Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6155704" data-attributes="member: 37579">All the extremes are less playable. Right now I'm playing in a game where I cannot die. The GM will not let me die. "Heroic self-sacrifice? Not on my watch!"This doesn't sit well with me as I like to "play boldly" doing risky things that might be cool if they succeed or dangerous if the fail. But as I cannot die the risk is not there, and thus the rewards for success are lessened. At the same time, if you die regularly and cannot get attached to your character, death has no meaning and your successes seem short term and transitory. Like most arguments, the solution is the middle ground: a compromise. The default should be moderate survivability with the real risk of death if unlucky, foolish, or sloppy. Monsters with the chance to be more lethal if they're lucky but on average just bringing a risk of injury. But the option to use more deadly monsters 'n' spells to change the dynamic when necessary for tension, a reminder or morality, or a just increasing the risk. After all, no one is going to force you to include SoD or SoS monsters in your game. Even if using a published module unless they're the main villain on the cover you can swap it out for a different monster. Now, if you're a player and you keep running into SoD monsters, traps, and spells with an extremely high mortality rate, your problem isn't with the game, it's with the GM. Which means it doesn't matter what the game says, because the GM can always add SoD effects to the game. (Admittedly, the big exception is Organized Play. OP modules cannot be changed, so SoD effects remain. But I'm hesitant to make changes to an entire game based on the non-representational play style that is OP. It's easier to just regulate the use of SoD in OP modules.)</blockquote>

Verification