Too Much Effort to Make New Characters?

[Jd Smith1]

Because you don't like something does not automatically make it a "poor system" unless the statement is a "poor system to match my style of play."

I didn't state my criteria for a poor system, so you are leaping to conclusions.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Yes. Easily overcome. That's you don't agree has no impact on my statement and, in fact, highlights the fact that there are lots of different ways to play the games we play.

I seriously doubt we're playing the same games.

Some games have vast power differences. Some do not. In some games, the speed at which levels are gained at lower levels quickly allow the PC to catch up to the levels of the others. In some, they do not. In some games, new characters are brought back at comparable or near comparable levels. In some, they are not.

In D&D 5e, for example, the amount of experience for a character to go from 6th to 7th level (9000 xp) would raise a new character all the way up to 5th level and mid-way to 6th.

So... Yes. Easily overcome.

Really? Its been quite a while, but I don't recall players ever earning more than 25% of a given level in a single session.

As I've already PCs aren't awarded a set block, but instead receive based on their performance. But say 3-4 sessions per level, a 5th level PC (again, do not use D&D) would be an investment of 12-15 sessions.

So, yeah, that's a hefty setback.

 

[Blue]

The OP is yet another example of people who don't want to face consequences for their poor decisions in D&D.

If you (effectively) can't lose, what is the point of playing?

Not sure if you've read, but the led that was buried was that it was a TPK, from a DM who averages a TPK every 12 hours. And the players were 3rd level and didn't want to just lose all the progress on the adventure they had put in.

 

[beancounter]

Not sure if you've read, but the led that was buried was that it was a TPK, from a DM who averages a TPK every 12 hours. And the players were 3rd level and didn't want to just lose all the progress on the adventure they had put in.

Well then, the bigger question is - why do these players continue to play under such conditions? That's a TPK every 3 sessions on average. I would have found another DM....

 

[Jd Smith1]

Well then, the bigger question is - why do these players continue to play under such conditions? That's a TPK every 3 sessions on average. I would have found another DM....

Are you referring to the OP?

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Well then, the bigger question is - why do these players continue to play under such conditions? That's a TPK every 3 sessions on average. I would have found another DM....

From postings in other threads the OP runs multiple games. So, he may be delivering a TPK every 3 sessions but not to the same people. I would also reckon that the request for a do over is the first step in a player revolt.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

I don’t think it’s fair to say they are disinterested in the game. It could be various reasons why they don’t want to make new characters, many of which have been touched upon.

My advice is to pool money and buy Gloomhaven. As the dm, you can have several encounters ready to go when the players show up. You can replay scenarios as many times as you want, there’s a story arc and characters progress and level.

The best thing is you get to play a character too.

The game is big and overwhelming to set up and learn which is why having one person host it as the ‘dm’ to do all the prep works really well(you are doing prep work for D&D anyways). Making a new character is as easy as picking one up out of the box.

 

[Retreater]

From postings in other threads the OP runs multiple games. So, he may be delivering a TPK every 3 sessions but not to the same people. I would also reckon that the request for a do over is the first step in a player revolt.

Yeah, the actual statistic would be a TPK every 12 hours I run in D&D5e or PF2 (especially PF2). If I'm a player in a group, I don't count that towards my average - unless I start somehow killing the whole party somehow.

 

[Retreater]

My advice is to pool money and buy Gloomhaven. As the dm, you can have several encounters ready to go when the players show up. You can replay scenarios as many times as you want, there’s a story arc and characters progress and level.

The best thing is you get to play a character too.

The game is big and overwhelming to set up and learn which is why having one person host it as the ‘dm’ to do all the prep works really well(you are doing prep work for D&D anyways). Making a new character is as easy as picking one up out of the box.

We play our RPGs on VTT - don't know if that's been brought up yet or not.
In the rare event we get to play a board game in person (maybe twice in the past 2.5 years), we play stuff like Dungeon! or HeroQuest. We don't meet frequently enough to really advance a game that as complex as Gloomhaven.

 

[payn]

Yeah, the actual statistic would be a TPK every 12 hours I run in D&D5e or PF2 (especially PF2). If I'm a player in a group, I don't count that towards my average - unless I start somehow killing the whole party somehow.

At first, the PF2 makes sense as its a game where the numbers easily stack against the players and if they dont use tactics its wipe city. Though, im a little surprised to hear 5E has a similar problem. I find 5E way more forgiving both in numbers and tactics.