You can install a sense of danger without killing PCs.
Cut the "OLOL 4e" garbage too. You're just being dumb, there.
In regards to the whole raise, res, true res issue.
Frankly I'm becoming more and more a fan of game systems where it is incredibly difficult or outright impossible to come back to life. I'm thinking of banning the spells in future games, and at a minimum restricting reincarnation. I remember having one character die that everyone loved and instead of it being a tragic and touching moment, it split the party over whether to use raise dead or reincarnate.
Still that's my enjoyment and not other people's, as always to each their own as long as they respect mine.
On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..yes sometimes the dice are against them..but are you suggesting you should plan to kill them..the DM is there to facilitate the players enjoyment not to turn it into a me vs them scenario
+1 A heroes death should mean something and have a direct impact in the story line, if a character is killed with in minuts of play do to being overwhelmed or even crummy die rolls the DM is not doing his or her job either.
The Lord of the Rings would have fallen flat if all the Hobbits were killed during their first encounter with the Nazgul.
|
On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..yes sometimes the dice are against them..but are you suggesting you should plan to kill them..the DM is there to facilitate the players enjoyment not to turn it into a me vs them scenario+1 A heroes death should mean something and have a direct impact in the story line, if a character is killed with in minuts of play do to being overwhelmed or even crummy die rolls the DM is not doing his or her job either.
The Lord of the Rings would have fallen flat if all the Hobbits were killed during their first encounter with the Nazgul.
And yet, Frodo was in very real danger of death from the first 'real' encounter with them. It very easily could have fallen to Sam or one of the others to carry the ring.
|
Just to add in...
I've been gaming for 30 years and seen it all.
Honestly, my preferred style of play is that I do not want to feel challenged. I've really got to stress that... I do not want to feel challenged.
I vastly prefer games where I feel manifest destiny unrolling with my character. Kind of the hero's journey without any of the doubt or learning. Kind of starting the story where Neo is on the phone with the machines (and ignoring the next two movies). He's going to win, it's just an issue of seeing how it unfolds.
After all of these years, I'm more interested in wish fullfillment in my RPGs, and not competitive tension. I look to the games as an "I Dream of Genie" scenario, where I've got this Genie who's ready to just make my wishes come true.
I still play the competitive games, more of fellowship and friendship than any real desire to be challenged. They're ok... but eh... I've had my fill.
While it hasn't happened yet, I think my ideal game would be playing in a competitive game, but where my character isn't at any real risk. Instead I'm more of a Gandalf figure, or perhaps more like Fizban from Dragonlance. The drama for me wouldn't be my own character's fate... that's already foretold. It's seeing that I keep the rest of the party and the quest going. My character would be constancy and could from time to time go nova, but for the most part had to keep things under wraps. When other player's characters would die then I'd feel the loss. I think that way I'd get the narrative anchoring that I want to see in a game, rather than the normal "them's the breaks!" old school attitude of tournament play.
To me (note the previous two words friends) what you have described is a book, not a game.
If the outcome isn't in doubt, if the script is written, what are you playing?
If it works for you, and it's fun, that is great. Books themselves are great. It is perhaps better and nobler to read, or to be part of a group story creation, which is how I would describe an experience in which the player is pre-ordained to successfully complete his quest.
But that isn't gaming to me. It's something else. Something cool and fun, but to me (see, there they are again) it isn't a game unless losing is an option.
Thanks for the feedback and alternate perspective.
On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..yes sometimes the dice are against them..but are you suggesting you should plan to kill them..the DM is there to facilitate the players enjoyment not to turn it into a me vs them scenarioI see it as the players that put themselves in those positions in my experience. Let me ask you this; When is it alright to put a PC someone has carefully planned in peril?
OP +1
I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC's it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
Remember the object of this whole game is to first and foremost have fun. It is the job of the GM to balance challenge with mercy from time to time ie make sure his players have an enjoyable experience. A brutal GM almost always forgets this.
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
You know, I'm starting to think the next time I run a game, since I'm already planning on using Hero Points, I may let the players start with two, allowing them to "dodge death" once before they are out of points, and if they end up spending those points for something else early on, its really on them.
Hm.
|
|
You can install a sense of danger without killing PCs.
Cut the "OLOL 4e" garbage too. You're just being dumb, there.
If your PCs know they won't die, then there is no danger to sense.
Also, this is the Paizo message board, not WoTC. People can bash other systems to their hearts content. People can (and often do) bash Pathfinder if they want. Many of us are on these boards because we dislike 4E.
I think you need to accept that and stop trying to moderate what people can and cannot criticize, as you've done that on several forums. Much like we all have to accept death as a reality in both our real and gaming lives, you should accept many people on here came here specifically because they consider 4E an money grubbing abomination.
