|
I mean, personally the games I play (whether they be home games or games at conventions) the focus is the roleplaying aspect of the roleplaying game.
NOT generally one to use fallacies, but this is a gaming fallacy. To say that you cannot optimize a PC while ROLEplaying, or that ROLE player don't optimize their characters is the Oberoni fallacy, if I am not mistaken.
One can tweak their mechanics sot hat they are at their mechanical best and yet still have quirks and traits while roleplaying outside of situations where those mechanics are needed or used.
Yes, but the objective of the DM is to make a situation where the dice will most likely not kill the players, but can come very close. Dabbler isn't talking about fudging dice or not sending the players up against nasty things. He is talking about designing the encounter to be at the limmit of what the players can actually handle, without going into the territory where they will outright fail or someone will die. If the players make it harder for themselves and fail, that is their fault and someone may very well die. I don't think he is saying to reduce the danger as the players make stupid choices.
I'm taking it there's no room in this equation for randomized encounter charts that contain encounters out of a certain level range. The other night, the party I DM for rolled a kraken and a dragon turtle as encounters. I ran both encounters because that's what they rolled. There was a definite chance of the party dying in the first one and likely the second, since they were 5th level at the time. According to the philosophy you're going with, I shouldn't have done that because the only reason they survived the first was a sheer miracle. I knew going in they would probably die in both encounters. That they did not is a matter of sheer luck.
A knight of Kyuss was like 16th level, tho, right? It should have a good attack bonus. A 16th level PC probably has 40+ AC, however. So at 12th, yeah, it can be nasty. 4 levels later, it's having problems.
==Aelryinth
They were CR 13, and the Swords of Kyuss were CR 11. Now since AoW is a meatgrinder it does not fit within normal CR ranges, which is why it is a bad AP to use if you are trying to compare yourself to ordinary mooks.
The only reason I'm using it as an example is because it is an actual adventure. It's easy to use theoretical encounters that a DM might use. Using an actual adventure lets me discuss what a DM will use. The characters have evolved based on the campaign. They have made decision based on what they know or think is coming up in the future. They know that they will be dealing with undead often so they make sure that they have ways to deal with that problem. If they were playing in Kingmaker, then their characters would have been built very differently and taken a completely different path as they adapted to that campaign.
The party has mostly used the gear that has dropped. Some people left the campaign do to the jobs but they took the gear with them. I have asked that we assume that the characters that become NPCs stay characters and keep what they have earned. Until they got to the Free City, they were very limited on the gear they could get. Once in the Free City, they spent more time improving their gear but they did't want to focus on all combat gear. Some of the more expensive items were kept because they were cool. My players like trophies.
I don't support the silly "ilusion of choice/danger" mindset. If the dice say the players get killed, they get killed.
Did I say they didn't? Fudging dice is the worst way of keeping PCs alive and soon becomes obvious to them.
Yes, but the objective of the DM is to make a situation where the dice will most likely not kill the players, but can come very close. Dabbler isn't talking about fudging dice or not sending the players up against nasty things. He is talking about designing the encounter to be at the limmit of what the players can actually handle, without going into the territory where they will outright fail or someone will die. If the players make it harder for themselves and fail, that is their fault and someone may very well die. I don't think he is saying to reduce the danger as the players make stupid choices.I'm taking it there's no room in this equation for randomized encounter charts that contain encounters out of a certain level range. The other night, the party I DM for rolled a kraken and a dragon turtle as encounters. I ran both encounters because that's what they rolled. There was a definite chance of the party dying in the first one and likely the second, since they were 5th level at the time. According to the philosophy you're going with, I shouldn't have done that because the only reason they survived the first was a sheer miracle. I knew going in they would probably die in both encounters. That they did not is a matter of sheer luck.
No, you present the encounters in such a way that the party does not need to fight it, or can run. This came up a lot in the Kingmaker thread, where level 1 characters can go up against will-o-wisps and 1d3 trolls. A random encounter does not need to be a fight. I rolled a will-o-wisp and described to my players a floating light that was dancing over a corpse that they saw in the distance. They got knowledge checks to figure out what it was, so they could realize that it would destroy them.
