Who's the biggest loser/coward from last night's game?

[Mark]

It's not even a spell...it is just some aura of fear. I really dislike fear effects in any system because they are mechanics that dictate your character's personality to you.

Say I create a warrior named, "Bob the fearless," (. . .)

Name him "Bob the Invincible Immortal" and you'll never worry about any of the pesky circumstances and consequences at all.

This could be especially troubling for the dwarven cleric in the OP (. . .)

. . . who should have thrown the Heroes Feast spell in the first place.

 

[Derren]

Say I create a warrior named, "Bob the fearless," with the intent of playing him as bold and courageous. Now in my first fight with a demon or undead horror I fail my save and run away leaving my party to deal with it. My character concept has now been radically altered. Sure, I can role play this....Bob wasn't as fearless as he thought....he now has to reconcile his actions with his self-concept and overcome his fears. However, that is not the character I wanted to play....I wanted to play Bob the fearless.

I can create a warrior named, "Bob the invincible god of slaughter" with the intend of playing him as invincible fighter who no one can match in combat. Now in my first fight with a demon or undead horror I get hit, loose HP and fail to kill the enemy in one strike. My character concept has now been radically altered. Sure, I can role play this....Bob wasn't as invincible as he thought....he now has to reconcile his actions with his self-concept and overcome his fears. However, that is not the character I wanted to play....I wanted to play Bob the invincible god of slaughter.

 

[Mark]

I can create a warrior named, "Bob the invincible god of slaughter" with the intend of playing him as invincible fighter who no one can match in combat. Now in my first fight with a demon or undead horror I get hit, loose HP and fail to kill the enemy in one strike. My character concept has now been radically altered. Sure, I can role play this....Bob wasn't as invincible as he thought....he now has to reconcile his actions with his self-concept and overcome his fears. However, that is not the character I wanted to play....I wanted to play Bob the invincible god of slaughter.

My post was shorter, faster and funnier.

 

[ppaladin123]

I can create a warrior named, "Bob the invincible god of slaughter" with the intend of playing him as invincible fighter who no one can match in combat. Now in my first fight with a demon or undead horror I get hit, loose HP and fail to kill the enemy in one strike. My character concept has now been radically altered. Sure, I can role play this....Bob wasn't as invincible as he thought....he now has to reconcile his actions with his self-concept and overcome his fears. However, that is not the character I wanted to play....I wanted to play Bob the invincible god of slaughter.

Cute...I always enjoy reductio ad absurdum. I recognize there is a limit to my line of argument. At some level every player (and DM) has to surrender to the mechanics of the system...certain concepts cannot be accommodated in certain systems (i.e. I am totally invincible! haha!) I don't think it is reasonable for example to play a game about physical combat and expect to bypass the rules for physical combat. However, I tend to draw the line at personality traits.

I know some people like to have personality traits and mechanics intertwined....I do not. I'd rather a system not have rules to tell me that I am, in fact, a coward whether I like it or not. I'd rather not have to spend in-game resources (feats, magic items, levels in classes, etc.) to make sure that I don't have a "belied by the mechanics," moment.

We can certainly take the absurdity in the opposite direction. A system could simply dictate that all magic users are arrogant, all paladins are fearless (oh wait...), every time you gain treasure you could be forced to make a saving throw versus "be overcome with avarice and kill your party members because it's all MINE! MINE!" Every time you interact with an attractive member of your preferred sex you could be forced to make a saving throw against committing adultery (but I wanted to play a loyal family man!). Etc.

My point is that there is a balance in any game between the player's right to construct the character she desires (or the GM's right to construct the story/world he desires) and the requirements of rules/mechanics. This sort of fear effect, I think, dictates a bit too much about the player's character..takes too much control out of her hands. But...of course I realize that this is just my preference. Every group has to find its own balance.

 

[Belphanior]

Due to the nature of Will saves, sorcerers are braver than barbarians and fighters. Even braver than paladins before they reach level 3. It's exactly this kind of rules artefact that makes me dislike magical fear effects. Preciously few RPGs that try to measure courage can actually measure it accurately. And D&D fail at this too.

(4e sort of circumvents the problem by reducing both the frequency and impact of fear effects, but even then the problem is only reduced instead of eliminated.)

So yeah, the biggest loser was the game itself. Calling people a coward because their d20 rolled low is incomprehensible to me.

 

[Tuft]

Say I create a warrior named, "Bob the fearless," with the intent of playing him as bold and courageous.

If you want to play "Bob the fearless" you invest in whatever fear protection the system can provide. Just as:

• "Bob the strong" invests in strength,
• "Bob the leader" invests in charisma,
• "Bob the acrobat" invests in dexterity,
• and "Bob the Builder" invests in a trowel...

TANSTAAFL...

 

[ProfessorCirno]

I don't get this idea of "Wizards are braver" or "My hero shouldn't be afraid!"

It's magical fear. It's not the monster making a face and saying "Rawr, I'm so scary!" it's magic going up, reaching into your brain, finding the fear dial, and turning it to eleven. It's like saying "My wizard is super smart, just look at his intellect; there's no way he'd let that monster just trip him like some dupe!"

 

[Wild Gazebo]

It's magical fear. It's not the monster making a face and saying "Rawr, I'm so scary!" it's magic going up, reaching into your brain, finding the fear dial, and turning it to eleven.

LOL!

You bastard! I spit my drink all over my screen!

 

[Dragongrief]

Say I create a warrior named, "Bob the fearless," with the intent of playing him as bold and courageous.

Then you play the 7th Sea system and choose the Reckless Hubris. First line: "You lack the emotion of fear." Basic effect is that the DM can force you to face a situation that any normal person would be soiling themselves over.

Can't force someone to run from one supernatural terror and then stay for another.

That being said, I've never been a fan of "Save or Flee". Other alternatives don't bother me - shaken, stunned (briefly), etc.

 

[roguerouge]

Uh... a lot of fear effects don't force you to make a second save after you've saved once against that monster's fear effect. Sure your DM was doing it right?