D&D General Kobayashi Maru: Should the fate of the character always be in the player's hands? POLL

Is it fair for a character to die over an event that the player has no control?

  • Completely fair. Sometimes you roll the 1.

    Votes: 66 54.1%
  • Somewhat fair. The rules shouldn't encourage death, but you can't get rid of randomness.

    Votes: 35 28.7%
  • Unfair. There is no such thing as an "unwinnable scenario," and players, not dice, should control

    Votes: 8 6.6%
  • Other- I will explain in the comments.

    Votes: 12 9.8%
  • I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then I could beat up Dracula AND Superman.

    Votes: 1 0.8%

  • Poll closed .
Running away is always a good tactic.
In light of this post, i feel a need to share a fun-fact:
On this date in 1975, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" was released in the U.S.
176789914_3926746597407756_8877384960719819013_n.jpg
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It depends on your story. If a story is completely character driven then killing off that character kills the campaign. If the story is event driven, then a character can die and other characters can pick up the story. My campaigns tend to have a bit of a mix of those, but I think that it is important that players know their characters CAN get in over their heads and die.

I've had a number of encounters where the dice have turned sideways and a character has died - including random encounters. No chance of resurrections either because the other characters are too busy running for their lives to collect the corpse.

I'm known as a killer DM amongst my gaming groups, but my games are considered the most fun. I think that tension that you might easily die is part of that.
I believe story emerges FROM play, rather than from pre-determined elements by either GMs or players. Not that I don't think people should play any way but that which makes them happy, but if given a choice I will always pick the "emergent narrative" option.
 

I've always found this to be an odd brag/point of pride.

As DM killing characters is easy even trivial, if that's what I wish to happen.

Challenging them, designing encounters in such a way that Players have to push their characters and certainly possibly fail (which may or may not mean death) - but still have a blast doing it, that's what I try for.
Very well said.

We had a killed DM in the early 80s. We never give him our dead character sheets. Instead we played the same characters, no longer dead, with a new DM.
 
Last edited:

Unfair.

I find random death unsatisfying in literally every media from games to movies and TV.
Death can't be random in movies or TV or books. A writer decided. One of the big draws of RPGs is that there is no writer, that folks decisions and the dice create an uncertain outcome and produce and unexpected story. I don't know why one would play an RPG with a foregone conclusion.
 

I voted somewhat unfair.

There's nothing wrong with character death per se. It's part of the game. Sometimes characters die, and it can even be fun.

However, I do consider unavoidable death to be very undesirable. If the player's choices have no impact on whether the character survives, or worse, the player does not even get to make a choice, that's not fun, in my opinion.

How fair it is really depends on the circumstances. The rules can certainly influence how frequently fair or unfair deaths arise.
 


Death can't be random in movies or TV or books. A writer decided.
Writers can write events that are random and pointless in-universe. 90% of comic event deaths for example.
One of the big draws of RPGs is that there is no writer, that folks decisions and the dice create an uncertain outcome and produce and unexpected story. I don't know why one would play an RPG with a foregone conclusion.
Sigh.

Every thread about death in the game. I'm very tired of this argument.

Look, just because you don't die from random dumb crap in the game doesn't mean everything else is a foregone conclusion. I respectfully ask that people stop using this fallacy.
 

Writers can write events that are random and pointless in-universe. 90% of comic event deaths for example.

Sigh.

Every thread about death in the game. I'm very tired of this argument.

Look, just because you don't die from random dumb crap in the game doesn't mean everything else is a foregone conclusion. I respectfully ask that people stop using this fallacy.
Well, how does it work? If you don't have "real" random character effects upto death, then you just pick and choose what happens, right? So why bother rolling? Why bother playing the game? If all attacks will "miss" the special protected character, you don't have much of a game.

Or do you just constantly fudge and alter any roll you want, again making rolling pointless. If the dice roll a "wrong" number you just change it or ignore it?

It's random death...or your a rated G cartoon.
 

Writers can write events that are random and pointless in-universe. 90% of comic event deaths for example.

Sigh.

Every thread about death in the game. I'm very tired of this argument.

Look, just because you don't die from random dumb crap in the game doesn't mean everything else is a foregone conclusion. I respectfully ask that people stop using this fallacy.
I don't know what sorts of preferences you have for games. I don't know if you like "stories" or "sandboxes" or something else. So it is difficult to assess whether your argument that a lack of potential PC death based on the result of die rolls is something I understand or can argue about.
 

Well, how does it work? If you don't have "real" random character effects upto death, then you just pick and choose what happens, right? So why bother rolling? Why bother playing the game? If all attacks will "miss" the special protected character, you don't have much of a game.

Or do you just constantly fudge and alter any roll you want, again making rolling pointless. If the dice roll a "wrong" number you just change it or ignore it?

It's random death...or your a rated G cartoon.
This argument is so stale.

Not even every RPG has Death as a consequence. Having it not be on the table means just that: death isn't on the table. Death is not the only stake possible; lazy writers have just conditioned us to feel that way over the last 40 years. Heroes can fail, villains can win, darkness can fall, people can be exiled from their homeland, have loved ones turned against them, have fortunes and lands taken from them, have thier dreams dashed--all without death.

You don't even have to fudge die rolls, just replace the results of 'Death Saves' with something less permanent. Then BAM. No death, but nothing else is changed.
 

Remove ads

Top