Man who uses exploit to leave the map boundaries upset the designers didn't put anything for him to do or way back besides resetting...Nope - I-as-player choose to have my character do this seemingly-suicidal action. However, I-as-player also expressly deny permission for my character's death.
Now where are we? Yeah, that's right - degenerate-land.
Nope. If you're doing this to stir crap in the game, it's definitely a suicide attempt.
Nope - I-as-player choose to have my character do this seemingly-suicidal action. However, I-as-player also expressly deny permission for my character's death.
Now where are we? Yeah, that's right - degenerate-land.
In a game with wishes and gods, eventually you are going to become powerful enough to do something about it. I don't need to have the power of a god, when eventually I'm going to be powerful enough that one will listen and/or owe me a favor for saving their temple or even their religion during some adventure when I'm 20th level. Or maybe I'll figure out a way to make an artifact that can do it and quest for what that takes. Or...
Nobody is claiming player characters will not age and die. This is really taking the argument to silly places. During adventures player characters will not meet their ends through a series of bad dice rolls, bad luck or that one uninformed bad decision. Even at 20th level, they are not gods, and just like most groups will probably quit playing long before then anyway. In games with death there are still going to be characters who can potentially reach 20th level too, so don't they get to undo all their mistakes as well? There's been epic play in DnD for decades. If you are now saying it's inevitable that player characters will achieve these high levels, I haven't seen this as any more common than in more deadly games. And even if a group found a powerful artifact or cajoled a deity into bending to their will and reversed an event from back in 3rd level, I'm thinking Flashpoint. There will be consequences, big unknowable consequences. And this would be entirely logical, not an adversarial move by the GM.
That was just a bit of hyperbole on my part to illustrate the point. It's not going to take anywhere near old age to achieve 20th level and those things I mentioned.
IF they make it there, yes. It's the "if" that makes all the difference. If you can't be guaranteed to get there and/or can die when you do, then true failure can happen. You might never succeed before death claims you. That potential makes all of the other setbacks possibly permanent ones, which alters the feel of the game considerably.
Sure! And that's part of the fun. Consequences are part of game play starting from the first moment of the first session. We're not discussing consequences, though. We're discussing setbacks and failures, which even though are consequences, don't comprise the entire set of what consequences are. All A = B, but not all B = A.
Please don't include me in that. I told @Lanefan that doing that would constitute a player decision to have his PC die.
With all the exaggeration and misrepresenting the OP's point that's going around, maybe we could not for just this one thread?
Did you want to respond to any other part of that post, or just the part that avoids any real issues being discussed?
I just want to cut down on the weeds in the conversation right now. All this useless hyperbole and outrage gets in the way of the actual arguments and causes people to rabbit off after arguments that shouldn't be taken seriously.
