Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="transmission89" data-source="post: 8270840" data-attributes="member: 6688441">Reference to the original post :”Alot of the time, D&amp;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?”Fair and balanced encounters (and expectations of) and the threat of death are absolutely tied together. Combat as sport vs war are absolutely tied to this. This is making my point for me, the mindset difference I referred to. If it is sport, the challenge is mitigated with respect to the question posed by the OP.If the central conceit of the game is ”heroes go into a perilous dungeon and brave the hazards therein for rewards“ (for that is what the basic framework of the rules provide for despite all the marvellous ways generations of players have pulled at these to create campaigns with scope behind this) and you are not prepared for the idea that your character may die an ignominious death from a rogue green slime, falling down a spiked pit, or ambushed by 20 kobolds after triggering an alarm, you must answer no to the original question.If you subscribe to the view that death or challenge should be in service to (or derived) from the story, that challenge is artificial. You have an almost literal plot armour as death is only threatened when called for.Of course, play what works for you, but I suspect many would recoil at the idea I expressed above which again, referring back to my post and the op shows that no, most players don’t want this risk, they want the illusion of it to satisfy their power fantasy. Balanced encounters are in service to this.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="transmission89, post: 8270840, member: 6688441"] Reference to the original post : ” 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?” Fair and balanced encounters (and expectations of) and the threat of death are absolutely tied together. Combat as sport vs war are absolutely tied to this. This is making my point for me, the mindset difference I referred to. If it is sport, the challenge is mitigated with respect to the question posed by the OP. If the central conceit of the game is ”heroes go into a perilous dungeon and brave the hazards therein for rewards“ (for that is what the basic framework of the rules provide for despite all the marvellous ways generations of players have pulled at these to create campaigns with scope behind this) and you are not prepared for the idea that your character may die an ignominious death from a rogue green slime, falling down a spiked pit, or ambushed by 20 kobolds after triggering an alarm, you must answer no to the original question. If you subscribe to the view that death or challenge should be in service to (or derived) from the story, that challenge is artificial. You have an almost literal plot armour as death is only threatened when called for. Of course, play what works for you, but I suspect many would recoil at the idea I expressed above which again, referring back to my post and the op shows that no, most players don’t want this risk, they want the illusion of it to satisfy their power fantasy. Balanced encounters are in service to this. [/QUOTE]

Verification