| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 3:37 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| garhkal wrote: | | They didn't. The air speeder they did have (T16 iirc) has from what i remember, the same controls as an Xwing... |
Id better put some jetfighter controls in my Cessna then.. 
_________________
My Biggest Beard Retard award goes to: The Admiral of course.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
tetsuoh
Captain
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
Posts: 505
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 16, 2010 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
huh all this time I never realized T16's were speeder class....
silly me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdlake
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 65
Location: Montclair, NJ
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garkhal wrote: |
Sorry for phrasing it the way i did. BUT i have seen great ideas for games ruined cause X or Y pc was 'so integral to th campaign' NOTHING bad could (or would) happen to them
|
Point taken. But I've also seen campaigns ruined by strict adherence to the die rolls--for example, when our ranger suffered a debilitating brain aneurism and lapsed into a coma without even reaching the first dungeon, just by staying alert for ambushes. (Rolemaster. Ye gods!) I've also seen adventures ruined by a refusal to treat the PCs as special. "Yeah, I know you want to join the fighting on deck, but you're suffering from intestinal peritonitis. It happened a lot back then. Oh, by the way, your side won." I kid you not. Also: lowbie PCs adventuring alongside Elminster. Yawn. There's a happy medium between these horrific extremes that involves GM intervention.
| garkhal wrote: |
You have obviously never read any of the threads i have posted in the game master area. I rarely make a 'combat/other situation' tailored to the group. I have it tailored to the setting/area and what I believe the person(s) should have. If that means a newbie starting out is going to get overwhelmed, then they better remember the first rule of combat. Runaway!
|
On the contrary. I have, and with interest. You'll have to pardon me if I don't recall all the details of every post, and who wrote which.
But now I'm curious: what happens in your games when the newbie IS in a situation where he's going to get overwhelmed, and he's expected to run away?
I mean, expecting him to make that decision in the first place implies a certain amount of tailoring the threat to the PC, making sure security is lax enough that he can scope out the defenses or making sure he can accurately gauge the skill of a potential foe. Realistically, a newbie shouldn't always know what he's getting into. And if he dives in (whether out of ignorance or folly) only to discover he's in over his head, and then runs away, his realistic chances to escape should be virtually nil: a tyrannical, paranoid empire or a Huttese criminal gang is going to respond with overwhelming force, and if the PC can't win with the advantage of surprise, he sure can't beat the bad guys when they take the initiative. Making "run away" a viable choice again implies a certain amount of tailoring the threat to the PC, if only by leashing the reaction. Or perhaps you mean the newbie should know what he's getting into and never tackle the challenge at all. Well, okay, but then what does he do? Either you provide him a different adventure he CAN handle, again tailoring the adventure to the PC, or he sits around wishing he had something to do. I wouldn't keep returning to that game week after week.
| garkhal wrote: |
With some of the gamers i have played with, those 'horrible consequences' would phase them about as much as someone trotting out ''random innocent civilian #102 and shooting them....
|
Yeah, we've all dealt with those at some point. As I acknowledged above, players of casual psychopaths generally need a strong hand on the lash, and I wouldn't try appealing to conscience. But I might still try humiliation. I've seen players oblivious to official reprimand, but never to an enemy who dissects their failures in embarrassing detail, calls them a waste of his time, and maybe drills them right there on the interrogation bench. If that didn't prick their motivation, I'd try a few more angles, but ultimately I suppose I'd get bored and drift off. If they aren't sufficiently interested in the game world to care when something happens to any part of it or their reputation with anyone in it, and only want to outroll target numbers until death catches up with them, a FPS or MMO engine could meet their modest GMing needs, and we'd all be happier. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:44 pm Post subject: character death and fudging |
|
|
| Whill wrote: |
The fact that you even know about it means it was unsuccessful fudging. If it was obvious to you that they were fudging all those times, then its obvious to us GMs that have used fudging successfully that your GMs were not good GMs, because good GMs can fudge without you knowing it happened. What you have experienced are bad GMs, and it sounds like a lot of them. |
| garhkal wrote: | | So to be (in your words) a good gm, one has to fudge? Is that what i am hearing? |
Not quite. To be a good GM, you won't let on thet you are fudging, if you fudge. Meaning, good GMs could be fudging, but maybe they aren't, and you'd never know either way. I did not say you had to fudge to be a good GM. I meant you have to not reveal it if and when you do fudge.
