Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fox Lee" data-source="post: 5691404" data-attributes="member: 4346">For some of us it is, though ^^; That part really is a matter of group style - since I invest lots of time, effort and emotion into a character, I'm not interested in a game where they're likely to die to a bit of bad luck. In the same way that I don't appreciate a meaningless death in a book or movie, I don't care for it in a game either - that's the point where the game stops being fun for me. YMMV, of&nbsp; course, and I am certainly in a minority based on the posts I've read here. But the point is, it's true for some folks, and if that's the case, why shouldn't they be cautious?By and large, I think you're right about the intended flavour of D&amp;D. But there's a fine line between &quot;heroes doing dangerous things&quot; and &quot;morons taking unneccessary risks&quot; (with the difference frequently being decided by success or failure). Plenty of gamers love to be he genre-savvy character in a story - you know, the one who doesn't let the BBEG finish his stalling speech? -&nbsp; or just enjoy playing grounded, sensible heroes. Those characters aren't somehow less worthy than gung-ho, kick-the-door-down HEROES(tm) (indeed, they can be a very useful party element).Really, the spirit of cooperation is called for here. If the players don't want their characters to make bad mechnical choices for the sake of narrative, then acknowledge that - and in turn, give them good mechanical reasons to do what you want. I don't think it's wrong for the players to want motivation to cooperate with either story tropes or game conceits, as long as they are willing to take it on board when provided.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fox Lee, post: 5691404, member: 4346"] For some of us it [i]is[/i], though ^^; That part really is a matter of group style - since I invest lots of time, effort and emotion into a character, I'm not interested in a game where they're likely to die to a bit of bad luck. In the same way that I don't appreciate a meaningless death in a book or movie, I don't care for it in a game either - that's the point where the game stops being fun for me. YMMV, of course, and I am certainly in a minority based on the posts I've read here. But the point is, it's true for some folks, and if that's the case, why shouldn't they be cautious? By and large, I think you're right about the intended flavour of [i]D&D[/i]. But there's a fine line between "heroes doing dangerous things" and "morons taking unneccessary risks" (with the difference frequently being decided by success or failure). Plenty of gamers love to be he genre-savvy character in a story - you know, the one who [i]doesn't[/i] let the BBEG finish his stalling speech? - or just enjoy playing grounded, sensible heroes. Those characters aren't somehow less worthy than gung-ho, kick-the-door-down HEROES(tm) (indeed, they can be a very useful party element). Really, the spirit of cooperation is called for here. If the players don't want their characters to make bad mechnical choices for the sake of narrative, then acknowledge that - and in turn, give them good mechanical reasons to do what you want. I don't think it's wrong for the players to want motivation to cooperate with either story tropes or game conceits, as long as they are willing to take it on board when provided. [/QUOTE]

Verification