Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9572432" data-attributes="member: 177">Not sure I agree.&nbsp; I think we, as RPG people who have a perennial argument about death in games, need to be careful about how we think about deaths in other forms of narrative.&nbsp; Especially when we are trying to use that to justify something about out games.In general, characters in other forms of fiction don't fail to die because they are &quot;essential&quot;.&nbsp; They fail to die because the author needs a reason to kill them. Characters die because actors become unavailable, and everywhere else because the death serves some intended purpose in the story.&nbsp; We in our games are special, because we don't need a reason.&nbsp; We have dice that can decree it happening, and it... just happens.&nbsp; Death is always a choice in other authored fictions.On Star Trek: The Next Generation, Commander Ryker is not &quot;essential&quot;.&nbsp; The overall plot of Next Gen does not fall apart if he's not there.&nbsp; And we can totally imagine the series going on without him - either Lt. Commander Data gets promoted, or they bring in a new first officer.&nbsp; Either totally plausible, and neither would ruin the show.&nbsp; Ryker could totally die without breaking things.But, do either of those alternatives serve the purposes of Next Gen?&nbsp; Not really.&nbsp; It isn't that we can't do without him, but that doing without him isn't really an improvement, nor a theme the show was looking to explore.&nbsp; So, having no reason to kill him, Ryker lives.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 9572432, member: 177"] Not sure I agree. I think we, as RPG people who have a perennial argument about death in games, need to be careful about how we think about deaths in other forms of narrative. Especially when we are trying to use that to justify something about out games. In general, characters in other forms of fiction don't fail to die because they are "essential". They fail to die because the author [I]needs a reason[/I] to kill them. Characters die because actors become unavailable, and everywhere else because the death serves some intended purpose in the story. We in our games are special, because we don't need a reason. We have dice that can decree it happening, and it... just happens. Death is always a choice in other authored fictions. On Star Trek: The Next Generation, Commander Ryker is not "essential". The overall plot of Next Gen does not fall apart if he's not there. And we can totally imagine the series going on without him - either Lt. Commander Data gets promoted, or they bring in a new first officer. Either totally plausible, and neither would ruin the show. Ryker could totally die without breaking things. But, do either of those alternatives [I]serve the purposes[/I] of Next Gen? Not really. It isn't that we can't do without him, but that doing without him isn't really an improvement, nor a theme the show was looking to explore. So, having no reason to kill him, Ryker lives. [/QUOTE]

Verification