Most people don't enjoy creating characters repeatedly in any WotC edition nor even 2E, in my experience.
There's a huge difference, as you know, and just pretending you don't see it isn't an argument, isn't rational, and isn't even a point. It's merely being obtuse.
Not an argument against anything I said, you're just supporting my point by ignoring what I've actually said.
This is impressive, you're basically conceding every single point I've made and instead just harrumphing.
Again you effectively support my point. I haven't mentioned "tantrum throwers". People are upset when their characters die almost never throw tantrums. I've never actually seen it happen with someone who wasn't a
literal child. I would go as far as to suggest they basically don't exist. But being upset and demoralized and not particularly wanting to continue is very different to throwing a tantrum.
In case this is difficult for you to understand, allow me to illustrate. If you go and see a movie, and that movie is long, dull and bad, or just has a massive downer ending and is not at all "bad in a fun way", and people come out demoralized and don't want to go for a drink after or whatever, just want to go home, that's what I'm talking about when people don't their characters dying.
That's different from if you went to a terrible movie, and your friend starting throwing pop-corn at the screen, bellowing insults at the actors, and basically has to be asked to leave - that's throwing a tantrum.
If you throw a tantrum, you're probably either screaming and shouting, lying on the floor kicking your legs in the air, throwing dice at people (I've seen it happen), or just generally making a gigantic fuss. My entire main groups hates their PCs dying in games which aren't about PCs dying (i.e. CoC etc.), and literally none of them has thrown a tantrum when their PC dies. They just really don't like - that's very different. So if your problem is only tantrums, and you don't play with kids, you're not actually going to have a problem, so your keen-ness to fire anyone who isn't keen on dying is strange.
Also, this makes no sense, why can you handle the former more easily? Sure the result the same, they're kicked out? But you're suggesting kicking out anyone who isn't basically into a form of masochism.
I notice you conceded pretty much all my points re: the common bad behaviours of people who don't care about their characters dying, only arguing metagaming, and I personally find that to be dubious, because that's been the case in 100% of the people I've seen who didn't mind their PCs dying at all - they were inveterate metagamers, the sort of people who immediately tell you the weaknesses and so on of a monster before it's even been fully described. They're basically acting like D&D is a videogame so your rogue-like comparison was apt.
@overgeeked also basically said I was right on my critiques of players who don't mind characters dying, right down to admitting he dislikes people who RP significantly (that's certainly what it sounds like).
Sure, but if you force churn on people in them, you're thus going to get a bad result. They're game designed for a different and less grindy mode of play.
I said RAW/RAI. RAW/RAI, it's not a meat-grinder. If you follow the encounter guidelines, 5E is pretty low-fatality at low levels. Not as low as 4E, but lower than 3E. If you completely ignore the encounter guidelines, all bets are off, but that's forcing a meat-grinder into the game, it's not one that was already there.
I have severe ADHD and I personally couldn't disagree more. Phones make ADHD
much worse, not better. Personally, RPGs allow me to ADHD hyperfocus, which is both pleasant and helpful (especially as a DM).
