The Gaming Den

Elennsar wrote:No. What I want is actual risk that can actually be overcome.

I don;t think you know what risk means, or atleast are using some bizarre definition of risk that I don;t understand

Risk: If you are 'risking your life' there is a material chance you will die. That chance might be 20%. This is the scenario I just described. On average, you will not make it to level 2 in D&D. (60% to die)

But you just said thats not what you mean, which is why I'm back at the illusionary risk position.

Then you go on to describe a 'hard counters' system of gameplay: Which is illusoary risk, or worse yet a pass/fail system of gameplay. Either I know the correct counters, and thus are at no risk, or I don't, and then I die.

This might be less fun.

Psychic Robot wrote:Possible solutions to the "real chances of dying" that I think people are overlooking.

1. Avoid combat. Stealth, diplomacy, bribery, whatever.

I brought this up already and apparently I am not a hero when I do so.

Psychic Robot wrote:Possible solutions to the "real chances of dying" that I think people are overlooking.

Also, running away. Already suggested, already dismissed. Check the Artorius thread, amongst others.

Psychic Robot wrote:I still think Elennsar should run WoD.

He's already explained to us that he doesn't have anyone to play RPGs with, so that isn't really an option, is it?

Wait, wait, wait. You are supposed to fight in Elennsar's game, even though you have a real chance of dying?

Yes. This is why everybody thought you were dumb for agreeing with him.

Well, fuck me with a broomstick. That sounds like an awful game. My apologies to everyone.

Psychic Robot wrote:Well, fuck me with a broomstick. That sounds like an awful game. My apologies to everyone.

Welcome back PR. Was starting to wonder what koolaid you'd drunk.

MartinHarper wrote: Also, running away. Already suggested, already dismissed. Check the Artorius thread, amongst others.

Yeah, I'd like to thank Roy for drawing me to that thread, wouldn't have even looked at it unless I was curious of what kind of smartass comment he was making to poor E. That is the most hilarious thing I've read in ages. I especially like how he manages to estrange ViM and Grek, the only two people seemingly interested in playing his game, within 3 pages. There are some fucking brilliant quotes you can dig of that.

What can I say, I'm a glutton for punishment.

I think arguing with Elennsar is getting boring, whoever is right, wrong, or the pettiest. Lets try something constructive. Following the flow of the thread, one of the best ways to have heroic and brave characters is to give the illusion of risk. While some people may not like this, I'd like to focus on it.

I'd like some advice on both the player and the GM's side to create the illusion of risk well. What sort of techniques can the GM use to make getting an imaginary character hit over the side of a head with an imaginary large sharp lump of metal scary to the player?

The only one I can think of is more evocative descriptions. Which I have two problems with: firstly that I'm not great at them, and secondly they can take a while, during which the players gets bored and start rolling attacks. I keep cutting short my descriptions because I keep thinking I'm boring everyone.

Could you guys give me some examples of short, sharp descriptions of the risky kind? Or even ways to make listening to the whole description more interesting.

What about other ways to make PCs seem more heroic?

Ah yes, the illusion of risk, something I suggested such a long time ago.

The equivalent of hero points, rerolls as it were, can help create this effect.

Parthenon wrote:I think arguing with Elennsar is getting boring, whoever is right, wrong, or the pettiest.

True, I in fact would say engaging him in dialogue is even less fun than getting your dick stuck in a pencil sharpener (which at least leaves you a good story to tell your kids). But once you can stop caring about what nonsense is spewing out and just watch the dance, it's like the poetic dance of a near blind and mentally addled caribou slowly and meticulously being torn apart by a pack of wolves. In a certain light it is art in words, not great art but ,I don't expect much from our generation.

A tightly limited resource like 'fate points' or burning edge is good. It allows the DM to push things right up to the edge so the players are just about to die before them winning through, and if they actually die, you have an 'out' without killing the campagin.

Or you can run with risk and play Mook: The Dying Time.

Computer game multiple-character implementations are quite fun, though they often involve elaborate ways of killing off guys whose Dragonskin balistic vests somehow stop a heavy plasma to the chest that would be too much work for paper and pencil.

