Would you quit a game if....

[haakon1]

When we watch/read . . . Conan, WE know that the character will not die and has plot immunity, but the character doesn't know that! When reading/watching, THAT'S what we buy into--the peril from the character's point of view.

If you watch the movie "Conan the Barbarian" for the first time, you're not entirely sure Conan will survive (it was before Hollywood was all sequels), and if you think all the PC's in his party will survive . . .

 

[S'mon]

It's the player's perspective we have to worry about, is it not? From the character's perspective . . . seriously? Given a choice between your own life, and a good chunk of humanity's cultural heritage, you'd choose your own life? I wouldn't, and if I were playing Nobilis, I wouldn't play a character that did.

My life, or rock'n'roll? Er...

 

[GSHamster]

If death is so important, why do we have spells like Raise Dead and Resurrection?

It seems to me that it is not that large a step to go from a game with Raise Dead to one where the default is characters don't die.

 

[blargney the second]

D&D has cure spells. Why not do away with damage?

 

[GSHamster]

D&D has cure spells. Why not do away with damage?

Because sometimes you run out of cure spells and the damage kills you?

If cure spells guaranteed that any damage done in previous round was negated, and this was true for every round in combat, then we might as well do away with damage.

Similarly, if Raise Dead is common enough and easy enough such that practically every death could be undone with Raise Dead, then we might as well do away with death.

 

[prosfilaes]

Not really. A Fate Point's purpose is akin to the purpose of levels and hit points. The more of 'em you have, the better chance it is that you live.

They're not get out of jail free cards.

Whatever they are, they're clearly extra-character mechanics. They're not playing the character doing something; they're the player manipulating the universe ("fate") on behalf of the character, director-stance.

I've seen a DM take the "flubbing" that far, and it makes the fighting boring for me. But the same guy will then turn around and allow deaths or even a TPK in another fight. <shrug>

I agree. That's the worst of all worlds, where the drama of death is taken away, and nothing is put in its place. Failure is not an option isn't fun.

Similarly, if Raise Dead is common enough and easy enough such that practically every death could be undone with Raise Dead, then we might as well do away with death.

My problem is that it is common enough and easy enough in high-level D&D. As long as the cleric is alive, death is a fancy form of damage, and if the wizard lives and the cleric doesn't, raise dead is just a teleport away. If they both die, then that's a DM specific situation, but if the players don't want to roll up more characters, so the fighter tosses them in the bag of holding and heads for the nearest city, many DMs aren't going to want a TPK or extended play with two players sitting it out, so the fighter will make it in short order.

Short of a TPK, in high-level D&D most players would rather have their characters die then lose an important piece of equipment. The latter has more consequences.

 

[Water Bob]

If death is so important, why do we have spells like Raise Dead and Resurrection?

Like hit points and Fate Points, those things help keep your character alive, not ensure it.

In my games, you couldn't just hit the local cleric in town like you were stopping at a medical clinic. Many times, the spell was not available. If it was, then I'd consider the particular religion and how that applies to the character.

It seems to me that it is not that large a step to go from a game with Raise Dead to one where the default is characters don't die.

The game is called Dungeons & Dragons, not Demigods & Immortals.

 

[Water Bob]

Whatever they are, they're clearly extra-character mechanics. They're not playing the character doing something; they're the player manipulating the universe ("fate") on behalf of the character, director-stance.

Fate Points are a replacement for Cure light/moderate/serious wounds and other spells like Raise Dead. Conan doesn't have magical healing as an integral part of the game they way D&D does.

If a player can accept a Healing Potion, then he shouldn't have trouble accepting Fate Points in a game where there are no Healing Potions.

 

[blargney the second]

With restoration in the game, why bother with ability damage?
With remove blindness in the game, why bother with blindness?

This forum will eventually no longer exist. Why bother typing?

Nihilism is ridiculous. Just play the damn game.
-blarg

 

[blargney the second]

Just reread that last post, and it didn't come out right. Fatalism is a pet peeve of mine, and I spoke harshly. I'm sorry.