Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="riprock" data-source="post: 2961030" data-attributes="member: 42506">This is one of those many logistical issues that can make it hard to enjoy gaming to the fullest.Many times I've settled for a mediocre game that didn't risk upsetting anyone rather than risk player death, possibly triggering arguments and early ends of the gaming session.It's a human issue more than a rule balance issue, IMHO, because it's much easier with groups I know well.&nbsp; Some gaming groups cooperate better than others.It can be hard for some groups to get organized enough to do this.&nbsp; I've seen groups where players had to arrive very early so that there wasn't a bottleneck at the rulebook for character generation.&nbsp; One problem with too-frequent character replacement is that it can dilute player engagement and involvement.&nbsp; Parties start thinking, &quot;Who cares how many of us die?&nbsp; We're not going to keep these characters for a long time.&quot;&nbsp; I think DarkSun built rules for this into the base system because it had a high fatality rate, but I haven't played it.Also, with some settings, there might be just one character concept that appeals to a player while also fitting with the group.&nbsp; I've also seen a lot of compromise with players taking character concepts they didn't really love to avoid intra-group arguments at the gaming table.&nbsp; If you really identify with your characters and you don't have many chances to game, character death can derail your story for weeks or longer.One alternative is to play a cinematic campaign where the good guys have a different weighting of odds.&nbsp; That isn't always possible to do in practice.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="riprock, post: 2961030, member: 42506"] This is one of those many logistical issues that can make it hard to enjoy gaming to the fullest. Many times I've settled for a mediocre game that didn't risk upsetting anyone rather than risk player death, possibly triggering arguments and early ends of the gaming session. It's a human issue more than a rule balance issue, IMHO, because it's much easier with groups I know well. Some gaming groups cooperate better than others. It can be hard for some groups to get organized enough to do this. I've seen groups where players had to arrive very early so that there wasn't a bottleneck at the rulebook for character generation. One problem with too-frequent character replacement is that it can dilute player engagement and involvement. Parties start thinking, "Who cares how many of us die? We're not going to keep these characters for a long time." I think DarkSun built rules for this into the base system because it had a high fatality rate, but I haven't played it. Also, with some settings, there might be just one character concept that appeals to a player while also fitting with the group. I've also seen a lot of compromise with players taking character concepts they didn't really love to avoid intra-group arguments at the gaming table. If you really identify with your characters and you don't have many chances to game, character death can derail your story for weeks or longer. One alternative is to play a cinematic campaign where the good guys have a different weighting of odds. That isn't always possible to do in practice. [/QUOTE]

Verification