Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8688265" data-attributes="member: 6790260">This whole concept is just bizarre to me. Rolls are needed whenever anything is in doubt. To treat that as a "failure" condition is just...you're literally saying using the rules ever, for any reason, is a failure condition. If it is a failure to need the rules, why are we even playing a game at all?If it's supposed to happen, it's not a failure state. If it's a failure state, it's not supposed to happen. Like, that's literally what a "failure state" means! If it's supposed to happen, it is at least in some way intended. If it's a failure state, it occurring means something went wrong.What else could those words in that combination mean?In my experience, it is, though I admit I don't have quite as much experience with those levels as I have with the earlier levels. Where characters dropping to 0 (and then outright dying) happened. A lot. Repeatedly. It ruined several games as a result. Hence why I am so skeptical about a rule like this. When four totally different DMs have each caused undesired and campaign-ending TPKs at early levels, yeah, I take rather seriously that death lurks around every corner.The bolded bit is covered by the puckish rogues or, for the darkest versions, villain protagonists. Like, that's the whole point of being a murderhobo diving into a murder-hole. You're supposed to take big risks for big reward. You aren't supposed to respond with fear to the murder-hole. Constantly running away leads to rather dull gameplay in the Gygaxian dungeon-heist model. Which is why I said what I said.Let me rephrase:Why is random, permanent, irrevocable character death the only form of risk?I already said death can happen in my game. It hasn't yet (because my players are extremely cautious...frankly, cautious to a fault despite my assurances), but it can happen. The only guarantee I offer is that I won't take away a player's character. If a character dies, then their death will either be an agreement between us, or it will only be temporary, or it can be reversed later but that will require effort from the players.Rock climbing, football, and being an astronaut are all dangerous. No one looks forward (or, rather, should look forward) to the possibility of dying from them. But, as stated, it is totally possible that a character could die in my game--they just either won't stay that way, or will pass on because the player thinks that's for the best. The quest to save a friend from death becomes one of the main consequences, which is dramatically more interesting than "welp, guess they're dead and never getting any resolution about anything ever, what do you want to roll up now?"I'm saying the game is fundamentally designed not to be played that way, and stuff needs to be done to adjust it so that it can actually work for that goal. The Fighter being an absolute desert for anything except combat features is one of those things that needs adjustment. Monster design is another.I legit don't care if people want to use a rule like this or not. I'm solely pointing out that going for a rule like this without changing anything else to match it is a recipe for upset players and poor experiences.</blockquote>

Verification