Plot immunity for PCs

[fusangite]

Being a good GM is about giving your characters a meaningful sense of free will and the belief that their actions will affect the outcome of the game. However, which body of rules you use will dramatically affect how you can make this free will manifest.

When I want to run games wherein theme is a strong element, plot immunity is an important principle and the players feel that they are shaping a real narrative, I do not use D&D. The rules are simply too ill-suited for such games and better rules are available in their stead.

So, I understand the type of game you're talking about -- ones in which the thematic and plot elements are damaged by the unexpected death of a PC or major NPC; the majority of games I have run in my 18 years as a GM fall into this category. However, I would never use D&D to run such a game.

The way my players experience free will in D&D is understanding that a lucky roll, clever anticipation of an NPC's actions or a well-planned strategy can surprise the DM, potentially kill off bad guys before their plans can mature and give the players a real sense of narrative control. The flip side of that is that NPCs are realistically trying to outwit the PCs, cobbling together new plans, making surprise attacks, rolling with the punches and posing a genuine threat to the lives of the PCs.

Neither type of gaming is "better" but it is my view that some game systems are better suited to theme-heavy narrative games while others, such as D&D, are better suited to adversarial play. In D&D, the actions of the characters determine whether something can happen; in other rules-light, strongly narrative systems, the actions of the characters determine on what terms something can happen.

 

[d4]

...I also worry that the tension, suspense and a player's personal sense of investment in the game declines if he/she begins to realize that the DM isn't really going to let them die.

i have the exact opposite playing style. my personal sense of investment in the game and my character takes a serious nosedive as soon as i realize that the DM will let PCs die.

if i know my PC has a good chance of dying, i won't bother role-playing him very well or work out a good background, or what-have-you. why bother? the character probably isn't going to last long enough to make that worthwhile.

on the other hand, if i know the PC will definitely make it to the end of the campaign, i have a much easier time getting into the character and role-playing him well, designing an extensive background, etc.

i agree with fusangite that D&D isn't the best vehicle for these kinds of games, but i don't feel that it can't be done.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I usually do all my rolling where the players can see it. That takes a lot of dice fudging out of the equation. If they knew a 13 hit them before, and I roll a 15 and say, "it just missed", they know I'm fudging and that causes them to lose respect for the consequences of thier actions...and bad rolling.

 

[S'mon]

i have the exact opposite playing style. my personal sense of investment in the game and my character takes a serious nosedive as soon as i realize that the DM will let PCs die.

if i know my PC has a good chance of dying, i won't bother role-playing him very well or work out a good background, or what-have-you. why bother? the character probably isn't going to last long enough to make that worthwhile.

How can roleplaying the character well not be worthwhile? I can understand that taking hours to write background for a potentially shortlived PC can be a poor investment. Personally as DM I find 1-page backgrounds are best, multi-page opuses rarely result in good characters in-game.

 

[S'mon]

On-topic: I never give PCs plot immunity; if they die they die. If they don't want to die they better be smart, and preferably lucky. I don't think my current game has a huge death rate, though one climactic lost battle recently did result in a dead PC and 2 dead cohorts.

 

[Norfleet]

I'm a killer DM. I don't do plot immunity. I feel that random, senseless death tends to accurately capture the spirit of real combat, and that therefore, it belongs in the game: Characters who don't wish to die in random, senseless violence should try to avoid engaging in it. Plus, I assess the difficulty of a battle based nearly entirely on casualty ratios. If there aren't any casualties, it must not have been a very hard battle. It makes for a very nice ad-hoc CR evaluation: If an encounter of a CR equal to the level of the party is expected to consume about 25% of a party's resources, a party of 4 can therefore be expected to sustain one casualty as a result. More casualties equates more challenge.

Of course, you can always try to deal with the situation without getting into a fight, which is worth the rated experience. Otherwise, somebody's likely to die, possibly in a random, utterly senseless way. And that's just how combat is.

 

[diaglo]

i want death in my game. if it isn't, i'm not playing.

alot of DMs suck

 

[diaglo]

How can roleplaying the character well not be worthwhile? I can understand that taking hours to write background for a potentially shortlived PC can be a poor investment. Personally as DM I find 1-page backgrounds are best, multi-page opuses rarely result in good characters in-game.

besides part of the fun of this game is coming up with this stuff.

i live and breath my character...until the next one.

 

[d4]

How can roleplaying the character well not be worthwhile? I can understand that taking hours to write background for a potentially shortlived PC can be a poor investment. Personally as DM I find 1-page backgrounds are best, multi-page opuses rarely result in good characters in-game.

it's a failing of me as a player. i realize that. when i fear for my PCs life, i shut down my emotional attachment to it and i don't role-play well.

i see a lot of people saying they want combat to be deadly because that's more realistic. my point of view, however, is that i don't want the game to be realistic -- i want to simulate action movies or comic books or adventure novels, not reality. that's why i always do my best to avoid killing PCs.

for example, i run a lot of Star Wars campaigns. killing half the party in a random blaster fight wouldn't be in keeping with the tone of the genre. i find, however, that i also tend to keep that same kind of style in my D&D games as well.

 

[Norfleet]

killing half the party in a random blaster fight wouldn't be in keeping with the tone of the genre.

The sort of random senseless violence inherent in a "random blaster fight" is the sort of thing that people who value their lives should be trying to avoid. If your players wish to engage in senseless random violence, this is fine, but they should be prepared to accept the consequences of engaging in random acts of senseless violence, such as being injured and/or killed.

This is not to say that I'm against random acts of senseless violence, merely that I believe one should be willing to accept the consequences of one's actions.