For either of those encounters, you could have had the monsters surfacing in the distance. Profession sailor rolls to navigate the ship away from the monster before it noticed them. The dragon turtle is intelligent, and in its description it even says that sailors offer bribes to them for safe passage, so a knowledge check can figure that out and the players can avoid the combat entirely by giving a bribe.
These will allow the campaign to go on in the future, and avoid the party randomly dieing and rolling up new characters. I've had 2 campaigns destroyed because of this, and the new characters are never as good as the ones you spent time creating who never get to reach their potential.
Garguantuan. Which means if normal javelins are 3 feet long, and one inch in diameter at the shaft then these javelins are two dozen feet long and eight inches thick.
I'm pretty sure that RAI you are correct.. but RAW you are not.
And we have a problem here: you are using RAI or RAW depending from the advantage you get by it in the discussion.
Morevoer, if to avoid using evocation I have too cheese out UMD, unclear dropping item action, and a loophole on weapon damage and weight for javelins, I keep my evocation spells thank you.
I start to see why your game go that way.
It's funny how every single DM I ever played with allowed it without blinking.
In my campaign bears shoot lazors from the eyes. Since I allow it, is part of the rules
*looks at bestiary*
wait is not!
No, you present the encounters in such a way that the party does not need to fight it, or can run.
Nice to know I've been doing it "wrong" for years and years.We have had several occasions where the whole party gets wiped out. It happens. Then the campaign goes in the pile to be reskinned and run again later.
james maissen wrote:
CoDzilla wrote:I have no idea about the Fighter thing. People keep insisting one is there. I don't see why they would, as the party would either be all casters, or a mix of competent martials and casters. Either way, no Fighter. But if one is there, he gets Dominated.
Let's say one is there. You claim he's not useful.
He makes his save on the domination (around a 90% chance to happen) and the Balor has wasted his standard action. Seems like a good trade for having the fighter there, as if there are 3 other PCs that are casters he's basically given them each an action.
90%? So his Will save is in the mid 20s, huh? In PF only? Not happening.
No, his will save is 20 and he has a re-roll. 20 isn't hard. Thus he has a chance of failure on 30% of 30%, or a 91% success rate, without any ally buffs.
Quote:
As to wind wall, I don't think that large sized javelins are really on the same level as siege weapons, but to each their own.Garguantuan. Which means if normal javelins are 3 feet long, and one inch in diameter at the shaft then these javelins are two dozen feet long and eight inches thick.
More like small trees than javelins. Yet, I would say that counts as siege weapons. Especially since actual siege weapons, such as a ballista bolt would be smaller.
Quote:
Regardless getting items from shrunk to full size either requires them to be tossed to the ground or a command word.Free action: Drop items.
move action, retrieve item. got 15 move actions to retieve all those objects you are about to drop?
Quote:
Also you are talking about the Balor UMDing 15 scrolls of shrink item for this for each volley that he wants to have this way.If he needs to transport them, he uses a Shrink Item wand to do so. Of course since they cost 8 gold, and can therefore be crafted easily he can just make more, if he so chooses. He does not need Shrink Item any other time. They can just sit on a massive weapon rack in his home or something.
Don't your Balors have Abyssal palaces, and if they do roam around on the Material Plane they have some base of operations there?
Quote:
And that's before we talk about how ineffective an attack this is (well actually after as I've already posted on it).So you have a bit of things here that I'm not sure that you've really thought through.
-James
15 attack rolls, each comparable with its pathetic sword attack, and each doing over half the damage of its pathetic sword attack.
No, I thought it through. Fact of the matter is if you want damage from a spell, you cast TK. Not Evocations.
You mean the sword attack that does more damage (2d6+25, +2d6 vs good) and has a chance to instant kill the opponent. Or how about his whip (1d4+13+1d6), which also has a chance to instant kill. Thats before you even spend the Balor's money on reasonable gear for his level.
