How serious is your d&d?

Hjorimir

Adventurer
I get the point you're trying to make here, and I know a lot of this is largely a personal preference thing, but I have to ask how one can consider "player has input on whether their character is permanently dead or not" to be at odds with "player agency". Like, there's an argument to made that a PC's actions should have real consequences, but "death" is but one of great many consequences, and honestly it's one of the least interesting consequences possible, at least from a narrativist perspective. I would consider that a player having a role in deciding whether their own character's story is finished or not to be a pretty strong example of player agency, all things considered.

Again, I totally understand the other side of this, and I think it's a perfectly fine and valid way to approach the game, but it's obviously not an approach that suits everyone, and I don't think either one has the monopoly on the claim of best supporting player agency. There's pros and cons to either side; it's all a matter of preference.

I think it's fine to play with avoiding character death if that's what makes the game most fun for your table. For me, if you cannot die, most consequences are temporary at best. I think it leads to characters bumbling forward. I enjoy the game most when the PCs are forced to put a lot of thought into their actions because the consequences of failure have the potential to be extremely dire, but that's not for everybody. We all get different things out of these games we play and that's perfectly okay.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/her)
I think it's fine to play with avoiding character death if that's what makes the game most fun for your table. For me, if you cannot die, most consequences are temporary at best. I think it leads to characters bumbling forward. I enjoy the game most when the PCs are forced to put a lot of thought into their actions because the consequences of failure have the potential to be extremely dire, but that's not for everybody. We all get different things out of these games we play and that's perfectly okay.

I guess I can understand this. Personally, I can think of many consequences within a D&D campaign that are more effective, more interesting, and given resurrection is a thing, more permanent than death. I'd honestly feel like I had very little agency at all if the only thing really riding on my choices was the physical safety of my PC and their allies. But I suppose it also depends heavily on the nature of the campaign; its tone and its goals specifically
 

It's funny - nowadays when someone mentions a "gritty" campaign, thanks to the Philadelphia Flyers' mascot, I'm imagining something quite different from what they are!

(And what would said Gritty campaign look like? Perhaps the wacky hijinks of a larger orange monster - perhaps a reskinned goliath or something similar - and his group of sidekicks - heavily armored fighters armed with some unique staff-slings, and one really heavily armored defender - as they go around the countryside taking down devils, sharks, coyotes, panthers, knights, rangers, and so on. They might even take on senators and kings! Even penguins and maples might be dangerious...)
 

Gradine

The Elephant in the Room (she/her)
It's funny - nowadays when someone mentions a "gritty" campaign, thanks to the Philadelphia Flyers' mascot, I'm imagining something quite different from what they are!

(And what would said Gritty campaign look like? Perhaps the wacky hijinks of a larger orange monster - perhaps a reskinned goliath or something similar - and his group of sidekicks - heavily armored fighters armed with some unique staff-slings, and one really heavily armored defender - as they go around the countryside taking down devils, sharks, coyotes, panthers, knights, rangers, and so on. They might even take on senators and kings! Even penguins and maples might be dangerious...)

As a denizen of Northern California, I can assure Gritty and friends that, at least since about two weeks ago, they have little to fear presently from sharks. :rant:
 

Satyrn

First Post
It's funny - nowadays when someone mentions a "gritty" campaign, thanks to the Philadelphia Flyers' mascot, I'm imagining something quite different from what they are!

(And what would said Gritty campaign look like? Perhaps the wacky hijinks of a larger orange monster - perhaps a reskinned goliath or something similar - and his group of sidekicks - heavily armored fighters armed with some unique staff-slings, and one really heavily armored defender - as they go around the countryside taking down devils, sharks, coyotes, panthers, knights, rangers, and so on. They might even take on senators and kings! Even penguins and maples might be dangerious...)

The boss fight is a dire bear wielding a wand of lightning bolts.
 

S'mon

Legend
I guess I can understand this. Personally, I can think of many consequences within a D&D campaign that are more effective, more interesting, and given resurrection is a thing, more permanent than death. I'd honestly feel like I had very little agency at all if the only thing really riding on my choices was the physical safety of my PC and their allies.

There's an excluded middle where the PC choices can result in both death AND other bad consequences.

For a typical D&D campaign, taking death off the table wouldn't work at all for me. In my current Primeval Thule games I even removed raise dead magic; and told the players not to expect balanced encounters. Smart players now play like the heroes in swords & sorcery tales - lots of running away! Last session there was a cool scene with slamming the stone door shut BEFORE the foolish NPCs activate the guardian monster & get shredded... and at the end the PCs abandoned the Maguffin to the pursuing guardians rather than risk getting caught and squashed. A lot of cool choices & consequences came up that simply would not have been possible with no-PC-death in effect.

Session account here - https://simonsprimevalthule.blogspot.com/2019/03/tuesday-session-6-317-1082213.html
 
Last edited:

smbakeresq

Explorer
How serious is your d&d?

Serious 70-80, silly rest.

Main group is all veterans with years upon years of gaming, so we follow all the rules and apply real world physics and rules questions are “common sensed” out. Very little hand waving of stuff. Die rolls are open and death rate is high, a 1/3 chance at least from first level. We essentially believe a DM should have no mercy unless it makes sense in a game for plot or role play purposes.



Everyone knows how to play various games and systems so the game flies by as everyone comes prepared, we don’t need to consult rules that often, and we all understand that D&D is not a zero-sum game. That leaves more time for being silly as the silly isn’t a distraction from the main journey.
 
Last edited:

smbakeresq

Explorer
I guess I can understand this. Personally, I can think of many consequences within a D&D campaign that are more effective, more interesting, and given resurrection is a thing, more permanent than death. I'd honestly feel like I had very little agency at all if the only thing really riding on my choices was the physical safety of my PC and their allies. But I suppose it also depends heavily on the nature of the campaign; its tone and its goals specifically

This is also correct. How about forced sex change through a magical trap like in Tomb of Horrors? Serious and silly with long term fame effects. Or having the only way to compete a task is losing a body part that can’t be restored, even by a Wish? I had one in an older edition where you were killed and then resurrected in same class but had to retool stats using the old Druid resurrection table.
 

Retreater

Legend
I try to present the world as serious, because the players bring their own silliness and zaniness to the game without needing my help. I have the occasional eccentric NPC, but try to be serious in my long-term campaigns. Sometimes I do parody short campaigns, but these are the exception.
 

Remove ads

Top