In all the examples you presented, the GMs were obviously fudging so they were not being good GMs. Just because I fudge and consider myself a good GM, that doesn't mean that I fudge in every adventure I run. There have been many adventures I have ran without having the the need to fudge. But when I do, no one has a clue. It's a con I've ran on dozens of players throughout the years!
| garhkal wrote: | | i have gmed for almost 17 years of the 22 or so i have been in the game |
Thanks for clarifying you also GM. You have demonstrated GM-related opinions, but it seems that most of your examples you have posted of actual gameplay are examples of you being player, so I didn't realize you are a GM too.
| garhkal wrote: | | I have also had many compliments on my keeping it 'real and competitive' |
Cool, whatever works for your game. Hopefully now you realize that I was never saying you are not a good GM if you don't fudge. I was merely stating that successfully fudging appropriately does not automatically make one a bad GM. Misuse of fudging and unsuccessful fudging does makes one a bad GM.
| garhkal wrote: | | YES i have had some players who were 'used to gms fudging' so as not to kill them off, get peeved at me... i have seen great ideas for games ruined cause X or Y pc was 'so integral to th campaign' NOTHING bad could (or would) happen to them, or it would fall apart so quickly. And that sentiment was not just mine. Several of those players who had the gm 'do that' to their character lost interest in the game. So yes, i do see an issue when it comes to making pc's central to the story. YES i do realise no players, no game. BUT that is afar cry from a character being central to a film. |
I have been working on my next big campaign off and on for a few years now, and part of it involves a prophecy of rise of evil, a huge battle and a savior. Mystery is a major hook of the campaign which involves slowly uncovering clues leading up to the revelation until the story's climax at the end of the campaign. Despite planning on there being many red herrings, I wanted to have the savior to be one of the PCs, a cynical smuggler or mercenary who will find himself in a monumental moment in which he realizes he becomes the chosen one just by making a choice towards faith that will be intstruamental in turning the tide of the battle. That chacacter, not even being Force-sensative, would be the last last person anyone would expect to be the savior. I would include no implications along the way that the savior even had to be one of the PCs - I just thought it would be a cool twist for it to turn out that way. Despite the obvious influences of the Star Wars films, the Matrix and Indiana Jones, I must have been influenced by the DaVinci Code because I had it in my mind that the chosen one would be the progeny of a secret bloodline from another savior 1000 years ago.
One day I was chatting with Grimace about these ideas, and he asked what if the chosen PC dies in the campaign. I said that he wouldn't. Depsite the fact that I had never done this before, I admit I was actually planning on secretly protecing the character so that he couldn't die. Grimace brought me to my senses of how bad it was to do that, and I eventually realized I had temporaily lost sight of why I had never done that in the past. Of course, Grimace is right.
And in the conversation, sparks of imagination struck me and I came up with a solution that would not only allow anyone (of any species) to be the chosen one, but also went along with the intended themes of my campaign and the Star Wars films much better. My secret intended potential savior could shift as the story gets closer to the end until I chose the chosen one and make up explanations for why implications of any one else being the savior ended up being red herrings. So if anyone dies before the end, they obviously weren't the chosen one. No PC is protected and the story can go on with new PCs as PCs die off (if any do).
