually ressurection and true ressurection. That changed my strategies considerably (in a fight with a foe who knew them, the cleric was Target #1 whenever possible, which led to such fun things as him being sat on by a dragon for an encounter to the prompt use of forcecages) but I still managed to make things challenging enough that though death seemed a bit more inconsequential, it still moved the players closer to a TPK (Total Party Kill, for the newcomers) and was treated seriously. In fact, it was rather liberating, as I could throw just a bit more than they could handle at them from time to time and knew the aftereffects of a mistake on my part need not be permanent.
But I think truly the real issue I have with death and ressurection in gaming goes hand-in-hand with the reality level of your world. For instance, anyone who assassinates a major figure in a ressurection-available world had best know how to trap the soul, or the effort will merely be a show of force rather than a permanent attack. That old coot who dies just after imparting a vital clue? Much more convenient to raise him back so he can fill you in on the rest of it. If it was important enough to drag his bleeding carcass across two counties just to whisper his last words into the ear of a party member to set the adventure, surely he'd come back to fill them in on the rest, right? Lastly, to take it to its most ridiculous conclusion, you may hear conversations like this one:
Sweaty Farmer: "Parson, come...well, whenever y'all can. Jethro done went and got himself run over by the horsecart again. We need ta get him raised before the harvest!"
Parson Simmons: "Oh, come now, this is the fifth raise dead I've cast on Jethro this month! If you weren't so devout to Mrph, god of Dirt, I'd have to charge you for it..."
But I think truly the real issue I have with death and ressurection in gaming goes hand-in-hand with the reality level of your world. For instance, anyone who assassinates a major figure in a ressurection-available world had best know how to trap the soul, or the effort will merely be a show of force rather than a permanent attack. That old coot who dies just after imparting a vital clue? Much more convenient to raise him back so he can fill you in on the rest of it. If it was important enough to drag his bleeding carcass across two counties just to whisper his last words into the ear of a party member to set the adventure, surely he'd come back to fill them in on the rest, right?
Well I guess we need to get rid of Speak with Dead as well, as that can solve that problem without having to Raise the fellow. But really, with the cost (in gp and possibly in levels) raising people willy-nilly shouldn't really happen in any setting. Also another thing to consider is that to be raised a soul has to be willing. If your soul was already in paradise, why would it want to come back? To plow some dirt?
Lastly, to take it to its most ridiculous conclusion, you may hear conversations like this one:
Sweaty Farmer: "Parson, come...well, whenever y'all can. Jethro done went and got himself run over by the horsecart again. We need ta get him raised before the harvest!"
Parson Simmons: "Oh, come now, this is the fifth raise dead I've cast on Jethro this month! If you weren't so devout to Mrph, god of Dirt, I'd have to charge you for it..."
And that is what happens when folk don't use the rules and then complain about it being too easy. Your dirt farmer would be charged, and thus probably couldn't even afford the first raise dead, let alone the fifth. And that is assuming that Jethro even wanted to come back at all.
Our campaign group is split into multiple parties of adventurers who all know each other to varying levels. We switch playing one group for another about every three months or so. This allows us to play varying levels of characters, and different characters more often.
When someone dies in a group and resurrection isn't available (see below), we generally promote up characters through the ranks, so the "new" character joins the lowest level group. Making lower level characters and creating personality for them has been much easier for us than trying to integrate a new 10th level person into the group.
After implementing this, the desire for resurrects actually dropped as people were more willing to make heroic sacrifices. These have varied from "I'll hold them off, you get out of here", to more simple non-death actions of "I need to stay back and help this community rebuild." Actions that the players felt their character would normally take, but the player wasn't willing to if it meant rebuilding a high level character. Now they just move around the characters they already have and like and add a new one in the low end. We've built a farily decent (I think) system for handling this in-game and in-story.
For lesser (?) deaths, we allow ressurections/raises within an hour of death, or within a day if gentle repose or other preservation has been made. Larger temples can use rituals to bring people back up to a week gone, but it's not a case of "quest for X and we'll do it". If you haven't already built up the relationships, forget it. All raises presume that the character's soul wants to return, and that their god sees a good reason for it. If their god has other plans for them (which becomes more likely the "bigger" the character is), there's less and less likelihood as well.
That said, we've used dead PC's as NPC's of sorts that returned as messengers and such from their particular gods and keep them partially involved.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
There's a wonderful book from Necromancer Games, called Raise the Dead. I've not had a character death in my RotRL game, yet. (damnit!) When I do, It will come down to how the player wants to handle it, and the party.
1) Player doesn't want to play the character anymore: no problem, roll up a new one, one level down.
2) Player wants character raised, and they have the resources. Poof, he's back with the spell's effects. Note: Reincarnate doesn't suck off a level.
