D&D 5E "The so-called '5-Minute Workday' is Something I've Seen Regularly Playing 5E D&D" (a poll)

[Luceilia]

AD&D Player's Handbook, c1978.

"so challenging... A good Dungeon Master will most certainly make each game a surpassing challenge for his or her players. Treasure and experience gained must be taken at great risk or by means of utmost cleverness only. If the game is not challenging, if advancement is too speedy, then it becomes staid and boring."

This relatively checks out, but I'm a bit conflicted.

It's talking about how advancement shouldn't be allowed too quickly, as in the GM can't be allowing too much loot too quickly to blitz the PCs through the character levels. It doesn't seem to be specifically emphasizing danger but moreso pacing.

That being said, it makes sense a wargame adaptation with character avatars would be built on a culture of throwing game pieces to the hands of fate.

Moldvay Basic, c1981. heroes venture out on dangerous quests in search of fame and fortune. Characters gain experience by overcoming perils and recovering treasures. As characters gain experience, they grow in power and ability."

Dangerous perils are relative. Anything that can kill you is a dangerous peril, even if you're far more likely to overcome it. But this is still old school, so you're probably right.

Sometimes an adventurer might come to a grisly end, torn apart by ferocious monsters or done in by a nefarious villain. Even so, the other adventurers can search for powerful magic to revive their fallen comrade, or the player might choose to create a new character to carry on. The group might fail to complete an adventure successfully, but if everyone had a good time and created a memorable story, they all win."

I don't see high risk anywhere in this. Risk yes, but there's zero quantifiers here.

So, yes, the spirit of D&D is high risk, high reward fantasy action-adventure, risking life and limb, etc.

Certainly for older editions at least but I have to ask... How does one successfully immerse themselves in such an environment?

I've played two somewhat similar campaigns (3rd edition with older with self ascribed AD&D GMs) and got two different miserable experiences.

In one, the GM was a master of the 'balancing encounters and probably secretly fudging the dice' style, bringing us to the brink of death time and time again. I got literal stress sickness from that campaign, from dreading the next combat and whether or not I would die, or worse be captured by some foul beast with vile intent. I kept coming because my character had a great relationship with the other characters (and the group was cool too) and was determined to see through the quest, but the kiss of death- albeit painful- was sweet relief from my suffering.

The other was a bit of a meatgrinder, mild by Old School standards but somebody was dying about once or twice a level. Watching my friends all die infront of me, powerless to stop it. Suffering the cold and clammy claws of death and having to try to resonate with another character... By my third character I was completely deadened, numb and bored out of my mind because I had no connection to anything. All I had was a video game character I was trying to get to survive, but all I could see for this detached and meaningless character was death and despair.

In your post above you noted that you wanted no more than a 2% chance of character death until easy access to resurrection becomes available. Respectfully, that sounds like you don't want risk. You want your character to survive. Period.

Do you want to die? Do you want to watch your friends die?

There needs to be an element of risk, a possibility of death but I want it low.

If I wanted that experience I would play a horror game as a one shot.

Right. You don't want risk. That's a perfectly valid way to play. It is, however, the opposite of what I want out of gaming.

Close. I want enough risk to add a little spice, but low enough any death will be RARE and meaningful.

Nothing wrong with your style of course, but yeah I think I would probably be unhappy at your table for more than a session or two based on this conversation....

I don't understand how you can think that having less than a 90% chance to win is "bad" odds. It's so high there's no point rolling dice. You just win.

Ok, WHAT?

A 10% chance of failure is huge!

Statistically if you roll a d10 ten times you're going to fail.

Who in the world would accept those odds? 10% chance for a vehicle failure. 10% chance of severe medicine side effects, 10% chance of prison? Those are horrible odds.

Conversely, I would walk away from any game that didn't involve risk. Nor would I run games for players who were that risk averse. It takes all kinds. Glad you have fun playing your way. It's definitely not for me though.

It does indeed take all kinds. Thank you for your time indulging me here <3

EDIT: fixed formatting

 

[overgeeked]

This relatively checks out, but I'm a bit conflicted.

It's talking about how advancement shouldn't be allowed too quickly, as in the GM can't be allowing too much loot too quickly to blitz the PCs through the character levels. It doesn't seem to be specifically emphasizing danger but moreso pacing.

That being said, it makes sense a wargame adaptation with character avatars would be built on a culture of throwing game pieces to the hands of fate.

Dangerous perils are relative. Anything that can kill you is a dangerous peril, even if you're far more likely to overcome it. But this is still old school, so you're probably right.

Well, yeah...that's D&D.

Certainly for older editions at least but I have to ask... How does one successfully immerse themselves in such an environment?

Immersion is not prevented by the presence of risk. You can be completely immersed in a high-risk game and completely not immersed in a no-risk game. They're not connected.

bringing us to the brink of death time and time again...I would die, or worse be captured by some foul beast with vile intent...

Watching my friends all die in front of me, powerless to stop it. Suffering the cold and clammy claws of death and having to try to resonate with another character... By my third character I was completely deadened, numb and bored out of my mind because I had no connection to anything...

Do you want to die? Do you want to watch your friends die?

You are not your character. Your character is not a real person. Your friends' characters are not your friends. Your friends' characters are not real people. If something bad happens to your character, it does not happen to you. It is a fictional construct for immersing into the game's fictional world. You can be immersed in the game world without so strongly identifying with your character that the line blurs and you suffer physical and mental stress over the outcome of a die roll.

If I wanted that experience I would play a horror game as a one shot.

The best and longest game I ever ran was a Call of Cthulhu campaign. It was glorious. So much fun.

