|
Post by joecrak on Jun 21, 2017 17:43:01 GMT -8
Hasn't it been said that you can't really compare deaths in fiction to deaths in a game? Like, the New Mutants, Firefly, and Game of Thrones examples, none of that was random, there were all the decisions of the person writing them.
Games feature multiple writers for the story, more often than not using dice to help determine which way the story will go.
That all said, I can easily see how some of these examples could be translated to a game after the fact.
The important thing is people should all be on the same page about character death before the game starts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2017 18:03:07 GMT -8
So, I have a few thoughts on this: 1) Your playing the wrong system. I've never played WFR, but I have played in games with exploding dice mechanics and realize that any roll can go to a "max damage" point. If that isn't something that you as a player can live with, don't play that system or have [house] rules that limit how much dice can explode. 2) Dice weren't needed. Again, this goes to my point of if there is only one acceptable outcome, then no dice are needed. The GM could just say, "they beat you savagely, take a point of damage. Do you shut up now?" As this was to goal for the scene. Personally I wouldn't have done this, but if that was the only acceptable outcome for the group, then that is probably what should have happened. 3) That sounds awesome! The scene as you describe it (and I assume you played a friend or companion if the PC that died), that your PC and co were captured, and one of them began to scream, and the guard whipped him. Through some turn of fate or odd chance, this blow killed your companion (perhaps the whip wrapped around his neck and the guard choked him to death, or maybe it trip him and he fell back and split his head open, thats up to the GM and the rules to determine exactly what the exploding dice mean). Now you are still in this cell looking down at the dead body of someone you once fought along side of, killed for crying out at his imprisonment! What does your character feel? How will this effect him/her? Can this PC ever look at a skaven with anything other than hate? Will you now have a life long vow to wipe out the skaven? Your whole character arc could take a turn to revenge! See THAT is drama, THAT is the power of a "trivial" death. edit: [] above to clarify 1) Nope. It was a case of #2. In a system where damage dice explode, you don't attack something you aren't willing to kill. If there is no intent to kill, there should be no rolling of damage. The game even had a talent for knockout blows that made it so you could take people out without rolling damage. 2) Spot on. 3) Not really. WHFRP 2nd has fate points that can be burnt to survive "death", because the game is so lethal. It just reduced his resource pool (since burnt points can't be spent for rerolls, making you more likely to die in the future). Also, skaven are minions of chaos, we already hated and wanted to kill them. No more drama was being infused into the scene. It wasn't a golden opportunity. It was a moment of bad GMing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2017 18:13:27 GMT -8
[snip] A mugging might be a 'random' encounter, but it's still an important event in the game to the audience (the players). No one told them that you decided to roll on a chart. Even if you did tell them, that is usually based on something. This neighborhood is dangerous, so there is a chance you get mugged when walking through it. The fact that you rolled to see if it happened or not doesn't really make it random. Even the basic D&D 'wandering monster' encounters aren't really random. They happen as a response to the character's remaining in a dangerous area. Would we call a session random if the GM used charts to come up with the premise for it? No. Then why do we keep insisting that encounters are random? They're not. Unplanned? Not even. That chart came from somewhere. 'Random' combats carry as much weight as any other combat. There is danger inherent in it because of the fighting. If that wasn't the case then it wouldn't even be an encounter, it would be a narration speed bump. A good point I've seen before is the random encounter. What is the purpose of a random encounter? I kind of think it's an evolutionary leftover in game design. What are you going for? D&D has had (in 1e and I think 5e again now) a random dungeon generator - in that case, yes, have random monsters, possibly more powerful than the PCs. But in a game, a random encounter off a chart is really just Random Damage and Resource Expenditure. And in earlier editions especially of D&D that caused the problem of the 15-Minute Workday -- "I cast my one spell and now we need to rest or else I'm useless..." I don't get it. People play D&D to have a fantasy adventure, then bitch when they have to fight some strange creature. That's the point of the whole game. Overcome this fantastical challenge! The only difference between a dungeon generated off a chart and one planned by hand is how much things make sense. If the charts are set up with a theme and the DM puts the results together thoughtfully, it should be indistinguishable from any other planned encounter. Granted D&D fans love random, so I'm sure a good deal of them make gonzo BS instead. That isn't the fault of random encounters or dungeons though. Heck, I could say PbtA has random encounters. I don't plan every fight that comes up. Sometimes when I have to make a move it results in an encounter. And just like a good random encounter table, I have a list of things that are themed for the game at hand. Sure, I chose what to do instead of rolling a die, but it wasn't preplanned. I could have rolled a die to decide. In both cases it's the same idea at work. The only difference is that instead of time being the factor it is the narrative flow that determines when that sort of thing will come up.
