Is D&D too PC friendly

Iced Tea · Jul 17, 2003

My bro brought up a good point the other day while we were talking about his campaign as well as HackMaster (which is a lot like old school D&D mainly cause i think they bought the rights to 2nd edition but made it cooler and revised a lot of things). anyway, do you think there should be a greater animosity towards the player from the DM (or GM in hackmaster), all this coming from a multi-TPK DM (my brother). and if you have the hackmaster PHB look up the example of gameplay

Iced Tea · Jul 17, 2003

reason why just right means at least one PC death is because i believe that it is more realistic if at least one or two PCs have died along the way

d4 · Jul 17, 2003

i can't answer your poll because i don't agree with your basic premise. i think campaigns are better with no PC deaths.

i'd argue your idea that a death or two is realistic, but who cares about being realistic anyway? i prefer my games to be like action movies. you never see the hero die halfway through the movie, so i don't like seeing PCs die in my campaigns.

i believe the GM should work with the players to make an interesting story, not work against them.

Micar Sin · Jul 17, 2003

I have to disagree with the basic premise as well. Having a pc die does not necessarily make the campaign more realistic. Does the threat of death make it so? yes. Does the threat of death affect how the players act? Yes. But arbitrarily saying 'in order to make this campaign realistic, at least one of your pcs has to die' flies in the face of realism....

Uder · Jul 17, 2003

I don't cheat on dice rolls, and I run a heavy-combat game. I guess that makes me "Not PC Friendly". There's no edge or drama in a game where everybody knows they are the "star" and can't die. On the other hand, nobody will invest much RP-time into a set of stats that's doomed to die because the DM has something to prove.

Aside from lethality though, it is the job of the DM to show the PCs who is boss. If you don't, they will walk all over you. I've seen it from both sides of the screen. Nobody takes a wimp DM seriously. I can't stand the majority of the game system, but Hackmaster adds some interesting carrots and sticks for GM/DM/HMs to play with that have nothing to do with offing PCs.

Ever since the advent of RP-heavy games and D&D 2nd edition, the gamemaster's role has started to blur a bit, crossing over into a half-referee, half-nursemaid role. 3E pretty much slipped up the chance to instill some good old-fashioned DM fear in players. Hackmaster does a (slightly too) good job at shoving some spine back into the gamemaster image.

Mista Collins · Jul 17, 2003

I don't think you should judge whether or not your campaign is PC friendly. The way I look at my campaign is this.

- I create a world
- I create problems in this world
- Some are too big for PCs to handle and they must run
- Some the PCs could easily handle

And I don't think a death really matters as long as my players understand the way I handle things. I make my world and campaigns based on these premises. It is up to the PCs to determine how "PC Friendly" it is. If they think they can handle something and attempt and die, it is not my fault, they chose to try.

But when the white bunny of death arrives, everyone dies:

Phasmus · Jul 17, 2003

Putting aside the issue of character death, in my experience with a somewhat low-loot-level party I have found that combats against appropriate CRs are often trivially easy, even allowing for the expected amount of PC resources to be expended.

In that respect, I would typify D&D as somewhat PC-Friendly. However, it is simple for a GM to adjust for the default PC-friendliness as he sees fit.

Tallok · Jul 17, 2003

I think that it makes the campaign much less interesting for the players when they are always dead ( I spent much of my last campaign unconscious, then dead through the last session)

Fenes 2 · Jul 17, 2003

I don't care about realism, I care about the fun my group is having. People sometimes forget that the goal of the game is to have fun, and that different people have fun in a different way. Does the threat of PC death help your players having more fun? If so, good for you. It is not the case with my group, however. We don't like to worry or fear for our PCs.

I personally made the experience that I play very differently in a game where I have to fear for my PC. I play more "efficient", less concerned with fun and style, instead focusing on tactics and minmaxing. I am also more prone to rules lawyering in order to avoid my PC getting harmed. All these things I do not consider conductive to a fun experience at the gaming table.

As a DM I don't kill off PCs without a warning and a way out ("Do that and you may/will die. Want to reconsider?"). I don't want a game focused on tactics and survival, but a game focused on character interaction and style/panache, where players can play characters as if in a movie (or sitcom/soap, in some cases).

Artimoff · Jul 17, 2003

I think that there was a DM vs. PC mentality to 1e and Hackmaster that isn't in 3e ( or 2e). So yes, 3e is more friendly to PCs. But that's just because it's not shoot on sight anymore. 3e waits until it sees the whites of your eyes first.