Close. I want enough risk to add a little spice, but low enough any death will be RARE and meaningful.

Death is inherently meaningful. It doesn't need to be a perfectly timed heroic sacrifice to have meaning.

Ok, WHAT?

A 10% chance of failure is huge!

Statistically if you roll a d10 ten times you're going to fail.

Yes, that's what 10% means. 1 in 10. Failure doesn't equal death. Failure is failure. Death is death. You can fail to win a fight and not die. It's not victory or death.

Who in the world would accept those odds? 10% chance for a vehicle failure. 10% chance of severe medicine side effects, 10% chance of prison? Those are horrible odds.

Well, you do. Every day of your life. Depending on your risk factors and lifestyle choices. We all do. But this is well and truly outside the scope and intent of this thread.

 

[Oofta]

Well, yeah...that's D&D.

Immersion is not prevented by the presence of risk. You can be completely immersed in a high-risk game and completely not immersed in a no-risk game. They're not connected.

You are not your character. Your character is not a real person. Your friends' characters are not your friends. Your friends' characters are not real people. If something bad happens to your character, it does not happen to you. It is a fictional construct for immersing into the game's fictional world. You can be immersed in the game world without so strongly identifying with your character that the line blurs and you suffer physical and mental stress over the outcome of a die roll.

The best and longest game I ever ran was a Call of Cthulhu campaign. It was glorious. So much fun.

Death is inherently meaningful. It doesn't need to be a perfectly timed heroic sacrifice to have meaning.

Yes, that's what 10% means. 1 in 10. Failure doesn't equal death. Failure is failure. Death is death. You can fail to win a fight and not die. It's not victory or death.

Well, you do. Every day of your life. Depending on your risk factors and lifestyle choices. We all do. But this is well and truly outside the scope and intent of this thread.

For some people, a character that we don't care about, fellow PCs that we have no attachment to, take the immersion and fun out of the game. Have you never read a book, watched a movie where you became emotionally attached to those characters? That connection can be just as strong to PCs.

If a PC is just a pawn, a game piece, they become less meaningful. Having a character that becomes more than just a pile of numbers is one of the best parts of the game for some of us.

 

[overgeeked]

For some people, a character that we don't care about, fellow PCs that we have no attachment to, take the immersion and fun out of the game.

There's a vast excluded middle between not caring and caring so much that the thought of something bad happening to your character causes you stress.

Have you never read a book, watched a movie where you became emotionally attached to those characters? That connection can be just as strong to PCs.

Yes. But at no point did I suffer physical or mental stress over the outcome of the movie or book. There's the normal tension and release of a dramatic scene or the build up in a horror movie to a jump scare. But the fictional life or death of a character doesn't cause me to stress out. At worst it is a grumpy expletive, a "that sucks," and I go on with my day.

If a PC is just a pawn, a game piece, they become less meaningful. Having a character that becomes more than just a pile of numbers is one of the best parts of the game for some of us.

Again there's a vast gulf between those two positions. Your options are more than "meaningless pawn game piece" and "overpowering emotional connection."

Is this the thing Nordic LARPs are going for? Is this "bleed"?

 

[Vaalingrade]

Just wanting to chill out and play your character without the constant specter of death isn't a new, weird thing. We've always been here.

 

[Luceilia]

Again there's a vast gulf between those two positions. Your options are more than "meaningless pawn game piece" and "overpowering emotional connection."

Is this the thing Nordic LARPs are going for? Is this "bleed"?

Indeed there us a gulf between them.

I'm not familiar with Nordic Larp, but for me the entire point of a roleplaying game is to insert myself into the character. To see the world through her eyes and feel it through her heart.

That resonance is the only reason I got into the hobby to begin with (though obviously I can't resonate much when I GM. Just small hits of empathy with the various NPCs I portray.)

I play the game element because it's the rules that resolve conflict in the roleplay, not for the sake of throwing dice and seeing how a discarnate character performs like in a videogame or a boardgame.

To each their own of course, I'm not here to criticize anyone just explaining my own perspective.

 

[Hussar]

@overgeeked - at no point in your life have your chances of death been even remotely close to 1 in 10.

How many classes have you taken where 1 in 10 students failed? Very very few.

 

[overgeeked]

@overgeeked - at no point in your life have your chances of death been even remotely close to 1 in 10.

How many classes have you taken where 1 in 10 students failed? Very very few.

Really? I've died twice and been revived.

And we're not talking about having a 1 in 10 chance of death. We're talking about having a 1 in 10 chance of failing to win a fight. That doesn't equal death.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I've seen a few five minute adventuring days. Sometimes the first thing you do turns into a knock-down-drag-out nightmare giant encounter where you're all just lucky to be alive at the end. I see nothing overly gamey about calling it a day just because it is still morning when you are utterly exhausted and spent. Sometimes it makes perfect RP sense and pressing on because you have to do some intended amount of stuff per game day would be the less "realistic" thing.

What I have never actually seen is the five minute adventuring day as an intentional strategy to game the resource management, which seems to be the problematic form. Certainly I've seen players burn through resources too fast in a few minor encounters and push for a rest, or want to rest at a narratively inopportune time, but everyone I've played with who was at all socialized to the game has understood that expecting a long rest after a single encounter is not reasonable under normal circumstances. I've never come close to feeling like any sort of house rule was in order to deal with any sort of problem in this vein.

 

[Hussar]

Really? I've died twice and been revived.

And we're not talking about having a 1 in 10 chance of death. We're talking about having a 1 in 10 chance of failing to win a fight. That doesn't equal death.

Do you really think there was a ten percent chance they would not be able to revive you? Twice?