Noteworthy instances include X-com (all of them) and dwarf fortress, with roleplaying game levels of character detail and mass death.

Since we are taking the 'ignore E' position on this thread, I'm back.

Parthenon, the easiest way to create risk (or illusion of it) is to kill people (or really try).

Because I like using examples from my gaming table, I will use a few here:
- Have an NPC give important information and join the party (usually they don't like this). Then, when combat strikes up (it will), kill him.
- Render the PC helpless for a round or two (grapples do this extremely well). Bonus points for using the Ride Grapple option to render the character motionless and attacking at significant penalty. Also, take a look at some of the F&K Necromancy spells. Nothing strikes fear into a players heart like being slowly walked off a cliff.
- Leave dead bodies lying around. These monsters do eat, after all. Bonus points if the bodies are stone statues or other fear-inducing monster. Bonus points if they are clearly other adventurers.
- Make sure that the PCs know they are overmatched by certain opponents. Nothing does this better than a Disintegrate (whether it hits or misses).
- make the PCs fight mooks of their CR. Then, have the mooks claim that the BBEG is MUCH MORE POWERFUL than they (the 'mooks') are.
- have the enemies kill someone, anyone. Bonus points if this person had a backstory.
- Have the enemies surprise the heroes. Nothing puts the fear of Death into a PC more than the monster getting two turns in a row.
- Have the monster be genuinely unseeable. This works crazy-good for Shadows at low level, and Ghosts at later levels.
- Have the characters know that they are being followed (see: surprise attacks).
- Kill a PC. Sometimes it is needed (the player doesn't like playing the PC is among the best, but a series of stupid PC actions in my campaigns will kill you).
- Throw in a genuinely unkillable monster. The Minotaur at level 1 is usually a good call for this. Having it own an NPC first should be a clue if the players wish to engage. Players in my campaign know that running away is the correct action sometimes.
- Have the adventurers encounter another group of PCs. If they don't team up with them, litter their dead bodies. Have the survivors tell horrow stories. If they do team up with them, give them a backstory, maybe even kill them too.

Now, please, please, please don't use all of these rapid-fire. Killing 2 out of 4 players is a good way to vote in a new DM. Even if you aren't killing players (or bringing them to 0, as it may be), nothing will ensure that your players buy a Robe of Eyes and a Ring of Never Sleeping quicker than some combo of the above actions. Also, if one of your players throws out a comment like "they are probably going to die anyways" you have probably overdone it, and it is time to stop.

Oh, one more: I read about a campaign arc that ended in a giant Senate metting of some type. The main villian crashed the party and MAss Disintegrated (or blew up, or something), all of the NPCs that they had met during the arc. This included the sister of one of the PCs. The sister appeared as a ghost towards the end of the arc and one of the PCs had a tearful conversation vowing vengeance. This is a VERY extreme example, but happens to be awesome. I have been trying to work in something like this for a while, but the prevalence of evil campaigns has precluded it.

So you have 2 defenses, and any enemies who can penetrate that defense have a real chance of killing you. If you're facing 5 enemies, you have 3 real chances of dying every round.

How are characters supposed to survive the first fight of a campaign?

Not fighting five enemies at once?

Being missed by an enemy? They have to succeed on their attack roll, too - its not just "You have two defenses."

Surviving (one way or another) the attacks that do hit?

I don;t think you know what risk means, or atleast are using some bizarre definition of risk that I don;t understand

Risk: the chance of injury, damage, or loss; dangerous chance; hazard http://www.yourdictionary.com/risk

There is a risk that if you play the Oregon Trail game that your "PC" will drown.

Funny, the overwhelming majority of times I've played the game didn't end with drowning.


And once again, the Den returns to the usual "we don't want our PCs to die ever." discussion. Because there's no reason anyone would risk their life unless they were insane or stupid or granted success.

Nope, no reason at all. And here I was thinking people actually went to the Klondike (and most didn't strike it rich).

Must have been a figment of my imagination.

