How to deal with death in RPG?

[S'mon]

That is an awesome story, and it's not really what I meant. Player ingenuity is one thing -- what I'm describing usually results from player ambivalence. Killing the sphinx rather than bother solving the riddle you spent all night coming up with, sort of thing.

If I create content I'll generally aim to ensure it's reusable. Re riddle I'm sure I'd just google one, or more likely I have one or two in my head I'd use. I'd not count on the PCs solving the riddle - but if I get to present it then it's seen use. If fighting the sphinx is an option (they are tough in 5e) I'd not be surprised if the PCs take it.

 

[5ekyu]

Half of the party expects the GM to cheat and half doesn`t. I`m in favor of let actions and dices decide.

But the other half says a good GM doens`t let a player die, unless, he wants to. Because they put so much time and effort in creating and desenvolving their characters. Also they say that rules don`t metter, only fun.

Ok, so my first rule of rpg and death...

A discussion of "death, before and after" is vital to a campaign at day one. This is a huge issue and its critical everybody is on the same page. It is a very defining aspect of the campaign. Get agreement, one way or the other. It may wind up that some are at the wrong table and find that out early.

At my table, the before parts include
Nobody dies by dice alone! So, massive damage is gone, that rule not used. Death saves apply everytime. Spells with one save or die, put you to death saves although they may force harsher results otherwise. Similarly, spells with one save or out for long time get the same kinda three-save-race. NET RESULT- getting hit with these starts an "oh ####" drama instead of bring just a scene ender for someone. It becomes a vital issue for others to act right now.
Instead of material comps at the time of rezz, there are items called soul catchers that you need to be wearing when you die. They cost to get made and without them dead is dead. This tends to explain the world not being way off-kilter with raising being available after the fact for anyone,

At my table, the after part includes:
After-death scenes where the issue of "do you want to go back?" is played thru with ties to background, some challenging choices and even opposing or rival forces getting into the mix. Every time I ran one, the character came back with internal personal changes (player side, not forced) and often with info or outlooks that impacted campaigns. Every dead-and-back mattered a lot.
In a previous game, likely in this one too, I also added cults of rival status. One saw those that came back as abominations, insults to death gods, to be killed, likely after torture. Other cult saw them as blessed, prophets, etc. So, again, every death-and-back matters a lot with ongoing impacts.
Finally, in a previous campaign, I allowed "feats" that gave characters some medium mystic type options eith the prerequisite of dead-and-back.

The net result was that every PC dead and back was a major event, not just a glossed over thing, not just a tougher heal. They were personal moments of change. Even the more hard-core guys had a blast. One told me later "I regret my PC never died in that game cuz it missed out." He had built a major tough everything to not die type.

Frequently, the big complaint about games with rezz etc is that it makes death "meaningless" but my experience has shown me the key is not to refuse the comebacks but make it meaningful even if they come back.

These were some of the ways I managed that.

Not for everyone.

Maybe good for some.

 

[Umbran]

Killing the sphinx rather than bother solving the riddle you spent all night coming up with, sort of thing.

If they demand a riddle in lieu of a combat encounter you planned, I think that's a win win, all things considered. I mean, provided you are good at improvising riddles.

But, dude...

If they say screw it and attack the sphinx, then aren't they just demanding a combat in lieu of the riddle encounter you planned?

There is a maxim that we should reward players for the behavior we want to see in our games, but on the other hand, if they decide they just want to kill the monster, what's wrong with that?

 

[DMZ2112]

But, dude...
If they say screw it and attack the sphinx, then aren't they just demanding a combat in lieu of the riddle encounter you planned?
There is a maxim that we should reward players for the behavior we want to see in our games, but on the other hand, if they decide they just want to kill the monster, what's wrong with that?

I think you folks are overthinking this. My point is just that sometimes things happen in game to all of us that we're not happy with. That sometimes the players deal the gamemaster an unwelcome surprise. That we understand what that feels like. That we can relate to the feeling of having effort rendered meaningless, even if it is only in the short term. That it's not fun.

Maybe we deserve it, maybe we don't; maybe we're good at coping with it, maybe we're not -- that's irrelevant. No one comes to a game session expecting to be negated, and when it happens, we get disgruntled.

That's all I'm saying. I'm not trying to make a broader statement about style.

