Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Stoat" data-source="post: 4477136" data-attributes="member: 16786">With regard to the "Orc with a Greataxe" question, it occurs to me that two separate issues are being discussed here.The first is the proximity between the choice made by the player and the fatal consequences of that choice.  Every PC death is ultimately the result of a choice made by the player.  However, the more remove between the choice and the consequence, the more players are likely to object.  This issue frequently hinges on the players' knowledge of the threats their characters might face.The second is the players' opportunity to avoid the consequences of the fatal choice once the extent of those consequences is known to the player.  In other words, after the plaintiff realizes the trouble he's in, does he have a chance to get out?  As an example, consider two encounters between a party of sixth level characters and a Medusa.In the first case, the DM makes use of random encounter tables and wandering monsters.  The players are aware of this fact.  During the characters' travels, the DM rolls on the encounter table and generates a medusa, a very rare monster for this area.  A random roll determines that the encounter begins at a distance of less than 30'.  The Medusa beats the 6th level Wizard's initiative and uses her gaze attack against him.  The Wizard fails his save and turns to stone.In the second case, an NPC reveals to the players that the MacGuffin is in the possession of a certain medusa.  Additional research and divination yields the approximate location of the medusa's lair.  The players travel to the location and observe the petrified remains of the medusa's prior victims.  They press on and meet the medusa.  The Wizard wins the initiative and uses a mirror to target the Medusa with a spell.  The medusa survives and retaliates with her gaze attack.  The Wizard fails his save and turns to stone.In the first case, there is considerable distance between the player's death and the decision that lead to the death.  Presumably, the player knew that the DM would use random encounters.  It was reasonable for the player to assume that some random encounters would be deadly.  However, the player is unlikely to know exactly what monsters might be randomly encountered in a given area, and he has no way to know what specific monters will appear during a given adventure.  Arguably, the fatal decision is made when the player sits down to play.  Further, the player has little, perhaps no chance to act and avoid death (or at least petrification), once the medusa appears on the scene.  He gets an initiative check and a fortitude save -- two essentially passive dice rolls.  In the second case, the fatal outcome comes close behind the fatal decision.  The players press on despite knowing that they are close to the medusa's lair.  In addition, the petrified player has some chance to affirmatively act to avoid death.The issue of proximity between choice and consequence is largely one of playstyle.  Proximity decreases when the players can gain intelligence through research, investigation and divination.  Proximity increases when encounters are random and, therefore, unpredictable.  Some rules (Gather Information checks, the Augury spell) facilitate intelligence gathering, but overall I think its mostly up to the players and the DM to reach a consensus on how to handle this issue.The ability of players to avoid the consequences of their bad decisions is more tightly wired to mechanics.  In 3E it could be particularly difficult.  Save or die effects were relatively common.  Monsters could do large amounts of damage in a singe round.  Attacks of opportunity made withdrawing from a losing fight difficult.  4E makes it easier to live to regret a bad decision by nerfing save or dies and lowering monster damage.Any individual's preference is, as always, idiosyncratic and beyond debate.  However, it seems to me that these it is preference regarding these two variables that's really driving this discussion.</blockquote>

Verification