Why Do You Hate An RPG System?

[Thomas Shey]

The ultimate challenge: The Keeper tells you your character died before you roll them up.

I play a decent amount of BRP with M-Space and CoC; I mean, I don't just randomly kill off characters, its too long of a process to generate them. Even with 5e, granted I don't play it all that much, it is longer than old D&D which was about as long as it took to roll the stats because we knew the spells and gear.

Unless you actively intervene though, its not like its hard for combat in BRP derivatives to kill people because, well, you're in combat. M-Space might be a little better (being a Mythras derivative) though I've always been dubious of gun combat in Mythras because so many of the damage mitigation strategies in normal Mythras don't apply.

But traditionally in most versions of BRP unless you just ignored crits, it could be "one crit and you're done".

 

[dragoner]

Unless you actively intervene though, its not like its hard for combat in BRP derivatives to kill people because, well, you're in combat. M-Space might be a little better (being a Mythras derivative) though I've always been dubious of gun combat in Mythras because so many of the damage mitigation strategies in normal Mythras don't apply.

But traditionally in most versions of BRP unless you just ignored crits, it could be "one crit and you're done".

I ran Caverns of Thracia and Mythic Constantinople with Mythras; Thanatos and the Wights really wiped the party, it was a TPK or so. It happens, though we were multiple sessions in the game, and that was an ending, we played (with I as a player) Paranoia after that.

M-Space/Mythras indeed can be deadly with the RQ6 Firearms supplement. There have been discussions that weapons such as the Gauss Rifle are too powerful, then again those discussions go back to Classic Traveller, where the Gauss Rifle is like a death ray.

Intervention can take all forms, a friend talked about a TPK with a ship in mongoose Traveller, because a crit fail in taking off, and I would not have been faithful to that roll, nope. It seems a big waste of time to go through starting the game, then to let in collapse right out the gate.

 

[dragoner]

You can have some random elements without producing this result (whether that's desirable is in the eyes of the observer); I don't think people would probably run into too many rocks with the character gen in Cepheus Deluxe for example.

But a lot of games in the first few years (maybe as much as a decade) of the hobby left you entirely at the mercy of the dice. And not all of them had as little relevance as OD&D attributes started out being.

Omer and Josh are friends and we talk other places, they do great work and Cepheus Deluxe is worthy of all the accolades it has been given. I bought it and gave a quick read, it is good, I haven't gone too much in depth yet, however.

I mean I have friends who always play the same character, they will take out an old character sheet and try to use it if you let them. Even random, they try the same. I envy their finding that one character that makes them happy; except I also like breaking up the monotony a bit, random helps there. To me that is mainly what the dice are, a way to randomize things; helps with world building too.

It has been a long time since playing or running any OD&D games, nothing against them, it is just nothing much for them either. I have thought about it, a while back I took out my Holmes Blue and gave it a read through. Personally I'd rather run Mythras, or play 5e, and I have a DM for that in my group.

 

[Campbell]

It's not all that uncommon to play games where violence is on the table, but where losing in a fight is more about narrative consequences than losing your PC. This is how Apocalypse World, Tenra Bansho Zero, Dune 2d20, and Blades in the Dark work by default. Exalted Third Edition, Vampire Fifth Edition, and L5R Fifth Edition provide the GM with discretion to decide a character is dying rather than dead.

In our group we almost always treat character death as a negotiated thing, mostly because we would rather focus on the narrative consequences of that loss. Death is generally the easy way out when you have a bunch of real character oriented things at stake.

There's definitely room for a more challenge oriented take where loss means loss of character, but that hugely incentivizes a different sort of play then we tend to prefer in my more character oriented group. We're certainly not going to spend the 2 sessions we did for our Exalted game setting up character and situation details if that work can just get tossed away the first time they get into a fight.

