D&D (2024) Do players really want balance?

[pemerton]

six gibbering mouthers

I just want to say that, to me, that is a bizarrely large conglomeration of mouthers. I tend to think of them as solitary. Or perhaps closing in as a pair, one from each end of a corridor.

But not six. That's like a phalanx of mouthers!

 

[tetrasodium]

Yup. This^

I have run games where there was literally never any chance any of the PCs were going to die unless they murdered each other. It still -felt- dangerous, and I still played enemies as ferocious and tactical. I just stacked the deck in such a way the PCs were going to win. The players never learned it was theater and it shouldn't matter if they did, later.

Because it didn't stop anyone from breathlessly telling me how much fun a given session was, or telling their friends or spouses about the cool things that happened. And those experiences and sessions and the joy and camaraderie that was had by all were just as real as they couldn't have been in a "Dice fall where they may" session since stuff would almost certainly have gone -way- different.

There have been people who talked about why making that the default for the system causes problems and how said problems areade worse because it is the default. But I don't think anyone has said that you should not be able to dial down risk as you describe doing here or said that you shouldn't while making that point.

Like. I get it. Some people want to play the game as a complete random chance simulator. And I do that, too, to varying degrees based on the story being told. But sometimes?

Sometimes the dice just get in the way.

This seems to be a caricaturized rephrasing of what people are saying. Who do you believe is making this point & what post?

 

[Zardnaar]

Yup. This^

I have run games where there was literally never any chance any of the PCs were going to die unless they murdered each other. It still -felt- dangerous, and I still played enemies as ferocious and tactical. I just stacked the deck in such a way the PCs were going to win. The players never learned it was theater and it shouldn't matter if they did, later.

Because it didn't stop anyone from breathlessly telling me how much fun a given session was, or telling their friends or spouses about the cool things that happened. And those experiences and sessions and the joy and camaraderie that was had by all were just as real as they couldn't have been in a "Dice fall where they may" session since stuff would almost certainly have gone -way- different.

Like. I get it. Some people want to play the game as a complete random chance simulator. And I do that, too, to varying degrees based on the story being told. But sometimes?

Sometimes the dice just get in the way.

It's the illusion of risk. If they do something blatantly stupid eg walk into adult red dragon lair low level that's on them.

Short of some really bad dice rolls or high risk derp charge chance of death is remote.

 

[DEFCON 1]

But not six. That's like a phalanx of mouthers!

I believe the correct collective noun is a "cacophony of gibbering mouthers".

 

[FrogReaver]

Exactly! That's the point of death spirals: to discourage the PCs from getting into that position, and to better represent injury.

Its far less death spirally than default death rules.

Just curious: is your proposed solution a houserule to 5.5 that you use?

No. We decided to do our first 5.5e without major house rules, only one session in so far. We used this firWe tinker a lot so

If they shuffled multiple decks together for poker it would become possible to get a hand of five of a kind, which isn't normally possible without cheating.

Oh, I dunno - psyching out your opponent is a part of chess too.

Theres been so many chess moves that were obvious blunders that I made so confidently that my opponent didn’t see I hung a piece.

 

[Micah Sweet]

People have expectations from D&D so they can't really do drastic changes.

Probably work better as a 10 level game and everything is short rest and at will based like Warlock. Spells can stay the same.

It's also a waste of time writing a formula for encounters as every group is different. 2E had about the best approach. Basically a heap of guidelines and dont use creatures immune to stuff if half the party can't hurt them.

It's an art form not a science.

I really miss 2e.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yup. This^

I have run games where there was literally never any chance any of the PCs were going to die unless they murdered each other. It still -felt- dangerous, and I still played enemies as ferocious and tactical. I just stacked the deck in such a way the PCs were going to win. The players never learned it was theater and it shouldn't matter if they did, later.

Because it didn't stop anyone from breathlessly telling me how much fun a given session was, or telling their friends or spouses about the cool things that happened. And those experiences and sessions and the joy and camaraderie that was had by all were just as real as they couldn't have been in a "Dice fall where they may" session since stuff would almost certainly have gone -way- different.

Like. I get it. Some people want to play the game as a complete random chance simulator. And I do that, too, to varying degrees based on the story being told. But sometimes?

Sometimes the dice just get in the way.

You know, there is a place between "no chance of character death" and "completely random chance simulator". No one seems to bring that up, however. Maybe because extremes are easier to argue against?

 

[Micah Sweet]

In Torchbearer 2e, which has been most of my RPGing for the past couple of years, PCs can't die unless death is explicitly on the line - either (i) because the PCs are in a kill conflict, or (ii) because a PC is sick or injured (these are both technical conditions that can be acquired by failing a test or losing a contest) and the GM announces that "death is on the line" as a possible consequence of a failed test.

If a PC does die, then provided they have one unspent Persona point (a type of "currency" that players can accrue via play), the player can spend the Persona and declare that the PC has "the will to live". This then triggers a set of rules, in which the player and the GM both have decisions to make about changes to the PC sheet, and which also require the player to explain how their PC miraculously survived.

In 20 sessions of play, we have had one PC "die" twice and another once. One all three occasions, they had the will to live.

None of this stops the play of the game being intense. When my players initiate combat, generally it is to capture or to drive off (rather than to kill), because they don't want death to be on the line. Those combats are not less intense because the PCs aren't at risk of death.

As I already mentioned upthread, another RPG I've played in the past little while is Prince Valiant. It's default approach to stakes is that death is not on the line. Only if the fiction makes death the only real stakes (eg someone has been hurled over the parapet of a high tower; or someone is lying injured on a desert battlefield, bleeding and without water) does it come into play as a possibility. This doesn't stop conflicts, including combats, being intense.

I don't think that intense and engaged play requires making players think that death is on the line if it is not.

All of that is fine if you have players and a DM who care more about making a cool story than exploring a (more-or-less) logically consistent imaginary world. That's just not me, and most of my players wouldn't be happy using metacurrency to alter reality at the table either.

 

[Zardnaar]

I really miss 2e.

I mine it and occasionally play.

 

[pemerton]

All of that is fine if you have players and a DM who care more about making a cool story than exploring a (more-or-less) logically consistent imaginary world. That's just not me, and most of my players wouldn't be happy using metacurrency to alter reality at the table either.

The imaginary world of my Torchbearer play is logically consistent. You can read the actual play reports yourself and observe that this is so: Torchbearer 2e - actual play of this AWESOME system! (+)

The campaign is also (in my humble opinion) pretty cool, but then I aspire for all my RPGing to involve cool stuff. I get enough non-cool when I'm not playing games!

As far as a PC having the will to live, as the very phrase suggests this need not be "meta" at all. It can be a manifestation of a PC's will to live. (5e D&D does this via death saves; but it doesn't become less (or more) "realistic" to do this via an expenditure than via a random roll.)