So why don't characters die in your games? I find that if my players are not exposed to the potential event of random death, maiming or insanity then they often make irrational decisions. Example: player manages to stealthily make their way to the edge of the wood, notices an immense amount of enemies in the clearing beyond, wants to frighten the enemies off so throws a rock at the nearest one, never stopping to think..... oh shit the potential for my death is HIGH. Anyway love your stuff!
@thestrollingbones My experience to it is that players just build combat monkeys it reverts to horrible, horrible role playing. When they know they are not going to be killed they are willing to step into things my would have otherwise avoided. This of course implies that your players are not wankers.
What I like to think is ... Being a GM is just like being a magician. You tell a story, making everybody believe in what you say, but your fingers are doing the exact opposite. In this case, the most important thing is that the player REALLY believes he's going to put his life on the line. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant.
People talked about railroad here ? I don't see one. I just see a vague background in which the players are going to have a very, very bad time.
How can you declare, tonight I will kill a PC? Seems like a ridiculous way to GM. Death by dice (i.e. random events) sometimes seem trivial - but really its up to the GM to make the most of it. Do something to make it meaningful, thats the GM's job, to make the game an interesting story. Killing for the sake of killing, which you're extolling here is just mean. You take a guy who really wants to play a particular character, you say no, then yes... but first I aim to kill you. Bad GM!
This is a very narrativist look at character death. Thank you. I don't happen to subscribe fully to it, because I see value in the tactical simulation of combat. The stakes are often high - if you win, you get to live a bit longer. If not, your character may die.
If the death seems like nothing, make it not. It was just a little skirmish and someone was unlucky? Roll with it. Throw 10 more goblins and a couple orc taskmasters after them. Reinforcements. Suddenly, this little battle is unwinnable and that character who died made a sacrifice to save the rest or something. Make it work. I know what you mean that it shouldn't be trivial, but even in D&D, you can take a trivial death and make it completely opposite if you just get creative.
Think of Boromir's death in the first Lord of the Rings. He was just shot up by an orc. Big deal. But through its presentation on screen, his death was just as epic as Gandalf's "death" earlier in the film. So it was a goblin, not a balrog. The DM should be able to make something like that equal. Just like a movie, EVERY death should be cinematic and be given purpose. So even if it's a "random" encounter, it should make sense in the story, and therefore, so should his death.
I'm gonna disagree with you here, John. Play an MMO. You'll notice that even the most basic quest at any level seems like the end of the world. Only YOU, a level 11 Warlock, can go kill 5 Gnolls. Through text and story (the delivery, essentially), it comes off as something so much more. That should also be present in D&D. As a DM, you should make sure every battle and quest doesn't seem like a waste of time or just another quest before something bigger. Everything should be for a reason.
If this was one of my games, I'd print out to sheets: 1 Mage and 1 Vampire. I'd tell him that if he can survive then he's a mage and then try and sire him as a kindred.
@LordStrange I believe he says that because you say: tonight I am going to kill a character, seems a bit unfair to me. I have to say John, you do come with the some good ideas. But this is not one of them, IMHO. I've played with GMs before they purposefully set out to kill a character. Its easy for a GM to do that. In this instance it seems to have no other purpose than to piss off a player.
So why don't characters die in your games? I find that if my players are not exposed to the potential event of random death, maiming or insanity then they often make irrational decisions. Example: player manages to stealthily make their way to the edge of the wood, notices an immense amount of enemies in the clearing beyond, wants to frighten the enemies off so throws a rock at the nearest one, never stopping to think..... oh shit the potential for my death is HIGH. Anyway love your stuff!
thestrollingbones 10 months ago
@thestrollingbones My experience to it is that players just build combat monkeys it reverts to horrible, horrible role playing. When they know they are not going to be killed they are willing to step into things my would have otherwise avoided. This of course implies that your players are not wankers.
thadrine 5 months ago
What I like to think is ... Being a GM is just like being a magician. You tell a story, making everybody believe in what you say, but your fingers are doing the exact opposite. In this case, the most important thing is that the player REALLY believes he's going to put his life on the line. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant.
People talked about railroad here ? I don't see one. I just see a vague background in which the players are going to have a very, very bad time.
Safirio 1 year ago
At 5:28, was that a fart or was he hiding a Tribble in his pants?