If you're a Wizard, you don't need UMD for Shrink Item. Drop item actions are also very clear. So are weapon damage scaling rules, and weight scaling rules. There's nothing loopholish about it. Everything is clearly spelled out. If you want a caster that does damage, use TK. That also extends to monsters who can cast TK.
CoD.. if the spell is setted to deal 15d6 max, I'm pretty sure that "play" with the weight of the javelin to reach 45d6 or such is quite finding a loophole. A very fun one - thank you for it ;) - but is a loophole.
Moreover, drop ONE weapon is a thing, drop 15 from a quiver, assuming the size is correct, is not. The "drop all in one" effect is VERY subjected to DM mercy here.
I'm sorry, 'til now, we only have shown that DM adjudication means all. This counts for an magical quiver, or a "gamebreaking" commune.
No, you present the encounters in such a way that the party does not need to fight it, or can run.Nice to know I've been doing it "wrong" for years and years.We have had several occasions where the whole party gets wiped out. It happens. Then the campaign goes in the pile to be reskinned and run again later.
I never said you were doing it wrong. If your players have fun dieing randomly, then your not. Too bad most people get pissed because random luck completely beyond their control just ruined what they have spent the last year or 2 building up. Getting TPKed by something you know you can't handle isn't fun for most people. Its anti-climactic. It ruins the story that you are building.
You asked for how you can still have those things on the random encounter table in a campaign where the GM isn't throwing things beyond the party's control at them. Its quite possible to do. You give the players options about how to defeat the encounter without combat.
Yes, but the objective of the DM is to make a situation where the dice will most likely not kill the players, but can come very close. Dabbler isn't talking about fudging dice or not sending the players up against nasty things. He is talking about designing the encounter to be at the limmit of what the players can actually handle, without going into the territory where they will outright fail or someone will die. If the players make it harder for themselves and fail, that is their fault and someone may very well die. I don't think he is saying to reduce the danger as the players make stupid choices.I'm taking it there's no room in this equation for randomized encounter charts that contain encounters out of a certain level range. The other night, the party I DM for rolled a kraken and a dragon turtle as encounters. I ran both encounters because that's what they rolled. There was a definite chance of the party dying in the first one and likely the second, since they were 5th level at the time. According to the philosophy you're going with, I shouldn't have done that because the only reason they survived the first was a sheer miracle. I knew going in they would probably die in both encounters. That they did not is a matter of sheer luck.
Yeah, I don't think you should have done that to be honest. As a GM, you put them against something they have at least a chance against. To take a more extreme example, putting 1st level characters up against a randomly-rolled kraken is kind of....pointless. But I don't know, maybe you approach has some merit - clearly they are having to learn how to survive pretty quickly. Or are relying on a lots and lots of luck.
You asked for how you can still have those things on the random encounter table in a campaign where the GM isn't throwing things beyond the party's control at them.
Actually, no, I didn't. I was simply stating the truth: There's no room in that campaign for the type of random encounter that I run. There's no room for, "A balor appears in 40 feet of this first-level party. Roll initiative."
Yeah, I don't think you should have done that to be honest. As a GM, you put them against something they have at least a chance against.
Well, not necessarily. IMHO, a lethal challenge, if the PCs have way to understand the peril and way to go away, is still a lot into fair game.
Of course, one thing is do this occasionally to remember tham that the world is bigger than they could think, and another is do it continuously for the sake of it.
Sometimes, too, GO AWAY is the challenge. But do it correctly without railroad is really, really hard.
If you were designing a new 5th level spell the maximum damage from it would be 15d6 ala Cone of Cold or Blight.
RAI:
Telekinesis should have a similar damage cap that keeps maximum damage from exceeding a certain threshold. Because each missile requires a separate attack roll it's possibly worthwhile to allow damage in excess of d6 per weapon but considering the spell has a ton of other uses I'd be ok with limiting projectile damage to d6 per missile because throwing a sword is going to do much less damage than swinging a sword, etc.
