Which one do you prefer your character suffer? Death vs Rust Monster vs Level Drain

[UngeheuerLich]

i miss the good old disjunction But as a player who didnt care for balance it was horror

 

[JRRNeiklot]

You know, as a DM, I've never seen PCs shy away from something just because it can kill them. I have, however, seen PCs trip over themselves running from the rust monster.

That's because there's generally a bunch of hitpoints to go through before death, or at least a saving throw. And you can always re-evaluate the situation after the loss of a few hit points and run. Level drain and rust monster take something permanently.

 

[Dausuul]

That's because there's generally a bunch of hitpoints to go through before death, or at least a saving throw.

You never played Tomb of Horrors, did you?

More generally, my experience with pre-3E was that death could be very sudden and arbitrary, especially if the DM was of the "let the dice fall where they may" school. Yes, the monsters had to go through your hit points or make you fail a save, but that could happen in the blink of an eye. You walk around the corner and see a bodak - you fail your save - you're dead. Several monsters hit you at once - they roll high on damage - you're dead. No chance to re-evaluate and run away.

And sometimes, such as when facing an NPC spellcaster with the higher-level kill spells prepared (death spell, power word kill), you didn't even get the courtesy of a save. You just fell over and died.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

I said rust monster, for the reasons many have stated.

However, upon further reflection, it really depends what exactly the rust monster is doing:
- Rust attack? I can handle that.
- The indignity of lustful rust monster leg-love? In that case, I choose death.

 

[billd91]

- The indignity of lustful rust monster leg-love? In that case, I choose death.

Then death it is... death by lustful rust monster leg-love!!! Go get him, Rusty!

 

[AllisterH]

Heh...as the OP, I think I needed to set more conditions since in retrospect, there are a lot of factors going into the decision....

For example, when I was thinking of "rust monster", I'm thinking of a rust monster that's attacking a paladin with his Holy Sword or a dwarf fighter with his hammer of thunderbolts. Basically any "once in a blue moon" powerful magic item that you COULDN'T expect to get back.

Similarly, there's a big difference between losing 4 levels at level 18 and 4 levels at level 9 in pre 3e. I found that really, past level 13, level didn't make THAT big a deal whereas there's an appreciable jump between effectiveness between a level 9 fighter and a level 5 fighter.

It's why for me, Death, then level drain then rust monster is my order of choice.

 

[Lanefan]

I voted for "death" mostly because I figured I had to vote for something, and as death is what's most frequently happened to my cadre of characters over the long haul, it is therefore what I'm most familiar with.

But any are all, in the long run, fine; also the others that diaglo mentioned. The game must by necessity at times be cruel to its characters - and by extension, its players - if only to indicate that bad things can and will happen sometimes to the best of people.

And from the introductory blurb to my own current campaign, I present as exhibit A:

In the course of any long campaign such as this, there will inevitably be highs and lows. As DM, I will not sugar-coat the lows, nor will I pull punches; sometimes, the best thing your character can do is run away, and luck can be a cruel thing. Be prepared for bad things – including but not necessarily limited to death – to happen to your characters, because from time to time they will; it's as simple as that.

I expect nothing different when I'm playing.

It's when the bad things can't happen that things get dull. If I were playing in a game where I knew my character couldn't die, for example, I'd probably abuse the bejeebers out of that knowledge for a few sessions just to make a point. And then I'd leave.

Lan-"6 deaths and still going strong"-efan

 

[JRRNeiklot]

You never played Tomb of Horrors, did you?

Several times, actually. But I did say "generally"

More generally, my experience with pre-3E was that death could be very sudden and arbitrary, especially if the DM was of the "let the dice fall where they may" school. Yes, the monsters had to go through your hit points or make you fail a save, but that could happen in the blink of an eye. You walk around the corner and see a bodak - you fail your save - you're dead. Several monsters hit you at once - they roll high on damage - you're dead. No chance to re-evaluate and run away.

Sure, it happens, but in my experience, not very often. I don't even remember seeing a bodak in 1e. Several 1d6 arrows really shouldn't kill anyone other than at really low levels. Maybe the magic user. Most of the instant kill things I remember were poison.

And sometimes, such as when facing an NPC spellcaster with the higher-level kill spells prepared (death spell, power word kill), you didn't even get the courtesy of a save. You just fell over and died.

Power Word kill requires an 18th level magic user and will only kill someone with 60 or less hit points. Presumably the party is at or near the same level, so they are going to have more than 60 hit points. Even the mage, if he has a high enough constitution. But then, it's a 9th level spell, it should be powerful. In 1e, a 20th level magic user has 2 of these per day, and he really should choose something else to take out an adventuring party of 6-8 pcs. Of course, if a dm wants to screw pcs he can throw hordes of 20th level wizards at the party, but if he wants to scre you, he will find a way anyway. But I digress, I'd choose the rust monster, because my gear does not define me. I'm a hero by deed, not by gear.

 

[wingsandsword]

Rust monster. Loss of gear is temporary. Losing levels feels like slipping backwards and un-accomplishing progress.

Yeah, this.

Definitely Rust Monster.

You are NOT your stuff, in any edition (don't know about 4th), and stuff is easier to get back. You could find a +5 Sword in the next room of the dungeon, you're still playing the game (unlike Death), and you still have most of your abilities (unlike being heavily level drained).

In 1e and 2e resurrection is never a sure thing to get back thanks to resurrection survival rolls and even then you permanently lose CON, and the only way to get resurrected back in 3e/3.5e without losing a level is a 9th level spell so it won't come up in many/most campaigns. Level Drain hurts, and it feels like un-progress.

Rust Monsters are annoying like nothing else, heck as a DM I use them more of a comic-relief monster than anything else, like an NPC druid who lets Rust Monsters roam his grove, so the PC's have to stow their metal gear before visiting, or a slippery bridge over a shallow pit with rust monsters in it, so the destruction of gear is pretty avoidable with tactics or preparation, but it's there at least theoretically. Losing big-gun items is defeating, but you can get gear back easier and more reliably than lives and probably quicker than levels (varying by edition).

 

[Ariosto]

Yeah, in ToH often the only "save" is the player's experience and caution (although there are also second and third chances versus pits lined with poisoned spikes).

This is an unusual scenario in that the characters start almost totally bereft of equipment and spells. Many players think of their characters in terms of their powers and possessions, rather than as people. Such players will probably be totally at a loss for the first few minutes of play. It is likely that they will be angry at the DM for putting them in such an “unfair” situation. They will demand or beg concessions. ...