DonTadow said:the reason i dont include any random battles in my campaign world. Whats the point of them.
I say the same thing about gnomes, but some people like them I guess.
The gamer (as opposed to story teller) style values simulation, IMO, and random events are a better simulation of real life than DM-determined events, and so lend a certain air of plausibility. A "game" style gamer wants to say "cool - it's like it's a real world".
The story-teller style requires a greater suspension of disbelief and cedes more control to the DM to manipulate outcomes and events. Whereas a "game"-style gamer wants to be convinced that he's part of a believable fantasy world, a "story-teller" is content to first believe that he is.
A "gamer" is scared because he knows that TPK is a possibility. A "story-teller" gamer is scared because he wants to pretend to be scared. A "gamer" believes he's taking risks because the risks are obvious in the rules. The "story-teller" pretends that he's taking risks and ignores evidence to the contrary.
A gamer doesn't find TPKs to be fun. But arguing that they should be removed is like arguing that scorekeeping should be removed from sports because losing isn't fun. To a gamer, suriving is not as fun if getting killed is not an option. You can't have the yin without the yang.