D&D General Do players even like the risk of death?

[Oofta]

Thing is, in the games I run/play in each player has numerous characters in the setting; and a story consequence that matters deeply to one character might not affect another of the same player's characters in the slightest. As such, the players (including me) tend to distance ourselves a bit from story consequences unless we're playing a characterat the time who is directly affected.

ALL characters, however, are affected by big-time mechanical consequences such as level loss, item loss and death; which means the player will also be affected no matter what.

Yep, we play different types of games. What works for me may not work for you.

 

[tetrasodium]

Thing is, in the games I run/play in each player has numerous characters in the setting; and a story consequence that matters deeply to one character might not affect another of the same player's characters in the slightest. As such, the players (including me) tend to distance ourselves a bit from story consequences unless we're playing a characterat the time who is directly affected.

ALL characters, however, are affected by big-time mechanical consequences such as level loss, item loss and death; which means the player will also be affected no matter what.

My players only have one character but even the best players can get a bit lost in not caring about something just from the main character syndrome urges being a quarter a notch too high for them to not particularly care about something that doesn't affect them being burned down metaphorically.

Even with only one character at a time per player; trying to make everyone care about some specific plot or story related thing can be extremely difficult because most GMs are human. Humans are generally pretty awful at trying to multitask complex interwoven prewritten plot threads like a computer can in a video game. Even if someone is skilled in doing that they will still run into problems where the limits of things like language alone where only one plot can be in focus at a given time and players also tend to be mere humans.

I think quite a few people pushing the "just put something else on the line" are ignoring just how much work is involved in doing that for just one or two players without some kind of mechanical carrot/stick & carrots need to get better over time making things worse

 

[doctorbadwolf]

How exciting is a battle if you know you can't lose?

Lose and die are rather different beasts.

 

[Immoralkickass]

Alot of the time, D&D veterans may have criticisms that the game is a bit too easy. Its certainly easier than the older editions and player death isn't nearly as frequent, but the risk is there.

The question is: Do players actually want this risk?

Don't listen to D&D veterans who say the game is too easy, they just want to sound like a badass grizzled war veteran who has seen it all in Vietnam.

 

[Reynard]

I think it is worth pointing out that death can be BOTH a consequence of mechanical interactions (combat) AND an important narrative outcome that affects the overall story of the game.

In my long (20 year, multiple editions) campaign I have a few examples. The first was early on, low level characters. The bard ended up dying to a banshee in a random woods encounter (we were playing 2e). That event became legendary through a multi-generational campaign that had impact all the way to the "modern" super-hero era of the game. And it was literally a random encounters, save or die situation. It illustrates that we can't just say "random death is boring and adds nothing to the game." That might be true sometimes, or even most of the time, but it is demonstrably not true ALL of the time.

The other one was a big "boss" battle where one of the PCs (they were all related by blood, many of them siblings) was killed fighting a very powerful dragon. It wasn't planned. it was the result of the dice. But when the surviving PCs got back to town and had to tell NPC members of the family what had happened, players cried real world tears. Letting the dice fall where they may increased the narrative power of the game through a character death.

In short: death isn't the only consequence that might matter in the game, but it is one that very surely can matter and isn't necessarily the "boring" outcome.

 

[Jack Daniel]

All I know is, I'm happier and my players are happier since I gave up on various character-preserving mechanics (negative hit points, wound systems, saving throws or Con checks or other kinds of luck rolls when hovering at death's door) and just reverted to death at 0 hp. My regular players also don't seem to like it very much if I make resurrection cheap or easy to come by for low-level characters. Give the people what they want, sez I.

 

[Lanefan]

All I know is, I'm happier and my players are happier since I gave up on various character-preserving mechanics (negative hit points, wound systems, saving throws or Con checks or other kinds of luck rolls when hovering at death's door) and just reverted to death at 0 hp. My regular players also don't seem to like it very much if I make resurrection cheap or easy to come by for low-level characters. Give the people what they want, sez I.

I hear ya, but I stick with -10 as a death point mostly because I want some sort of unconsciousness mechanic in the game, and straight-up death at 0 doesn't leave any space for that where death at -10 does.

 

[Maxperson]

I've always hated death at 0. I mean, "I'm conscious! Now I'm dead!" I like there to be a portion where a PC can actually be unconscious through combat. It's too easy to stay alive these days, but death at 0 isn't anything I will ever play or run.

 

[tetrasodium]

I hear ya, but I stick with -10 as a death point mostly because I want some sort of unconsciousness mechanic in the game, and straight-up death at 0 doesn't leave any space for that where death at -10 does.

IE that one also makes such a scary risk that being anywhere near "this thing could drop me with one good hit & probably would with a crit" hitpoint ranges. Sure bob might be confident the party can kill the monster first, but getting hit for 12 with only 5 hp will drop him to -7 so the healer would need to use a big heal & hope they don't roll bad to keep from healing bob to -1 but still down & 9 points from death. Everyone knows the stakes & treats them accordingly.

IME this kind of thing really needs healing spells or scaling to them that supports the needs better than 5e has to avoid feeling like a losing slog

 

[Umbran]

Don't listen to D&D veterans who say the game is too easy, they just want to sound like a badass grizzled war veteran who has seen it all in Vietnam.

Mod Note:

So, the broad-brush insults hoping to dismiss an entire class of gamer, based on nothing but your personal assessments of what is likely a statistically insignificant portion of the population... does not make for a solid rhetorical position.

Being insulting makes for red text from moderators.

So, maybe, next time you are tempted... don't do that, please and thank you.