Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Enrahim2" data-source="post: 9012016" data-attributes="member: 7039850">I think this touches on a crucial point. You talking about people befriended dying as something to avoid, or getting character development as something you desire. This is a common mode of play today, but not the only. In the purest form of this mode of play it can be argued that perma death should be completely off the table.However if the mode of play is rather focusing on befriending the other players, and develop the party together, the death of a character is a completely different matter. To what extent lethality should be telegraphed and attempted avoided is highly dependent on mode of play.One thing granting DM high degree of autonomy rather than binding their hands to avoid &quot;mistakes&quot; alows for is the DM to read the table. That a designer cannot do. From how the lich tower incident is described it is a fond memory for the players, and they angle the talk about it as the players messed up, not the DM. That indicates to me that this was a case the DM read the table correctly, no matter how much warning or signaling the DM might have given in advance.If playing a system with for instance player known budgets of what a DM could introduce of monsters, that group would have been one fond story poorer. I am also sceptical if the suggested have the characters &quot;auto evade&quot; the monsters, and have a creepy dungeon exploration would have been anywhere near as memorable despite potentially being more &quot;fun&quot; at the moment. In this story the DMs ability to crush half the party based on reading the table was what made this story valuable. This is one of the flexibilities an empowered DM can give the game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Enrahim2, post: 9012016, member: 7039850"] I think this touches on a crucial point. You talking about people befriended dying as something to avoid, or getting character development as something you desire. This is a common mode of play today, but not the only. In the purest form of this mode of play it can be argued that perma death should be completely off the table. However if the mode of play is rather focusing on befriending the other players, and develop the party together, the death of a character is a completely different matter. To what extent lethality should be telegraphed and attempted avoided is highly dependent on mode of play. One thing granting DM high degree of autonomy rather than binding their hands to avoid "mistakes" alows for is the DM to read the table. That a designer cannot do. From how the lich tower incident is described it is a fond memory for the players, and they angle the talk about it as the players messed up, not the DM. That indicates to me that this was a case the DM read the table correctly, no matter how much warning or signaling the DM might have given in advance. If playing a system with for instance player known budgets of what a DM could introduce of monsters, that group would have been one fond story poorer. I am also sceptical if the suggested have the characters "auto evade" the monsters, and have a creepy dungeon exploration would have been anywhere near as memorable despite potentially being more "fun" at the moment. In this story the DMs ability to crush half the party based on reading the table was what made this story valuable. This is one of the flexibilities an empowered DM can give the game. [/QUOTE]

Verification