New tidbit about spells and hit points.

[Zimri]

Where is the fun without danger? Where is the thrills if you don't take the chance of facing death? If there is no threat of death and no threat of harm for your character then what is the point?

It is the struggle that makes the game fun, and the risk of failure, of death, and over coming that risk is what makes the game worth playing. Remove that then you might as well be playing Monoploy or Scrabble.

Awwww crud I'm having badwrongfun again. Here I thought I derived pleasure from gathering socially with my friends, breaking bread, sharing various beverages, and telling an awesome interactive story where we get to act heroic, flirt with danger and save the village, kingdom, plane, whatever. Can we die sure but we get attached to our PCs motivations and backgrounds death should mean something more than whiping out an already generated and optimized clone that magically gets ported in. It's also no fun to tell a tablemate that they get to be the "fetch it from the fridge" person because they rolled a die poorly once.

On the other hand killing the BBEG in one shot because the DM rolled poorly ? For the love of polyhedron please fudge the roll unless it is down to 1 party member and the boss.

 

[Visceris]

A victory is a victory, and most of the time if my character is still alive and standing at the end of battle that is victory enough for me.

I don't fudge dice, Zimri. Not for or against PCs or NPCs. Let the die roll what it may.

 

[Fobok]

Personally, I'd rather a challenge I can work to overcome (a tough monster requiring tactics, and so on), than to either win or lose based on an extreme case of luck.

 

[Szatany]

And that has never happened in your campaigns?

Fairness? I am fair to my players most of the time. Sometimes I keep enemy alive for few rounds more if players are having too easy time but that's it. I used massive damage rules in 3e but only to balance weapon attacks with instakill spells. But I really dislike both. I could see a replacement for death from massive damage being mutilation from massive damage (take some serious penalty, but you still fight).

 

[Zimri]

And that has never happened in your campaigns?

ummm no ?

Sorry we are friends with a common goal or two: Have fun, Fulfill the mission objectives to get money and XP , have more fun.

Making new characters is fun during downtime, when new inspiration makes you want to try a different concept, not so much at the opening of a 4 or 5 hour play session while everyone else is still playing.

 

[Visceris]

Fairness? I am fair to my players most of the time. Sometimes I keep enemy alive for few rounds more if players are having too easy time but that's it. I used massive damage rules in 3e but only to balance weapon attacks with instakill spells. But I really dislike both. I could see a replacement for death from massive damage being mutilation from massive damage (take some serious penalty, but you still fight).

No, player versus player.

In one campaign, in which I was running the Dragon Mountain box set, the dragon made a deal with the fighter/rogue in the group to betray the party. The dragon told her if she help kill the other party members she would recieve compensation. She agree and when the moment was right she would attack the party. The timing involved a kobold the party let live and keep its wand of fireballs which it promptly shoved it up the monk's beehind and let loose a fireball, and its buddies shooting frost arrows at those which survived the fireball. Except for the Cleric and the Bard, everyone else was dead or dying.

The survivors picked up the bodies, except for the rogue, and fled the mountain to heal up. It was overall a pretty fun session which everyone enjoyed. Its not that I didn't give the party clues not to trust the kobold. I mean the paladin decided to detect evil and detected the kobold. He simply told the kobold to get out of his way. Also with a name like Killet Kwik should be enough of a clue as well.

 

[Zimri]

A victory is a victory, and most of the time if my character is still alive and standing at the end of battle that is victory enough for me.

I don't fudge dice, Zimri. Not for or against PCs or NPCs. Let the die roll what it may.

Dice shouldn't kill PCs. They are the hero(in)es. Fantasy would suck out loud if Frodo, Drizz't, Garion, et al died because a mook rolled high and they rolled low.

Plot devices, noble sacrifice, and stupidity should kill characters otherwise leave em mangled and scarred and perhaps delootified, and of course plotting vengance. Same for recurring villains.

My D&D is a fun engaging interactive story. Yes with some mystery and intrigue, and some scary bits. We manage to suspend our disbelief but know we'll mostly make it to the other end having grown, matured, learned about our characters developmentally speaking.

My D&D isn't a tactical war sim. It seems yours is and more power to ya if thats what you enjoy. It isn't my cup of Tea, Earl Grey, Hot

 

[Visceris]

Dice shouldn't kill PCs. They are the hero(in)es. Fantasy would suck out loud if Frodo, Drizz't, Garion, et al died because a mook rolled high and they rolled low.

Plot devices, noble sacrifice, and stupidity should kill characters otherwise leave em mangled and scarred and perhaps delootified, and of course plotting vengance. Same for recurring villains.

My D&D is a fun engaging interactive story. Yes with some mystery and intrigue, and some scary bits. We manage to suspend our disbelief but know we'll mostly make it to the other end having grown, matured, learned about our characters developmentally speaking.

My D&D isn't a tactical war sim. It seems yours is and more power to ya if thats what you enjoy. It isn't my cup of Tea, Earl Grey, Hot

Actually I try to have a balance between story and combat sim. Sometimes a useless death is a useless death. Sometimes its not.

 

[Zimri]

No, player versus player.

In one campaign, in which I was running the Dragon Mountain box set, the dragon made a deal with the fighter/rogue in the group to betray the party. The dragon told her if she help kill the other party members she would recieve compensation. She agree and when the moment was right she would attack the party.

Was she charmed, did she fail a will save or something ? Do your PLAYERS not like one another or value the time and mental effort put in to crafting a persona you plan to spend 10-20 levels with ? No really I am trying to understand I've run up against this attitude here before and it always vexes me.

I create characters I PLAN on keeping until their story is told, something from the past is resolved and well they get an ending, happy, noble, or otherwise. I don't understand the concept of "it's just numbers on paper" of course I am not so far gone as to think I am the character I just think like them while playing, and I have yet to try to do anything in RL because my character could.

So please explain it and use small words I don't seem to be able to pick it up quickly.

 

[Hypersmurf]

You say this like it's a negative thing.

hong...

-Hyp.
(Moderator)