D&D 5E [+] Questions for zero character death players and DMs…

[JiffyPopTart]

Yes

Can your character be lost instantly to fickle dice rolls though? The outcomes are the results of whole series of decisions you’ve made. Sure, random chance plays a role, but it is a secondary role to your own decisions. All of your actions are calculated risks (though I suppose maybe less calculated if your DM isn’t forthcoming with important information like DCs and potential consequences; that I could certainly see making deaths feel much more random).

I think it comes down to what we’re looking for from the game. You want to contribute to a narrative that the group constructs together. I want to exercise agency within a fictional space. The possibility of unexpected character death undermines your ability to construct a satisfying narrative, while the impossibility of the same undermines my sense of agency.

Yes they can. As I mentioned (I think it was this thread) in my last session my 10th level druid went from full HP to dying in one hit despite me not casting spells and remaining hidden behind a building on the opposite edge of the map from the BBEG.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I mean...that is in fact what it is. We are escaping to something else. By recognizing that and leveraging it, we can do cool things.

Plus, it's absolutely not true that low- or no-death games "never lead to outcomes that don't serve that escapist objective," and especially not true that "[your] decisions don't really matter." As with most of these conversations, there's a strong conflation here between "the things I do must have consequences I cannot just immediately wish away" and "the one and only consequence that ever matters is death."

Like...for real, if death is the one and only thing that makes choices ever matter, that makes the vast majority of actual choices, some of them incredibly poignant and affecting, totally irrelevant. Choosing love over work doesn't decide if you live or die, so that choice "doesn't matter." Choosing faith over reason, or vice versa, rarely affects your lifespan in more than a statistical way, so it's totally meaningless. Oh, and any choices that result in harm or death of other people? Just as irrelevant. Snubbing your estranged father on his deathbed, vs swallowing your pride and seeing him one last time? Who cares, it's not your own death, it has no meaning, just flip a coin.

The hyperbole used in these conversations gets kind of tedious. There are lots of meaningful choices which are totally orthogonal to whether making them will result in you being alive or dead an hour from now.

Most people don't spend their real lives constantly getting into life or death situations. You can't compare D&D to reality in that way fairly.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'm a distant outlier in this conversation, but here goes... I ran a 'no death' campaign a few years ago.

The entire game world took place on the Plane of Ysgard...the player characters were once great heroes on the Material World, and when they died they passed on to their eternal reward in the mead halls of Valhalla. Here they would enjoy endless mead and the tales of valor of their ancestors! Here they would meet the heroes of the pantheon, from the mighty Thor and wise Odin, to the beautiful Freya and the cunning Loki! What a reward! What paradise!

(record scratch) And they discovered that they were all 1st level commoners. Turns out, the myths weren't entirely forthcoming about the afterlife, and the Norse gods are all jerks. Yes, the characters would spend eternity in the mead halls as promised--they'd be the ones pouring the mead and mopping it up. And yes they would hear countless tales of valor and battle--they'd hear them over and over again, day in and day out, at work. They might dwell in the Halls of Valhalla, but they arrived at the very lowest rung of the ladder.

So, anyway. Ysgard is a place of eternal battle and glory. People who die here don't stay dead--instead, they rise at dawn of the next day, ready for another glorious day of battle and valor and chest-thumping. (This was for the 3rd Edition game, so planar descriptions might vary.) The party of heroes wanted to avoid death because it made them look sloppy and weak and decidedly UN-heroic, but it wasn't "fatal" in the mortal sense of the word.

The party needed to find a sponsor (basically pick the Norse god they wanted to work for), convince that sponsor to take them under their wing. Then they would have to work their way up, overhearing stories of quests and taking missions under-the-table at one of the many Mead Halls, and grow their status. Along the way they would learn of Loki's plot to kill the World-Tree and conquer Ysgard...it was a whole big Thing.

 

[Charlaquin]

It happened to me in a 4e game. (The character was revived but there was a phase where it looked like he might not. We were only level 3, IIRC.) If it can happen in the game people openly knocked for being too "safe" and having too high initial HP, it can happen anywhere.

(Very specifically we were fighting a solo. I was slightly above 25% HP and thought, as a Paladin, I could take a hit. The solo proceeded to crit on its strongest attack at exactly that moment. I went from over 25% HP to under -50% in a single hit, something all of us, DM included, genuinely thought wasn't possible. Dice were rolled open, this was Roll20, so no trickery involved. By 4e rules, that's literally instant death, no saves.)