3) Player wants character raised, party doesn't have the resources. Run a side quest, give the player a substitute character, one level down. When the party retrieves the McGuffin, they raise the dead character, and the dead character gets 1/2 the XP the substitute earned.
How do people handle 'Bill's dead, what's he got?' I usually put circumstance penalties on reactions, if they're carrying the dead guy's stuff. "Wow, Bill went out with them and never came back, now Jim's wearing Bill's shiny magical armour. I don't trust their "He got et" story. If he got ate, how come his armour's intact?"
I have always been bothered by this in my games. For a long time now, I have ran my game without having any sort of resurrection spell available to my players. I have been a lot more lenient about killing them, but if their character dies, he will not come back. I like this, personally, as I think that death should be something for the player to fear, and I think that a hero should be willing to sacrifice himself.
However, one of my players has been complaining recently, saying that he would like to play with resurrection spells available to him. I'm not sure if I want to do this or not. I don't really want it to be as easily available as the Player's Handbook makes it out to be, but I'm thinking about having resurrections in some way available.
I am curious as to how you other DM's out there handle character death. How do you keep death as a constant threat, without frustrating the players?
hmm, the first real rez spell is raise dead. Need a 9th/name level cleric for that one. Those are somewhat rare as NPCs. Also, you need the body. Which means extra hardship on the team because they need to either win the fight (keeping the field) with one man down, or carry the body away from the field somehow. This is a particular challenge that keeps the threat of death potent. Plus, intelligent bad guys loot too. Dead characters have a way of losing gear around here. Even when the bad guys are planning a retreat. They just snatch a characters item that is laying out or in easy reach and book to the next room/level where they can regroup and (they hope) utilize whatever they took to add to their defense/retaliation. While this has no effect on a characters life/death it makes them try to avoid dying if it means losing their cherished Hackmaster +12.
Just as in American cinema, no one really complains that the Good Guys never die. This has never been a problem for me. Then again, I lean toward naratavist as opposed to gamist.
|
|
Why have I never thought of that?! It also has the benefit that they still know what's going on, instead of having to have a 10 minute recap.Somereally love playing the critters for me for the rest of the session (revenge on their former party for chuckling at their death!)
It works pretty good for some groups.
Generally in my games, when your character dies and you roll up a new one, you start out with 80% XP of the group average. Good RP when you are playing the critter can bump it up to 90% though. Usually provides a little motivation.
Just as in American cinema, no one really complains that the Good Guys never die. This has never been a problem for me. Then again, I lean toward naratavist as opposed to gamist.
Actually I complain about that all of the time. Give me movies from the 70's where everything seems fine and everyone is in the car laughing as they fly through a stop sign and are unexpectedly obliterated by an eighteen wheeler. Cut to black. Roll credits. If we know the good guy is always going to survive, then not only is any real drama gone for those who've seen enough films to become intuitive about their formulae, but it also limits the film's possible outcomes and you wind up watching the same script ad infinitum, with little to no story variance. True tragedy is stripped away even when a hero dies, because they tend to show how his passing left some lasting value that benefitted the community.
Geez, suck it up, kids... Just rub them out and start again. Why in my day...
My hero :)
Raise dead probably won't be seen much in our new (evil) campaign -- the group's cleric is likely to animate any and all casualties.
I am running my own personal campaign world, where gods and religion are serious things to consider. They know the price of souls, and are jealous about their worshippers. The more worshippers, the more powerful the deity.
If a character is brought back to life by a priest, he is automatically converted to the god of this priest, who even gets special XP for this "conversion".
He loses one level, one Constitution point, and if the death occured in a dramatic fashion, he might suffer from an affliction, a taint or an insanity (like the fear of spiders, mentioned above).
If the character was a follower of another cult, it can of course bring some interesting situations.
If he refuses to be brought back by another cult, he is allowed to a Will save (only Wis bonus, no items). If he succeeds, then he stays dead, waiting to be eventually brought back to life by his own cultists. If he was a spiritualist (cleric, druid, paladin, shaman), he gets his level as a bonus.
If the character is raised, he becomes a faithful of his new god, feeling no remorse about this conversion. Consider this as being grateful, seeing the light, that kind of things. His alignment has to be one step from the cult.
If he was a spiritualist, he loses another level (so 2 in total) and becomes a spiritualist of this cult, taking the required alignment.
However, if some people from his former religion or friends try to make him understand what happened, he might get another Will save. If succeeded, he can present himself at a temple of his former cult, to follow some special rituals. After a special Geas, he might be able to convert back.
But then of course his raisers might not appreciate that, bringing other situations.
|
|
Just as in American cinema, no one really complains that the Good Guys never die. This has never been a problem for me. Then again, I lean toward naratavist as opposed to gamist.