Elennsar wrote: There is a risk that if you play the Oregon Trail game that your "PC" will drown.

Funny, the overwhelming majority of times I've played the game didn't end with drowning.

That usually happened to your oxen. People generally died from sickeness.

And once again, the Den returns to the usual "we don't want our PCs to die ever." discussion. Because there's no reason anyone would risk their life unless they were insane or stupid or granted success.

Umm... No, most of the Den doesn't give a shit. The ones on this thread chose to get back on topic about heroes and then Path asked how to create risk and create atmosphere to help set the mood for saving lives and whatnot.

Nope, no reason at all. And here I was thinking people actually went to the Klondike (and most didn't strike it rich).

Must have been a figment of my imagination.

What does that have to do with anything? Those people by your definition aren't heroes.

It's bad enough that you make contradicting statements, now you don't even follow your own logic when it comes to proving a point.

Hell, you definition says that most of the soldiers in the Revolutionary War were not heroes, because apparently you can't ambush people and be a hero.

That usually happened to your oxen. People generally died from sickeness.

More so in 2 than 1, I think. 1 seems to be a little less forgiving for some reason, but that's another topic.

Umm... No, most of the Den doesn't give a shit. The ones on this thread chose to get back on topic about heroes and then Path asked how to create risk and create atmosphere to help set the mood for saving lives and whatnot.

The illusion of risk. As distinct from an actual peril.

"You're being shot at by Imperial Stormtroopers! What do you do?"

"I ." is probably not something you want to be an effective response - but it would work fine if you give IS the Never Hits flaw.

What does that have to do with anything? Those people by your definition aren't heroes.

No, but they're taking actual risks and surviving them, and doing so in pursuit of something that is not very likely to work in their favor.

Something which apparently is hugely undesirable to Denners for their characters.

Hell, you definition says that most of the soldiers in the Revolutionary War were not heroes, because apparently you can't ambush people and be a hero.

We are talking about the same Revolutionary War that was fought by this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continental_Army and not the story where every second American had a rifle, right?

Elennsar wrote: Not fighting five enemies at once?

Being missed by an enemy? They have to succeed on their attack roll, too - its not just "You have two defenses."

Surviving (one way or another) the attacks that do hit?

Avoiding the fight is the only option there that PCs can actually take. The rest of the risk can't be avoided, you're just praying for a good roll.

If the only way of avoiding getting killed is rolling well, then the risk is not preventable.

PR said it best

Wait, wait, wait. You are supposed to fight in Elennsar's game, even though you have a real chance of dying?
Well, fuck me with a broomstick. That sounds like an awful game.

PR said it best


Wait, wait, wait. You are supposed to fight in Elennsar's game, even though you have a real chance of dying?
Well, fuck me with a broomstick. That sounds like an awful game.

And as usual, the Den demonstrates an abhorrence of anything that could actually kill and beat their PCs even existing.

Elennsar wrote:

PR said it best


Wait, wait, wait. You are supposed to fight in Elennsar's game, even though you have a real chance of dying?
Well, fuck me with a broomstick. That sounds like an awful game.

And as usual, the Den demonstrates an abhorrence of anything that could actually kill and beat their PCs even existing.

Look, E. It's not that. It's the fact that most of us like to have games to have a possibility of success. I personally don't like to have to make a new character every few sessions (which, by the way, you may want to make character creation extremely easy).

As far as can be determined, there's no fucking way to succeed at your game. An individual character can't accomplish crap because he's going to be dead soon. Trying to maximize character survival time by, you know, taking a weasel's approach to accomplishing goals (in the least risky and most sure way possible) is "not-heroic" and meets stiff opposition from the DM (that's you).

So how are people supposed to fucking get anything done?

Look, E. It's not that. It's the fact that most of us like to have games to have a possibility of success. I personally don't like to have to make a new character every few sessions (which, by the way, you may want to make character creation extremely easy).

Which is quite possible without making the chance of characters dying 0.01%.

