Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Scurvy_Platypus" data-source="post: 5530653" data-attributes="member: 43283">At the end of the day, "Character death, yes or no?" is the question you're effectively asking me. That's a fundamental playstyle issue.In other words, the question about "where does the sense of dangerous adventure come from?" is bread-and-butter, part-n-parcel of the reason why I and the people I'm playing with are getting together for a game in the first place.In old school D&D, it was much more the tendency for the GM to be challenging the players. How the players overcame that challenge was using the tools they had: their characters. The challenge took place in the game; not necessarily on the battlefield, but the game.Sidenote: The reason I'm walking through this in this fashion is so that you can see where my reasoning; I know I'm not going to change your opinion and that's not my goal.Because of course, characters could die before genuinely entering battle. Sneak attacks and traps being favored methods, an NPC terminating an uppity PC that mouthed off in negotiations (rp) being another one.Basically, death was a penalty. _YOU_ the player screwed up, your toy/tool (the character) is taken away. Of course, as time goes on people really develop a fondness for a tool or another; just look at the non-rpg world and artists with their favorite pens and brushes.Coming back from the dead is a do-over. A "Yeah, you screwed up but you've got so much invested in this character, I'll let you have another chance. But... there's a price for it; there's no such thing as a free lunch".This is a mentality that still pretty much dominates D&D play.I'm not making a judgment on the "validity" of that style of play, simply saying it's there, it dominates D&D, and it's one that I personally have moved away from."Where does the sense of dangerous adventure come from?" is "how do I make the players feel the danger and excitement of being adventurers?"*shrug*I really don't have an answer for you, because that's not why I and the people I play with are playing rpgs fundamentally. That doesn't mean that they don't feel excitement or that there isn't danger in the game; it just means that I'm not challenging the _players_ in that fashion.Killing characters is a time-honoured and popular activity. As long as players are fine with it, it's a perfectly serviceable approach.But 9 times out of 10, character death is "random". Sure, they made a decision that led to them being butchered by the critter; at the end of the day though, the GM created that creature and put it there. Maybe it was "bad luck" or "the players should have known better and avoided the encounter", but the GM has deliberately set up a situation where the player can be punished by taking away their character.This is why I say that players and GMs need to actually commit. If you're going to challenge the _players_, then challenge them. And when their character dies (which there is a decent chance of happening if you're actually challenging them) they can suck it up and make a new character.Because letting the character come _back_ to life is the same thing as not having killed them."Oh, but there's a price for it" or "bad things might happen when they come back" are both non-answers to me. You can charge the player (by taking away money or stats) just as easy without killing the character.If characters can come back once, they can effectively come back an infinite number of times.That being the case (remember, this is the assumption that I operate on and therefore I'm not saying it applies to all GMs/games) removal of "death" as a consequence makes sense.It doesn't mean everyone is immortal. It doesn't mean players can fling their characters from 50 story roofs with no consequences; as always, the "don't be a jerk" and "players agree to respect the implicit assumptions of the world" rules are also in effect.After all, the core rules don't say anything about having to use the bathroom.And if a player wants their character to die? *shrug* Sure, why not? It's their choice. I as a GM will try and make sure that the death isn't going to be a knifing in some seedy alley and nobody will find the body for 3 days, but ultimately it's their choice.For me and my group, death isn't a consequence for player failure. It's an outcome that suits the dramatic sensibilities of the story, the group, and the players. In-game, there's all sorts of reasons for why people die and stay dead and as a GM, I personally don't think gods would be really keen on letting people get a do-over on life. The internal cosmology of my game doesn't require me to kill a character though, unless the player is wanting it.And if they do want it, that character _stays_ dead. Because the player has chosen to make a dramatic statement. And that statement is just as dramatic in terms of the in-game fiction too; here's a person that's scraped through so many things that have killed lesser folks, now dead and into the next realm.Of course, there's something to be said for a Rotating Door of Death as well. You've got a pretty interesting world where that happens, just look at the Steven Brust novels. It's just that it's a different sort of world from the usual zero-to-hero, fight the evil overlord setup that most D&Ders play; it's not an incompatible one either, just different.So.... yeah. It's all about the reasons for sitting down at the table in the first place. There's not a right or a wrong answer (despite what some folks might say) just a matter of being aware of _why_ you're killing (or not) characters in the first place.The problems usually happen when either A) Not everyone is actually fine with that goal and/or B) When people _aren't_ actually aware of the reasoning for killing a character (either the GM or the player) and start introducing changes to legislate out-of-game group behaviour (or assumptions) with in-game punishments.As I've said, my view isn't a _popular_ one; it's simply a very considered approach. And I don't bother philosophising with the players about it either. I just tell 'em "Look, we need to decide if character death is going to be on the table as a consequence for losing a fight. If it is, characters _stay_ dead. If it's not, then we've got a couple of ways of dealing with what might theoretically 'kill' a person in the world..."</blockquote>

Verification