Thank you again, Grimace! Not only did you bring me to my senses, but my campaign was greatly improved, more things came into focus and clicked into place thematically.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage
Last edited by Whill on Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:11 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)
Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:48 pm Post subject: Character Death & Fudging |
|
|
When I was a senior in high school, by the dice an unlucky PC was killed in the opening firefight of an adventure. I thought that was horribly undramatic for that adventure, so I fudged and spared him (I think I raised his wound level to incapacitated). During a break, I pulled the player (Jim) into another room and told him I fudged to save his PC, but the character was now on borrowed time and thus was destined to die by the end of this advenutre, one way or another. I told him that his PC would have an opportunity to heroicly sacrifice his life to save his team by the end. I asked him not to tell any of the players so that they would be surprised. Jim was only a sophomore in high school but took it all in stride. He agreed that it would have sucked for his character to die at that point early in the adventure, and thanked me for the opportunity go out with a bang. He fully accepted the sudden change to his role brought on by the combination of chance and GM-intervention.
Jim was playing a cynical, selfish scoundrel type of character with a Solo-like story arc, so after that break (and his character was healed while his teammates persued leads), he worked his PC's "near-death" experience in the character dynamics of finally placing the team above himself, and really taking the mission and their cause to heart, incorporating all this into the PC's words and actions. That day, the other players and I witnessed a great roleplayer emerge out of a mediocre one, but only I had any clue where his motivations came from. Jim seemed a little nervous going into the final chapter of the adventure through.
A climactic confrontation between the group of five Rebel PCs and two Imperially-employed archnemesis armored bounty hunters seemed to leaning to the PCs' favor, but then suddenly the battle takes a turn for the worse when a back-up squad of hunters shows up at the battle. The PCs started taking wounds, and when it came to Jim's PC's turn, he spent a FP. The PC dramatically pulled two thermal detonators seemingly out of no where, said a few final inspirational words to his teammates (something like "For the Rebellion..."), charged to between the two groups of hunters, dodging all their shots on the way until getting totally blown away at point blank range as the activated thermal detonators flew from his hands in each direction, causing a huge explosion that brought the roof down over all the hunters. Wounded and stunned at the loss of their friend, the team escaped to their ship with their lives (minus one), and their mission was a great success for the Rebellion.
You should have seen the other players' faces! After the adventure, the other players and I applauded Jim's final "performance" as that character. And little did the other four players know that Jim was brought in on a "fudge" with the GM. The fudge in favor of the PC was balanced in one way because it saved the PC, but only at the price of requiring his death later in the adventure. And it was also balanced in another way by me beefing up the opposition at the end, basically increasing the difficulty to the point of it being near-impossible for the group to win without the sacrifice of one of the characters. This greatly intensified the enjoyment of all the players, including Jim who said it was his favorite adventure despite his character dying (and depsite knowing his character had to die).
And even though it wasn't planned to be the final adventure of the campaign, it ended up being that as the school year ended and the group fell apart. The fudge saving Jim's character leading to his intense climactic heroic sacrifice made the adventure more memorable for all. Jim made a new character that he liked better and played it in a new mini-campaign that summer. The other players never found out that I had fudged anything, and Jim said he had no clue until I pulled him aside and told him.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 18, 2010 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mdlake wrote: |
Point taken. But I've also seen campaigns ruined by strict adherence to the die rolls--for example, when our ranger suffered a debilitating brain aneurism and lapsed into a coma without even reaching the first dungeon, just by staying alert for ambushes. (Rolemaster. Ye gods!) I've also seen adventures ruined by a refusal to treat the PCs as special. "Yeah, I know you want to join the fighting on deck, but you're suffering from intestinal peritonitis. It happened a lot back then. Oh, by the way, your side won." I kid you not. Also: lowbie PCs adventuring alongside Elminster. Yawn. There's a happy medium between these horrific extremes that involves GM intervention. |
If there is 'that happy medium' i have yet to see it. Now i will admit, i have had some gms who WERE known to fudge (and i caught it) but whether others did they did not notice, AND had fun cause of it.
| mdlake wrote: |
On the contrary. I have, and with interest. You'll have to pardon me if I don't recall all the details of every post, and who wrote which.
