Death in your games

[dunbruha]

We play that each character has one miracle-type recovery (a "divine mulligan", if you will). After a PC death (if the player chooses), the PC is miraculously restored to 0 HP. But after that one chance is used, there is no second chance--no raise, resurrection, etc.

[Hrolfgar]

Quote:
Suviving characters: take the dead guys sh#t and divide it up.

Dead character: dead, unless surivors want to have a side quest to find a 9th level cleric and a 5K gp gem to resurrect him (not easy, gems that big are VERY rare and guarded by more than just goblins).

Dead character's Player: either roll up a new character (at 1 level lower than your dead one), or convince your table mates to quest to resurrect you.

CK: chuckle evilly over his game screen, bwahahahahaah

I approve this message

[Lord Dynel]

As far as re-rolling characters go, I'll let a dead character roll up a new one at one level below the lowest level character in the party. The last time this happened, I had two 6th level, one 5th, and one 4th level character. The 5th level character died and chose to change characters and came back into the game with a level three character.

I might not mind starting the new character at level 1, but I've found (in my experience) that its too dangerous for that 1st elvel character when everyone else is much higher. Either that, or they feel a little worthless until they gain a few levels.

[Aladar]

I am willing to let PCs be brought back from the beyond, if their fellow adventures are willing to quest for it. Failing that, I follow along the same lines as Lord Dynel and let them come in with a new character who is one or two levels (depending on how they played in character) lower than the lowest party member.
_________________
Lord Aladar

Warden of the Welk Wood

Baron of the Castles & Crusades Society

The Poster formerly known as Alwyn

Senior Gamer - Member of the Senior RPG Tour

"NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT - At least not in Yu Gi Oh"
http://www.cncsociety.org/

[zacharythefirst]

Ditto.

A dead character is an opportunity: either one for a quest for resurrection, or to get to enjoy rolling up a new character.*
*--Usually a couple levels back of where the previous character was.
_________________
RPG Blog 2: Gamer resources, news, reviews, and commentary, from the Old School to Small Press. Updated regularly!

[Maliki]

IMHO character death or the chance of character death, has to be part of the game. (I've played in games where I knew the DM would not kill my character, it really took the fun out of the game)
_________________
Never throw rocks at a man with a Vorpal Sword!

[Galadrin]

HackMaster has a nice approach. When you die, either the party is charitable enough (or legally bound by party charter) to find you a high level Cleric for resurrection (more likely the greedy gits loot your corpse and dump you in a ditch) OR you reroll. At level 1.

That's why most HackMaster characters have protgs they give a portion of their XP's to. Dividing up your precious XP is far more preferable than starting over at level 1.

Of course, HackMaster characters tend to be complete scumbags, so generally no one sheds a tear when one perishes.

[Lord Dynel]

Maliki wrote:
IMHO character death or the chance of character death, has to be part of the game. (I've played in games where I knew the DM would not kill my character, it really took the fun out of the game)

That's exactly how I feel about it. That's the fear I have when I CK and that's my fear when I play (that there's no fear of dying). It just makes thing more realistic and puts that "danger factor" in the game.

[deimos3428]

Treebore wrote:
So when they opt for a new character they get the same XP's

That's what I'd do too.

Quote:
unless Raise is available, then I will put them at the bottom of their current level for wanting to switch characters.

But I don't get this part. What's so wrong with wanting to switch characters?

[DangerDwarf]

deimos3428 wrote:
But I don't get this part. What's so wrong with wanting to switch characters?

Nothing, but in my opinion, allowing those players who die and/or switch characters to be on par with those who don't die or switch fails to reward those who remain constant.

IN a 2 year campaign, the guy who still has his same character at the end of it should be a bit above those who frequently die and switch.

[deimos3428]

DangerDwarf wrote:
IN a 2 year campaign, the guy who still has his same character at the end of it should be a bit above those who frequently die and switch.

Lots of people play that way, sure. I don't understand why.

Is having the same character for a long period of time considered superior to having multiple characters for shorter lengths within that same 2-year span? Why should a player be penalized for electing to play something else, and/or why should a player be rewarded for electing to play a single role?

