D&D 4E Hitting "reset": A counterpoint to "gritty" 4e

So there has been a lot of discussion back and forth on whether 4e is making the game too "easy". That its not "gritty" enough. Some old school gamers miss save or die, or level draining. They like the Warhammer style of play where even a bar fight could end their life.

However, for my group we are really looking forward to 4e precisely because it lessens grit. We like cinematic heroics. Heroes who can take on dragons and walk away without permnanent disabilities.

Many of us have been gaming for 10+ years. Some of us (including myself) over 20 years. After our last Age of Worms session (likely our last 3.5 game), we had an interesting discussion after almost getting TPKed (which would have been our 2nd TPK in AoW had it happened). We talked about character death and after all the work we have put into our characters, seeing our characters die is almost like seeing all that work wasted. But all of us agreed that the threat of death is important to creating tension and excitement. No one wants to die, but its no fun to play a game where your character is untouchable. What would the point of playing be after all?

One of our players even went so far as to say that if his character dies, he'll be done playing. At least until 4e comes out and even then he isn't sure he would play again. He has lost so many characters and/or had so many campaigns start strong and then fizzle over the span of his many years of gaming that the will to make yet another new PC has been all but beaten out of him. But yet, being resurrected doesn't appeal to him either. Ironically, he felt it would cheapen the death of his character should it actually occur.

Gritty is what our group absolutely does not want. We want the threat of death, and we want death to be real, but we don't want to actually die. How can we reconcile these two seemingly opposite concepts?

After much discussion on ways avoid PC death, but yet not make it seem like we have plot immunity, we hit upon a solution. The next time a PC dies, our DM will let us hit "reset" like we were playing a video game. We will be able to rewind back to before that battle and replay it again (or perhaps even run away this time). This might be much too metagamey for some groups taste, but it seems like it would work out well for our group. I wanted to post this here, because I think it illustrates the drawback of gritty games. Sure they seem "real" but for my group, its certainly not a fun playstyle.

Have any other groups done anything similar? I wonder if the 4e DMG will offer a similar idea.

Less all-or-nothing save or dies, no level drain and some sort of action point / hero point mechanic definitely sound appealing to me.

Having save or die spells work on a sliding scale, with say, a Hold Person causing one to suffer the effects of a Slow or Entangle on a marginal success, and a full Pin / Paralysis on an excellent success, sound like a decent compromise. Stinking Clouds that Sicken, and *can* Nauseate on a good roll. Slay Living that just does a lot of damage on a normal hit and *can* drop you to -1 instantly (so Dying, not Dead). That sort of thing.

We dumped level drain back in 2nd Edition. Now that it's much easier to deal with, we use it again in 3rd Ed (the whole 'negative levels' thing, staved off by Fort save or lower level Restoration magic, was a much gentler system). Even then, the whole 'energy drain' thing seems more appropriate to target attributes, or cause Fatigue / Exhaustion.

Dragonblade said:

Have any other groups done anything similar? I wonder if the 4e DMG will offer a similar idea.

Click to expand...

I haven't done that, but I see no reason not to.

That would let me, as DM, create combats that are much, much tougher. In normal D&D, the DM is, from a certain perspective "playing to lose." I wouldn't mind kicking it up a notch once in a while, and this would give me a way.

Cadfan said:

I haven't done that, but I see no reason not to.

That would let me, as DM, create combats that are much, much tougher. In normal D&D, the DM is, from a certain perspective "playing to lose." I wouldn't mind kicking it up a notch once in a while, and this would give me a way.

Click to expand...

Our DM kind of felt the same way. He says he sometimes he holds back, but this way he can just go all out. And if we TPK we can do it again and use our knowledge of the first fight to refine our tactics. Everyone in our group seemed to like this idea.

First of all, save or Die spells do NOT constitute a 'gritty' game. Not by a long shot. Furthermore, in no version of dnd were pc's EVER in danger in a bar brawl; since bar patrons are usually 0-1 level npc's.

