Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Argyle King" data-source="post: 8490896" data-attributes="member: 58416">I'm not sure if this is relevant to the conversation, so just gloss over it if it doesn't fit:I answered earlier with option 4.Though, thinking more, I feel as though I can empathize with being (negatively)surprised by death because it's not always easy to tell what is deadly or what isn't deadly in D&amp;D.The non-D&amp;D games I play are largely WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). What I mean by that is there is some correlation between what can be perceived by the players/PCs and how things work in actual play......Gigantic fire-breathing lizard with large teeth?It's probably physically strong; the teeth are probably deadly if I'm chomped; and maybe I should try different tactics than Leroy Jenkins.But in D&amp;D? There may be no difference at all between the physical strength of the aforementioned creature and some random halfling encountered along the road. On the other end of the spectrum, there are anecdotal experiences I've had in which Straahd -who is supposedly some uber vampire- is completely stomped by the party, yet the jackal-headed demon thing from an earlier encounter almost TPKs the party. Yes, in combat, flukes happen sometimes. However, my point is that threat and danger are difficult to evaluate in contemporary D&amp;D.There's a bit of a disconnect between what a PC perceives and what the actual danger level of the situation is. While other games may also include situations with hidden dangers, they tend to require some effort to hide the danger; it's not just an assumed part of how those games are built. In D&amp;D, the information available to a player often doesn't provide much meaning in the context of making a decision.I think this may be a factor in some players being upset about PC death in D&amp;D.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Argyle King, post: 8490896, member: 58416"] I'm not sure if this is relevant to the conversation, so just gloss over it if it doesn't fit: I answered earlier with option 4. Though, thinking more, I feel as though I can empathize with being (negatively)surprised by death because it's not always easy to tell what is deadly or what isn't deadly in D&D. The non-D&D games I play are largely WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get). What I mean by that is there is some correlation between what can be perceived by the players/PCs and how things work in actual play... ...Gigantic fire-breathing lizard with large teeth? It's probably physically strong; the teeth are probably deadly if I'm chomped; and maybe I should try different tactics than Leroy Jenkins. But in D&D? There may be no difference at all between the physical strength of the aforementioned creature and some random halfling encountered along the road. On the other end of the spectrum, there are anecdotal experiences I've had in which Straahd -who is supposedly some uber vampire- is completely stomped by the party, yet the jackal-headed demon thing from an earlier encounter almost TPKs the party. Yes, in combat, flukes happen sometimes. However, my point is that threat and danger are difficult to evaluate in contemporary D&D. There's a bit of a disconnect between what a PC perceives and what the actual danger level of the situation is. While other games may also include situations with hidden dangers, they tend to require some effort to hide the danger; it's not just an assumed part of how those games are built. In D&D, the information available to a player often doesn't provide much meaning in the context of making a decision. I think this may be a factor in some players being upset about PC death in D&D. [/QUOTE]

Verification