Im having a few dilemmas in a game Im running. The first one is that I feel that the players are too attached to thier characters. If a few of the PCs were to perma die I feel they would quit playing all together. We are fairly laid back group and I generally prevent the characters from permadeath (falling unconscious is fine). I love that they feel attatched to their characters so I dont discourage this very much. But its got/ is getting to the point that they feel they cant die. I dont want this, I want them to feel threatened. How can I make a character feel threatened without killing them ...
My second delima is that they have a fairly close relationship with a powerful being and they chose to call on him during their last encounter when things got rough. They had just finished helping him with something and for rp reasons I felt he couldnt ignore them. He ended up ending the fight just making peace between the 2 parties and cast true resurection on a dead pc. I dont mind the true res outside of combat and want to use that in game somehow, but I didnt like him interupting the fight.
|
First of all, this: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/3/4/
But on a more serious note, I understand the difficulty of these situations. I ran a game where my PCs were all framed for a crime, which I found left me in an awkward position of not being able to kill them and then realistically let them insert a new character. That was a story issue, but same basic dilemma.
What I would suggest, if you are unwilling to kill the PCs, is to offer other sorts of threats. I've seen other posts on the subject, but usually taking their gear is a good incentive and possible threat. As well, if it is something particularly dear to them, it can provide a story hook while they try to retrieve it.
Alternatively, if you don't want to kill the party outright, let their actions have consequences. The werewolves they failed to defeat destroyed the shops in town so they will be unable to purchase supplies for a week while the damage is repaired. Or a more narrative challenge, like those werewolves killed a low-level NPC the party was somewhat friendly with.
As one word of advice, though, your powerful DMPC should ALWAYS have something better to do. If they're that powerful, odds are they're in a position of some responsibility. They can't handle every threat---that's what the adventurers are for!
I've been that attached before. Many have.After the character dies, and the tantrum and general snarkiness play out, the player will recover (hopefully before the next session). If not, he or she should seek help outside an rpg forum. :)
I've had this happen before. I convinced them to start a different campaign with new characters to try out new ideas I had. After a few sessions they were getting to know their new characters and once we went back to the old game, were not overly attached to the old characters to the point where I had to worry about replacing them.
I'm generally against letting players die, and have found that having characters who never die is often better for generating tension and suspense then having characters who die frequently. If death happens too frequently, they will not be attached to their characters and will in turn not fear death as much, better to frighten them with failure and suffering for the players they are attached to than death, especially if death is going to ruin their fun. It also allows for a lot more role playing and character development.
As for what to do, I would say that you should not save the players with an NPC, that cheapens their struggle, makes them feel powerless, reduces suspense, and makes them reliant on NPC's for help. I would allow them to fail and be defeated. This can include getting captured, losing items, having to flee, having importance NPC allies get killed, making enemies, failing to achieve major objectives, and so on.
I would, however, keep it a secret from the players that you don't let them die. You can say that you prefer for them not to die, but always leave the possibility open at least in their minds.
First I would point out to them that some of the greatest characters die Boromir, Sturm Brightblade, Eddard Stark, Hector of Troy, ect. Dieing a glorious death in battle happens remind them that just because thre is a lot of adolescent wish fulfillment inherent inherent in the game does not mean that they are imortal. Granted there are ways around it. Does the rest of the team want to pay/quest for resurection/reincarnate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm generally against letting players die, and have found that having characters who never die is often better for generating tension and suspense then having characters who die frequently. If death happens too frequently, they will not be attached to their characters and will in turn not fear death as much, better to frighten them with failure and suffering for the players they are attached to than death, especially if death is going to ruin their fun. It also allows for a lot more role playing and character development.
As for what to do, I would say that you should not save the players with an NPC, that cheapens their struggle, makes them feel powerless, reduces suspense, and makes them reliant on NPC's for help. I would allow them to fail and be defeated. This can include getting captured, losing items, having to flee, having importance NPC allies get killed, making enemies, failing to achieve major objectives, and so on.
I would, however, keep it a secret from the players that you don't let them die. You can say that you prefer for them not to die, but always leave the possibility open at least in their minds.
Have to agree with this. Honestly, I'm mystified by the idea that a player becoming attached to a character is a bad thing.
I'd have to agree that when it comes to making PCs feel threatened, there are better ways of doing things than just killing them off arbitrarily. High levels of character death just make them see their characters as stab blocks and ability scores instead of characters. Nobody's going to spend time working out character backstory when their PCs die after two sessions.
Plus, the games provides so many different ways of messing with a party without killing anyone. There's a reason one of my GM-mottos has always been. "I don't kill PCs ... that would be merciful."
|
Just a thought ... think Inception or any half-decent Twilight Zone episode:
Keep Deus Ex-ing the HECK out of them, past the point of absurdity and to the point of Cthulhu Dark/Groundhog Day level of insanity. Make them plot armored, the like Midas, curse the gods for their "blessing"
Bonus Points if you figure out how to leverage the Begged-For TPK into restarting the game, but this time for real... (all eye colors are switched back to 'normal' or some other "clear" example that this is the 'real' timeline)
Like I said ... just a thought.