Lastly you could take a page out of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay vc2's book and introduce fate points in the game. Each fate point prevents character death in a sllick roleplaynig fashion.

No one wants to die, but its no fun to play a game where your character is untouchable. What would the point of playing be after all?

Click to expand...

I, too, have been playing for over 20 years (actually, over 30 <shudder>). I think all of us go through the "realism" phase at one point or another. However, I wanted to address this specific comment above as I do not believe that risk of character death is the only (or even best) way to add tension. I have been DM'ing for all of those 30 years and occasionally been a player, and I can tell you that I have killed one character in the last 20 years and my players will all back me in saying that my games are some of the most tense they've experienced. Not because they feared that their character would die, but because of what would happen in the story if they screw up. Their childhood friend gets hanged because they were unable to successfully get the evidence to prove who really killed the mayor's son. They end up being responsible for the king getting deposed and a tyrant sitting on the throne because they weren't able to find and take care of the assassin. When players are actually role-playing, the scenario itself can generate a fear of failure far greater than any fear of death. I've had many players willing to sacrifice their characters (that they played for a couple years) in order to save the kingdom or what-have-you.

My players all pretty much know from the start that unless they do something totally foolhardy (like defeat a rogue who flees, then follow the rogue in order to kill him for his armor), or they want to fling their lives to the wind for a chance to beat the final bad guy of the campaign, their characters aren't going to die. They know they'll be able to participate in the story. They do, however, know that their actions have consequences in the story, and I think this is a much more powerful motivator (assuming you're playing with people that like stories more than looting bodies).

It can be difficult to get this to work until you're used to it, but it's a matter of game design. First, I ensure there's a reason for the combat other than "I want your stuff." When the players are hunting an assassin who's out to kill the king and the assassin beats them, he isn't specifically out to kill or loot them, he's got something else to do. When the PCs all end up bleeding and unconscious, he takes off and leaves them there. He doesn't care if they survive, he just needs to kill the king and now his way is clear. The guards might then find the PCs in the hall and stop them from bleeding to death just in time for the PCs to then run down the hall and find the king dead at his dinner table.

This brings me to another technique: deadlines. We've seen it in the movies; the hero never finds the bomb until there are only 20 seconds left to disarm it, and THAT's when the baddies get to him, so he has to defeat them in 20 seconds or the town blows sky high. The same technique can be used in gaming to add tension without risk of death. The high priest is gating in a horde of demons and the PCs get to the entrance 1 minute shy of the completion. They now have 10 rounds to defeat the guards in the hall (or find a way around them) and disrupt the ceremony. The guards in the hall can be weak -- just strong enough to delay the PCs. Again, no fear of death, just fear of what will happen to their town if they don't make it in time. And the priest doesn't care about killing the PCs. Heck, he's probably sadistic enough to make sure they live so that they can witness their failure unfold.

I also ensure there are backup plans in case things go too easy or too hard. The guards are on their way and get there "early" to help the PCs out. One of the escaped rogues calls for reinforcements. Or I'll lower or raise hp as necessary as I gain a better sense of how much damage the PCs can churn out. All the players know, however, is that combat is challenging and that there is a penalty for failure.

The added bonus to this methodology is that players always feel their characters are cool, because they rip through people, slay the dragons, etc.

This style of gaming requires mature players that are story driven; it's not for everyone. But then again, players who only care about getting loot view death or losing treasure as the mark of failure in which case death is not an issue.

Have you seen the E6 take on death? The GM states up front that 'death' leaves a PC KO'd instead. But gives players the option of "raising the death flag" which PCs get some kind of action point pool. It gives them a way of saying "this fight is worth dying for" It those cases PCs can die.
I would dislike a game that had chance of being able to heroically die for a cause. I also really dislike rewinding a game, rather than simple solution pulling of the final blow.

