NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9701568" data-attributes="member: 7045806">I don’t think we’re in total disagreement. My prior post may have framed death in a bit better of a light than I actually believe. I don’t mean to argue that death is the only way to provide stakes, just that in traditional D&D and games with similar mechanical assumptions, it’s one of the structural consequences that helps frame risk and decision-making. If you ditch it, and the players know you wont kill them, you end up with odd player behaviors. There might very well be a way to fix that, where death isn't on the table, I just have not seen it.I also agree with your point about turtling. If death is handled poorly, such as a sudden, meaningless punishment, you are correct, it absolutely kills experimentation. But to me, that’s a table culture issue more than a death issue. Some GMs use death as a blunt instrument, others use it more narratively. I’ve been on both sides, I’ve mishandled it before, and yeah, it shut people down. I've also seen it be a very powerful and positive force in a game when done correctly.If I came across as advocating for death as an ideal outcome, that’s not what I meant. I believe the threat of death is usually enough to prevent the behavior issues I fear when it's off the table. And I haven't, personally, killed many PCs. What I was trying to contrast was death and forced persuasion. Because when death happens (at least when it’s done right), it’s the result of the player’s choices. Forced persuasion, by contrast, hijacks the character’s inner life, and rarely involves a choice they made. That involvement of the player's choices is core to what I feel seperates the two.Personally, I’m already skeptical of status conditions like paralyzed or stunned, they can rob players of meaningful choices, and I’m not convinced they add much. So I’m not dogmatic about death either. Maybe in a year I’ll be convinced that it’s unnecessary. But I still think forced persuasion, especially when it overrides established character beliefs, is in the same category as the worst ways death can be handled. So I stand by the idea that it’s possible to be pro-death (in mechanical terms) while still opposing forced persuasion as poor form.TLDR: Someone who is better at running games than I am, might be able to remove the threat of death and not cause issues. I can't, not yet anyways.Edit: [USER=6779717]@Eric V[/USER] for visibility, as this kind of addresses his reply as well.</blockquote>

Verification