Having difficulty posting with my phone.
I agree. I want the players to feel attatched to their characters. I've played in both types of games from both sides. I truely like games where characters last a campaign. The problem was with tgeir reactin when one of the players hit -30 health and a few of the other players got mad at me for it. The person who died did not get mad the others did...
The session before this encounter the pc's saved the powerful character from some baddies. I wasn't expecting them to call on him for help. I figured he had to show up at this point to return the favor and it didn't hurt the overall store arc. This encounter wasn't supposed to happen either. I've denied them his help a few other times so hopefully they don't feel he is a get out of jail free card.
As soon as the pc died i was thinking of how i would send them on a quest to revive him. Now I'd like to twist his resurrection into a side quest to get rid of a resurrection side effect. He is a fire elemental bloodline sorcerer focued on fire magic. Any ideas?
Having difficulty posting with my phone.
I agree. I want the players to feel attatched to their characters. I've played in both types of games from both sides. I truely like games where characters last a campaign. The problem was with tgeir reactin when one of the players hit -30 health and a few of the other players got mad at me for it. The person who died did not get mad the others did...
The session before this encounter the pc's saved the powerful character from some baddies. I wasn't expecting them to call on him for help. I figured he had to show up at this point to return the favor and it didn't hurt the overall store arc. This encounter wasn't supposed to happen either. I've denied them his help a few other times so hopefully they don't feel he is a get out of jail free card.
As soon as the pc died i was thinking of how i would send them on a quest to revive him. Now I'd like to twist his resurrection into a side quest to get rid of a resurrection side effect. He is a fire elemental bloodline sorcerer focued on fire magic. Any ideas?
You could send them to the elemental plane of fire to take back the part of his soul lost when he died. Maybe a cruel effrit has it and they will have to assault his citadel to get it back.
Generally speaking- the best cure for thinking they can't die is to corpse 'em.
That being said- remember that raise, resurrection, and reincarnation are all available for them to remedy the condition after the fact.
If you are wanting to put a lil fear of death into them without taking away their favored critter you can still lay 'em low.. just have the means for their coming back relatvely close to hand.
I do agree though not to orchestrate their deaths. Don't decide "ok bob's wizard is gonna die this session". Rather just.. take off the kid gloves. Let the die roll how and where they roll. Your PC's can't die because you've arranged the game such that they can't. If you want to change that expectation all you really have to do is stop intervening when death is imminent.
Stop fudging die or pulling punches or halving HP in mid fight or whatevre it is you are doing to keep the PC's from dying. If the dice roll a crit and the guy has 5 HP left.. well, he should have withdrawn.
Also note that while its not a campaign style I would enjoy- there's really nothing wrong with the game you are currently running.. if they are fine with never dying and you are too and all are having fun.. just keep it goin :)
-S
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I give myself, the DM, 2 hero points per session, similar to the players' from the APG. I use those hero points to fudge things once in a while in the players' favor--to prevent death. But ultimately, they like their characters, they bond with their characters, and they know I don't want their characters to die. But they know their characters can/will die, if there's no natural, non-DXM way out of it.
There is nothing more pointless-feeling, *in my opinion*, that knowing that when you go into battle you're going to come out the other side "ok", regardless how bad you screw up. To me, the thrill of success is only as powerful as the reality that critical failure is looming. It is the possibility of failure that makes success so enjoyable.
Just a thought ... think Inception or any half-decent Twilight Zone episode:
Keep Deus Ex-ing the HECK out of them, past the point of absurdity and to the point of Cthulhu Dark/Groundhog Day level of insanity. Make them plot armored, the like Midas, curse the gods for their "blessing"
Bonus Points if you figure out how to leverage the Begged-For TPK into restarting the game, but this time for real... (all eye colors are switched back to 'normal' or some other "clear" example that this is the 'real' timeline)
Like I said ... just a thought.
That strikes me as being passive aggressive.
There is nothing wrong with being attached to one's characters, but even if there were, the GM should either talk to his players about it to see if some compromise can be reached or at the very worst letting the dice fall where they may. Don't torment your players for getting attached to their characters.
Im having a few dilemmas in a game Im running. The first one is that I feel that the players are too attached to thier characters. If a few of the PCs were to perma die I feel they would quit playing all together. We are fairly laid back group and I generally prevent the characters from permadeath (falling unconscious is fine). I love that they feel attatched to their characters so I dont discourage this very much. But its got/ is getting to the point that they feel they cant die. I dont want this, I want them to feel threatened. How can I make a character feel threatened without killing them ...
There's your problem. You're fudging the system. Get them into some situations where failure means at least one person is going to die. Make sure they know that the situation is that dire. Then, if they fail, follow through. They're adventurers; it's supposed to be deadly. Otherwise, what's the point in successfully surviving those dangers?
My second delima is that they have a fairly close relationship with a powerful being and they chose to call on him during their last encounter when things got rough. They had just finished helping him with something and for rp reasons I felt he couldnt ignore them. He ended up ending the fight just making peace between the 2 parties and cast true resurection on a dead pc. I dont mind the true res outside of combat and want to use that in game somehow, but I didnt like him interupting the fight.