But I digress...main point is if you don't believe your DM will kill/harm you if the dice or campaign calls for it, then for my money "winning" is hollow and the game is lacking.
|
|
On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..yes sometimes the dice are against them..but are you suggesting you should plan to kill them..the DM is there to facilitate the players enjoyment not to turn it into a me vs them scenario+1 A heroes death should mean something and have a direct impact in the story line, if a character is killed with in minuts of play do to being overwhelmed or even crummy die rolls the DM is not doing his or her job either.
The Lord of the Rings would have fallen flat if all the Hobbits were killed during their first encounter with the Nazgul.
True, but killing Boromir let you knew you were playing for keeps.
Also, this is the Paizo message board, not WoTC. People can bash other systems to their hearts content. People can (and often do) bash Pathfinder if they want. Many of us are on these boards because we dislike 4E.
I think you need to accept that and stop trying to moderate what people can and cannot criticize, as you've done that on several forums. Much like we all have to accept death as a reality in both our real and gaming lives, you should accept many people on here came here specifically because they consider 4E an money grubbing abomination.
I think you'll find that the moderators don't take kindly to bashing on other systems. You're right, this is the Paizo message board. It's meant for discussion of Paizo products. In this sub-board, the Pathfinder RPG. 4E bashing (or hypeing for that matter) has no place here.
|
|
I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC's
That can be a problem, as I said I'd walk away from a GM just looking for more notches on his d20.
it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
-snip-
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
Most GMs, even those like me who have no qualms about occasional PC death, are going to go out of their way not to kill someones first PC right away. Those that would, well they fall into that category of people that I would likely not be gaming with for long.
|
|
I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC'sThat can be a problem, as I said I'd walk away from a GM just looking for more notches on his d20.
Most GMs, even those like me who have no qualms about occasional PC death, are going to go out of their way not to kill someones first PC right away. Those that would, well they fall into that category of people that I would likely not be gaming with for long.it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
-snip-
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
This.
The CR system exists for a reason, and it's actually difficult to "kill" first levels if you use a little common sense. They have more negative hit points then actual hit points in most cases, and the Deus Machina of having someone come save them works really well when most NPC's are powerful enough to solo a first level encounter.
No your PCs shouldn't be fighting the Tarrasque right from jump. But they can also handle more than a single unarmed kobald.
True, but killing Boromir let you knew you were playing for keeps.On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..yes sometimes the dice are against them..but are you suggesting you should plan to kill them..the DM is there to facilitate the players enjoyment not to turn it into a me vs them scenario+1 A heroes death should mean something and have a direct impact in the story line, if a character is killed with in minuts of play do to being overwhelmed or even crummy die rolls the DM is not doing his or her job either.
The Lord of the Rings would have fallen flat if all the Hobbits were killed during their first encounter with the Nazgul.
Killing Borimir was important to the story. It was done to show the corrupting power of the ring. He was not killed by some random encounter that had no real effect on the plot.
One of the systems I've played a lot of recently is the old Marvel Universe RPG (MURPG), which is actually has game mechanics for some of the silly tropes that appear in comic books. One of the more blatant examples is that if an attack deals enough damage to kill you, you the player can decide to be simply knocked out instead of killed. Only in "chunky salsa" cases are you auto-killed (fall head-first in a woodchipper, hit directly with a nuclear warhead, etc, and depending on your character you might not even be killed by either of those). And even then, this is still a comic book universe we're talking about; death is usually temporary.
So, the threat of death is off the table. You're left with the threat of losing the battle, and whatever consequences that may have - from loss of civilian lives, to bragging rights. In the greater scheme of the adventure, tension comes from not knowing if you'll be able to achieve your goals. As long as you're involved in the plot, you have something at stake, and thus something to lose. Death doesn't have to be the only threat, nor is it really the most important one.
Now that's a silly example from a relatively silly game, but I see it as one end of a spectrum, with the gritty anyone-can-die styles at the other. My favourite game setting ever (though admittedly not my favourite system) is Hunter: the Vigil, mostly because your characters are always so far in over their heads, where you're always one slip up from a TPK. But I don't think that's the only way to have fun.
|
Fort save vs death.
But then, how much damage does a heart attack do?Ahh. I might have to do that to the next geriatric PC I have... oh damn... I'm the only one willing to make old fogeys.
*watches my Dwarf cleric keel over* Oh Abadar... I think this is it! The big one! Oh wait... sorry, made my save. See you tomorrow!
I can so see this with Redd Foxx playing your chaaracter.
I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC'sThat can be a problem, as I said I'd walk away from a GM just looking for more notches on his d20.
Most GMs, even those like me who have no qualms about occasional PC death, are going to go out of their way not to kill someones first PC right away. Those that would, well they fall into that category of people that I would likely not be gaming with for long.it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
-snip-
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
I agree, also note that challenging a PC group should not just be combat situations, Challenging encounters do not even need to be dangerous. Some of my favorite games involved no combat at all. Investigations, riddles, exploration etc.
|
|
I agree, also note that challenging a PC group should not just be combat situations, Challenging encounters do not even need to be dangerous. Some of my favorite games involved no combat at all. Investigations, riddles, exploration etc.I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC'sThat can be a problem, as I said I'd walk away from a GM just looking for more notches on his d20.
