Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5372644" data-attributes="member: 4937">The problem with protecting a player from 'weak deaths' is that it puts someone at the table in the position of deciding when the character should die.If it's the DM that decides when its a good death, then the whole game just turned into DM fiat and you might as well dispense with all the dice rolling because its illusionism.If it's the Player that gets to decide to die only when he wants to, then the game has turned into storytelling in rounds, which while fun, renders all that dice throwing you are doing still mere illusionism.It's possible to have games that work this way, but the mechanics must necessarily deal in the real coin of the game - narrative control - and not in simulationism of any sort because you've rendered that pointless.For myself, my 'comprimise' on this is to make bad luck on a single roll unlikely to kill a character.&nbsp; Essentially, characters get a stock of 'Destiny Points' which can be used in various ways to mitigate bad luck - they can turn a critical hit they recieve into a normal one, they can give them a reroll on a failed saving throw or attack,&nbsp; they can add a bonus die to any roll, as well as a variaty of other things.&nbsp; A character is rather unlikely to die suddenly unless they deplete their 'Destiny Points'.&nbsp; Not being able to die however changes the game you are playing dramaticly and D&amp;D loses alot if it isn't an ever present possibility.&nbsp; D&amp;D was invented by war gamers, and they had foremost in their mind the idea that the game could and should be played 'skillfully'.&nbsp; They literally thought that you shouldn't be 'allowed' by the DM to 'level up' until you'd proven your skill and worthiness to do so.&nbsp; Leveling up was a reward.&nbsp; If you can't die, then there is IMO also no value to 'leveling up'.&nbsp; If you remove the 'dumb death' from the game, you are now playing the sort of game where level advancement is not a needed part of the game.&nbsp; If you remove the 'dumb death' but not the level advancement, what you are doing is pretending you are earning rewards for skillful play.&nbsp;&nbsp; And that to me, smacks of 'ego gaming' rather than a commitment to story and characterization.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5372644, member: 4937"] The problem with protecting a player from 'weak deaths' is that it puts someone at the table in the position of deciding when the character should die. If it's the DM that decides when its a good death, then the whole game just turned into DM fiat and you might as well dispense with all the dice rolling because its illusionism. If it's the Player that gets to decide to die only when he wants to, then the game has turned into storytelling in rounds, which while fun, renders all that dice throwing you are doing still mere illusionism. It's possible to have games that work this way, but the mechanics must necessarily deal in the real coin of the game - narrative control - and not in simulationism of any sort because you've rendered that pointless. For myself, my 'comprimise' on this is to make bad luck on a single roll unlikely to kill a character. Essentially, characters get a stock of 'Destiny Points' which can be used in various ways to mitigate bad luck - they can turn a critical hit they recieve into a normal one, they can give them a reroll on a failed saving throw or attack, they can add a bonus die to any roll, as well as a variaty of other things. A character is rather unlikely to die suddenly unless they deplete their 'Destiny Points'. Not being able to die however changes the game you are playing dramaticly and D&D loses alot if it isn't an ever present possibility. D&D was invented by war gamers, and they had foremost in their mind the idea that the game could and should be played 'skillfully'. They literally thought that you shouldn't be 'allowed' by the DM to 'level up' until you'd proven your skill and worthiness to do so. Leveling up was a reward. If you can't die, then there is IMO also no value to 'leveling up'. If you remove the 'dumb death' from the game, you are now playing the sort of game where level advancement is not a needed part of the game. If you remove the 'dumb death' but not the level advancement, what you are doing is pretending you are earning rewards for skillful play. And that to me, smacks of 'ego gaming' rather than a commitment to story and characterization. [/QUOTE]

Verification