I mean… You just described the decisions that lead to this death. You were fighting a solo, you were slightly above 25% HP, you thought that was enough to take a hit, and you made the calculated risk of standing your ground, despite the possibility of a critical hit. Now, maybe you miscalculated the risk (as did the DM, apparently) but it was still the avoidable result of your decisions, not a totally random event.

I guess I just see it as...you are exercising agency, but some of that agency is at the level of authorship.

And, as noted, I do not ABSOLUTELY prevent deaths. They coincidentally haven't happened yet, but if they did I would put them in. They just would be recoverable one way or another, unless the player didn't want to do that. Maybe they don't find the costs worth the benefit, maybe they want a new character, maybe they like the story impact of the death. But I won't lock a player out of continuing a story solely because one tactical error and incredibly unfortunate dice said so.

Edit: That said, I also wouldn't let my players exploit my goodwill. This is meant as a gesture of respect between them and me, a collaboration to produce the best experience we can. If my "I won't arbitrarily end your story" is exploited to extract maximum advantage, I will become much less friendly about it. Death should always, always be a SERIOUS thing, even if it isn't a permanent thing. It should have consequences and be treated with respect. Will you be willing to pay the price? Will your friends? That's so much more interesting to me than "oh, yeah Bob died last year, it was pretty sad. Then we met Roberta."

Sure, and as I keep saying, that is a perfectly fine and valid way to play. I just don’t think it’s fair to say that unexpected character deaths have no place in narrative focused games. They may have no place in your games, but there are other narrative focused games where it does have a place.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is the language that makes me feel like the primary function of character death is actually punishment.

Constantly trying to put the blame on the player's 'decisions' and thus implying that their character would be alive if they played better. It's also an incongruous argument in a discussion that usually couches the good part of character death in risk vs reward terms.

The reverse is also true; trying to couch it in terms of 'consequences' when defending a concept that came about in a time when picking up the wrong thing or listening at a door would kill you instantly.

Again, it’s not punishment for playing “wrong,” any more than losing a piece (or pawn) in Chess is a punishment for playing “wrong.” It’s a totally normal possible outcome of the game played “right.” An undesirable one, that one typically plays to try and avoid. That’s part of how games work.

 

[Charlaquin]

And there's nothing wrong with that, so kindly stop accenting it with negative connotations.

I didn’t say there’s anything wrong with it. It’s just not how I prefer to play.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Again, it’s not punishment for playing “wrong,” any more than losing a piece (or pawn) in Chess is a punishment for playing “wrong.” It’s a totally normal possible outcome of the game played “right.” An undesirable one, that one typically plays to try and avoid. That’s part of how games work.

Again, losing an RPG character is in no way comparable to losing a pawn at chess and I think that disconnect in philosophy is the primary issue.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I mean… You just described the decisions that lead to this death. You were fighting a solo, you were slightly above 25% HP, you thought that was enough to take a hit, and you made the calculated risk of standing your ground, despite the possibility of a critical hit. Now, maybe you miscalculated the risk (as did the DM, apparently) but it was still the avoidable result of your decisions, not a totally random event.

A critical hit is, by definition, a random event. My decisions were absolutely correct if not for the random event. That's literally what's being talked about here.

Sure, and as I keep saying, that is a perfectly fine and valid way to play. I just don’t think it’s fair to say that unexpected character deaths have no place in narrative focused games. They may have no place in your games, but there are other narrative focused games where it does have a place.

Okay, but the converse is happening a lot here too. That unexpected character deaths are absolutely required.

 

[Charlaquin]

Again, losing an RPG character is in no way comparable to losing a pawn at chess and I think that disconnect in philosophy is the primary issue.

It’s absolutely comparable. It’s not the same - a pawn in chess doesn’t have the time, effort, or creative energy put into it than a D&D character often does. But it’s absolutely comparable, as both are perfectly normal (albeit undesirable) outcomes of play in their respective games.

 

[Charlaquin]

A critical hit is, by definition, a random event. My decisions were absolutely correct if not for the random event. That's literally what's being talked about here.

But it’s an event you are fully aware of the possibility, and even exact chances of, and can therefore factor into your risk assessment and decision making.

Okay, but the converse is happening a lot here too. That unexpected character deaths are absolutely required.

Well, I certainly don’t think it’s required. I have run and played in no-death games, and they can be enjoyable. They just aren’t my preference.