Actually I complain about that all of the time. Give me movies from the 70's where everything seems fine and everyone is in the car laughing as they fly through a stop sign and are unexpectedly obliterated by an eighteen wheeler. Cut to black. Roll credits. If we know the good guy is always going to survive, then not only is any real drama gone for those who've seen enough films to become intuitive about their formulae, but it also limits the film's possible outcomes and you wind up watching the same script ad infinitum, with little to no story variance.
I have mixed feelings overall. As far as storytelling/cinema goes, two come to mind -- Dark Crystal and Superman. In both cases a major character dies and comes back to life. Perhaps not quite the hero, but then we are really talking about a team of individuals rather than just one hero.
Personally, if you have instant death where a natural 1 can spell instant doom for a character, then I feel there should be an opposite as well.
Actually I complain about that all of the time.
If death is the only way to create drama, then I have to question one’s ability to story tell. Yes, it does limit a film’s outcome by one. If you consider that a film can end in an infinite number of ways…can you honestly say you would even notice the one that is missing? Just because the hero(es) survive does not mean there can be no variance within the story. That is just inaccurate. Finally, I have to argue that death is not the only tragedy.
Now I will agree that there is plenty of crappy American cinema out there in which the hero(es) are never really threatened. However, I do not buy into the theory that you have to kill someone to have a good story.
|
|
We run our games with resurection spells, but i have a long talk with the player who has decided to get his character raised. We add some psychological effects of the ordeal. for example one character came back with a pathological fear of spiders, since he was killed by one. It adds some extra effects to the experience to make the players think twice about it, and it is really funny to see a 300 puond dwarf panic at the sigth of some giant spiders.
Ah, the sweet smell of Death. I allow resurection but for me dying is always a chance to have a Diety to Character conversation before they get called back. Sometimes I can insert information at this point that I want the party to have or send them off on a whole new thing to work on the goals of the Diety. It is a beautiful thing.
If death is the only way to create drama, then I have to question one’s ability to story tell. Yes, it does limit a film’s outcome by one. If you consider that a film can end in an infinite number of ways…can you honestly say you would even notice the one that is missing? Just because the hero(es) survive does not mean there can be no variance within the story. That is just inaccurate. Finally, I have to argue that death is not the only tragedy.Now I will agree that there is plenty of crappy American cinema out there in which the hero(es) are never really threatened. However, I do not buy into the theory that you have to kill someone to have a good story.
Apologies to Clive for the jack.
"However, I do not buy into the theory that you have to kill someone to have a good story."
Nor do I. Everything you wrote misrepresents my point. Please reread and reconsider.
Knowing the good guy won't die regardless of the dangers thrust upon him, or that if he dies it will be ultimately be for the common good limits where the story can go and the veiwer knows it, this lessens the dramatic power of the threats working against him. That was my point. If writers could occasionally dissapoint an audience, as Stephen Geller suggests in his book on screenplay writing, they may find that the movies which don't turn out the way we wanted are sometimes the ones that stay very important to people and create the most debate. Hollyoowd movies have budgets far too large to risk anything on "artistic bravery" and they're always under the gun to perform or perish, as the majority of films actually lose money. (The KPI, or Kagen Point Index is the easy way to learn how a film did vs how much it cost to make--definitely worth checking out and very revealing.)
If I'm reading you right, you represent death in fiction as a single end; but one entry on a list of infinite eventualities. But I see its story potential, its statement and its methods of delivery as being gloriously illimitable.
Also, you can question one's ability to tell a story, but I sold a script for full purchase price to MGM/UA. Just sayin'. If it had actually been made I'd have better bragging rights, but I'm just letting you know that I am not naive when it comes to the study and art of storytelling.
In one group I game with, we already have back-up characters created and ready to jump in. Part of the fun is finding out how the character will be introduced in the event of a death. We once found two PCs (a gnome and a halfling) hanging on the wall in a dungeon in sacks labeled "Bear Food". Of course, there is nothing to say we couldn't get someone raised, barring the usual inconveniences.
Something to think about; the soul that originally inhabited a body doesn't necessarily have to be the one who returns to it. A simple Raise Dead could spur a new adventure if an evil soul or demon comes back in their buddy's body and causes trouble. You could even spring it on the party sometime later if the player is willing to play as the possessed PC for a time. Or how about an assassinated noble is brought back to life but it is really a devil in his place, and the PC's have to prove it.
Knowing the good guy won't die regardless of the dangers thrust upon him, or that if he dies it will be ultimately be for the common good limits where the story can go and the viewer knows it, this lessens the dramatic power of the threats working against him.
Agreed, however, there are other dramatic threats beyond death.
Hollywood movies have budgets far too large to risk anything on "artistic bravery" and they're always under the gun to perform or perish, as the majority of films actually lose money.