RAW:
TK is a badly designed spell that's had issues since 1e. If your group doesn't mind a Transmutation utility spell completely humbling every evocation in the game then go ahead.
I removed a post and a reply to it. The very first messageboard rule is 'Don't be a jerk.'
Yeah, I don't think you should have done that to be honest. As a GM, you put them against something they have at least a chance against.
Well, not necessarily. IMHO, a lethal challenge, if the PCs have way to understand the peril and way to go away, is still a lot into fair game.
Of course, one thing is do this occasionally to remember tham that the world is bigger than they could think, and another is do it continuously for the sake of it.
Sometimes, too, GO AWAY is the challenge. But do it correctly without railroad is really, really hard.
An escape scenario away from something they obviously couldn't handle would be fine.
No, you present the encounters in such a way that the party does not need to fight it, or can run.Nice to know I've been doing it "wrong" for years and years.We have had several occasions where the whole party gets wiped out. It happens. Then the campaign goes in the pile to be reskinned and run again later.I never said you were doing it wrong. If your players have fun dieing randomly, then your not. Too bad most people get pissed because random luck completely beyond their control just ruined what they have spent the last year or 2 building up. Getting TPKed by something you know you can't handle isn't fun for most people. Its anti-climactic. It ruins the story that you are building.
You asked for how you can still have those things on the random encounter table in a campaign where the GM isn't throwing things beyond the party's control at them. Its quite possible to do. You give the players options about how to defeat the encounter without combat.
This is usually how I, or the DMs I play for handle it. You see Monster X in the distance/30 feet away/are ambushed. Roll knowledge checks/sense motive, decide whether you should engage/run/stall/other. If you take on something that you shouldn't have and die, you're SOL. Regardless of intelligence score, random encounters don't always mean "a balor appears, you die" which btw is not very different than "rocks fall, you die", since creatures aren't necessarily hostile. Usually, but still.
@CoD Re: Level 20 Fighter's Will Save:
6 (Level) 5 (Wis. 14 start +6 Headband) 5 (Resistance) 2 (Iron Will) 2 (Heroism)=20. Vs. DC 27 will save for Dom Monster. That's without even trying or short duration buffs. 30% chance of failure, it's not 90% but then there is quite possibly other buffs in play. Worst case scenario he has a 30% chance of failure, and a free re-roll. I HOPE that balor wastes an action trying to dominate the fighter.
Dropping an item, or even a whole handful of items, is indeed a free action. If he is walking around with 15 javelins in hand then that's A-OK. If he is using shrink item, or has them in a quiver, he needs to retrieve them. Would you let someone shed their armor and all worn items (Hey I'm just dropping my full plate) or empty out a bag of holding as a free action?
Dang you all are still at it. The problem is your playing in a High magic world with Low technology world.
Low teck: 1-3 = Swords, bows, horses, explosives, maybe single shot ball pistols (teck 3).
Med Teck: 4-6 = guns, cars, trucks, airplanes, tanks, battleships.
High Teck: 7-9 = Robots, Power-suits, space ships, transporters, maybe even Stargate's (teck 9).
Real world = Commoners have asses to 1-4, big business 1-5, governments 1-6 (7 with billion/trillion in money for pro-types like man-on-the moon type stuff).
AND
Low magic 1-3 = magic missiles, Arcane locks, Invisibility, Darkvision, Fireball (magic 3).
Med Magic 4-6 = Stoneskin, Wall of Ice, Overland fight, Disintegrate, True Seeing.
High Magic 7-9 = Control Weather, Phase shift, Clone, Prismatic Sphere, Gate (magic 9).
.................................
Now give that fighter or rogue a suit of Power Armor, a Plasma rifle, and HUD display helmet, and gravitation belt "Fly". And see how all the wizard in your group with ""balanced" spell cry.
................................
THERE WILL NEVER BE BALANCE BETWEEN THE CLASSES !!!!
Once there is, this will no longer be a Dungeon & Dragon Type game.