 

[overgeeked]

It's not all that uncommon to play games where violence is on the table, but where losing in a fight is more about narrative consequences than losing your PC. This is how Apocalypse World, Tenra Bansho Zero, Dune 2d20, and Blades in the Dark work by default. Exalted Third Edition, Vampire Fifth Edition, and L5R Fifth Edition provide the GM with discretion to decide a character is dying rather than dead.

Basically any game with a Referee, DM, GM, Keeper, etc can be played that way. The Referee can say that at zero hit points you're captured instead of dead. In my experience, most gamers would rather have their characters die than be captured.

In our group we almost always treat character death as a negotiated thing, mostly because we would rather focus on the narrative consequences of that loss. Death is generally the easy way out when you have a bunch of real character oriented things at stake.

In my experience that would lead immediately and inevitably to abuse of the fiction. Players would simply do whatever stupid thing they thought was funny or cool in the moment, fiction be damned. "Well, I refuse to let you kill my character DM, so I guess they just survive taking this lava bath." Sorry, but no. Actions have consequences. The fiction should be upheld and make sense regardless of whatever plot immunity the player wants for their character. If you attack and adult red dragon at 1st-level, your character is at their mercy. If they want you dead, you're dead. Simple as. If the player objects, well, they shouldn't have been stupid enough to attack an adult red dragon at 1st level.

There's definitely room for a more challenge oriented take where loss means loss of character, but that hugely incentivizes a different sort of play then we tend to prefer in my more character oriented group. We're certainly not going to spend the 2 sessions we did for our Exalted game setting up character and situation details if that work can just get tossed away the first time they get into a fight.

Weird. That would just make me play smarter. The more invested I am in a character the smarter I try to play the game. Knowing that death is a possible outcome of a fight means I'll try to avoid fights if at all possible, and if a fight is unavoidable, I'll do my best to stack the deck as much in my favor as I can. The idea of not investing in a character because they might be killed or simply not playing a game unless my character is guaranteed to survive no matter what terrible choices I make sounds like bizarro world to me. At that level of plot immunity, why bother with dice or a GM? Just sit around and tell each other how cool your characters are.

 

[dragoner]

It's not all that uncommon to play games where violence is on the table, but where losing in a fight is more about narrative consequences than losing your PC. This is how Apocalypse World, Tenra Bansho Zero, Dune 2d20, and Blades in the Dark work by default. Exalted Third Edition, Vampire Fifth Edition, and L5R Fifth Edition provide the GM with discretion to decide a character is dying rather than dead.

In our group we almost always treat character death as a negotiated thing, mostly because we would rather focus on the narrative consequences of that loss. Death is generally the easy way out when you have a bunch of real character oriented things at stake.

There's definitely room for a more challenge oriented take where loss means loss of character, but that hugely incentivizes a different sort of play then we tend to prefer in my more character oriented group. We're certainly not going to spend the 2 sessions we did for our Exalted game setting up character and situation details if that work can just get tossed away the first time they get into a fight.

If you are having fun, you are doing it right in my book. I mean negotiated death is fine even in OD&D because one thing it is doing is handing over some narrative control to the player as insurance they don't get railroaded. I do see though that the discussion orbits around group dynamics as much as mechanics, and the death as a mechanic acts as a whip. Which yeah, not too hot on that idea.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I mean I have friends who always play the same character, they will take out an old character sheet and try to use it if you let them. Even random, they try the same. I envy their finding that one character that makes them happy; except I also like breaking up the monotony a bit, random helps there. To me that is mainly what the dice are, a way to randomize things; helps with world building too.

Please don't take this the wrong way, because I sometimes feel the same way but--at the end of the day, that's not our business. The one thing a player usually gets control over is what character they're playing and how they play them. Barring campaign incompatibility, if a player wants to play a minor variation on the guy they've done the last ten times, I can't help but see that as their right.

It has been a long time since playing or running any OD&D games, nothing against them, it is just nothing much for them either. I have thought about it, a while back I took out my Holmes Blue and gave it a read through. Personally I'd rather run Mythras, or play 5e, and I have a DM for that in my group.

