CatharzGodfoot at [unixtime wrote:1202087988[/unixtime]]Aeris dies
WHAT? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Moderator: Moderators
CatharzGodfoot at [unixtime wrote:1202087988[/unixtime]]Aeris dies
The Adventurer's Almanac wrote: ↑Fri Oct 01, 2021 10:25 pmNobody gives a flying fuck about Tordek and Regdar.
accept the RPG as a cleverly arranged conspiracy
rapanui at [unixtime wrote:1202082677[/unixtime]]
- Skill-testing doesn't have to involve protagonist death.
This is probably the strongest objection, but most RPG systems do not embrace this solution. We'll call it the RC-FF solution.
RandomCasualty at [unixtime wrote:1202095983[/unixtime]]rapanui at [unixtime wrote:1202082677[/unixtime]]
- Skill-testing doesn't have to involve protagonist death.
This is probably the strongest objection, but most RPG systems do not embrace this solution. We'll call it the RC-FF solution.
Yeah that's pretty much my point in a sentence. pretty much the only problem that we have seems to be PCs making new characters. It's okay for PCs to "lose", they just can't die. Han Solo can get encased in carbonite and Luke can get his hand chopped off and forced to retreat. James Bond can get captured.
We're fine with all that stuff happening. We just don't want PC characters to die. So while your character's life can suck, he can't get killed.
Fix that problem and it seems that all the issues are resolved, since all the problems seem to revolve around combats killing off PCs.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
rapanui wrote:No, you cannot. Besides the amazing amount of stupidly broken shit (and I've been disregarding that for the duration of this argument) running the game by the book would result in a narrative that goes something like this:
rapanui wrote:Players 1 to 4 generate characters. Every few game sessions, one of the players fails a saving throw and has to replace his character. A little less often, but still fairly often, the entire party gets killed while facing a challenge that according to the rules is level appropriate (but actually isn't).
rapanui wrote:That's not a narrative of any kind, that's just plain stupid. It's not heroic storytelling, it's just wargaming with some BS pretense in the background.
rapanui wrote:They do. I see it all the time. GMs often rule off-the-cuff in order to keep the game running and cool shit happening. I am not making this comment based on an isolated incident, just go and read the WotC forum about campaign stories and the like. (If you want your eyes to bleed that is.)
rapanui wrote:Why are you RPGing? Is it for the sake of your character, or the sake of showing off how awesome you are at coming up with good plans and tactics? Both? You cannot have both. The latter implies a broken choppy narrative punctuated by character death. The former implies that skill-testing takes a back seat.
rapanui wrote:Again, most games use rules that do encourage insignificant deaths.
rapanui wrote:Sorry if I'm starting to sound defensive, but I'm kinda getting the feeling here that you guys think I'm insulting the way you game. That's not the case. I'm simply making general points about the deeper root problems where most RPG issues come from.
K at [unixtime wrote:1202111376[/unixtime]]
The real fear is not death, but in losing a piece of your character; its worse than death.
rapanui at [unixtime wrote:1202156835[/unixtime]]
1. Have you ever had a character be killed (or be level-drained or imprisoned or something equally heninous) that partly destroyed your ideas about where the character was going?
2. Have you ever had a GM be more merciful towards a character because the GM liked the character concept?
3. Have you ever, as GM, fudged a roll that would have otherwise killed a character?
4. On average, what percentage of game sessions do you think involve some level of bending or outright ignoring the written rules of the game?
5. Have you ever had a character killed only to roll up another character that was very similar t the first one?
6. Would you agree or disagree with the statement that "people project themselves into their characters"?
7. If yes to above, would you agree that the vast majority of fantasy roleplaying involves a high degree of escapism, and that most people do not want their projected characters to die or suffer related heinous fates without their explicit approval?
8. In a typical campaign, how much of your character's fate is determined by GM whim and railroading?
9. In campaigns you have played, how often have subpar character been given special equipment designed by the GM specifically to help them catch up with more min/maxxed characters?
10. How important do you think skill-testing is to the pen and paper roleplaying experience? Are tabletop tactics one of the prime reasons to game, or is it secondary? Do you think most gamers would agree with your response?