Most GMs, even those like me who have no qualms about occasional PC death, are going to go out of their way not to kill someones first PC right away. Those that would, well they fall into that category of people that I would likely not be gaming with for long.it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
-snip-
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
I've had great encounter that involved no combat. But, lets be honest, d20 and indeed the legacy of D&D itself, is based on combat encounters.
I've had great encounter that involved no combat. But, lets be honest, d20 and indeed the legacy of D&D itself, is based on combat encounters.I agree, also note that challenging a PC group should not just be combat situations, Challenging encounters do not even need to be dangerous. Some of my favorite games involved no combat at all. Investigations, riddles, exploration etc.I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC'sThat can be a problem, as I said I'd walk away from a GM just looking for more notches on his d20.
Most GMs, even those like me who have no qualms about occasional PC death, are going to go out of their way not to kill someones first PC right away. Those that would, well they fall into that category of people that I would likely not be gaming with for long.it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
-snip-
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
Only if you let them be that way.
My players no that they need to well rounded because they don't know if a diplomacy roll would be needed over an ass whuppin.
Why everyone assumes that it should be all combat is silly. That is the skill system was added D&D 3.0 and had it starts a bit earlier, was to give players an option of doing something other than slaying monsters.
I have always felt that Role-Play > Roll-Play
|
|
Killing Borimir was important to the story. It was done to show the corrupting power of the ring. He was not killed by some random encounter that had no real effect on the plot.True, but killing Boromir let you knew you were playing for keeps.On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..yes sometimes the dice are against them..but are you suggesting you should plan to kill them..the DM is there to facilitate the players enjoyment not to turn it into a me vs them scenario+1 A heroes death should mean something and have a direct impact in the story line, if a character is killed with in minuts of play do to being overwhelmed or even crummy die rolls the DM is not doing his or her job either.
The Lord of the Rings would have fallen flat if all the Hobbits were killed during their first encounter with the Nazgul.
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
|
|
I hate killing PCs. I can't help wincing as I roll a critical threat on one that's already hurt. I keep apologizing as I do enough damage with a monster in one blow to take more than half a PC's hit points away - I can't seem to help it, even though it's a bit silly. But...what happens, happens.
Wolfthulhu hasn't left my game yet! :D
...although he might if he notices I'm posting here when their XP isn't posted yet...hrm.
::scribbles numbers::
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
Give me an example of what you mean. That "good DM" part sounds like you are making an all or nothing statement again, whether you intend to or not.
|
|
Give me an example of what you mean. That "good DM" part sounds like you are making an all or nothing statement again, whether you intend to or not.
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
Every encounter should move story. If it isn't moving story, why are you fighting in the first place? So every encounter that has risk is part of the story.
Boromir was killed by orcs who captured the halflings. Gandalf was killed fighting the Balrog, then resurrected.
These were encounters on the journey, and they died moving the story forward. If you are killed when your came is attacked at night on the way to wherever you are going, you were killed fighting with your fellow adventurers on the way to more adventure.
If your DM drops a boulder on you, or has a dingo eat your halfling while he is picking up milk from the store...that is a pointless death.
There is a story, which you as the DM are creating with the players. If the players are dealing with something that may kill them, it should be part of that story.
Give me an example of what you mean. That "good DM" part sounds like you are making an all or nothing statement again, whether you intend to or not.
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
Every encounter should move story. If it isn't moving story, why are you fighting in the first place? So every encounter that has risk is part of the story.
Boromir was killed by orcs who captured the halflings. Gandalf was killed fighting the Balrog, then resurrected.
These were encounters on the journey, and they died moving the story forward. If you are killed when your came is attacked at night on the way to wherever you are going, you were killed fighting with your fellow adventurers on the way to more adventure.
If your DM drops a boulder on you, or has a dingo eat your halfling while he is picking up milk from the store...that is a pointless death.
There is a story, which you as the DM are creating with the players. If the players are dealing with something that may kill them, it should be part of that story.
I do agree for the most part, but random encounters do happen. You may get jumped by bandits, or a pack of wolves, and so on. Being random should not make them less danger. I would not make a random encounter a boss level fight*, but if they die.... I do think random encounters should be rare though, even if the players ask for them.
*I am running KM, and it is completely possible if you get 95+ on the percent dice to off a party, but this is an exception to the way I normally DM. My party also specifically asked for random encounters in other games so I might run one that is 2 CR's above the APL at them, and not when they are at full strength.
|
I think the best way to handle random encounters is to have your table consist entirely of encounters that are relevant to the campaign in some way. For example, in my Shackled City game they've encountered dinosaurs and hillfolk bandits to reinforce the feel of the surrounding area, and to also foreshadow the hillfolk involvement in future encounters. Maybe that's not random to some people, but it makes sure that PCs never have a 'I'M A BEAR!' moment that kills them for no purpose.
|
|
Give me an example of what you mean. That "good DM" part sounds like you are making an all or nothing statement again, whether you intend to or not.