As long as GM enforce Low magic items on a High Magic world, where commoner do not normal have magic items, Business rarely have magic items, and you do not have governments not pumping out Magic Items like crazy (( Every Solder being sent to Iraq is not properly equipped, does not have proper Magic Armor vs fire, Magic Missile Bows, Detection vs Explosion goggles, etc, etc )).
................................
What i am trying to say, is if Fighter, Rogue, etc can not keep up to the wizards, then they need better magic items. Otherwise you are creating an in-balance of power. ((Arcane caster should have less money for magic equipment due to spell books, scrolls, and spell maternal components..... Divine Caster should have a 10% money sink in tithing.
...............................
Anyway that is my 2 cents worth.
Removed more posts. Constructiveness, not dismissiveness.
Dang you all are still at it. The problem is your playing in a High magic world with Low technology world.
Low teck: 1-3 = Swords, bows, horses, explosives, maybe single shot ball pistols (teck 3).
Med Teck: 4-6 = guns, cars, trucks, airplanes, tanks, battleships.
High Teck: 7-9 = Robots, Power-suits, space ships, transporters, maybe even Stargate's (teck 9).Real world = Commoners have asses to 1-4, big business 1-5, governments 1-6 (7 with billion/trillion in money for pro-types like man-on-the moon type stuff).
AND
Low magic 1-3 = magic missiles, Arcane locks, Invisibility, Darkvision, Fireball (magic 3).
Med Magic 4-6 = Stoneskin, Wall of Ice, Overland fight, Disintegrate, True Seeing.
High Magic 7-9 = Control Weather, Phase shift, Clone, Prismatic Sphere, Gate (magic 9)..................................
Now give that fighter or rogue a suit of Power Armor, a Plasma rifle, and HUD display helmet, and gravitation belt "Fly". And see how all the wizard in your group with ""balanced" spell cry.
................................
THERE WILL NEVER BE BALANCE BETWEEN THE CLASSES !!!!
Once there is, this will no longer be a Dungeon & Dragon Type game.
As long as GM enforce Low magic items on a High Magic world, where commoner do not normal have magic items, Business rarely have magic items, and you do not have governments not pumping out Magic Items like crazy (( Every Solder being sent to Iraq is not properly equipped, does not have proper Magic Armor vs fire, Magic Missile Bows, Detection vs Explosion goggles, etc, etc )).
................................
What i am trying to say, is if Fighter, Rogue, etc can not keep up to the wizards, then they need better magic items. Otherwise you are creating an in-balance of power. ((Arcane caster should have less money for magic equipment due to spell books, scrolls, and spell maternal components..... Divine Caster should have a 10% money sink in tithing.
...............................
Anyway that is my 2 cents worth.
...
I have a GM who is playing in a LVL 9 both :). Its quite fun to have my goblin chugging along with a smartlinked shotgun and power armor. Your right, it solves lots of the issues. Its still Dungeons and Dragons, just not what you are used too.
A knight of Kyuss was like 16th level, tho, right? It should have a good attack bonus. A 16th level PC probably has 40+ AC, however. So at 12th, yeah, it can be nasty. 4 levels later, it's having problems.
==Aelryinth
They were CR 13, and the Swords of Kyuss were CR 11. Now since AoW is a meatgrinder it does not fit within normal CR ranges, which is why it is a bad AP to use if you are trying to compare yourself to ordinary mooks.
Actually, I asked the level (Hit Dice), not the CR. Your stats indicate it has 16 hit dice, so yeah, it's gonna have a good TH.
That said, I dunno if it's a balanced CR. a single level 16 character is what CR?
==Aelryinth
|
No, you present the encounters in such a way that the party does not need to fight it, or can run.Nice to know I've been doing it "wrong" for years and years.We have had several occasions where the whole party gets wiped out. It happens. Then the campaign goes in the pile to be reskinned and run again later.I never said you were doing it wrong. If your players have fun dieing randomly, then your not. Too bad most people get pissed because random luck completely beyond their control just ruined what they have spent the last year or 2 building up. Getting TPKed by something you know you can't handle isn't fun for most people. Its anti-climactic. It ruins the story that you are building.