As far as can be determined, there's no fucking way to succeed at your game. An individual character can't accomplish crap because he's going to be dead soon. Trying to maximize character survival time by, you know, taking a weasel's approach to accomplishing goals (in the least risky and most sure way possible) is "not-heroic" and meets stiff opposition from the DM (that's you).

So how are people supposed to fucking get anything done?

As far as can be determined from...what? No, really? Did I say at some point that you will regularly be at a 50% chance or worse of surviving?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_ ... ionary_War

Yes we are talking about the same war.

Here is the thing El, you can't have actual risk since it is a game. It is all illusionary.

"I ROFL ." is probably not something you want to be an effective response - but it would work fine if you give IS the Never Hits flaw.

Did you see me type that? No one has said anything about never missing. Stop putting words in peoples mouths.

No, but they're taking actual risks and surviving them, and doing so in pursuit of something that is not very likely to work in their favor.

Okay but that has nothing to do with heroes just people wanting to make a better life for themselves.

Something which apparently is hugely undesirable to Denners for their characters.

Who the fuck said that? Did you not look at the suggestions SunTzu made?

Elennsar wrote: As far as can be determined from...what? No, really? Did I say at some point that you will regularly be at a 50% chance or worse of surviving?

OK you have three options.

A) Unavoidable Real risk: You must put yourself at risk, and that risk is real. While you can try to reduce it with tactics, you're never going to reduce it to the point that you can feel comfortable in combat. This leads to a short PC lifespan, because combat is unavoidable and you have a great chance of dying.

B) Avoidable Real risk: Combat is deadly, but if you're smart you can avoid combat, or ensure that you always have the jump on your foes and shoot them before they shoot you. PCs here can be recurring if they play smart, but it doesn't lead to people being heroic, it leads them to play as cautious as possible.

C) Illusory Risk: The numbers are laid out such that if you don't do anything stupid, the odds of you dying are very small. Most of the real danger is created via illusionism. Someone may die if they do something dumb, but generally you feel okay going into combat.

Since you want heroes, option B is clearly out. You have already stated that you're against option C.

So all that is left is option A.

Here is the thing El, you can't have actual risk since it is a game. It is all illusionary.

You can have the characters have actual risk, or you can say that they only think they're at risk because they're delusional or fooled.

Did you see me type that? No one has said anything about never missing. Stop putting words in peoples mouths.

I am not putting words in anyone's mouth, I am pointing out what happens if you make them incapable of hitting. Seriously, the idea that only Imperial Stormtroopers shoot "that accurately" is backed up by nothing we witness in the trilogy.

Okay but that has nothing to do with heroes just people wanting to make a better life for themselves.

Who the fuck said that? Did you not look at the suggestions SunTzu made?

The overwhelming majority of which do not result in dead PCs unless the PCs are stupid.

Illusion of risk, fine. Actual gee-this-is-actually-dangerous, sure doesn't look like there's nearly as much interest in.

Since you want heroes, option B is clearly out. You have already stated that you're against option C.

So all that is left is option A.

Or D.

D) Unavoidable Elements of Real Risk: You must put yourself at risk, and that risk is real a fair amount of the time. While you can try to reduce it with tactics, you're never going to reduce it to the point that you can feel comfortable in combat. PCs are probably not going to die easily, but nor are they unable to avoid risking death if they actually do something noteworthily bold. A saying about fighter pilots may or may not apply.

People have survived actual combat and have faced it without being insane, suicidal, or scarred to the point they feel they're going to die.

I am against making it so that PCs are threatened with things that can't actually threaten them. I am fine with PCs be able to counter the threat of a rank and filer, but I am not fine with that rank and filer never being able to threaten a PC to begin with.

For instance, let's say that I use CAN or something like that. You will quite possibly give someone CAN if you do something risky. If you do something risky and ignore them, you'll definately give them CAN. That may be enough for them to overcome the fact you're significantly superior and actually threaten you (it would with rank and filers, but probably not with peasants).

Now, sometimes doing that risky thing is important for one reason and another, and sometimes it appears more important than it really is.

If you're doing a hero, the fact that it is risky is not a serious deterrent.