D&D 5E Do PCs at your table have script immunity?

[Retreater]

I've been labeled as a Killer DM, and it's something I'm not proud of. Even one character death can derail the campaign, but if it's multiple deaths, that's usually the end of the game. When you get that reputation, players seem to disconnect with the game and start to interact with it like a boardgame.
But I also don't like backtracking or fudging rolls to keep them alive. So it's a pretty brutal world.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I was recently reading an older RPG and came to a part about "script immunity". Basically, the PCs aren't supposed to die unless it is necessary for the story being told. It got me thinking about something that has bothered me with D&D for a while now (particularly in 5E). I feel like the PCs aren't supposed to die, and I have heard how several groups now house-rule TPKs turn into captures, or the "it was all a dream" fake-out when PCs die, etc. Many DMs don't like bad luck killing off a PC unless they were doing something foolish (I've been in this position before as DM).

I know D&D is not about "winning" or "losing", but about the adventure, challenge, and story being told. However, lately I feel like a story that is already meant to be "successful" or "won" is not worth the telling. I have no interest in running a game where the players actually expect things to be ok. Where is the excitement if they believe the PCs will be ok--somehow...? Even if you have other goals where the PCs fail--it might not be heroic--but they are still there to try again.

The problem I have with this approach is that death is the single most boring consequence possible unless it's kept very rare; people just roll up another PC. What works far better is having them live with and try to deal with the consequences. And changing and twisting things up to and including changing the character subclass on the players.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I've been labeled as a Killer DM, and it's something I'm not proud of. Even one character death can derail the campaign, but if it's multiple deaths, that's usually the end of the game. When you get that reputation, players seem to disconnect with the game and start to interact with it like a boardgame.
But I also don't like backtracking or fudging rolls to keep them alive. So it's a pretty brutal world.

Yeah IME that way lies powergamer CharOp builds that aren’t fleshed out beyond the mechanics.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

The problem I have with this approach is that death is the single most boring consequence possible unless it's kept very rare; people just roll up another PC. What works far better is having them live with and try to deal with the consequences. And changing and twisting things up to and including changing the character subclass on the players.

It’s much more impactful to have a PC lose things and people that they care about, than to have the PC die, IME.

 

[HammerMan]

Many years ago, when the dinosaurs still roamed the earth, I played 2e. We used to joke (although it was pretty true to a point) no character needs a name until 3rd level, and wizards don't have back stories until 5th level.

 

[HammerMan]

Writing backstories is the part of the game you like? Interesting. What makes that the most engaging part for you?

in my case I think of it as my time to show off what I want to the DM, and allows me to get intot eh character's head space better

 

[the Jester]

The problem I have with this approach is that death is the single most boring consequence possible unless it's kept very rare; people just roll up another PC. What works far better is having them live with and try to deal with the consequences. And changing and twisting things up to and including changing the character subclass on the players.

I mean, it's only the most boring consequence if you make it that way. A pc dying can lead to amazing roleplaying opportunities for the group. Also, if every pc starts at first level, the consequences are far from boring.

 

[HammerMan]

Why would you ever do that? If you’re starting at low levels your character hasn’t done anything worth writing a backstory about. You’re a farmer fresh off the farm or a noble fresh off the estate. That’s a few sentences of backstory at most.

in 2e I had a Ranger that started as first level as a quasi multi class (spell fire from Volo's guide). I had established when the character was made that as I found out more about my 'gift' I would want to become more invested in magic and duelclass at some point to wizard unless the campaign went way crazy (it did but I still did around level 7ish).

My background could be summarized in a few paragraphs but I wrote it as 11 pages (yes wrote not computer typed). It also involvoed 2 other PCs who each wrote there own back stories (one much shorter and one much longer then mine). of the 7 players at that table we all had some form of background. It was all worked out with the DM, and worked into the story and as such it worked well.

I knew the fighter and the wizard/thief from my background, he (fighter) grew up in the town near the farm my (who i thought was my) family owned, and he was a bully who used to pick on and beat me up as a kid (I was a half elf he was human). She (Wizard/Thief) was the only of the 3 of us that WANTED to be an adventurer... she was someone we both competed to impress. By the time we were all late teens early twenties she had run off to adventure, he had been drafted into a local small war, and I was firmly in the mind he would just be a farmer...maybe someday own the family farm... then the red wizards AND a f ing beholder showed up destroyed his family home and tried to kidnap him until an old man that he didn't know saved him, and sent him to a bar... and that bar was the first game us all meeting, and the fighter apologizing to me, and both of us to her... and meeting 4 other people who all had an old man they didn't know some how get them to come to the bar... oh, and I had to admit at that point I knew I was being hunted.

our backgrounds MADE that game.

 

[Campbell]

I don't really go for this sort of thing in D&D, but in most other games I play or run prefer combat loss to be defeat rather than necessarily death. I want that to be explicit in those circumstances. Not a fan of welching after the fact.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Not for nothing, this (combat as performance) seems to be a pretty popular style of play.

More's the pity, imo.