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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5837641" data-attributes="member: 42582">Agreed, but maybe in a slightly different sense from what you meant (see below).I chose option 1 in the poll before reading the OP, and I don't think that this scenario captures what I had in mind in choosing Option 1.There are many forms of GM-player communication other than commenting on tactical or operational plan. And there are many forms of silliness other than TPK. And just because the players take note of what the GM says, it needn't follw that they expect the GM to save them - they may well become motivated by pride, for example, to do better.I've only had one "TPK" in my 4e game, and in fact only one of the PCs died permanently. I asked the players whether or not they wanted to keep playing the same PCs, and all but one did. So three of the four who were only at 0 hp were captured rather than killed by the goblins who had set the successful trap for them. (The half-elf feylock was killed and cooked up, however - the player of that PC wanted to bring in a drow sorcerer instead). And the one PC who had been dropped to negative bloodied (by friendly fire, from memory) came back to life - the goblin shaman summoned the spirit of the PC's nemesis back to unlife as a wraith, and the Raven Queen sent the spirit of the PC back into the world two, to bring the nemesis to heel.The response of the players to this wasn't to become lazily dependent upon the GM. It was to be embarassed by having fallen for the goblin's trap, and to resolve to do better next time!For me, the main role of GM communication is to remind the players of what is at stake, and to keep up the pressure. To borrow The Shaman's phrase, I want to make sure that they're acutely aware of the bed that they're making for themselves to sleep in. In my game, the risk of TPKing is not a very big part of that.This depends, doesn't it? I guess it depends in part what you mean by "interfere" - but when my players are debating what to do, I will speak up all the time - think of it as playing the little angels and/or devils on their shoulders, reminding them of what is at stake and what could go right or wrong, thereby building up the investment in the situation and the ancticipation of its outcome, whatever that happens to be. I don't particularly care what my players have their PCs do, but I do care that my players care about what is happening in the game. And I find GM commentary and interjection is one effective way to bring this about.</blockquote>

Verification