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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8712059" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I think this is probably the biggest difference between us. I don't see trying to survive as part of the game. Heck, the "deadly situations" part is mostly a consequence of the types of heroics the party wants to get up to. But I know I've been on the edge of my seat when fellow party members step into a dueling ring or an arena. Death isn't on the table there, you cannot die in a friendly duel, but I'm still invested because survival isn't the point. When we delve into the Lich's tomb, it isn't a question of "can we survive" but it is a question of "Can we stop the Lich". And this could be in part because if survival was a goal... we wouldn't be going on the adventure. We want to survive, because we want to keep playing these characters, but it isn't a goal to survive. Just like it isn't a goal or a question in 90% of media whether or not the protagonist survives til the end of the story.But does the situation need to demand it? Like, let's take a full on Deus ex Machina. Pelor sends a literal angel to revive you, or some other blatant divine intervention. Sure, if you are Smedly the theif who nicked Pelor's silver, this is bizarrely out-of-character and would break immersion. If you are Truth, the Celestial Warlock Pelor chose to send on a mission to stop Moloch's agents, and you haven't stopped them yet? Then Pelor going "I do not give you permission to die until your mission is complete" fits into the logic of the Game World 100%. This totally could happen in a fantasy story. And since you almost failed, Pelor demands more of you because they are investing in your life.And I think that is why a lot of us kind of scratch our heads. Death is already a revolving door in DnD. There are literal forces of the universer like Levistus which are bound to offer aid to mortals in peril. There is always something that can be done in the situation, the situation very very rarely "demands" death nor does it demand that death is irreversible. You may find that Gonzo, or out-of-genre, but this is high fantasy where people summon angels and descend into hell to punch out embodiments of evil. The question isn't "is it possible" but "what are the consequences" and it has the additional bonus of keeping the character in the story, which is important to a lot of us.See, for me and for a lot of the people I play with? The PCs are integral to the health of the Campaign. If I have Truth, the Celestial Warlock who is tracking the cult of Moloch, then if Truth vanishes, all the stuff I was doing with Moloch's agents is disrupted. That was designed to be THEIR part of the story, and focus on the things that player wanted to do. Maybe they make a new character who follows the same plot, but I feel like that should be their choice. And it is worse if you have something built up with a specific connection between a single character and a single NPC villain. The "I'm hunted by X" story is pretty compelling for some people, but if they are dead, then whatever planning I've put into that storyline is just gone, because you can't hunt them if they are dead. So, I agree with you that the players are most important, and the Campaign is important, but I see the PCs as vital to the campaign. They aren't and sometimes really shouldn't be interchangeable pieces.</blockquote>

Verification