The prevailing thought seems to be that the consequences of [frequent] character death should be effectively a penalty against the player -- he should end up with less of a character in some fashion.

[DangerDwarf]

deimos3428 wrote:
Is having the same character for a long period of time considered superior to having multiple characters for shorter lengths within that same 2-year span?

Yes. You've given a 2 year commitment to the same character and should have something beyond the player who goes for the "flavor of the week."

deimos3428 wrote:
Why should a player be penalized for electing to play something else, and/or why should a player be rewarded for electing to play a single role?

Same as above.

deimos3428 wrote:
The prevailing thought seems to be that the consequences of [frequent] character death should be effectively a penalty against the player -- he should end up with less of a character in some fashion.

And I personally don't see a problem in that. Sure, different strokes for different folks and all though.

[Treebore]

deimos3428 wrote:
That's what I'd do too.



But I don't get this part. What's so wrong with wanting to switch characters?

Switching to a new character becomes their choice. I am willing to not penalize when it comes to keeping to play the character that they have been playing, but when they chose, key being its their informed choice, then I have no problem putting in a bit of a penalty.

For the usual death, the death is not the fault of the player, its the fault of the dice, bad saving throws, very high damage roll, etc... Totally beyond the control of the player. So I refuse to throw salt into the situation and make a negative experience any more negative then it has to be.

Now if you look at how my house rules are written, if their death is due to "bad" playing, I do reserve the right to penalize them further. If they choose to play a new character I reserve the right to penalize them at that time too. Then again, I do strive to be rational and fair, so if they want to play a new character because their old one simply isn't working out well, then I will be reasonable and not impose a penalty of any kind.

So the bottom line for me is, is the penalty deserved? Because people may want to blow it off, but it is a additional punishment when you further penalize the player, or the player via their PC (lower their CON, lower their level, etc...), so rather than punish the player even further, making the negative of dying even more negative, I refuse to do so unless they died from doing something foolish (and rest assured I did give at LEAST one warning) or want to change to a new character essentially "just because".

Just because the player is looking at you and acting like they are totally OK with what has happened doesn't mean there is a lot going on inside their head and doing their best to not let anyone see how bothered by the events they truly are. Some people really do feel nothing, but if its a character they have been playing and having fun with for any period of time, their is regret and other negative feelings going on in their heads. They are just refusing to admit it and show it, because so many act like it should be nothing, but it is. So rather than force them to embarrass themselves, I assume it bothers them to some degree, and do my best to help reduce the negativity of the experience.

After all, what does it cost me to be generous? Nothing. What does it gain me? Likely a much happier player. Which in turn benefits everyone in the group.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[DangerDwarf]

Treebore wrote:
so rather than punish the player even further, making the negative of dying even more negative

But, if there is no penalty for dieing, its not a negative at all. So, by imposing a penalty you aren't making a negative more negative, you are imposing exactly what the negative part of dieing is.

Treebore wrote:
After all, what does it cost me to be generous? Nothing.

Not entirely true. It could cost you players. For me, if there is no penalty or consequences of death, I can't really get into the game. So what if that ogre splatters me. 2 shakes of the cleric's handy dandy stick and I'll be up and about next combat, good as new. So, not really seeing the motivation to care as to whether the ogre splatters me or not. I've known several players who would not play in games where they knew the DM wouldn't kill them or if death lacked teeth. Spoiled a good part of the game to them.

[GameOgre]

None of my players would play in a death lite rpg. I run it hard core in my games because thats what the players enjoy. Now I have heard a groan and moan from time to time...nothing hurts worse when your 16th level character dies and thats it no resurection coming...back to rolling up a 1st level character.

If the players didnt enjoy the thrill of the game more this way...I wouldnt runit that way. I have tried other ways from time to time but they never seem to get into it as much.

Death has a deep and deadly bite and is something to be feared. I have actually had players worried and scared that there characters were in too deep. For me that is one of the signs of a good game.

Although there is resurections and clone spells ect in my games they are HARD to come by and require either a ungodly amount of set up or for heaven and earth to be moved afterwards.
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)

Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org

[deimos3428]

DangerDwarf wrote:
But, if there is no penalty for dieing, its not a negative at all.

