D&D 4E Fun to die in 4e?

[Mercule]

What I generally encounter in D&D is that, when the death rate is high, players end up throwing in the towel on character development and make disposable, playing-piece style characters. They may enjoy the experience of playing them in the moment, but there's no expectation of character growth either mechanically or story-wise - the stereotypical "Bob the Fighter" and his brother "Bob 2.0 the Fighter," etc.

See, I would not say that is my experience. I make resurrection magic a real bear to access, have a low death rate, etc. My big thing is that the PCs/players need to think somewhat tactically. If you have your head up your rear, you'll die. If you have really bad die rolls and either you or the other PCs don't try to mitigate that, you'll die.

IMO, there is excitement not just in the "my character might fail to get the macguffin" mindset, but in the "I may never see this character again" mindset. I'm not talking about Tomb of Horrors -- the hammer can be a very small one, but it needs to be there.

For the record, I do allow action points to mitigate some of the risk of death for PCs. Usually, dumping all your remaining APs will convert the "dead" result to something less. The more APs available, the easier you get off.

Also, I think I've killed less than ten PCs in 25+ years of being primarily a GM. It isn't common, it's just the hint of a threat. Those deaths are permanent, though. Over the same span, I've only had resurrection magic used three times. One of those was an extremely high-powered game that had a PC ascend to godhood, one was in Speaker of Dreams, and one was a character who I realized I'd screwed up the combat, badly, and who was on a quest for his god.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Doesn't anyone use Raise Dead or Ressurections anymore? Plus be smart enough to drop the additional balogney penalties the PC is further shafted with?

Plus be smart enough to have a friend, or allie, or sponsor, etc... that can hook up low level characters with Raise Dead? Such friends are only a message spell away, usually.

Two issues here:

1) Some of us don't like raise dead or resurrection. I much prefer PCs being left for dead, beaten and bloodied, stripped of possessions, or just failing to complete their objective or achieve their goal to having them die and reboot. Death with no hope of resurrection is often brutally final; death with near certainty of resurrection can be pointless, trivial, and even boring.

2) Some of us prefer PCs to be out there without any safeguards beside their own abilities, wits, and luck. Shoring up the hardiness of PCs through higher hp, action points, and the like allows that feel of self-sufficiency without forcing constant character reroll.

 

[Talath]

Hey, isn't it true that, in 1st edition, you actually gained XP for dying? I think it was 1,000 XP per death.

You might me thinking of Rolemaster, which gave you XP for just about anything. Walk a few miles in uncharted territory? 25 xp. Dangerous? Make it 50 xp. Hit that goblin? 5 xp. Kill him? 15 xp. Died? If you came back, that's 100 xp.

I actually like this, because you gain XP for doing new things you haven't done before. You get less XP as you do the same thing over and over again, though.

That, and you started with 10,000 XP at 1st level.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

I totally agree! Win or lose, the game should be fun. It's not about PC death though. Everything should be fun. Failing a saving throw shouldn't be a ticket to a ruined evening (see: sleep, hold, Save or Die). Getting injured? Should be a blast. Sure, maybe not as much fun as WINNING, but each incremental act should be cool, in both directions (to apply and to be the target).

Lately, I'm really drawn to systems where failing is more profitable in terms of xp/burnable resources than winning is. It sets up this cool cycle of getting beat down time and time again, just to get up and pull off an amazing gut-wrenching last-second costly-upset win. And then I'm on empty and it starts again. Also, it's great for making those villains who I just hate until I finally, finally get the skills to rip them down a peg.

 

[ptolemy18]

Yes, sometimes it is fun for a character to die.

That's why characters only die in my games if the player CHOOSES for it to happen.

I've heard of that kind of game before, and I can't say I'm interested. I don't play video games without the threat of randomly dying -- I don't play board games or sports without the threat of losing the game -- why would I want to play a RPG without the threat of dying because I made a mistake or I rolled bad? Without risk, there's no fun. (And of course, there are risks that don't involve character death, but...)

The best D&D games, IMHO, are ones that have both a lot of roleplay AND a real "tough but fair" sense of balanced-but-dangerous tactical combat.

But then again, I *like* making new characters... usually after a few months playing a given character I'll start to think eagerly of the new characters I could make up. That's my Character Actor short-attention-span side speaking, I guess. Call me a role-playing masochist if you will... of course I'd RATHER survive and I don't like making one new character after another if my character dies in some way which I consider incredibly lame and cheap. But I have a pretty high tolerance for death in RPGs. 'Cause IT'S FUN!!

(within reason, that is... )

Jason

 

[ptolemy18]

Lately, I'm really drawn to systems where failing is more profitable in terms of xp/burnable resources than winning is. It sets up this cool cycle of getting beat down time and time again, just to get up and pull off an amazing gut-wrenching last-second costly-upset win. And then I'm on empty and it starts again. Also, it's great for making those villains who I just hate until I finally, finally get the skills to rip them down a peg.

You know, I thought I wouldn't like it, but I recently GMed a game using Skull & Bones' "Lives" system. The system where the PCs each have a certain (random and unknown to the players) number of "lives," and if they get reduced to zero hit points and "die," they just lose a life and have to risk getting their eye gouged out or their hand chopped off or something like that. (Since it's a pirates game, all the injuries are pirate-like, so you can get a pegleg or an eyepatch or whatever.)

This kind of system is actually a lot of fun. Firstly and most importantly, it means that the DM can throw "save or die" situations at the players without feeling TOO evil. It also means that the players can lose a fight, or get captured, or whatever, without having it be The End of the Game. In a regular D&D game, if the whole party "loses", it's almost always a TPK (or some kind of bizarre situation involving lots of subdual damage). But with the Lives element added, you can have really dramatic and crazy stuff happen, and then the party can recover from it and go seek revenge on their opponents or whatever. It's introduced a lot of fun role-playing and campaign opportunities.

Jason

 

[ptolemy18]

Thats the secret of roleplaying: gambling with your charecter.

Preach on, TerraDave!

For myself, I'll take it a step further: the way I personally game is Method Acting + Gambling.