Currently I play in the game using the "death flag" concept (I'm not sure if it's unique to the GM who also posts here, nor am I sure if he'd want to be named, so I'll leave him nameless)...

Basically, you're not going to die, unless you raise your death flag. Raising your death flag gives you six free d20 re-rolls, or you can spend two for an extra standard action.

However, if there's a TPK (and the fights are pretty tough in that game, we typically have several people hitting -10... makes me glad I built my character for survivability!), just because we're not dead, doesn't mean bad things aren't going to happen to us.

As the above poster noted: there can be consequences besides death.

I really enjoy this philosophy of play, because ultimately I feel that the closer RPGing gets to story telling, the better it is, and if I write up a several page background for my PC, I don't want him to get knocked off randomly... however, dying in a plot relevant manner is perfectly okay.

Edit: Crap, Evilhalfing beat me to it. We're currently playing E6. I don't like resurrect spells (since I like grittier fantasy more than high fantasy) so it works for me.

Dragonblade said:

Have any other groups done anything similar? I wonder if the 4e DMG will offer a similar idea.

Click to expand...

Very interesting idea. I haven't done the same thing, but I have tried to achieve the same ends as your group. I don't like easy acccess to resurrection magic and I don't like losing PCs, since the campaign is very heavily driven by PC choice and background. So I've essentially taken PC death out of my game, and I've found that it's easy to do that while retaining excitement and tension.

The method I use is as follows: PCs get 3 swashbuckling cards (earlier it was 3 action points) per session, each of which allows a special benefit. As a group they can also throw in 3 cards when a PC is taken to -10 or below by an attack, spell or effect. Doing so lets the PC survive, at -9 hp and stable. Until the encounter ends, they cannot be revived and can be killed if specifically targeted.

These rules make actual PC death very unlikely, and we've only had one in 70 sessions, even though fights IMC tend to be brutal, with a PC needing the "3 card" rule to survive every 2 sessions. It also means that there is unlikely to be a PC death without a TPK.

The way I retain excitement and tension in the game is by ensuring that there are many repercussions for group defeat and for individual PCs being dropped. The group may fail to achieve an objective or be unable to prevent enemies from achieving something which is dire for the PCs or the campaign. PCs, especially those who are dropped, may be captured and have horrible things done to them. Valuable equipment and items may be lost. Important NPCs and allies may be killed. Above all, there is the simple matter of PC (and player) ego, which absolutely hates to be beaten, whether death actually occurs or not.

So, in short, I think it's very easy to have excitement and tension in the game without PC death. All you need is to have repercussions for PC defeat (as a group and as individuals). That's why I wouldn't use the method that your group plans to, since being able to redo fights till one wins would remove any repercussions for failure. That said, as long as it works for your group, go for it. And when someone tells you your group is "playing D&D wrong," kick him in the nadgers.

This will be an interesting discussion to watch.

I attempted long ago the concept of a "restart" point that allowed me to retry a combat that would be otherwise too hard to use. However, the idea failed on a couple of levels. Mostly because my group was never on board with it. There were some pros and some cons to the concept though.

Pro:
* No risk of permanently losing "yet another" PC to random rolls or a poor night of dice.
* Would allow for creative ideas that normally might not work without some "safety net" concept.
* Encourages risk, heroics, and action over PCs turtling in a defensive posture at all times.

Con:
* Certain game elements become hard to track. What was your current hp going into the last battle. Did I use my potion of bulls strength here? How many charges did my wand have before this fight?
* A frustration factor of having to fight the same fight over and over and over again.
* Lack of a option for failure beyond death: Do you only restart only in a TPK or can we restart if I'm the only one who loses a PC but everyone else is fine? What about if we're just captured, paralyzed, or any other "temporary" defeat?

If you can hammer out these kinks, it might work. I doubt the DMG will endorse this play style, but if it works for you, more power to ya.

(and now I watch as the "that's badwrongfun" crowd descends upon this thread like a pack of wolves)