The penalty for dying is death itself. That should be a significant moment in a campaign! Either the character's gone for good or he's miraculously returned to the living after considerable cost and effort by others and he will have an indebtedness to those who saved his sorry butt. No additional penalties are necessary.

Besides, if you rely on penalties to safeguard the seriousness of death, -1 CON isn't sufficient to do the job. An average character ends up with more lives than a cat.

[Treebore]

DangerDwarf wrote:
But, if there is no penalty for dieing, its not a negative at all. So, by imposing a penalty you aren't making a negative more negative, you are imposing exactly what the negative part of dieing is.



Not entirely true. It could cost you players. For me, if there is no penalty or consequences of death, I can't really get into the game. So what if that ogre splatters me. 2 shakes of the cleric's handy dandy stick and I'll be up and about next combat, good as new. So, not really seeing the motivation to care as to whether the ogre splatters me or not. I've known several players who would not play in games where they knew the DM wouldn't kill them or if death lacked teeth. Spoiled a good part of the game to them.

So if your character dies your telling me you don't know it? Your telling me I need to reduce your PC's level and CON to make you realize your character died?

I don't think so. I think you know your PC died. I think you don't need me to drive it home for you. So in my games you'll die, you'll know it, and I'll ask you if you want that PC to come back to life. IF you tell me you do then I'll use one of my established NPC's to make it happen for you.

If you don't I'll allow you to make a new PC. If you tell me your doing the switch because you want the PC death to be permanent, so it has more meaning for you, then I likely won't even penalize you any XP's and allow your new PC to have the exact same XP's as your last PC.

Why would I need to do anything more? What would I teach you that you don't already know? You know your PC died. How you treat that death is up to you. I don't need to add game mechanic punishments to make you feel it even more.

To me that would smack of torturing and tormenting you even more. Like rubbing salt or lemon juice or vinegar into a raw open wound. Even if its a small wound, and the pain wouldn't be much at all, I do not feel a need to inflict it upon anyone, especially since I am playing a game that is meant to be fun. Doing all the extra punishments is not about being fun to me, its about adding insult to injury.

So I don't do it unless its the exceptions I have already posted about.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[DangerDwarf]

Of course I know Ranger Bob died. But if he's up and running around next session like all is well, then he might as well not have for all intents and purposes. My personal knowledge that an ogre clubbed Ranger Bob like a baby seal doesn't cause me any undue angst or grief, especially if he's strutting his way around the Gnarley Wood like it never happened this week.

Should I take that -1 hit to my CON, yeah I'm going to feel that. Ranger Bob's CON just went from 13 to 12. Ouch, my +1 bonus just went to 0. 10th level Ranger Bob just lost 10 permanent HP due to that ogre's club. I'm gonna be more careful next time.

Back in the days of 2nd Edition, I remember folks trading stories about their higher level characters and "Oh yeah? What's yer CON?" being a teasing question folks would ask. If you were in your upper teens with a higher than average CON score still in tact, you had accomplished something.

Besides, lets say Ranger Bob bites it and I choose to "let" him die. I roll up a new 10th level character, Fighter Bob and set out with the rest of the party. Doh! Fighter Bob got impaled. I "let" him die and here comes Wizard Bob. Wizard Bob has some luck for a bit, but a few sessions down the road he falls into the Pit of Incredibly, Incredible Doom. I again "let" him die and roll up Thief Bob.

Now, over the course of a few months I've gone through several characters due to my own mistakes and the occasional bad roll. But my fellow player JimJoe has been playing his character Percy the Cleric this whole time. JimJoe is an astute player, keeps his wits about him and dammit his dice have been on fire lately. Percy hasn't died a single time and JimJoe has been working hard at keeping it that way.

Why should me and my retinue of Bobs be on par with Percy?

We shouldn't. JimJoe, through a good measure of luck and skill has done far better than me and my Bob Lemmings so why shouldn't he be ahead in level? In fact, If I was JimJoe I'd be a little irate when Thief Bob bit it and Ranger Bob the Second rolled out that Ranger Bob had just as much XP as me and a few other players. Here we have been busting our ass and scraping to survive yet are no better off than the line of Bobs.