11. How often do gaming groups disband due to disputes over in-game matters?
rapanui wrote:1. Have you ever had a character be killed (or be level-drained or imprisoned or something equally heninous) that partly destroyed your ideas about where the character was going?
rapanui wrote:2. Have you ever had a GM be more merciful towards a character because the GM liked the character concept?
rapanui wrote:
3. Have you ever, as GM, fudged a roll that would have otherwise killed a character?
rapanui wrote:4. On average, what percentage of game sessions do you think involve some level of bending or outright ignoring the written rules of the game?
rapanui wrote:5. Have you ever had a character killed only to roll up another character that was very similar t the first one?
rapanui wrote:6. Would you agree or disagree with the statement that "people project themselves into their characters"?
rapanui wrote:7. If yes to above, would you agree that the vast majority of fantasy roleplaying involves a high degree of escapism, and that most people do not want their projected characters to die or suffer related heinous fates without their explicit approval?
rapanui wrote:8. In a typical campaign, how much of your character's fate is determined by GM whim and railroading?
rapanui wrote:9. In campaigns you have played, how often have subpar character been given special equipment designed by the GM specifically to help them catch up with more min/maxxed characters?
rapanui wrote:10. How important do you think skill-testing is to the pen and paper roleplaying experience? Are tabletop tactics one of the prime reasons to game, or is it secondary? Do you think most gamers would agree with your response?
rapanui wrote:11. How often do gaming groups disband due to disputes over in-game matters?
rapanui at [unixtime wrote:1202156835[/unixtime]]K, that's a very good point and I definitely agree. My argument is now extended to include severe character-warping events, not just death. I've never level-drained anyone in my RPGs because I don't know anyone that find that fun.
Sphere said:
"I am stating that a balanced rules system which includes a mechanic for failure, and death, is not at odds with enjoyable storytelling."
Ah, OK. I think we're getting somewhere. I guess the problem in my argument is that I'm making several assumptions about what kind of game people want to play. I'm drawing from a lot of anecdotal experience and maybe my experiences do not match up with what happens at a lot of tables.
Let me do a quick poll here (everyone is free to answer):
1. Have you ever had a character be killed (or be level-drained or imprisoned or something equally heninous) that partly destroyed your ideas about where the character was going?
2. Have you ever had a GM be more merciful towards a character because the GM liked the character concept?
3. Have you ever, as GM, fudged a roll that would have otherwise killed a character?
4. On average, what percentage of game sessions do you think involve some level of bending or outright ignoring the written rules of the game?
5. Have you ever had a character killed only to roll up another character that was very similar t the first one?
6. Would you agree or disagree with the statement that "people project themselves into their characters"?
7. If yes to above, would you agree that the vast majority of fantasy roleplaying involves a high degree of escapism, and that most people do not want their projected characters to die or suffer related heinous fates without their explicit approval?
8. In a typical campaign, how much of your character's fate is determined by GM whim and railroading?
9. In campaigns you have played, how often have subpar character been given special equipment designed by the GM specifically to help them catch up with more min/maxxed characters?
10. How important do you think skill-testing is to the pen and paper roleplaying experience? Are tabletop tactics one of the prime reasons to game, or is it secondary? Do you think most gamers would agree with your response?
11. How often do gaming groups disband due to disputes over in-game matters?
If some of the questions seem leading... well, that's on purpose. You can ignore whichever ones you like or don't think can answer accurately.
Sphere wrote:let tactical skill, the dice, and roleplaying create the story together as you go along
rapanui wrote:Furthermore, it seems to me that most of you are saying the following:
1. It doesn't matter if the rules or tactics undermine the story the player is trying to tell because part of roleplaying is putting up with whatever the dice and DM-determined plot say happens to your character.
2. It doesn't matter if the need for story undermines the tactics, because the tactical tests are there only to create a feeling of excitement to battles and stuff.
Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1202281946[/unixtime]]The challenge of roleplaying a game is the dice.
Otherwise it's just playing pretend.
rapanui wrote:1. DM packs his crap up, and you sit there wondering what the hell you just spent 20+ hours of your existence doing.
rapanui wrote:...and you both agree on the general tone of the campaign...
rapanui wrote:2. DM bangs his hand hard against the table, tipping the die over.
DM: "My mistake. That's a 15, not a 20. You just get hit for 20 points." You scratch your head wondering what the hell you're even doing rolling dice.
It seems to me that either the tone of the campaign is betrayed, or the integrity and necessity of the rules is undercut in the above example. That's it. That's my point.
Crissa at [unixtime wrote:1202301055[/unixtime]]That doesn't sound like the fault of the game, but the player and GM.
Why was death an option if you didn't want it to be?