D&D General How Often Should a PC Die in D&D 5e?

[Autumnal]

That seems more like it should be "Even level 1 should be fun" and less about changing people's expectations for the future.

So much agreement. I don’t think gamers need to earn the right to have fun by slogging through boring time. The boring part is all the rest of them spent not gaming. Characters should begin capable of worthwhile things - and this should include the capabilities the system assigns them, as well as players’ ingenuity in not actually using characters’ capabilities to get things done.

 

[Fatal_Theory]

So much agreement. I don’t think gamers need to earn the right to have fun by slogging through boring time. The boring part is all the rest of them spent not gaming. Characters should begin capable of worthwhile things - and this should include the capabilities the system assigns them, as well as players’ ingenuity in not actually using characters’ capabilities to get things done.

Exactly your character, like you, is so much more than something that can be written on a piece of paper.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

That seems more like it should be "Even level 1 should be fun" and less about changing people's expectations for the future.

Indeed. Almost like we should design the game so that you don't have to wait 16+ sessions (aka three or four months of weekly sessions) for the fun to start.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

So much agreement. I don’t think gamers need to earn the right to have fun by slogging through boring time. The boring part is all the rest of them spent not gaming. Characters should begin capable of worthwhile things - and this should include the capabilities the system assigns them, as well as players’ ingenuity in not actually using characters’ capabilities to get things done.

I'm not entirely sure I understand the meaning of that last bit. What do you mean by "players' ingenuity in not actually using characters' capabilities to get things done"?

 

[Autumnal]

OSR-types inventiveness where the character’s stats and abilities aren’t relevant to developing something clever exploiting the environment, tools, monster behavior, etc.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

OSR-types inventiveness where the character’s stats and abilities aren’t relevant to developing something clever exploiting the environment, tools, monster behavior, etc.

Firstly, I find it extremely annoying that folks assert that this only occurs in OSR games, or that OSR games are somehow special for inviting or inducing such things. It doesn't only occur there. It's not in any way special to that. People can be inventive under any circumstances, and people can fall into unthinking rote responses under any circumstances. Gygax's annoyance with overly-fixed (because they were highly effective) SOPs is specifically why we got things like ear seekers, cloakers, and the "so funny I forgot to laugh" cursed items that look identical to magic items but punish you for putting them on. I, personally, have seen OSR folks just follow along with someone "merely" using their class features (specifically, a wizard using some relevant spells), in a way that obviated any need for inventive solutions. The only reason one could draw any association at all is because OSR-like games often just give the player so little to work with in the first place. (And if spells somehow get a special dispensation despite very much being a class feature....let's just say I have some choice words for that particular form of magic favoritism.)

More importantly, why does it matter whether the inventiveness involves something on one specific part of the character sheet (ability scores and features, whether they be racial, class, feat, etc.), if you're totally okay with it using things from other parts of the character sheet (items, tools, hirelings/henchmen)? I don't understand why there's such a patronizing attitude toward ever using the features the game gave you. Inventiveness is inventiveness. We should encourage it anytime.

 

[dave2008]

Indeed. Almost like we should design the game so that you don't have to wait 16+ sessions (aka three or four months of weekly sessions) for the fun to start.

That is rather dismissive of people who have fun with starting characters. There a many ways to have fun and people enjoy different things.

In my current 5e game, it took us a year of playing (somethin like 24+/- 4 hour sessions) to get to level 4 and we had a blast the whole time. So much so that we can't imagine playing another edition of D&D really. In fact, we actually started at level 0 we like low powered play so much.

To me the lower levels are there for those you enjoy them. If you don't enjoy them you can just start at level 3 or 5, like many of the WotC adventures do.

 

[Maxperson]

Once again: no-one is advocating for it. The point is simply that it is possible. And by choosing not to do it, by choosing to skip parts of the adventure because they are not interesting, one is making a decision for narrative reasons.

Isn't that like responding to someone bringing up money woes with, "Well it's possible for you to win the Powerball jackpot."?

If it's something virtually no one really does, why does the possibility matter?

 

[soviet]

Isn't that like responding to someone bringing up money woes with, "Well it's possible for you to win the Powerball jackpot."?

If it's something virtually no one really does, why does the possibility matter?

The point isn't that virtually no-one does, it's that virtually everyone doesn't. But I'm not going to go over the context again, you may not have seen all the posts in the line of discussion.

 

[Maxperson]

Nope. It's not something I have any interest in doing. I'm just saying that it CAN be done.

I don't think it really can be literally done. Even if you play the game minute by minute, you are skipping time within those minutes. To not skip time, you'd have to play the game second by second, which would take many times longer just to describe what happens in a given second to four players.

An uneventful three week travel through the forest would take 1,814,400 seconds to happen. To describe what happens in a given second to 4 different characters is at least 10 seconds. So now we are at 30 weeks of real time to play 3 weeks of game time. In 3 hour sessions, it would take you 1,680 weekly sessions. So 240 years to roleplay out 3 uneventful weeks.

It's not possible to play out RPGs in real time. You have to have time skips, even if they are small.