But now I'm curious: what happens in your games when the newbie IS in a situation where he's going to get overwhelmed, and he's expected to run away? |
This is why i use "Stairs's rule of newbie gloving.
Total Newbie to rpgs - 5 games where the "kid gloves" are on (enemies ALWAYS go for capture, show some stupidity in tactics etc)
Played rpgs before but not starwars d6 - 3 games of gloves on.
Played starwars before, but not under me - 1 game session with it on so he gets a feel for how i am.
Now once past that limit, the gloves are off and he is 'treated' as anyone else.
| mdlake wrote: | | I mean, expecting him to make that decision in the first place implies a certain amount of tailoring the threat to the PC, making sure security is lax enough that he can scope out the defenses or making sure he can accurately gauge the skill of a potential foe. Realistically, a newbie shouldn't always know what he's getting into. And if he dives in (whether out of ignorance or folly) only to discover he's in over his head, and then runs away, his realistic chances to escape should be virtually nil: a tyrannical, paranoid empire or a Huttese criminal gang is going to respond with overwhelming force, and if the PC can't win with the advantage of surprise, he sure can't beat the bad guys when they take the initiative. Making "run away" a viable choice again implies a certain amount of tailoring the threat to the PC, if only by leashing the reaction. Or perhaps you mean the newbie should know what he's getting into and never tackle the challenge at all. Well, okay, but then what does he do? Either you provide him a different adventure he CAN handle, again tailoring the adventure to the PC, or he sits around wishing he had something to do. I wouldn't keep returning to that game week after week. |
Not really. Most combats i have had, even with 'overwhelming' force, had some 'outs' that the pcs could take if they look for them. BUT i will admit, i could do better letting them see those outs. Like maybe, dropping into that smelly sewer then swimming with the 's***' away from the combat. Or when in space, ejecting and having the ship keep flying on a path (the enemies always follow the ship).. YES for the latter they still might get captured, or die if no one picks them up, but that at least gives them a possible out.
| mdlake wrote: |
Yeah, we've all dealt with those at some point. As I acknowledged above, players of casual psychopaths generally need a strong hand on the lash, and I wouldn't try appealing to conscience. But I might still try humiliation. I've seen players oblivious to official reprimand, but never to an enemy who dissects their failures in embarrassing detail, calls them a waste of his time, and maybe drills them right there on the interrogation bench. If that didn't prick their motivation, I'd try a few more angles, but ultimately I suppose I'd get bored and drift off. If they aren't sufficiently interested in the game world to care when something happens to any part of it or their reputation with anyone in it, and only want to outroll target numbers until death catches up with them, a FPS or MMO engine could meet their modest GMing needs, and we'd all be happier. |
Agreed. Heck, one gamer who LOVED dark forces, 1 through 3 (especially Jedi outcast) wanted to get into gaming, bt when he found out there were no health packs, shields, shield boosters and you could not carry 9 big guns with all the ammo you want, he felt the rpg was unrealistic... compared to the pc games.... I did NOT have to do anything cause 3 of my other players just laughted him out of there.
| Whill wrote: | Not quite. To be a good GM, you won't let on thet you are fudging, if you fudge. Meaning, good GMs could be fudging, but maybe they aren't, and you'd never know either way. I did not say you had to fudge to be a good GM. I meant you have to not reveal it if and when you do fudge.
In all the examples you presented, the GMs were obviously fudging so they were not being good GMs. Just because I fudge and consider myself a good GM, that doesn't mean that I fudge in every adventure I run. There have been many adventures I have ran without having the the need to fudge. But when I do, no one has a clue. It's a con I've ran on dozens of players throughout the years! |
Ah. Misunderstood you. Though i will sy i have met one gm who flat out feels a gm who does NOT FUDGE to avoid killing a pc is a piss poor gm.
| Whill wrote: | | Thanks for clarifying you also GM. You have demonstrated GM-related opinions, but it seems that most of your examples you have posted of actual gameplay are examples of you being player, so I didn't realize you are a GM too. |
That's cause as i don't fudge as a gm, i have no examples of that to showcase.. 
