Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8139293" data-attributes="member: 7026617">You're using "misadventure" significantly more narrowly than I am.  I'm including things where there's obvious danger, but where the expected result is not, in fact, death.As an example, we have Savage Worlds.  Savage Worlds has a lot of tools for making your character more likely to win a fight or climb a cliff face, and yet more to make it unlikely you'll get killed if it fails to one degree or another.It also, however, has baked into the rules open ended die results.  As such the attack you expected to deal with can end up connecting even though your defense was such that it was a low incidence event (in fact, required the open-ended dice to happen even to occur) or where the fall from the (unlikely) failed climb roll ends up lethal because the dice that expected to at worst injure you mildly blew up and did so.Other games may express these other things in other ways--critical hits, fumbled climb rolls or whatever.As such it pays for players in a large number of games to at least limit the number of such situations because the law of large numbers and probability are not their friends.I don't think distinguishing between "preference" and "learned behavior" is especially useful in the cases I'm talking about.  In most cases the risks I'm referring to are quite clear to anyone who looks at the situation and the game mechanics.That's all very nice, but in practical terms, most players want to keep playing their character. There are exceptions of course (people who like trying out new characters regularly). While even for such players there can be, effectively, "fates worth than death", death still cuts off any further exploration of their character (barring resurrection at least, and that's not much of a thing beyond the D&D-sphere). If your character gets killed because of unnecessary risks, his/her story is done. As such, I think some degree of avoidance there is going to exist as long as someone is playing in a game system where that's a non-trivial risk, and outside of some types of story games and the aforementioned games that actively discourage it, that's a rather large number of games.I expect over time you'd notice the difference because of internal preference.  Within those faithful representations of the character, the Actor will tend to more consistently choose certain choices from their performative impact where the IC player won't (and may actively avoid them depending on their own natural tendencies).  You might, indeed, take a while to do so--but then, I've said before that I consider on the spectrum of Author/Actor/IC at least, the lines are very blurry.In absolute terms?  No.  Its possible for either to chose the same choice on occasion.  But in tendency, as I said, I think its possible.I believe when it comes to this topic I've indicated I thought they quite were at least four links back in this conversation.  Objecting because of something I've acknowledged early on seems a bit much.</blockquote>

Verification