You asked for how you can still have those things on the random encounter table in a campaign where the GM isn't throwing things beyond the party's control at them. Its quite possible to do. You give the players options about how to defeat the encounter without combat.
a) Not every table is trying to "build a story". Some are trying to just let a story happen organically.
b) If characters don't die by "random luck", the implication seems to be y'all get together before the game and decide, for dramatic reasons, that Bill's character should die in encounter x, since it would be more dramatic.
c) You don't need rules to tell a story. Campfires have worked admirably for that purpose for eons.
d) Sometimes things are beyond a party's control. I tend to separate good players from bad based on how they handle that situation.
e) You keep saying "most people". I highly doubt you know what "most people" like any more than I do.
A knight of Kyuss was like 16th level, tho, right? It should have a good attack bonus. A 16th level PC probably has 40+ AC, however. So at 12th, yeah, it can be nasty. 4 levels later, it's having problems.
==Aelryinth
They were CR 13, and the Swords of Kyuss were CR 11. Now since AoW is a meatgrinder it does not fit within normal CR ranges, which is why it is a bad AP to use if you are trying to compare yourself to ordinary mooks.
The only reason I'm using it as an example is because it is an actual adventure. It's easy to use theoretical encounters that a DM might use. Using an actual adventure lets me discuss what a DM will use. The characters have evolved based on the campaign. They have made decision based on what they know or think is coming up in the future. They know that they will be dealing with undead often so they make sure that they have ways to deal with that problem. If they were playing in Kingmaker, then their characters would have been built very differently and taken a completely different path as they adapted to that campaign.
The party has mostly used the gear that has dropped. Some people left the campaign do to the jobs but they took the gear with them. I have asked that we assume that the characters that become NPCs stay characters and keep what they have earned. Until they got to the Free City, they were very limited on the gear they could get. Once in the Free City, they spent more time improving their gear but they did't want to focus on all combat gear. Some of the more expensive items were kept because they were cool. My players like trophies.
I understand, but I would use real mooks, not AoW mooks. Darned evil AP.
In any event I think we should analyze the original statement which I believe was mooks not being able to hit an AC of 30.What is considered to be a mook to a level 12 PC, but still high enough that a DM might use it?
A knight of Kyuss was like 16th level, tho, right? It should have a good attack bonus. A 16th level PC probably has 40+ AC, however. So at 12th, yeah, it can be nasty. 4 levels later, it's having problems.
==Aelryinth
They were CR 13, and the Swords of Kyuss were CR 11. Now since AoW is a meatgrinder it does not fit within normal CR ranges, which is why it is a bad AP to use if you are trying to compare yourself to ordinary mooks.
Actually, I asked the level (Hit Dice), not the CR. Your stats indicate it has 16 hit dice, so yeah, it's gonna have a good TH.
That said, I dunno if it's a balanced CR. a single level 16 character is what CR?
==Aelryinth
It does not have a level since it has no class levels.
AoW does not use balanced CR's past chapter 7. I am assuming you are trying to find out if AoW was meant for the occasional gamer, and I don't think that it is.
A 16th level character in 3.5 is a CR 16. In PF it is a 15.
Didn't one of the higher level AoW chapters have a monster that was instadeath magic missile spam? Or was that something else?
Our AoW got bogged down fairly early on with RL so I really only read through the later adventures but IIRC there were some insane encounters in there.
What is considered to be a mook to a level 12 PC, but still high enough that a DM might use it?
I think this is reasonable question. What constitutes a "mook" in Pathfinder? For me it's CR 4 or lower than the APL (that's an estimation). There can be enough to be threatening, especially if they work as a unit, but easy enough to take out.
What is considered to be a mook to a level 12 PC, but still high enough that a DM might use it?I think this is reasonable question. What constitutes a "mook" in Pathfinder? For me it's CR 4 or lower than the APL (that's an estimation). There can be enough to be threatening, especially if they work as a unit, but easy enough to take out.