| Whill wrote: | | Thank you again, Grimace! Not only did you bring me to my senses, but my campaign was greatly improved, more things came into focus and clicked into place thematically. |
Sounds like that would have been a cool game to play, and i am glad Grimace helped you see the light (so to speak). I have had several of my modules i wrote up for the group i play at cons, that i ran by him.
| Whill wrote: | You should have seen the other players' faces! After the adventure, the other players and I applauded Jim's final "performance" as that character. And little did the other four players know that Jim was brought in on a "fudge" with the GM. The fudge in favor of the PC was balanced in one way because it saved the PC, but only at the price of requiring his death later in the adventure. And it was also balanced in another way by me beefing up the opposition at the end, basically increasing the difficulty to the point of it being near-impossible for the group to win without the sacrifice of one of the characters. This greatly intensified the enjoyment of all the players, including Jim who said it was his favorite adventure despite his character dying (and depsite knowing his character had to die).
And even though it wasn't planned to be the final adventure of the campaign, it ended up being that as the school year ended and the group fell apart. The fudge saving Jim's character leading to his intense climactic heroic sacrifice made the adventure more memorable for all. Jim made a new character that he liked better and played it in a new mini-campaign that summer. The other players never found out that I had fudged anything, and Jim said he had no clue until I pulled him aside and told him. |
Wow. Sounds like it was a blast (sorry for the pun). Though that brings up an interesting idea...
Would you all say fudging early on to save one, puts them on 'borrowed time' to where they WILL eventually die later on (maybe not that session)...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
garhkal wrote:
| Quote: | Wow. Sounds like it was a blast (sorry for the pun). Though that brings up an interesting idea...
Would you all say fudging early on to save one, puts them on 'borrowed time' to where they WILL eventually die later on (maybe not that session)... |
I have done that.
I’ve also had a player who created a character with a dark past that she designed to die heroically while reaching redemption. Maris was a slicer with a dark past who became the romantic interest of one of the other party members.
After she had sliced into the Sector Moff’s computer downloading the data on the Novagun, a prototype of the Deathstar superlaster and the Moff’s new super weapon, she was captured by Inquisitor Tremayne. As he began questioning her, Maris realized that Tremayne was reading her mind and that the mission, and more importantly her romantic interest, Deklin, are all in danger. She had maintained an open com during her capture and used it to tell her companions to run, telling Deklin she will be right behind him, then as a distraction she used her last Force point to attack and wound Tremayne. In retaliation, Tremayne’s Sorrostok bodyguard killed Maris, which was her intention in attacking Tremayne. 
The rest of the party escaped to a safe house with the downloaded data which they passed off to the Rebels in time so that an attack could be launched destroying the Novagun. The Rebels awarded Maris a posthumous medal named a Corellian Gunship after her. 8) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | garhkal wrote: | | They didn't. The air speeder they did have (T16 iirc) has from what i remember, the same controls as an Xwing... |
Id better put some jetfighter controls in my Cessna then.. |
More like putting Cessna controls in your Cessna.
The X-Wing was designed by the same company (Incom) who designed the T-16 and deliberalty had similar controls.
I suspect that since space travel is so commonplace in thre Star Wars Universe that most vehicles have farily similar controls.
Otherwise there is really no way to explain how people can fix and modfiy these things without engineering degrees.
Heck, if we realled looked at it seriously, a case could be made that each model fo vehicle might rreally be a seperate skill. But Star Wars seems to suggest that anybody can fly or fix just about any type of vehicle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2010 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | What is the greatedst 'fudge' of the SW saga?
|
That the surving Jedi Masters run off into exile, a hiding for 20 years so that they can dump everything on the semi-trained son of the guy who got them into the mess in the first place.