Replayability 1 year ago
How can you declare, tonight I will kill a PC? Seems like a ridiculous way to GM. Death by dice (i.e. random events) sometimes seem trivial - but really its up to the GM to make the most of it. Do something to make it meaningful, thats the GM's job, to make the game an interesting story. Killing for the sake of killing, which you're extolling here is just mean. You take a guy who really wants to play a particular character, you say no, then yes... but first I aim to kill you. Bad GM!
evilpilch 1 year ago
They should rename this Video: John Wick bitches about D&D (episode 40)
LordSathar 1 year ago
@LordSathar In nearly 8 minutes, I spend ten seconds on D&D. You've really got to get over your anti-JW obsession.
LordStrange 1 year ago
This is a very narrativist look at character death. Thank you. I don't happen to subscribe fully to it, because I see value in the tactical simulation of combat. The stakes are often high - if you win, you get to live a bit longer. If not, your character may die.
LanceVader 1 year ago
If the death seems like nothing, make it not. It was just a little skirmish and someone was unlucky? Roll with it. Throw 10 more goblins and a couple orc taskmasters after them. Reinforcements. Suddenly, this little battle is unwinnable and that character who died made a sacrifice to save the rest or something. Make it work. I know what you mean that it shouldn't be trivial, but even in D&D, you can take a trivial death and make it completely opposite if you just get creative.
HexDemon666 2 years ago
@HexDemon666 But, what does that death really contribute to the story?
thadrine 5 months ago
Think of Boromir's death in the first Lord of the Rings. He was just shot up by an orc. Big deal. But through its presentation on screen, his death was just as epic as Gandalf's "death" earlier in the film. So it was a goblin, not a balrog. The DM should be able to make something like that equal. Just like a movie, EVERY death should be cinematic and be given purpose. So even if it's a "random" encounter, it should make sense in the story, and therefore, so should his death.
HexDemon666 2 years ago
@HexDemon666 Very different. That was an "End of Book" event centered around a fight that you new for several chapters was on its way.
thadrine 5 months ago
I'm gonna disagree with you here, John. Play an MMO. You'll notice that even the most basic quest at any level seems like the end of the world. Only YOU, a level 11 Warlock, can go kill 5 Gnolls. Through text and story (the delivery, essentially), it comes off as something so much more. That should also be present in D&D. As a DM, you should make sure every battle and quest doesn't seem like a waste of time or just another quest before something bigger. Everything should be for a reason.
HexDemon666 2 years ago
What dramatis! What gravitas! Belissimo! Encore! Encore, I say!
thedarkoracleofvoid 2 years ago
Every GM has some rail-road in their campaigns; a good Gamemaster never lets players see the tracks.
nunspa 2 years ago
BAHAHAAH! I LOVE this!
Nicodemus24601 2 years ago
CHOOOOOOOOOOOOO CHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
Nice tracks you're laying down there. This is how you don't DM people.
Byrd3125 2 years ago
Interesting catch - Makes for a more dramatic story I imagine.
nlp3000 2 years ago
If this was one of my games, I'd print out to sheets: 1 Mage and 1 Vampire. I'd tell him that if he can survive then he's a mage and then try and sire him as a kindred.
bathlarper 2 years ago
You kind of remind me of my own ideas about roleplaying, but adding a few years of experience. Did I mention I subscribed?
W4RW017 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are so rail-road
zulgyan 3 years ago
How do you figure?
LordStrange 3 years ago 3
@LordStrange I believe he says that because you say: tonight I am going to kill a character, seems a bit unfair to me. I have to say John, you do come with the some good ideas. But this is not one of them, IMHO. I've played with GMs before they purposefully set out to kill a character. Its easy for a GM to do that. In this instance it seems to have no other purpose than to piss off a player.
evilpilch 1 year ago
If a GM is trying to kill a character, what chance does the character have? After all, can't you just say "Rock falls, everyone dies?"
stormcrow71 3 years ago
That would make me a wanker, and I'm a firm believer in the Wanker Rule.
LordStrange 3 years ago 3
my GM tried to do that to me SEVERAL times!
stephieru 2 years ago
@stormcrow71 Very easily, you play your character as if he were not a d-bag.
thadrine 5 months ago
Dude, you're the kind of magnificent bastard I want to be with my games. Can I just say you rock?
0griggs 3 years ago