[Lord Dynel]

I have to say that these last few posters pretty much echo my sentiments.

I, shamefully must admit, was falling into the "DM that won't kill his players" nametag. I would even manipulate things, mid-battle; to make sure the players survive. I don't think that they ever noticed (*crosses fingers*) but I was able to watch the players care less and less about the consequences of their actions. They didn't care if they were seriously outnumbered. They never ran. They always stayed and fought because I think they knew, at least subconsciously, that I was not going to kill them. Then I did. And that changed everything. They became more cautious. They surveyed situations and calculated the chance of survival. They ran if things got bad. It became more real, at least to me, and I think to the players, too.

As far as those not wishing penalty coming in a character "transfer" - I do understand where you're coming from. I do. But I don't look at it as penalizing other players so much for wanting to switch characters as it is rewarding those that stick with a character for a whole campaign. If no one has a problem in your game, then don't penalize them. But to me, it says that the lasting player really knew what he wanted to play since the beginning and he's stuck to his guns and I would think that deserves a little recognition. Sadly, the only way I can see that reward coming is at the other players' expense, in a way, by reducing their level if they make a new character. Maybe give them one change without a reduction.

I do not think dying is a penalty all itself, in my opinion. I think, even in a fantasy role-playing game, that death especially since it is not absolute, it should have some lasting affects. I use to give the option of -1 Con or -1 level, but I had the same thoughts you did, deimos; -1 Con is not that big a deal. -1 level is, though, and I'll probably switch the raising spells to thator not, I havent decided for certain. Either way, though, I think death is a big thing, and should be treated thus. I think that it should have a lasting effect till the end of the character's days - kind of like the Morgul wound Frodo suffered.

[deimos3428]

That's the thing. The standard -1 to CON penalty actually contributes to trivializing death and resurrection. How many examples can you think of in literature or legend where someone comes back from the dead? Ok, there's actually quite a few. But twice? I can't think of any.

I also can't think of any monsters that permanently drain CON, let alone any that get sated after one point and wander off. But that's effectively what death becomes if you just apply the standard penalty.

Part of it comes down to style. Letting characters "respawn" and run back into the dungeon repeatedly until their CON gives out like nothing happened just isn't very inspired role-playing. It's somewhere between a video game with multiple lives, and a comic book where nobody really dies. I played that way in high school, but these days, I'd rather a character stayed believably dead.

We all know Hamlet bites it at the end of the play. But what if an actor 'went rogue' during a production and simply refused follow the script, avoiding character death? Would he be a better actor? Of course not. RPGs don't have scripts, but IMO a player should always to do what makes sense for the role he's playing. Often, that quite reasonably results in character death through no fault of the player.

So if you want death to have real teeth, then by all means make resurrection more rare or more difficult, but don't seek to punish your players. Their job isn't to keep their characters alive, it's to attempt to play them in a believable fashion, and have fun doing it. Seeking to differentiate between the players whose characters happen to die and those who don't seem very petty -- akin to giving the guy who played Hamlet a wedgie once he's off-stage.

[Luther]

There should be some penalty for dieing, but I also think a DM should be flexible enough to go easy o nthose who die in specific circumstances.

Typically, when someone dies in my game and ressurection isn't available, their new character must be of a different class, must start out at the midpoint of the previous level (not too punishing) and don't get any of the treasure gained up to the point for XP purposes. But if someone dies in an heroic fashion, as one of my players did leading off the enemy in our last game, I tend to waver from that rule. I this case, I let them have the same XP as their last character, but it still has to be a different class and the money XP for the current adventure is gone.

There could be other variations of the above and I think, as DM/CK, that you should make the call on the fly, based on the situation at hand (was it stupidity, actual heroics, bad dice, etc.) and you should never do it the same way twice just to keep the players on their toes. This is the spirit of C&C and it should be applied in every situation...
_________________
IMHO, AFAIK, YMMV.

[Jonathan of White Haven]

deimos3428 wrote:
That's the thing. The standard -1 to CON penalty actually contributes to trivializing death and resurrection. How many examples can you think of in literature or legend where someone comes back from the dead? Ok, there's actually quite a few. But twice? I can't think of any.