No wonder Owen Lars kicked Obi-Wan off the farm! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Almost sounds like SW could do with a 'dark fate' like flaw pcs can take (they will eventually die horribly, but you could make them roll or pick a point half way ito the campaign) for a few extra perks like abonus die or two. BUT you must input their death before they get too strong otherwise the 'flaw' is meaningless.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2010 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Almost sounds like SW could do with a 'dark fate' like flaw pcs can take (they will eventually die horribly, but you could make them roll or pick a point half way ito the campaign) for a few extra perks like abonus die or two. BUT you must input their death before they get too strong otherwise the 'flaw' is meaningless. |
I like that Gharkal.  I've had a few players that would enjoy that. The people I play with tend to get attached to characters (ours and that of our friends) so this intentional plan to die could really help. Not sure how it impacts maintaining the feel or appearance of risk though. But I sense you play in a style with sufficient character deaths to maintain a sense of risk. 
Of course I play with folks who, when we played that other Star game, were quite happy to accept a note from the GM telling them their character had been possessed by an alien (parasite, spirit, mind control ray, or whatever) and would then happily move along trying to take over the entire ship and crew. I recall the GM getting a bit nervous at one point thinking my possessed character was going to succeed in infecting everyone in the crew.  I think this style was helped by the mutual trust that someone would eventually figure out how to save the ship. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 5:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Surprisingly i don't think i have had that many deaths.
Lets count it up. 8 gencons where i have gmed, 4 where i gmed 5 slots, 4 where i gmed 8 slots.
7 origins where i gmed 7 slots and one where i gmed 8 slots.
1 Verncon where i gmed 3 slots
2 fire and ices where i gmed 5 slots total.
That gives 117 slots of gming. Out o that i am at 15 deaths...
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bren
Vice Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 8:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ah...you are doing a lot of con slot play. I've only run a handful of con slots. The vast majority of our play is a recurring group of players and characters. Some of these people are folks I've gamed with for 20-35 years in multiple systems. Very different premise.
At a con, you may only have one or two opportunities to judge if the GM is "fair" and "fudging" can easily be or appear to be unfair. Kind of like the difference between buying a car and eating at a local restaurant. A car sale (especially a private sale) tends to be a one off transaction. I may never buy a car from you again. Where as my local restaurant wants repeat business and we have a series of interactions, rather than just one interaction, to build up (or lose) trust.
Also the con often has some competition involved, whether it is just advancing to the next slot or whatever that makes any bias unfair.
All that aside, your con play has a deaths/slot of 13%. That is far higher than our total PC deaths or our average on a per 4 hours of play basis. We've probably played on the order of 60 custom scenarios with each one usually running several weekends of play for probably 1500-2500 hours of play over the past 16 years. Dead PCs are probably on the order of 5 or so. Dead dependent NPCs probably 3x to 4x that. Death is definitely a risk, but for PCs it is a bit low risk. We spend a lot of effort in getting the back stories and intercharacter interactions and group dynamics set up, so we don't want to lightly kill off characters after that is done.
That being said, I probably lean towards wanting things to be a bit more deadly than my co-GM, but life is compromise. Funnily enough, back in the Jurassic Age of early 1970s original D&D I was on the Doom and Despair side of the GM fence.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rerun941
Commander
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Posts: 459
Location: San Antonio, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting, I had kinda assumed we were only discussing home-game player deaths.
My tally for cons is the following:
Slots played (all games): 2
Slots GMed (all games): 0
I'm simply not a con-goer. So I'm in the same boat as Bren. My players spend a lot of time on backstories, character interaction and long-term objectives. There are years of gaming behind these characters... twice a month, 4hr sessions in most cases.
Cons are a whole different case... much more one-shot oriented. Simply not as much time invested. So make em as deadly as ya like.
_________________
Han - "How're we doin'?"
Luke - "Same as always."
Han - "That bad, huh?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mdlake
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 65
Location: Montclair, NJ
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I thought we were discussing home game deaths, too. My death count at con games isn't very meaningful to the original question; I take convention one-shots as an opportunity to experiment, including several games intended to kill most or all the PCs.
Hey, it's not like they're going to be back next week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
