Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ThoughtBubble" data-source="post: 1431421" data-attributes="member: 9723">Steveroo, I see the difference. However, as I said earlier it's a damn fine line. Is weakining the encounters while we're in the wilderness because we're all fatigued a good idea? How about if our guns get stolen, should the next fight be that full group of bandits?And once the DM's I've played with stop dropping death as a consiquence, other things soon follow. We ran into a caravan (since wandering in the wilderness sucked. Note that this was completely by accident, and had nothing to do with our skills) who then ran into bandits, who had two cars. We got one for helping. Oh, we got some guns too. And really, you could only pull the survives the explosion barely but car is trashed thing once unless the narritive spirit is going with us. After that, I (and by extention in a non narrative/story game) my character wouldn't fear death, just losing stuff. And then I'd get petulant. In a more narrative/story/rp game though, it becomes the source of a running joke. See the difference?And in the bandit counter example, (just FYI we wandering in the desert was session 2-5 after weaking up with amnseia in a building. We hadn't had the time or capability to prepare for the journey we hadn't known about.) had we been captured by bandits and been uable to do much, I probablly would have quit the game there (we hadn't had a meaningful choice to that point).In the above mentioned campaign, no one actually felt like we were going to die (it was turning out to be a very exploration/simulationist campaign) since we were too important to the meta-plot. During the first difficult batttle we faced over half the party died. Then the GM changed his mind, and dropped them to nearly dead. From there, the story goes into a series of 'they did what?' and 'and that worked?' and then the party escaped. I was out of the game at the time and had many a disucssion with the GM as to our ridiculous behavior.Another result of not wanting to kill people in a simulationist game are those NPC's four levels higher who are always there to resucue us. I'm not saying that no unnecessarry death can't be fun. I'm saying in all the simulationist games I've been in where that rule was applied, the choices we made felt meaningless, our victories hollow, and we were generally babied. And when I ran a game where I followed the 'no killing unless something incredibly stupid is done over and over' I recall a player (who lobbied for that particular rule) saying "Why should I care? It's not like you're going to kill me."Key points: Both styles work, depending on the game. The people who I've played with (admittedly a little immature) who wanted to play sim style games and were heavily against dieing under any circumstances were also the ones who wanted to act with impunity. Players tend to gravitate towards what works.In story/narrative/rp heavy games dieing sucks, and I'd rather be furthering the plot.</blockquote>

Verification