Philip Jose Farmer's "Riverworld" series ("To Your Scattered Bodies Go") comes to mind. You're welcome.

Quote:
Part of it comes down to style. Letting characters "respawn" and run back into the dungeon repeatedly until their CON gives out like nothing happened just isn't very inspired role-playing. It's somewhere between a video game with multiple lives, and a comic book where nobody really dies. I played that way in high school, but these days, I'd rather a character stayed believably dead.

Back in the day (we're talking the '80s and '90s here--1E AD&D), I had several characters who managed to snuff it during the course of gameplay. They were of sufficient level and interest that I had reason to find ways to get them resurrected. None of them croaked more than once, though. As much as I'd like to say that was because of my superior gaming and learning abilities , it's far more likely being due to both sheer luck and perhaps even the unwillingness of the DM-of-the-moment to kill off PCs.

OTOH, I have played in a couple of campaigns where the DM actively sought to kill PCs when they became "too powerful". That determination depended on the DM, of course. One considered the "too powerful" point having tipped when a PC reached 5th level. Another DM didn't like Elves (though they were his favorite race to run as a player--go fig) and ruled that in his campaign, Elves couldn't be resurrected because they didn't have souls. (This made little sense to the players--why would Elves not have souls, but Dwarves, Halflings, Half-Orcs, and even Half-Elves get the nod?) We played them anyway, but took whatever precautions we could to keep them alive. Healing potions and Rings of Wishes (the only way to "resurrect" an Elvish PC) were very popular in that campaign...

[/quote]So if you want death to have real teeth, then by all means make resurrection more rare or more difficult, but don't seek to punish your players. Their job isn't to keep their characters alive, it's to attempt to play them in a believable fashion, and have fun doing it. Seeking to differentiate between the players whose characters happen to die and those who don't seem very petty -- akin to giving the guy who played Hamlet a wedgie once he's off-stage.[/quote]

In my experience as a player (and limited experience as a CK), most players become rather attached to their characters, especially after those characters have gained a few levels and have been more fully fleshed-out to have a "history". Permanently (or even temporarily) losing a cherished PC can be painful. Making it impossible to retrieve that PC, IMNSHO, can cause resentment towards the CK and diminishes his game.

I've yet to off a PC in my current, short-lived campaign. I've come close a couple of times, though. I'm waiting to see what my players will do when it finally happens. I expect a relatively short discussion/debate on it. Will they strip the body and "share the wealth" whilst saying goodbye to their friend and companion? Or will they hump the body the 50-60 miles back to Yggsburgh and find a cleric of sufficient level to cast either Raise Dead or Resurrection? I expect the latter, and would be surprised at the former.
_________________
"You don't understand, Beaufingle", said Lungwort cryptically. "You ARE dinner." -- M.M. Moamrath

[Treebore]

DangerDwarf wrote:
Of course I know Ranger Bob died. But if he's up and running around next session like all is well, then he might as well not have for all intents and purposes. My personal knowledge that an ogre clubbed Ranger Bob like a baby seal doesn't cause me any undue angst or grief, especially if he's strutting his way around the Gnarley Wood like it never happened this week.

Should I take that -1 hit to my CON, yeah I'm going to feel that. Ranger Bob's CON just went from 13 to 12. Ouch, my +1 bonus just went to 0. 10th level Ranger Bob just lost 10 permanent HP due to that ogre's club. I'm gonna be more careful next time.

Back in the days of 2nd Edition, I remember folks trading stories about their higher level characters and "Oh yeah? What's yer CON?" being a teasing question folks would ask. If you were in your upper teens with a higher than average CON score still in tact, you had accomplished something.

Besides, lets say Ranger Bob bites it and I choose to "let" him die. I roll up a new 10th level character, Fighter Bob and set out with the rest of the party. Doh! Fighter Bob got impaled. I "let" him die and here comes Wizard Bob. Wizard Bob has some luck for a bit, but a few sessions down the road he falls into the Pit of Incredibly, Incredible Doom. I again "let" him die and roll up Thief Bob.