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
Every encounter should move story. If it isn't moving story, why are you fighting in the first place? So every encounter that has risk is part of the story.
Boromir was killed by orcs who captured the halflings. Gandalf was killed fighting the Balrog, then resurrected.
These were encounters on the journey, and they died moving the story forward. If you are killed when your came is attacked at night on the way to wherever you are going, you were killed fighting with your fellow adventurers on the way to more adventure.
If your DM drops a boulder on you, or has a dingo eat your halfling while he is picking up milk from the store...that is a pointless death.
There is a story, which you as the DM are creating with the players. If the players are dealing with something that may kill them, it should be part of that story.
I do agree for the most part, but random encounters do happen. You may get jumped by bandits, or a pack of wolves, and so on. Being random should not make them less danger. I would not make a random encounter a boss level fight*, but if they die.... I do think random encounters should be rare though, even if the players ask for them.
*I am running KM, and it is completely possible if you get 95+ on the percent dice to off a party, but this is an exception to the way I normally DM. My party also specifically asked for random encounters in other games so I might run one that is 2 CR's above the APL at them, and not when they are at full strength.
If you think about it the Balrog was a random encounter that killed the most powerful person in the party.
So because there was risk, the random encounter became central to the story. They didn't have to fight the balrog, they could have gotten through without it. but it would have been less interesting that way.
Just because it's random doesn't mean it isn't part of the story.
I think the best way to handle random encounters is to have your table consist entirely of encounters that are relevant to the campaign in some way. For example, in my Shackled City game they've encountered dinosaurs and hillfolk bandits to reinforce the feel of the surrounding area, and to also foreshadow the hillfolk involvement in future encounters. Maybe that's not random to some people, but it makes sure that PCs never have a 'I'M A BEAR!' moment that kills them for no purpose.
If you are traveling from city A to city B in a world that has monsters on the prowl, along with evil intelligent beings I can see you being attacked for no other reason than being at the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't think the logistics of this make it a common occurrence, which is why I do tie some of the attacks into the story. Being attacked for "just because" also stretches suspension of belief.
If you think about it the Balrog was a random encounter that killed the most powerful person in the party.
So because there was risk, the random...
My random encounters have rewards. Sometimes it is only XP, and sometimes treasure also. My current group does not see it as an RE(yep more abbreviations for you guys to learn ) if it is story related. I would adjust the RE's to fit if it was another group though.
As an aside my players got the 1d4 trolls as a random encounter. They ran away(eventually), but made it a point to get a rematch later, which they did.
I removed some posts that became excessively personal.
Give me an example of what you mean. That "good DM" part sounds like you are making an all or nothing statement again, whether you intend to or not.
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
Every encounter should move story. If it isn't moving story, why are you fighting in the first place? So every encounter that has risk is part of the story.
Boromir was killed by orcs who captured the halflings. Gandalf was killed fighting the Balrog, then resurrected.
These were encounters on the journey, and they died moving the story forward. If you are killed when your came is attacked at night on the way to wherever you are going, you were killed fighting with your fellow adventurers on the way to more adventure.
If your DM drops a boulder on you, or has a dingo eat your halfling while he is picking up milk from the store...that is a pointless death.
There is a story, which you as the DM are creating with the players. If the players are dealing with something that may kill them, it should be part of that story.
I think maintaining a story in a campaign with a significant risk of death every encounter multiple times per session, however, is very difficult indeed. The common risk of death will statistically translate into many character deaths - PCs will get bad dice rolls and will not always make optimal decisions, so they will die frequently (or else the risks in your campaign are not nearly as high as you make them out to be, in which case we are probably on the same page). As such, I think it is best to frequently substitute an illusion of risk. For example, I give my PCs luck points. These can be used to avert some of the risks without necessarily decreasing the perception of risk a whole lot.
The only way I can see to maintain a strong story in a game that involves a large amount of character deaths is by liberal use of various resurrecting magics. To me, however, the frequent use of such is even more jarring than 'plot defense' of the characters and it cheapens death (and indeed one could say that it ultimately removes the risk of 'losing' even more than a degree of 'plot defense'). I do permit resurrection et al in my games, but place various conditions and restrictions on it, as I believe it should be a rare event and utterly momentous for the character.
I will just repost a post I made earlier for more details of my thoughts on this matter in general:
Well, I don't quite agree with the OP - at least it is not my preference. It's not that I disagree with everything he says, but a play style where encounters are designed to place the characters on the verge of death every session or multiple times per session is not something I favor, as a good deal of those 'high risks' of death will result in actual character deaths.