It's a little late, but the usual way of doing that sort of thing is with a token that grants a single boon rather than a vague, ongoing relationship. If they'd had the token, they would have used it, and the situation is easily resolved.
Barring that, just don't give them any experience for that encounter/adventure. You don't get the rewards if you call in the cavalry to do your job for you--unless calling in the cavalry is what the adventure is all about.
One more thing you could do: Kill the powerful being.
Follow up: It's good that they get attached to their characters. They should! That means the game is going well, and people are having fun. It also means that if one of them dies, it's truly tragic enough for such a great game. That death will be talked about for a long time.
As for the first one- They're playing the wrong game then, really. use hero points to avoid deaths from terrible luck, but poor decisions can result in death.
As for the latter, what is the alignment of the creature, and it's personality? I can see for most any alignment, the creature helping them and then turning to the party with "Now, about your payment..."
Im having a few dilemmas in a game Im running. The first one is that I feel that the players are too attached to thier characters. If a few of the PCs were to perma die I feel they would quit playing all together. We are fairly laid back group and I generally prevent the characters from permadeath (falling unconscious is fine). I love that they feel attatched to their characters so I dont discourage this very much. But its got/ is getting to the point that they feel they cant die. I dont want this, I want them to feel threatened. How can I make a character feel threatened without killing them ...
My second delima is that they have a fairly close relationship with a powerful being and they chose to call on him during their last encounter when things got rough. They had just finished helping him with something and for rp reasons I felt he couldnt ignore them. He ended up ending the fight just making peace between the 2 parties and cast true resurection on a dead pc. I dont mind the true res outside of combat and want to use that in game somehow, but I didnt like him interupting the fight.
1)
You don't have to kill the PCs to punish mistakes. The death of a well-loved NPC can be more than sufficient to teach them to think before they act.2)
See the (1).
Have the powerful being sacrifice himself to save the lives of the PCs. No more powerful being playing Deus ex Machina and you teach the PCs that their actions have consequences.
Though I do want people to care about their characters (that's part f the fun) I would never game with people that get TOO attached. That can easily lead to problems (such as explosive behavior when something negative happens to the character) and, quite frankly, hints at mental instability (that they either can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality, or that they are far too emotionally invested into what is, quite simply, just a game).
I give myself, the DM, 2 hero points per session, similar to the players' from the APG. I use those hero points to fudge things once in a while in the players' favor--to prevent death. But ultimately, they like their characters, they bond with their characters, and they know I don't want their characters to die. But they know their characters can/will die, if there's no natural, non-DXM way out of it.
I'll second the suggestion of a limited number of hero points or some other "get out of jail free" mechanic. I think they really add to the feeling of "we just barely survived", which is more interesting than "oh, I died, roll up a new character", IMO. And when a PC runs out of hero points and dies for real, then nobody can say that they didn't get a second chance.
I used to have a group that felt they couldn't die, and that I wouldn't run them against situation that could permakill or perma damage their PCs. They had some learning to do, so I ran them through a Ravenloft campaign... I have a binder full of dead and damaged PCs now. The true horror of that campaign is how many trees died to provide me with 20 dead PCs by level 11. 10 of them were one player, who had some extra learning to do.
My campaigns have been much better from a GM perspective since then, as they KNOW I am out to kill them, and I will do it if they give me too many chances. They also know I am fair about the challenges I send their way. Within the gentleman's agreement about CR vs APL they know I am trying very hard to kill them.
My players are generally happy with this, as their sense of accomplishment is much higher, and when they fail they know they screwed up. They also know that failure sometimes means that cherished characters get added to my binder.
|
Both of the things Rylar is concerned with can probably be handled by communication. Pre-session, out-of-game communication, making clear to the players what sort of expectations you have.
On the item of character death and attachment, I would advise them up front that it is possible for their characters to die. If the dice go that way, if they do something stupid... they can bite it. Of course, this stops being a crippling threat after a certain point in their Wealth. Nonetheless, they should know up front they don't have infallible PC Plot Armor. This will encourage them to play smart, use teamwork, etc. Edit: One thing that can help is having backup character concepts. I keep about a half-dozen sheets handy that I can quickly retool to meet various campaigns' needs. If one of my characters dies such that they won't be getting revived... yeah, I'll feel a little let down, I do have some investment in my characters. Still, I'll get over it because I have tons of nifty character ideas I want to explore; the death of one means I will just send in another that I enjoy.
It's a habit I would actually encourage in more players, because I think it helps act as a buffer against over-attachment. (end edit)
As to the matter of the powerful NPC that helped them... this can also be covered up front. Let them know this NPC cannot be counted on for timely intervention. Said NPC did it this once, but it's not something they can rely on. As others have already suggested, any influential NPC likely has several other concerns to tend to. Make it clear the players/their characters have cashed in their one emergency aid from this NPC, and they cannot count on extraordinary help in battle or other situations from here on.
This may be the sort of thing you have to schedule a few extra minutes for in the session, to make sure they understand you're doing it for story cohesion, maintaining dramatic tension/risk, etc. and that it's not being done as some sort of punishment upon them.