I’m so weak!

[Methinkus]

I’m so weak!

I DM a group of players every week, I enjoy the campaign and we all have fun. It is with some of my oldest friends, and I do my best to be a good DM, the problem is thus – I do no want the characters to die . . . .

It’s really only some of the characters. Their stories and potential is just to much for me to waist by simply saying “the orc plunges his broadsword into your chest and you die screaming” I want to see how their characters stories develop and where they go as they advance.

Some of the less imaginative player’s characters aren’t so charmed; Im more than ready to kill the big dumb fighter who joined up with the party “’cause it would be fun” Is this a good or bad thing? I lean towards bad, since even though if I do kill that character it will keep them from feeling like none of them are really in any danger, but at the same time what it boils down to is me playing favorites as DM. Because this person’s history moved me or intrigued me I will not let them die. That just plain isn’t fair.

Has anyone else ever faced this sort of prejudice – either been the dm and wanted to keep some specific characters alive and not others (the classic example of the guy who lets his wife sit in at the game shouldn’t be that rare here) or maybe been a player and noticed this behavior in the game? How did it end up?

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Salutations,

I tend to be open about my bias-

I like character-based stories and side-plots, and will work with any player who shows interest in making the effort. I normally won't allow that bias to affect character death, but it does show up in character spot-light.

My character-death bias comes from player stupidity- I normally may fudge a roll or two for the pc's, but if someone is doing something stupid - the dice fall where they will fall.

FD

 

[333 Dave]

The real problem is that the player who's character gets killed will be less inclined to put as much effort in his future characters because they might just end up killed like the first one and this goes on and on in an endless spiral where some players keep the same characters forever and others need new ones every other week. So try to help the player get motivated or just admit to your players your less inclined to kill richly storied characters.

 

[alsih2o]

end of last session we had our cleric raised, poor guy lost his life (and a lvl) when he tried to rescue another party member....towards the end of todays session(i am d.m.ing) he ends up toe to toe with a fire giant, 78 points of dmg in one rd and he is dead again....so it got fudged, he ended up at -9 instead of -10, with some hideous scars.

normally i woulda offed him on the spot, but man, he was just raised!

so, yes, some bias goes into these things in our game

 

[Nightfall]

Something like that, I guess for me ashilo, the cleric's deity might interfere. Perhaps send along a small helper, but nothing major. Like a celestial of some sort, just to distract the fire giant.

 

[Rune]

Fudging for some players and not for others is a big no-no!

I suggest that you force yourself to be fair by not fudging at all.

Try rolling all combat rolls in the open.

 

[Numion]

Re: I’m so weak!

I lean towards bad, since even though if I do kill that character it will keep them from feeling like none of them are really in any danger, but at the same time what it boils down to is me playing favorites as DM. Because this person’s history moved me or intrigued me I will not let them die. That just plain isn’t fair.

How's that not fair? I think that players who come up with detailed character backgrounds should be rewarded... Just tell the players how it's going to go.

 

[bloodymage]

Read my sig!

 

[Inez Hull]

I GM'ed my first TPK last week. Previous to this event I have probably sheltered the party and only had two character deaths in two campaigns. At first I was really disappointed and angry with myself (the circumstances of the TPK were mainly attribtable to me, I have now wasted lots of planning for the campaign, and I really liked the PC's) but I am now feeling liberated in being able to play things a bit tougher and not feel like the players have to win to like me (or something like that anyway).

I have definitely felt an aversion to killing off PC's that I liked, but my opinion now is that I shouldn't be forming too strong a bond, that's for the players to do. I need to know what the characters are like and more importantly, what the players want from the game and for their characters. However, liking the characters too much involoves the risk of fudging things when you shouldn't because you don't want to see the PC's die.

 

[Henry]

We have recently in our campaign had several deaths of certain characters. These deaths, however, stressed three important points:

1) Never take on something that is obviously beyond your abilities

2) Never split up the party, especially just before tackling an evenly-matched opponent

3) Character deaths DO happen

All the character deaths were directly related to these three issues. I have had one PC who was resurrected in exchange for a future favor from the church, one whose finger was regenerated in exchange for a future favor, one who rolled up a new character because his body could not be recovered, and one who retired his old character and created a new one who was more combat oriented.

Several of my players have learned important lessons from these challenges: they learned that I am not afraid to kill off PC's when they play them unwisely; they also learned that there are things available in my campaigns that are well beyond them. I do not "drop" these opponents on them - they have places they can go to encounter these opponents, and if they go there and attack these foes, they WILL get the full force of their fury.

These two things have definitely led to more cautious play in my games, and from what I've seen, this is a positive thing.