Agreed.
If I'm reading you right, you represent death in fiction as a single end; but one entry on a list of infinite eventualities. But I see its story potential, its statement and its methods of delivery as being gloriously illimitable.
Life is equally illimitable. And stop editing your post when I am trying to reply (grin).
Also, you can question one's ability to tell a story, but I sold a script for full purchase price to MGM/UA.
I sincerely apologize if that came off as some kind of personal attack. Congratulations. I envy you.
Honestly, I do sometimes wish Hollywood would kill off a hero or two. I applaud the makers of Serenity for killing Walsh. It certainly increased the tension.
That being said, I am not convinced that death for death’s sake has a place in role playing games. This thread alone points out plenty of potential problems. I believe many GMs fear their players would take needless risks if the same players knew their characters could not die. I am not suggesting you announce that the PCs are invincible. However, in my 20 years of running games, I can not recall ever killing off a player character. Failure was always more than enough motivation and provided plenty of drama.
I see post after post of GMs smiling gleefully about how they killed a PC because of ‘stupid’ decisions. I can not help but wonder if these are the same GMs who bemoan their players constantly meta-gaming and munchkining their characters. If death as seen as losing who wouldn’t play to win? Doing otherwise would be ‘stupid’.
|
I used to have a 'fool's life', which basically meant that you could die an extra time. Big mistake. Never use this! It's utterly disastrous, because the PCs no longer fear death. Be wary of it!
I hd a kender that had the kender luck feat (from the kencyclopedia) tats basically, you can make one attack or damage against you per day be rerolled. this saved the PC 5 times... and then when he DID die he was reincarnated, and got a 99 on the d% for the reincarnation table, and was still a kender
Honestly, I do sometimes wish Hollywood would kill off a hero or two. I applaud the makers of Serenity for killing Walsh. It certainly increased the tension.That being said, I am not convinced that death for death’s sake has a place in role playing games. This thread alone points out plenty of potential problems. I believe many GMs fear their players would take needless risks if the same players knew their characters could not die. I am not suggesting you announce that the PCs are invincible. However, in my 20 years of running games, I can not recall ever killing off a player character. Failure was always more than enough motivation and provided plenty of drama.
I see post after post of GMs smiling gleefully about how they killed a PC because of ‘stupid’ decisions. I can not help but wonder if these are the same GMs who bemoan their...
I agree. I never saw Walsh's death coming and its occurence only strengthens the resonance of the film.
I must admit I wasn't paying any attention to what people were saying about rpgs and death... I just saw your mention of cinema and it inspired me. I like "everybody lives" campaigns as much as I love the occasional way I die with honor. At the end of one of Logue's games recently I went down hard but it was a hero's death and it bought time for our one surviving member to land the killing blow and temporarily cripple the onslaught of purest evil. Same thing happened in True Dungeon. We all got to the last room and only Greg Oppedisano survived the beholder, but he made it to the end, and as far as I was concerned that was a victory for all of us.
I die as well as I live. :)
Knowing the good guy won't die regardless of the dangers thrust upon him, or that if he dies it will be ultimately be for the common good limits where the story can go and the viewer knows it, this lessens the dramatic power of the threats working against him.Agreed, however, there are other dramatic threats beyond death.
Absolutely, I just think they are so fully explored as to be expected. Almost always expected. So when the good guy's life ends to little fanfare, it's so effective because one doesn't usually get to explore a represention of the grimness of an unheralded passing and such a death affects us quite differently than when William Wallace so nobly meets his maker. I understand that one function of most movies is escapism, and we like to see people win the lottery and get the girl and survive, but another function of some films is satire or social commentary, and in this endeavor death is quite welcome. It can be tragic, hilarious, inciting... anything, and it tastes great on salad.
The most recent time my players used Raise Dead it was to raise a 2nd level NPC. That was about two years ago. Many character deaths have since come to pass. My players still talk about that NPC as if she was a real person.
Player characters come and go but NPC's are forever!
I agree. I never saw Walsh's death coming and its occurence only strengthens the resonance of the film.
You say so, it seemed pretty lame to me. That coupled with the Mary Sue character of River (oh, the whole group fights so hard to survive some reavers only to have River go and kill them all single handedly, who needs the rest of you, heck she can even pilot a ship, so who needed Walsh either) really made the movie kind of a let down.
I agree. I never saw Walsh's death coming and its occurence only strengthens the resonance of the film.You say so, it seemed pretty lame to me. That coupled with the Mary Sue character of River (oh, the whole group fights so hard to survive some reavers only to have River go and kill them all single handedly, who needs the rest of you, heck she can even pilot a ship, so who needed Walsh either) really made the movie kind of a let down.
Well I've certainly been told, haven't I? Happy New Years, feller.