 

[S'mon]

I think you folks are overthinking this. My point is just that sometimes things happen in game to all of us that we're not happy with. That sometimes the players deal the gamemaster an unwelcome surprise. That we understand what that feels like. That we can relate to the feeling of having effort rendered meaningless, even if it is only in the short term. That it's not fun.

As GM? No, this basically never happens to me. There was something in a session about 16 years ago when players latched onto a passing NPC (a small boy I happened to describe passing them on a city street) and missed the Main Plot, but that was maybe a thousand game sessions ago. Normally whatever the PCs do, is great - freedom of action is the whole point.

As a player I've sometimes been railroaded by the GM ("No, you can't do X, you have to do Y"), and that's annoying.

 

[Immortal Sun]

As GM? No, this basically never happens to me. There was something in a session about 16 years ago when players latched onto a passing NPC (a small boy I happened to describe passing them on a city street) and missed the Main Plot, but that was maybe a thousand game sessions ago. Normally whatever the PCs do, is great - freedom of action is the whole point.

As a player I've sometimes been railroaded by the GM ("No, you can't do X, you have to do Y"), and that's annoying.

Wait seriously? You've never had players go "Screw this we're gonna hit it instead!"???

Really?

<----this is my incredulous face.

 

[DMZ2112]

As GM? No, this basically never happens to me. There was something in a session about 16 years ago when players latched onto a passing NPC (a small boy I happened to describe passing them on a city street) and missed the Main Plot, but that was maybe a thousand game sessions ago. Normally whatever the PCs do, is great - freedom of action is the whole point.

As a player I've sometimes been railroaded by the GM ("No, you can't do X, you have to do Y"), and that's annoying.

You haven't had a disappointing session as gamemaster in 16 years?

:: patronizing smile:: Okay.

 

[S'mon]

You haven't had a disappointing session as gamemaster in 16 years?

:: patronizing smile:: Okay.

I'm sorry you have so many disappointing game sessions.

 

[S'mon]

Wait seriously? You've never had players go "Screw this we're gonna hit it instead!"???

Really?

<----this is my incredulous face.

Players do all kinds of amazing and wonderful stuff!

There's a well known trick - prepare situation/environment not plot, and however the pcs react is cool.

 

[pemerton]

As GM? No, this basically never happens to me. There was something in a session about 16 years ago when players latched onto a passing NPC (a small boy I happened to describe passing them on a city street) and missed the Main Plot, but that was maybe a thousand game sessions ago. Normally whatever the PCs do, is great - freedom of action is the whole point.

There's a well known trick - prepare situation/environment not plot, and however the pcs react is cool.

Wait seriously? You've never had players go "Screw this we're gonna hit it instead!"???

Really?

<----this is my incredulous face.

You haven't had a disappointing session as gamemaster in 16 years?

:: patronizing smile:: Okay.

My experience is pretty close to S'mon's. I prepare less environment than he (typically does), and more situation, and it's served me pretty well for a long time.

I'm not sure exactly what "screw this!" from the players is in this context. But I'm only playing games that my players want to play. Eg last weekend when we were inquorate for Traveller and Prince Valiant I had brought along a few different games including Over the Edge and The Dying Earth RPG. I described the games (maybe a minute or two for each), The Dying Earth got the nod and so we went for it.

Our Classic Traveller and Prince Valiant games started the same way.

The last thing I can think of as dissapointing in a game session would be a year or so ago in Traveller: the PCs were in a domed city on a world with a corrosive atmosphere, with their ATV and some vacc suits. And I was pretty determined that I was going to get them out of the dome in their vehicle and suits to see what happened. And I did! - but in the course of that I discovered that the on-world exploration rules in Traveller are probably the weakest sub-system in the rulebook, bogging down with no guarantee of a resolution. I pulled out of it in the next session and the actual firefight in vacc-suits was excellent, including snagged oxygen hoses and shattered face plates and desperate crawling into air-locks and all the stuff that I'd been hoping for.

It's probably trite to say it, but I will anyway: I think that pretty key to running a RPG system is to know what you want to get out of it, and to play to that, relying on the system to deliver. (If the system lets you down, as Traveller did for a moment, well then you live-and-learn and re-route around the damage. But that's why I try to run well-designed systems!)