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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9534656" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Not really. Once you get relatively far in, random pointless death becomes a lot rarer. Remember that Jon Snow survived being killed, without becoming an undead monster or catatonic lump.Kosh's death was not even slightly random. In fact, this would be precisely what I would use as a possible cost for preventing a PC's death. A beloved NPC pays the price for the choice.Except nearly everyone who "died" in the show was actually a Cylon and thus woke back up again in another Cylon body. Genuinely surprised you'd use it as an example given how many times it had fakeout deaths.Actually, per official canon, we don't know for sure that Neo or Trinity died. (The Machines did not report their bodies as recycled, which is extremely unusual if they were Just Dead.) Morpheus survived. Even if we ignore the post-film canon and look just at the original trilogy, both Neo and Trinity die in entirely non-random ways on a mission they knew was almost certainly suicidal. So this really isn't as much of an example as you might like.You already covered this in your note, but...yeah. This death wasn't permanent. That was kinda why I explicitly used it as an example earlier.Jack Harkness is literally super-immortal. We never 100% for sure see him die and stay dead. It was never explicitly confirmed that he was the "Face of Boe" though it seems likely that he was.Yes, because soap operas only invoke death randomly and without build-up or pay-off of any kind.C'mon, man. I know you know better than to compare these kinds of deaths to Random Hobgoblin #12 getting an unlucky crit against your level 2 character and causing instant death.I genuinely don't understand the point you're making here.Yes. Deaths do occasionally happen in sports. Would you agree that these are rare, preventable accidents? Would you claim that a well-constructed sports RPG should have legit straight-up death as an expected consequence?...yes. Which is precisely why I said, in the very post you quoted, that death shouldn't be present on the sports field. As in, if it is present on the sports field, something has gone terribly wrong and needs to be fixed.Your claimed analogy between sports TTRPGs and D&D-alike TTRPGs fails for the very specific reason that "losing" in a sport DOES NOT CAUSE DEATH. Like....that's literally where the analogy fails! Yes, I completely agree that IF you removed the possibility of losing a game, that would make a sports TTRPG quite boring. BUT I WOULD NEVER DO THAT. I would never do that specifically BECAUSE there's no need to! It's not like D&D-alike games where the consequence of failure in combat is permanent. A sports team that loses even every single game in an entire season is extremely unlikely to be under threat of ceasing to exist, of ceasing to be able to continue games in the next season. The Cleveland Browns had a perfectly winless season in 2017, going nineteen total games (16 actually on-season) with an unbroken losing streak. Hell, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers lost their first 26 games, all 14 in 1976 and a further 12 in 1977, and yet that team is still in existence now.Your analogy to sports games is simply, fundamentally broken, because sports TTRPGs just do. not. have. a consequence that is comparable to what death is in D&D-alike games. They just don't, and it would be extremely weird to try to add such a consequence. Sports TTRPGs have already "removed" death as a consequence, and yet you seem to think they are still games that can be played and that have consequences!</blockquote>

Verification