Now, over the course of a few months I've gone through several characters due to my own mistakes and the occasional bad roll. But my fellow player JimJoe has been playing his character Percy the Cleric this whole time. JimJoe is an astute player, keeps his wits about him and dammit his dice have been on fire lately. Percy hasn't died a single time and JimJoe has been working hard at keeping it that way.

Why should me and my retinue of Bobs be on par with Percy?

We shouldn't. JimJoe, through a good measure of luck and skill has done far better than me and my Bob Lemmings so why shouldn't he be ahead in level? In fact, If I was JimJoe I'd be a little irate when Thief Bob bit it and Ranger Bob the Second rolled out that Ranger Bob had just as much XP as me and a few other players. Here we have been busting our ass and scraping to survive yet are no better off than the line of Bobs.

If you play a character that died like it, for all intents and purposes, did not die, I see that as your problem. Your failure to make it "meaningful". If you want me to help you make it meaningful by forcing you to also lose CON, or XP's, or both, I would do it. Not because I think its needed to make your PC's death meaningful, but because you need it to make it meaningful.

Plus I also accept all of the rules of this game. I accept it has spells that can bring characters back from the dead, even if there are no remains. So I don't try and twist it into a reflection of the real world where physical death is permanent. When I run games all the spells are fair game. They can and will be used.

I accept how that effects my campaign world. The poor, common masses die and stay dead. Adventurers rich enough, or connected enough, get brought back to life. The rich get brought back to life until their death is due to age. These are the "realities" of a world where death can be put off until age kills them, or they are made unraisable.

If I have players who express an interest in playing in a "grittier world", where death is permanent, then I will alter the spell lists to reflect that and start the campaign.

If I have a player, or players, who start playing like you say you would, DD, I will start to penalize them. However I guess I have been lucky enough to have most of my players able to know that their PC died, to take it seriously, to do their best to not die again, all without me having to add punishments on top of things.

Plus I have been lucky enough to have players whose characters die most often from bad dice rolls, not due to their stupidity or foolishness.

Like in the last session of my "Against the Giants" portion of my game. They were fighting the Red Dragon, a C&C Red Dragon, not that whimpy thing created in 1E. She came in polymorphed into a surface elf. The group thought she was really a drow. She really caught them completely off guard when she turned into her Ancient Red Draconic form. She is 26 HD, which means in the M&T rules she does a 26d10 breath weapon. She breathed. 2 characters took 160 HP of damage and "died". They both opted to permanently burn luck points to be stabilized at "deaths door", rather than actually die.

I could have let their PC's actually die. What would that have accomplished? My players know they technically died. It bugs them both still, and its been over 10 days since the game session. I didn't need to have their PC actually die, or make them lose a point of CON, or lose XP's, or even have them actually die for them to feel the negativity of their PC dying. They KNOW they technically should have died, but for the grace of the gods and great luck (which is what permanently burning the luck point represents) they barely managed to survive the encounter. Rolling a "1" versus a save for Charm Monster later in the fight helped too.

Now if I had players who refuse to "get it", who fail to feel the death of their PC on any level, I would impose penalties. Fortunately I have players who do get it. Who do know their PC died, and do not need me to prove it to them with any further punishment.

Even my 12 year old hates in when his Illusionist dies. Which he has, several times now. I know this because when his character dies he leaves the table and goes off to be by himself. I know he does this to hide his anger and tears over his PC dying. Do I need to make him hurt even more with further punishments? Does he need to have his PC lose CON or XP's to make his PC death even more real to him? Nope. I don't think so.

So as long as my players PC's "die well", meaning due to bad dice rolls and good role play, I will not add further punishment to their PC's death. If they insist on playing carelessly, foolishly, or even stupidly, then I will add insult to injury until they are able to "get it" without me doing so.

Fortunately I have not had players like that in a long time.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Go0gleplex]

If characters die...the party has a couple options;

a) get them back to a cleric and be ready to pay big and perform a service for the church/deity in question

b) hope their own cleric is high enough level to raise or such

c) make a new character....