Yes, it can be fun to play in such a game. I recall playing a campaign where we had on average a death a session (some death free sessions, but also multiple death sessions), which is the natural result of every character being on the verge of death every sessions. Yes, it was a fun game - I did enjoy it. That said, it was also a game concentrated on hacking and slashing. There was a bit of a background plot, but obviously it took a back seat to the 'action', considering the fact that pretty soon none of the original characters were in the game any more. Although I had fun, most of the time, I do prefer both playing and running games that are much more plot-driven and that requires some sort of character continuity.
Of course, there still needs to be a perception of risk for most people to find a plot-based game fun, but it needn't be anywhere as serious as every character being on the verge of death every session. That's not to say that characters are immune to death in my world - beyond perceptual risks, there are indeed real risks they face. For example, in one of my campaigns that currently is on hiatus (I am not near the group at the moment) there were 3 deaths by the time the party reached 10th level. It is a large group of 7 players (6 of whom usually show up) plus me as the DM, so it amounts to about 50% death rate over 10 levels. One of these characters (the second to die) was resurrected in what was an quite epic race against time to do so. The other two couldn't be resurrected on account of resurrection being possibl erather difficult to accomplish in my world. There are various conditions on resurrection, one of which includes the fact that it must be done in a MAJOR holy place of the deity that is being petitioned for the resurrection in order for it to have any chance of working.
To answer a question of one poster: the player of the dead character can create a new character. He may also temporarily be allowed to play an existing NPC.
quality stuff
I dont think every encounter should be so difficult as to cause a possible death. I do think the DM should play his monsters well enough that they can take out a party member for making bad decisions, and coddling should be very limited. I only agree with the OP to a certain extent. I do enjoy a game like SCAP every once in a while, but it can wear on some people, so I would not have every fight be made into a boss level fight.
As a side note I have thought above making magic that revives people less predictable. Maybe while trying to call Boris the Brave's soul back an evil slips through instead. I heard about it a while back, but never implemented it. The higher level magic you use the better chance of you getting the right soul/spirit to come through. I would probably drop the monetary feat or greatly reduce it if I did use the altered version though. Paying that much money for a failure might not go over too well.
|
|
I've had great encounter that involved no combat. But, lets be honest, d20 and indeed the legacy of D&D itself, is based on combat encounters.I agree, also note that challenging a PC group should not just be combat situations, Challenging encounters do not even need to be dangerous. Some of my favorite games involved no combat at all. Investigations, riddles, exploration etc.I've seen the opposite, brutal GMs that just get their kicks killing PC'sThat can be a problem, as I said I'd walk away from a GM just looking for more notches on his d20.
Most GMs, even those like me who have no qualms about occasional PC death, are going to go out of their way not to kill someones first PC right away. Those that would, well they fall into that category of people that I would likely not be gaming with for long.it ruined my first experience with the game. I did not play again until almost 2 years later.
-snip-
Starting players will not play if the character they have spent almost 2 hour creating complete with character sketch and back story dies if their character was killed in a "bar fight" that had no part of the story in the first place.
Only if you let them be that way.
My players no that they need to well rounded because they don't know if a diplomacy roll would be needed over an ass whuppin.
Why everyone assumes that it should be all combat is silly. That is the skill system was added D&D 3.0 and had it starts a bit earlier, was to give players an option of doing something other than slaying monsters.
I have always felt that Role-Play > Roll-Play
You seem to have completely missed my point. At it's heart, D&D is a game about killing monsters. It has been since 1974. Has it grown beyond that to encompass much more? Of course it has, but the largest part of any 'crunch' rulebook you pick up is going to be about inflicting violence upon others.
|
|
I hate killing PCs. I can't help wincing as I roll a critical threat on one that's already hurt. I keep apologizing as I do enough damage with a monster in one blow to take more than half a PC's hit points away - I can't seem to help it, even though it's a bit silly. But...what happens, happens.
Wolfthulhu hasn't left my game yet! :D
...although he might if he notices I'm posting here when their XP isn't posted yet...hrm.
::scribbles numbers::
Nah, I'm not even trying to work on the journal/treasure split posts until Monday following now. Got to be too exhausting. And tonight it would have been really bad as I was dealing with allergies for a couple hours.
|
|
Give me an example of what you mean. That "good DM" part sounds like you are making an all or nothing statement again, whether you intend to or not.
Good DMs don't have random encounters that have no real effect on the plot where a PC could realistically die.
Every encounter should move story. If it isn't moving story, why are you fighting in the first place? So every encounter that has risk is part of the story.
Boromir was killed by orcs who captured the halflings. Gandalf was killed fighting the Balrog, then resurrected.
These were encounters on the journey, and they died moving the story forward. If you are killed when your came is attacked at night on the way to wherever you are going, you were killed fighting with your fellow adventurers on the way to more adventure.
If your DM drops a boulder on you, or has a dingo eat your halfling while he is picking up milk from the store...that is a pointless death.
There is a story, which you as the DM are creating with the players. If the players are dealing with something that may kill them, it should be part of that story.