That was just noting that random rolls in OD&D often only made a marginal difference. It was a big contrast with, say, Gamma World where there were random elements that could very easily make dramatic differences in look and feel, let alone capability.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Death is generally the easy way out when you have a bunch of real character oriented things at stake.

Yeah, character death is often the least interesting result for many games. I mean, if I’m running Mothership or Alien, sure, kill a PC. They’re not exactly the focus of the game in the way PCs are in other games. They’re kind of meant to be disposable and replaceable in those games.

But for other games, that’s not really the case. In my Spire campaign, we had one player whose character took Severe Blood Fallout, which can be lethal. In this case, he was shot point blank by a powerful pistol.

There are a few options to choose from, one of which is “Dying- You’re dying. Choose: do some- thing useful before you die (and roll with mastery, because this is the last thing you’ll ever do) or desperately try to cling onto life (and lose something vital in the bargain).”

This basically gives the player the option to go out with one last herculean effort, or else cling to life but lose something as a result. I put this to the player and he opted to keep the PC alive, but lose something. So I narrated a blood-witch arriving on the scene and making an offer to other PCs to save their friend. So she cut open her palm and fed him her blood, and his wound was healed. But she now has a hold over him, and that’ll definitely come into play. I’ll make that hurt.

Seems more interesting than just having the PC die only to be replaced by a new one.

Basically any game with a Referee, DM, GM, Keeper, etc can be played that way. The Referee can say that at zero hit points you're captured instead of dead. In my experience, most gamers would rather have their characters die than be captured.

I mean, if the GM is free to do anything, then yeah, I guess that can happen. Some games actually offer alternatives that are interesting. They have rules for this stuff.

And some players are actually interested in alternatives not because they want to be free to do “stupid stuff” and have “no consequences.” Quite the opposite, very often.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I ran Caverns of Thracia and Mythic Constantinople with Mythras; Thanatos and the Wights really wiped the party, it was a TPK or so. It happens, though we were multiple sessions in the game, and that was an ending, we played (with I as a player) Paranoia after that.

M-Space/Mythras indeed can be deadly with the RQ6 Firearms supplement. There have been discussions that weapons such as the Gauss Rifle are too powerful, then again those discussions go back to Classic Traveller, where the Gauss Rifle is like a death ray.

Intervention can take all forms, a friend talked about a TPK with a ship in mongoose Traveller, because a crit fail in taking off, and I would not have been faithful to that roll, nope. It seems a big waste of time to go through starting the game, then to let in collapse right out the gate.

The usual issue with that is, once you start going "Nope, we're not going to have that happen," it can turn into a situation where people feel like you're being selective about it if you don't do it every time.

Which doesn't mean I don't understand your point about the latter; it'd be pointless to let that happen there. But then you have to ask, what point does that roll ever serve if its that severe?

 

[dragoner]

Please don't take this the wrong way, because I sometimes feel the same way but--at the end of the day, that's not our business. The one thing a player usually gets control over is what character they're playing and how they play them. Barring campaign incompatibility, if a player wants to play a minor variation on the guy they've done the last ten times, I can't help but see that as their right.



That was just noting that random rolls in OD&D often only made a marginal difference. It was a big contrast with, say, Gamma World where there were random elements that could very easily make dramatic differences in look and feel, let alone capability.

Don't worry, I don't try to force them out of their comfort zone, I mean a long time ago, yes.

The usual issue with that is, once you start going "Nope, we're not going to have that happen," it can turn into a situation where people feel like you're being selective about it if you don't do it every time.

Which doesn't mean I don't understand your point about the latter; it'd be pointless to let that happen there. But then you have to ask, what point does that roll ever serve if its that severe?

Exactly, why roll? That's my philosophy now. It's kind of an odd one too, as I don't remember it in Classic either. I like rolls to actually have interesting consequences, now; where there was a time of count every bullet, role-play every distance traveled, which I don't do, not anymore, now it is cut to the action.