D&D 4E 4e How Should PCs be allowed to Die (Cinematically or Like Everyone Else)?

[Ruin Explorer]

Samnell - An extremely unlikely roll is pretty much the same as assassination, I'd argue, but there's always GMs who'll defend this like the murderous super-intelligent stealth bodak guy on rpg.net.

Remathilis - Yeah, that's a really good list, and I think it varies from group to group, and even campaign to campaign. There's not a lot of point in running Tomb of Horrors and not doing "death by die-roll", but then maybe there's just not a lot of point in running Tomb of Horrors, considering how many high-level PCs the players are likely to have to generate (unless they know it's secrets). Similarly, there's not a lot of point in running some sort of dramatic campaign where all the PCs have very detailed roles and plots and so on, and then randomly letting a PC die to a single bad role - it's pretty equivalent to having an actor randomly leave a TV show - sure, you can work around it, you can recover, maybe some good will come of it, but a lot of work will be lost and people won't necessarily have fun, and that's all the counts in the end.

Psionotic - My vote too. Whilst I kill off PCs VERY rarely in the last decade (my last TPK in D&D was about 1994), they don't get resurrected. Indeed, I've never even had a PC expect such a thing, and I don't really like the idea of it. We had some PCs get reincarnated back in the day, though, that was kind of fun.

 

[Sundragon2012]

I've said this before, but my vote is for making it harder for PCs to die, but making death more final. Just as PCs (and NPCs) shouldn't die from one bad roll, so too they shouldn't be able to come back to life every morning...

Yeah, I'm very, much in favor of this. Hard to kill and as hard to bring back.



Sundragon

 

[Samnell]

Samnell - An extremely unlikely roll is pretty much the same as assassination, I'd argue, but there's always GMs who'll defend this like the murderous super-intelligent stealth bodak guy on rpg.net.

At the risk of being caught in an inflammatory agenda...

I have no idea what goes on at rpg.net. I don't go there.

The difference is that an extremely unlucky die roll doesn't make the statement that the DM just chose to kill you out of nowhere, and you have no recourse. When the bad guys make attack rolls, there's always the chance they could hit. Barring infinite hit points, every combat includes the possibility that the orc could bisect the wizard with his axe or something to that effect. If you die because of a failed d20 roll, that's no one's fault but the randomness inherent in the game. Agreeing to that randomness is a part of sitting down at the table.

Raise dead, resurrection, and so forth can cure a run of bad luck just fine. If I were stingy with raise dead and made the party move heaven and earth to get one I might feel differently. But I am not, so it's not an issue to me. But my guys actually thought ahead. They've bought raise dead scrolls and deposited them with a cleric nearer to their adventures to handle those runs of bad luck. After they did that, they were actually a bit pleased the next time someone died. They saved travel time. I use the variant that they just get a negative level that never leads to actual level loss when they die, so they're pretty easy about it.

Is it cheesy that they die and then get brought back? Well maybe. D&D is a really, really cheesy game. Magic missiles, evasion, dual-wielding+sneak attack, animal people, dwarves, elves, the cheddar runs thick and deep. But it's at least as cheesy to say that they'll only die in battles the DM deems dramatically appropriate. Embedding that kind of decision into the game means if the dice kill you, it's still the DM's fault because he said that this time the dice do and other times they don't. At best, it's a wash.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The difference is that an extremely unlucky die roll doesn't make the statement that the DM just chose to kill you out of nowhere, and you have no recourse.

Er, nice post but I actually don't mean unlucky roll, sorry for being unclear, I mean save or die when the DC is so high it's a virtual certainty that you'll die (i.e. 80% or better).

 

[Sundragon2012]

I don't understand the kind of sentiment that goes something like this, "I want to play a hero and heroes don't die via a mook's critical hit or a wizard's disintigration spell."

I thought that heroes in fantasy fiction and fantasy RPing for the last 30yrs has assumed that the most memorable heroes are the ones that actually survived. I am pretty sure that Aragorn and I know for certain that Conan travelled with a lot of skilled warriors and hero types but Aragorn survived and some of his friends didn't, Conan survived and many of his comrades died.

The heroes of legend are those that take the risks, can be killed via a crossbow bolt in the chest but via skill and good fortune survive long enough to develop a legendary reputation. No player is guaranteed a hero of legend. How dumb and unheroic would it be if you were a legend without actually accomplishing anything? How unheroic would it be if the two NPCs who travelled with you get their skulls creushed by a giant's club durng a couple critical hits but YOU COULDN'T DIE that way?

Heroes are folks who take MORE risks than the average person, actually sacrifice more than the average person and unfortunately often don't live as long as a normal person. Those that do become legends, those that don't become footnotes. If heroes are guaranteed survival against all threats, like critical hits, that would kill a "normal" than they they aren't heroes at all, but beings whose very nature (the rules of the game) assures survival and makes the word hero meaningless.