I disagree. You aren't acting out a novel, your playing in a 'living world' things happen around your PCs that aren't central to the main plot. Most encounters should be relevant sure, but not 100% of them.
|
|
One of the systems I've played a lot of recently is the old Marvel Universe RPG (MURPG),
My favorite Marvel character was "Captain Corn", an altered human whose only (and I mean ONLY) ability was the power to communicate with corn, at near-godlike levels. When he wanted to "go nova" he would try to communicate with High-fructose corn syrup (which, as you can imagine, was very all-encompassing and enabled him to find a lot of answers to a lot of questions).
|
|
I disagree. You aren't acting out a novel, your playing in a 'living world' things happen around your PCs that aren't central to the main plot. Most encounters should be relevant sure, but not 100% of them.
You are acting out a living world, where outcomes aren't pre-ordained. You could become the king, or be eaten by a grue, depending on your choices and luck.
But if there is no way you can't become king, no way you can't lose, then it reduces the impact of succeeding.
Plus death is a story too, in and of itself. When you fight undead versions of old friends, when you are reincarnated as a kobald, when you heroically hold off the horde so your friends may live to save the princess (who is off course in another castle) you are living the story, with the story changing based on events.
I don't think you can have a living world without the real possibility of death. No you shouldn't kill them all every encounter (like I said, all my current campaign characters are alive at 4th, my current higher level campaign is at 12th with all the originals thanks to teamworks, good choices, good luck, and a number of breath of lifes).
But players should believe it is a very real possibility. Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes...
The overly angst Tanis may have been more interesting by being randomly killed in the first hundred pages.... :)On the other hand if a player has spent hours working up a back story carefully planning his character and equiping him to the best of his ability..losing him in the first combat is definitely discouraging..True. And I don't think that the Dragonlance saga would have been more interesting if Raistlin was killed by a random hobgoblin in the first 100 pages of the story, for instance.
WHAT THE HELL MAN?!?
That's not very nice.
And Raistlin got ganked all the time. That's why i think he went a bit crazy.
You know, I'm starting to think the next time I run a game, since I'm already planning on using Hero Points, I may let the players start with two, allowing them to "dodge death" once before they are out of points, and if they end up spending those points for something else early on, its really on them.
Hm.
I basically came to the same conclusion -- I like the idea that a PC gets one or two "get out of jail free" cards, but then all bets are off after that. And maybe I would even say that you can't dodge death in a "boss" fight.
.
..
...
....
.....
|
|
I disagree. You aren't acting out a novel, your playing in a 'living world' things happen around your PCs that aren't central to the main plot. Most encounters should be relevant sure, but not 100% of them.
You are acting out a living world, where outcomes aren't pre-ordained. You could become the king, or be eaten by a grue, depending on your choices and luck.
But if there is no way you can't become king, no way you can't lose, then it reduces the impact of succeeding.
Plus death is a story too, in and of itself. When you fight undead versions of old friends, when you are reincarnated as a kobald, when you heroically hold off the horde so your friends may live to save the princess (who is off course in another castle) you are living the story, with the story changing based on events.
I don't think you can have a living world without the real possibility of death. No you shouldn't kill them all every encounter (like I said, all my current campaign characters are alive at 4th, my current higher level campaign is at 12th with all the originals thanks to teamworks, good choices, good luck, and a number of breath of lifes).
But players should believe it is a very real possibility. Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes...
Are you even reading my posts or have you lumped everyone into one 'all against me' group? I'm not arguing against PC death. If you go back and read the thread you'll see that we are totally on the same page there.
The last two posts I directed at you were addressing this comment:
Every encounter should move story. If it isn't moving story, why are you fighting in the first place? So every encounter that has risk is part of the story.
Well, I have mixed feelings on this subject...
As a player my character are usually not good at front fighting, using wits, con and social skills to avoid direct fight, or having the dirty works done by others... So, basically, I try to do everything possible to avoid being in danger and face possible death... So I will not consider as normal if the DM won't "reward" my roleplay by letting me avoid some threat because of my planning... Of course, sometimes I come up with a really goofy plan, I can't be a genius 100% of the times :p , and indeed I do want to feel from time to time that coming with a bad plan can mean my death...
As a DM this is something really difficult to balance... At first level every encounter can mean death...
For example this saturday :
Tsuto has made 2 rounds before fleeing... One of the PC (a rogue) has lost his fight against 1 gobelin : fumble from him, two crit from me... Without the Oracle he was dead since the gob try to put him in a furnace while he was out...
A little time after that the druid's tiger fall in negative with a fumble doing simple damage to Tsuto and double damage to himself(I use the wonderful paizo fumble and critical cards)
A single bad roll can kill you at level one... You HAVE to refrain your monster from "coup de grace" every fallen PC...
Heck, a bad roll can kill you at level 10...
In my experience what the players want is the threat to die, not the actual death... :p
"In my experience what the players want is the threat to die, not the actual death... :p"
This. But I'll add a collary to the first statement "sometimes heros die". In order for a hero to die, they have to had the opportunity to have done something heroic... otherwise the dead PC died with just as little meaning as any of the BBEG's other victims who were killed off screen.
