Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Zak S" data-source="post: 6605621" data-attributes="member: 90370">I think if a character does something or has something attached to them that the PLAYER feels is worse than death (&quot;You're a worm forever now&quot;&quot;You eat orphans to live now and always will&quot;&quot;Your PC's face looks like a butt&quot;&quot;) then you've rendered the character unplayable which is, essentially, like death and creates all the problems for GMs and players that death would.1. So a consequence that the CHARACTER doesn't want but the PLAYER thinks is interesting isn't scary.2. A consequence that the CHARACTER doesn't want but the PLAYER thinks is uninteresting is a wonderful stake, even though it's a terrible result.The people who say &quot;I can think of many things that are more interesting than death&quot; --well, so can everyone. The question is does the player consider that consequence so severe as a stake that they are forced to stop playing make a new PC (death) or they want to stop playing and make a new PC (the humiliations or defeats you describe).If they aren't, then they're just problems that keep the game interesting (like any ogre or evil mage). If they are, then you've incurred all the problems (for GM and player) killing a character creates.There are exceptions--certain styles of play have &quot;Play the character until you're bored&quot; as an explicit goal. But then the PC's death or abandonment in the face of untenable change or humiliation is NOT a good stake, because it's not an outcome the player's invested in avoiding.TL;DR:Unless a stake is severe in a way that makes play less fun should it come to pass (and therefore provoke or require abandonment of the PC), it won't provoke as much true fear as death. And true fear is what many players want.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Zak S, post: 6605621, member: 90370"] I think if a character does something or has something attached to them that the PLAYER feels is worse than death ("You're a worm forever now""You eat orphans to live now and always will""Your PC's face looks like a butt"") then you've rendered the character unplayable which is, essentially, like death and creates all the problems for GMs and players that death would. 1. So a consequence that the CHARACTER doesn't want but the PLAYER thinks is interesting isn't scary. 2. A consequence that the CHARACTER doesn't want but the PLAYER thinks is uninteresting is a wonderful stake, even though it's a terrible result. The people who say "I can think of many things that are more interesting than death" --well, so can everyone. The question is does the player consider that consequence so severe as a stake that they are forced to stop playing make a new PC (death) or they want to stop playing and make a new PC (the humiliations or defeats you describe). If they aren't, then they're just problems that keep the game interesting (like any ogre or evil mage). If they are, then you've incurred all the problems (for GM and player) killing a character creates. There are exceptions--certain styles of play have "Play the character until you're bored" as an explicit goal. But then the PC's death or abandonment in the face of untenable change or humiliation is NOT a good stake, because it's not an outcome the player's invested in avoiding. TL;DR: Unless a stake is severe in a way that makes play less fun should it come to pass (and therefore provoke or require abandonment of the PC), it won't provoke as much true fear as death. And true fear is what many players want. [/QUOTE]

Verification