Now, if one likes lighter games where the good guys die less via some hero protection mechanic, DM fudging or Player Choice (?!?!?!) that's fine, just not my cup o' tea. I can however, definately get behind hero points or action points to allow a reroll or add a certain number of points to the roll based on how many points the character uses (acting as the blessing of the gods or fate perhaps...in fact I use a rule like this) but if the PC blows it, maybe by rolling a 1 again....I'm sorry but the PC has got to go. At this point my players would solemnly crumple up their character sheet and know it was time to create a new PC.

IMO it is very unfun to play a coddled character. I am a DM and I know DMs fudge from time to time...I do though rarely. However, if I know the DM is fudging or if I felt that I was in some way being guarded against death either by arbitrary game mechanics or DM fiat I would find myself disassociated from the character because I would know....it would feel like cheating.

Thankfully my players feel the same way.



Sundragon

 

[Samnell]

Er, nice post but I actually don't mean unlucky roll, sorry for being unclear, I mean save or die when the DC is so high it's a virtual certainty that you'll die (i.e. 80% or better).

Well that's a different animal entirely. If the DM creates a villain with a save or die where the save is truly just a formality, I would count that as close enough to a literal assassination-by-DM to object to it. About the only circumstance I can see where I might swing otherwise is if the PC did something amazingly stupid. A first level rogue going up and urinating on the leg of the king of all demons would probably qualify, but I think I'd still prefer a humiliating punishment that involves some poetic justice.

I don't normally place my players in battles with foes that outclass them to the degree where such a save would come up. They occasionally do encounter such beings at times where violence is not the expected content of the encounter, but even then I take pains to make sure the NPCs don't flip out for insufficient provocation and that if it comes to carnage, it's the party that initiates hostilities.

EDIT: It's not necessarily fair to ascribe to unclear writing what could have come from a careless reading of the text.

 

[Malhost Zormaeril]

I myself don't have a problem about my players not having heroic deaths for their characters: Those are usually more like mercenary bastards than heroes, anyway. It's a group thing, though; the players themselves often like to laugh about PC deaths after the fact, inventing funny dramatisations for them...

 

[shilsen]

Heroes are folks who take MORE risks than the average person, actually sacrifice more than the average person and unfortunately often don't live as long as a normal person. Those that do become legends, those that don't become footnotes. If heroes are guaranteed survival against all threats, like critical hits, that would kill a "normal" than they they aren't heroes at all, but beings whose very nature (the rules of the game) assures survival and makes the word hero meaningless.

That's an arguable definition, but then arguably heroes are also living people. Calling a D&D character a hero is a lot like saying "My imaginary friend is a hero because he did great imaginary deeds while fighting dangerous imaginary creatures." It's all a matter of definition.

IMO it is very unfun to play a coddled character.

Again, what's 'coddled' is a matter of definition. Does your PC have a magical weapon? Then he's a lot more coddled than a character without one. Does he have hit points that are in double digits? That's a lot more coddled than a character who only has 5 hp. It's all a matter of drawing arbitrary lines, so why assume your arbitrary line is more or less justifiable than any other.

Personally, I like my games to be heavily player/character-driven and I want my players to be invested in their PCs and enjoy playing them for the long term. At the same time, I want there to be consequences and repercussions for PC failure. The solution, for me, is simple. I allow use of action pts and swashbuckling cards to offset PC death. And I use a whole lot of consequences for PC defeat beyond death. Death, for me, is one of the most boring and least imaginative of consequences for PC failure, providing little or no benefit to my game. YMMV, and evidently does.

 

[RPG_Tweaker]

I really don't have a problem with "save or screwed" type effects, but I think that those type of spells, traps and monsters should have an optional rule box that offers a reduced effect for DMs preferring a tamer outcome.



My campaigns don't assume players begin as "heroes" but merely protagonists; they are potential heroes. The only way they actually become such is by doing deeds and earning a reputation. That means facing death.

Before they go into the world, I warn players of their characters possible death and to remember that henchmen/hirelings (read redshirts) are an invaluable asset. These two points should really be mentioned in the first paragraph of the PHB Introduction and reiterated in the Adventuring chapter!

I use an Action Point system. I also use an exploding d20 system for combat/saves so there's no auto-succeed/auto-fail.

Your chance of "respawning" are very slim; it's an historical event (Chance based on the clerics piety, your level/reputation, and whim of the gods). Even then, it takes about a month to recover fully.

I also have a system that if a player wants me to kill their character in the plot, they receive an "heroic death". This comes with a dramatic description of their sacrifice, some monument built by the locals, and/or a famous bardic song. Additionally, their next character begins with an extra AP.

 

[FireLance]

I don't understand the kind of sentiment that goes something like this, "I want to play a hero and heroes don't die via a mook's critical hit or a wizard's disintigration spell."

The fundamental disconnect is whether dice should trump story (or equally, whether dice should determine story) or whether story should trump dice. Some gamers do have the general outline of what should happen in a game worked out beforehand, and only use the dice to determine the details.

A related question is, "What do you want to determine randomly in your game?" Some like to place treasure randomly, others don't. Some like to encounter monsters randomly, others don't. Some want to determine hit points randomly, others don't. Some want to determine whether a character lives or dies randomly, others don't.