Jess Door (Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Adventure Path Subscriber), 02:56 AM Flag | List | FAQ | Reply
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
I hate killing PCs. I can't help wincing as I roll a critical threat on one that's already hurt. I keep apologizing as I do enough damage with a monster in one blow to take more than half a PC's hit points away - I can't seem to help it,
WHAT!!!
Jess the DM= "Unfortunately an arrow from that nasty, nasty orc unluckily hits you during such heroic acts! (whats your hit points?....oh my golly gosh...)...umm...It digs a tad deeply though and, and, and... it actually kinda hurts a little bit. Soooo you feel the need to take a little nap now then you may feel better! So you comfortably fall back in a blanket of soft green clover. your eyes gently close and you smell the scent of showering pink pretty rose petals and hear trumpets blaring in solemn love for their fallen heroic, impressive, very intelligent and charming and pretty strong and (whats your charisma?)..even a bit sexy!..(whats your race?)...ahh.. half orc falls asleep like a little baby fairy snuggled up with mother in a little gum nut!!......so yes... your kind of not really very alive much now...anymore...sorta....and ...im just so so sorry....ok?.... ..umm....would you like a chip?"
NATHAN THE DM= "The orc tosses his girly bow and charges drawing this HUGE axe salivating madly from slimy fangs at the thought of drinking your babyface blood. He slashes brilliantly (roll....horah!!!) across your belly splattering your intestines everywhere and as you to grope at your spilling entrails pathetically attempting to stuff them back in. You fall to one knee allowing the now gleeful orc to pick out an eyeball with a sole dirty elongated fingernail to which he flicks back bouncing off your forehead before blackness prevails due to a savage btch slap with your bloody newly removed arm, causing the other eye ball to fly out yet attached and dangling via its pink optic nerve. You topple backward in HORRENDOUS pain as the lone eye is jostled around between hordes of goblins tearing at your useless fat FORGETFUL ass , giggling and betting on how many main organs they can eat (without the use of hands) before your heart stops beating in your mauled, now naked carcass that will soon be scooped clean and used for a gay hill giants matching hand bag and slipper set....so.....whos the tuff one now?...now THATS what I call a power attack!..hey?...sorry?..you say something?...yeah...thats right..…I didn’t think so…..Ok, so... Anyone else forget their initiative order besides the Mr Goldfish impersonator here?..by the way, you can go home now, and lets all see next week if you forget the chips"
Get in there! Take the kiddy gloves off and get your hands dirty. Take those pcs down. Its a do or die world and lets play it, not gay it!
You do this to your PCs, sure they will gasp, wince and moan and depart the room silently or with a sniff. Maybe they come back, maybe they dont. But if they do, they certainly listen more and hang on your every word cause they know one wrong move and BLAM they are eatin dust. People crave a challenge, death is their fear, take it away and youll get boredom (unless your all top notch roleplayers)
Im cruel, but when PCs leap out of the chair in excitement after they win an encounter and high five cause they over come the odds. I sit there with my inner smile.....because…...it worked...NOW i won.
PS= Im not this bad but you know what i mean and Jess. You sound a nice person and this isnt an attack at all ok. Its been a long day and Im just sharing a laugh, so thanks.
In my experience what the players want is the threat to die, not the actual death... :p
As a player and DM I agree, but players are smart, well at least mine are, and it is hard to fool them on a consistent basis. If you never off anyone things start to look real suspicious after a while.
|
|
Jess Door (Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Adventure Path Subscriber), 02:56 AM Flag | List | FAQ | Reply
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
I hate killing PCs. I can't help wincing as I roll a critical threat on one that's already hurt. I keep apologizing as I do enough damage with a monster in one blow to take more than half a PC's hit points away - I can't seem to help it,
WHAT!!!
Jess the DM= "Unfortunately an arrow from that nasty, nasty orc unluckily hits you during such heroic acts! (whats your hit points?....oh my golly gosh...)...umm...It digs a tad deeply though and, and, and... it actually kinda hurts a little bit. Soooo you feel the need to take a little nap now then you may feel better! So you comfortably fall back in a blanket of soft green clover. your eyes gently close and you smell the scent of showering pink pretty rose petals and hear trumpets blaring in solemn love for their fallen heroic, impressive, very intelligent and charming and pretty strong and (whats your charisma?)..even a bit sexy!..(whats your race?)...ahh.. half orc falls asleep like a little baby fairy snuggled up with mother in a little gum nut!!......so yes... your kind of not really very alive much now...anymore...sorta....and ...im just so so sorry....ok?.... ..umm....would you like a chip?"
NATHAN THE DM= "The orc tosses his girly bow and charges drawing this HUGE axe salivating madly from slimy fangs at the thought of drinking your babyface blood. He slashes brilliantly (roll....horah!!!) across your belly splattering your intestines everywhere and as you to grope at your spilling entrails pathetically attempting to stuff them back in. You fall to one knee allowing the now gleeful orc to pick out an eyeball with a sole dirty elongated fingernail to which he flicks back bouncing off your forehead before blackness prevails due to a savage btch slap with your bloody newly removed arm, causing the other eye ball to fly out yet attached and...
