Search results

Except now we are just playing with semantics and introducing gradation. Indeed, as mentioned above, the answer will always be far more nuanced and muddled, but, for the purposes of a forum discussion, I’d say the answer is no. The question posed was essentially old school was like this, this...

Yet one play style is ok with the idea of these deaths and risk (or stakes) as par for the course of play and one is less frequent/ rare. So it is as it relates to that question.

With the opening post then expanding on it, discussing frequency (as it acknowledges death still happening in 5e). I already mentioned above why I offered the funnel as the clearest example, but hell, we could expand that to a longer Dcc campaign, or a b/x campaign where the meat grinder effect...

And indeed, all that is true. Of course, there are always, always variances, shades of grey ambiguities in a question like this. I don’t disagree with you here at all. It’s why I’ve posed my answers as generalisms (because that’s all one can really do to such a general question without it...

Yes. Exactly. Players won’t suddenly prefer that play style. Which is literally the opening question that I answered. If they don’t want that, then it answers that question of if players today necessarily want that level of risk. I picked DCC as the system because that’s it’s raisin detre, a...

I didn’t say that at all. I’m aware there’s a middle ground, which is the structured artificial challenge I was referring too. I’m not so dismissive as to say players want easy street, I’m not into bad wrong funning. None of my statements have been judgemental in nature, merely descriptive of...

Not quite. You’d be testing if they’d accept immediate potentially lethal consequence for actions as a response. Doesn’t even have to be in fighting a monster. Again, I imagine quite a few won’t vibe that style. Which means the answer still stands as no to the original question.

Again, feel free to put it to the test with a DCC funnel adventure:)

So you’re right here on the last point. To be clear, I’m not saying later editions are impossible to be lethal with, nor are there tool unavailable to do it. I’m saying the desire is not there (for the vast majority), going back to that original question (and this is regardless of tools or...

Indeed you are right, they are a tool to help a DM balance an encounter. In doing so, you have assessed and quantified, measured out the risk, to some extent reducing it because it is a known factor. But, what I’m saying is they’ve contributed to the cultural mindset shift in which many don’t...

“more lethal is not the same as more deaths” That’s pretty much the definition of what lethal is. The fact that your 5e characters were shocked that they died shows there is the cultural expectation now of less risk. Which goes back to my first post yet again... :)

Reference to the original post : ” Alot of the time, D&D veterans may have criticisms that the game is a bit too easy. Its certainly easier than the older editions and player death isn't nearly as frequent, but the risk is there. The question is: Do players actually want this risk?” Fair and...

And that’s my point in a nut shell. In following a scheme of fair and balanced encounters, it’s the “illusion of challenge” I referred to in my original post. They want to feel challenged, but don’t want the risks of an uncontained confrontation. Which is fine, I’m not saying one play style is...

And CR is part of it. Even the notion of balanced encounters. It’s that expectation that’s what I’m talking about. As to the lack of complaint regarding dice, there’s a character death in critical role that also got a lot of complaints, because of the dice... And again, it shattered the pre...

Therein is the rub. The notion of “accidentally killing the characters”. And also “making an encounter harder than intended”. This is the mindset difference to which I was referring. If you take the “dice fall where they may” approach, it is not accidental, it just is. Encounters aren’t harder...

In answering the original question, I think that the majority of players who play the modern editions don’t actually want this risk or challenge. They want the illusion of it. There is an expectation of balanced encounters, where, they can enjoy a tougher end encounter, come out bruised and...

And definitely not nostalgia from me as I started on the newer systems and went back. I prefer the older ones warts and all.

So I play AD&D and OSE primarily, so it’s still the old school hunting for treasure. It’s a moving target at the moment as I’m still building it and adding in new things as inspiration hits me. But general high level is kind of Expedition to the Barrier peaks meets Aliens/The Thing (in vibe)...

People have kept answering saying that good dungeons are not just linear combat fests yet you keep using that line. It’s like you saying you can do anything you want in town, and everyone else in response just going , “well towns are just boring places to shop”. It’s becoming increasingly...

You’re not wrong, but as I’ve said, my statements have only ever been made within the context of D&D based systems. So when I’ve said before B/X provides a rules light system, that is in relation to newer versions of D&D. Which, to be honest, was the context that I understood from the original...