Then of course there's always, for the mere sum of 1000 gold royals, our guaranteed resurrection insurance plan. For a mere 5000 gold royals you can upgrade to our Certified recovery plan where we make every effort to retrieve even the smallest of body parts with which to work with. This offer is null and void in acid, fire, and tarrasque intistinal tract environments.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

[Treebore]

Go0gleplex wrote:
I

Then of course there's always, for the mere sum of 1000 gold royals, our guaranteed resurrection insurance plan. For a mere 5000 gold royals you can upgrade to our Certified recovery plan where we make every effort to retrieve even the smallest of body parts with which to work with. This offer is null and void in acid, fire, and tarrasque intistinal tract environments.

Sounds like you guys may have played some Shadowrun! IE the "Doc Wagon" contracts SR has.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

[Go0gleplex]

[quote="Treebore"][quote="Go0gleplex"]I

Then of course there's always, for the mere sum of 1000 gold royals, our guaranteed resurrection insurance plan. For a mere 5000 gold royals you can upgrade to our Certified recovery plan where we make every effort to retrieve even the smallest of body parts with which to work with. This offer is null and void in acid, fire, and tarrasque intistinal tract environments. [/quote]

Sounds like you guys may have played some Shadowrun! IE the "Doc Wagon" contracts SR has.[/quote]

We were getting RI and CRRI plans back in the late 70's...running in places called Wolf Mountian, Castle Misbegotten, Janet's Woods, and Cornelius' Tower (HE'S A DENTAL WIZARD!!!!! )
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

[DangerDwarf]

Treebore wrote:
I will not add further punishment to their PC's death.

See, I think that is the fundamental difference in our thoughts on this one. I, nor my players over the years, have ever viewed it as a punishment. It has always just been part of the game. Just like landing on a chute in Chutes & Ladders. It sucks, but it is part of the game.

Some groups are more gamist in nature than others.

[GameOgre]

I'm with Dangerdwarf! Go Danger go!!

The sad thing is if Danger kills him it will not matter, Treebore will just respawn again with the same exp.
Death! Death! Death!

Quote:
Just like landing on a chute in Chutes & Ladders. It sucks, but it is part of the game.

Don't get me started on the whole people make everything easier over time and ruin it issue! Granted it has always been mmo's till now but I think its the same issue!

I would make a little rant ect but I need to go drive my son to work and steal breakfast from him!
_________________
Baron Golden, Knights of the Tin Palace (GameOgre)

Subscriber to Crusader Magazine!
http://www.cncsociety.org

[Lord Dynel]

Treebore wrote:
Even my 12 year old hates in when his Illusionist dies. Which he has, several times now. I know this because when his character dies he leaves the table and goes off to be by himself. I know he does this to hide his anger and tears over his PC dying. Do I need to make him hurt even more with further punishments? Does he need to have his PC lose CON or XP's to make his PC death even more real to him? Nope. I don't think so.

I never put it in that perspective before, Tree. I can begin to see where you're coming from, especially when it comes to dealing with younger, "fresher," players. My son is, hopefully, going to be starting on playing soon, and he would probably react in a similar fashion.

But reading this, and the rest of your post, you have some excellent points. I think some - including me still, to a point - are focused more on the character instead of the player. I'm seeing the other side of the coin and you're right, a player may not exhibit he disappointment but that doesn't mean it's not there. While I think there should be some repercussions to dying (though at this juncture I'm not sure what), it has to be done in a fashion not to upset the player. You have chosen to sacrifice any (or most) negative consequences for dying in hope of keeping player spirits high. There's certainly nothing wrong with that decision. I guess I still hold on to the fear that, should I follow a similar route, my kindness would be taken advantage of. I'm not saying players would purposely die to take advantage of the lack of penalty associated with such action, it's just that they wouldn't fear it so much - which again, I believe is where a lot of the hang-ups in this discussion take place.

[Go0gleplex]

Which is why (referring the Tree's and Dynel's comments) the group(s) I've played with have always kept an option open to recover the character. Usually the penalty has been a loss of 1 Con and any xp from the current level only...and of course gold, magic items, or such to pay for it. Lacking gold, we've embarked on missions for the church to work off the debt (meaning more potential story hooks).

On the other hand...the first DM I played with...and myself, tended to kill off first characters within a few sessions to sort of make players aware that they can lose 'em irrevocably.
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society