Sure reads like an attack. And it's totally off base. Yesterday she dropped a PC to -3 hp in a pretty nasty drawnout fight, and last week she had a worg slavering over my tripped and very low HP character. If it hadn't already been heavily damaged itself and the rest of the party wailing away on it, I have no doubt she would have attacked me again going for the kill.
Feeling bad about killing PCs doesn't mean you play patty cake with them.
I'm like Jess Door: I wince and apologize when the dice get prejudiced against the players. My players seem to love reading my expressions, trying to gauge just how bad the situation is before I announce the results.
I am definately in the camp that loathes killing a PC. I dont want to do it as a dm and I dont want it done to me as a player. We all put hours into working out backstories, developing personalities and ofcourse developing the story around the player. A death can cause all sorts of problems. First of all it brings to light all the issues with the revolving door afterlife if you have raise dead / ressurection spells in your world.
Next it can interfere with the story you as a group or as a dm have layed out. If the plot was being driven by the character, now what? Sure it depends on where and when, and a dramatic death can be a great plot point, but in the game, deaths dont always happen where you want them. I player getting killed by an unlucky crit by the mook guard at the castle gates doesnt make for much of a story.
Last and most important for me is, this is a game. We show up because we want to play. And a dramatic death can be very cool, but it can also really suck for the player. My groups game sessions can last 4-8 hours depending on everyone's schedule for the next day and what time we get started. If a player is killed early in the session he can be stuck NOT PLAYING THE GAME for a long time. He is either waiting for a time where the party can get into a position to raise/ressurect him or he has to roll up a new character (which can be a long process at higher levels) and wait for a rational point for the dm to re-introduce the character).
This is potentially hours of real time where the player isnt playing the game. If the principal responsibility of the dm is ensuring people have fun at his or her table, then this seems to me to be something to be avoided.
|
|
This:
I'm like Jess Door: I wince and apologize when the dice get prejudiced against the players. My players seem to love reading my expressions, trying to gauge just how bad the situation is before I announce the results.
and this:
Sure reads like an attack. And it's totally off base. Yesterday she dropped a PC to -3 hp in a pretty nasty drawnout fight, and last week she had a worg slavering over my tripped and very low HP character. If it hadn't already been heavily damaged itself and the rest of the party wailing away on it, I have no doubt she would have attacked me again going for the kill.
Feeling bad about killing PCs doesn't mean you play patty cake with them.
I don't want the PCs to die. I'm pulling for them. And I hate when MY characters die, so there's a lot of empathy. But...I'll still do it. I'd have felt terrible if the poor ranger had died due to the nasty giant centipede munching on him...but he'd still have been dead. And at second level, dead is pretty permanent. My players know that this is a harsh world - and they know better than to assume that if a fight turns against them, I won't have the enemies take full advantage of that fact if they don't recognize this and get out.
I am definately in the camp that loathes killing a PC. I dont want to do it as a dm and I dont want it done to me as a player. We all put hours into working out backstories, developing personalities and ofcourse developing the story around the player. A death can cause all sorts of problems. First of all it brings to light all the issues with the revolving door afterlife if you have raise dead / ressurection spells in your world.
Next it can interfere with the story you as a group or as a dm have layed out. If the plot was being driven by the character, now what? Sure it depends on where and when, and a dramatic death can be a great plot point, but in the game, deaths dont always happen where you want them. I player getting killed by an unlucky crit by the mook guard at the castle gates doesnt make for much of a story.
Last and most important for me is, this is a game. We show up because we want to play. And a dramatic death can be very cool, but it can also really suck for the player. My groups game sessions can last 4-8 hours depending on everyone's schedule for the next day and what time we get started. If a player is killed early in the session he can be stuck NOT PLAYING THE GAME for a long time. He is either waiting for a time where the party can get into a position to raise/ressurect him or he has to roll up a new character (which can be a long process at higher levels) and wait for a rational point for the dm to re-introduce the character).
This is potentially hours of real time where the player isnt playing the game. If the principal responsibility of the dm is ensuring people have fun at his or her table, then this seems to me to be something to be avoided.
I would guess your group is more of a narrative group, and there is nothing wrong with that, but those of us that enjoy the threat of death hate all the inconveniences you do, but we realize that our characters would have to deal with them if their world was real. We also don't base entire plots around PC's. A PC might have a subplot based around him, but his death will never mean the game can't go on. Personally if I know I can't die it takes all the fun away. No point in playing if I know the results ahead of time. I don't even guarantee victory against BBEG's. So if you play in my campaign for six months and think "He has to let us win this fight", and start doing silly things the party may lose.
I don't think you are having bad/wrong fun though. I was just pointing out why some of us play the way we do.