I think most CR'8 do have a tough time hitting a 30. If they are smart they will flank and use aid another, but they should still die before any PC's go down.
I don't think there is any hard and fast rules as to what constitutes a mook.
For me as long as an NPC/monster hits with it's primary attack at least a certain percentage of the time (more than 5%) or it can affect the outcome of the battle in a meaningful way then I think it's still acceptable to be utilized as a mook.
One thing that I really like about mooks is that I can give them some low value magic items like potions/poisons/wands/etc that improve their threat to the party without really worrying about the impact their loot will have on the party's finances.
I also like mooks because they actually encourage players to invest in at least a minimum number of AoE blasts or Damage Dealing Control spells.
I think that would be the spell weaver, which could throw 6 levels of spells/rd. Or 6 magic missiles, 3 scorching rays, etc.
==Aelryinth
Its also true that it requires all of them to hit, but against your wizard that's going to happen (natural 20s balancing out natural 1s on average), and 315hps of damage is going to kill him. He only has 250+temp hps (less by your reckoning) which gives room even for aberrant numbers of natural 1s that aren't balanced out by crits (or negated via some degree of fortification/immunity).
I don't think there's all that much chance that a high level wizard is trucking around without some amount of miss chance (especially after getting nailed the first time) -- or a Contingency for that matter.
Just as long as we're, you know, theorycrafting.
No, you present the encounters in such a way that the party does not need to fight it, or can run.Nice to know I've been doing it "wrong" for years and years.We have had several occasions where the whole party gets wiped out. It happens. Then the campaign goes in the pile to be reskinned and run again later.I never said you were doing it wrong. If your players have fun dieing randomly, then your not. Too bad most people get pissed because random luck completely beyond their control just ruined what they have spent the last year or 2 building up. Getting TPKed by something you know you can't handle isn't fun for most people. Its anti-climactic. It ruins the story that you are building.
You asked for how you can still have those things on the random encounter table in a campaign where the GM isn't throwing things beyond the party's control at them. Its quite possible to do. You give the players options about how to defeat the encounter without combat.
a) Not every table is trying to "build a story". Some are trying to just let a story happen organically.
b) If characters don't die by "random luck", the implication seems to be y'all get together before the game and decide, for dramatic reasons, that Bill's character should die in encounter x, since it would be more dramatic.
c) You don't need rules to tell a story. Campfires have worked admirably for that purpose for eons.
d) Sometimes things are beyond a party's control. I tend to separate good players from bad based on how they handle that situation.
e) You keep saying "most people". I highly doubt you know what "most people" like any more than I do.
a. An organic story is still building a story together. The only real difference is how much the DM uses hooks to lead the players. Cutting the story short because of a random encounter sucks more in organic stories, IMO, because the players tend to have goals of their own designs instead of ones based off of the GM's plot.
b. No, they can die through their choices in game. If my Paladin decides to to be the rear guard so that everyone else can escape, and he dies, that is not random luck. That is an active choice. If the rogue decides to sneak into the enemy base alone and is discovered and killed, its his choice, he dies, and its not random luck. If the players decide to take on the evil overlord in his secret lair, and they TPK, its their fault. If 4 dragons swoop down on your party in a random encounter on an open plane and TPK you, that is random luck and the GM being a dick or not knowing what he is doing.
c. No you don't. But you cannot provide challenges to the players without rules, since you will have no conflict resolution mechanic. The rules in d&d change the story and make it so that it is not entirely within your control.
d. Yes, things are out of their control. IMO, those things should not be designed in such a way that the players do not have a way of handling them. DMs should not intentionally put their PCs into a position where the expected outcome is a TPK. They should design the encounters to be difficult. They should design the encounters to need intelligent thinking. They should not design encounters to kill the players outright. Its too easy to do that, and if it is the GM's goal he cannot lose.
e. Right. I can only speak from experience with the 50+ people I have played with, in multiple different communities, and having never met someone who likes players to randomly die and TPK to things entirely outside their control.