|
|
|
Post by chronovore on Jun 21, 2017 19:31:03 GMT -8
As for the chocolate covered espresso beans, my main concern was that you were going to crash early. You were SO WIRED mid afternoon, before we even started playing! It wasn't the initial leap that I remember, it was the convulsing aftershocks that told me how much caffeine you had running through your system. ;-) Did he write a ZINE!!!!! that night? No, he fell asleep "early" at about 2AM. The game we ran that night inadvisably ran until 5AM or so, and we went out for donuts and coffee at 5:30. I can't blame him at all — Stu's never been a fan of lengthy fight scenes, and one player unfortunately shat all over the peaceful resolution I'd secretly hoped they'd take.
|
|
|
HJRP 19-13
Jun 21, 2017 22:48:12 GMT -8
via mobile
Post by uncommonman on Jun 21, 2017 22:48:12 GMT -8
stu made a good ponit about character death, Life isn't fair and (almost) no one decide their own death. Of you play agame that is supposed to mimic life (even if it is a fantasy life) why stop at death. For every real life hero that survived against the odds many more died and where forgotten. Even Achiles died from a critical hit in the leg...
|
|
|
Post by chronovore on Jun 22, 2017 1:06:45 GMT -8
stu made a good ponit about character death, Life isn't fair and (almost) no one decide their own death. Of you play agame that is supposed to mimic life (even if it is a fantasy life) why stop at death. For every real life hero that survived against the odds many more died and where forgotten. Even Achiles died from a critical hit in the leg... Which is, oddly, impossible in GURPS. (YEAH!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2017 3:49:16 GMT -8
stu made a good ponit about character death, Life isn't fair and (almost) no one decide their own death. Of you play agame that is supposed to mimic life (even if it is a fantasy life) why stop at death. For every real life hero that survived against the odds many more died and where forgotten. Even Achiles died from a critical hit in the leg... Which is, oddly, impossible in GURPS. (YEAH!)Not true. You can bleed to death from a hit to the leg. People seem to think it's only death if it's instantly so, which isn't how most people die. GURPS doesn't always get the amount of bleeding right though. A cut off leg can kill you lickity split if no one it there stop the bleeding of the femoral artery.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jun 22, 2017 4:54:12 GMT -8
Of you play agame that is supposed to mimic life (even if it is a fantasy life) why stop at death. Because that's not everyone's goal. Some people want to mimic life, others want to tell an EPIC story, still others fall somewhere in between. As with so many other things associated with our hobby, there isn't just one way to do it.
|
|
|
Post by uncommonman on Jun 22, 2017 6:06:22 GMT -8
Of you play agame that is supposed to mimic life (even if it is a fantasy life) why stop at death. Because that's not everyone's goal. Some people want to mimic life, others want to tell an EPIC story, still others fall somewhere in between. As with so many other things associated with our hobby, there isn't just one way to do it. And that's fine, play how you like but if you play a "gritty game" you can't just ignore the risk of character death since that is one part of that type of game. That's like saying you play DnD but don't use dice, it's not right.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jun 22, 2017 6:34:31 GMT -8
I have a question for you: What is a random encounter from the perspective of the players? I'll tell you my answer: there is no such thing. How you choose to generate encounters does not matter. GM: "So you're walking through the forest, and suddenly... *rolls a d6 on the table, sees the result of 1*... you encounter something! Hang on... *rolls a d20, spots the result of 13, looks on the "Random Wilderness Encounter table", sees 1d6 orcs, rolls 1d6 and gets 3, quickly rolls 1d8+1 for each of the orc's HPs* three pig-snouted and tusked humanoids with greenish-grey skin hop out from behind a tree! They brandish their swords at you, grunt, and rush in for the attack!" ...versus... GM: "So you're walking through the forest and suddenly three pig-snouted and tusked humanoids with greenish-grey skin hop out from behind a tree! They brandish their swords at you, grunt, and rush in for the attack!" I dunno. I'd certainly realize the former was a random encounter. From the perspective of the narrative, of the story, there's no difference. But from the perspective of the players? Yeah, I think there is a difference. Having seen the GM roll the dice, consult the charts, do some quick stat generation, yeah... I now know that the orcs I'm fighting were a random encounter, that they aren't actually part of the larger story. They're only there because the GM rolled a die and got a specific result.
|
|
|
Post by uncommonman on Jun 22, 2017 6:44:19 GMT -8
I have a question for you: What is a random encounter from the perspective of the players? I'll tell you my answer: there is no such thing. How you choose to generate encounters does not matter. GM: "So you're walking through the forest, and suddenly... *rolls a d6 on the table, sees the result of 1*... you encounter something! Hang on... *rolls a d20, spots the result of 13, looks on the "Random Wilderness Encounter table", sees 1d6 orcs, rolls 1d6 and gets 3, quickly rolls 1d8+1 for each of the orc's HPs* three pig-snouted and tusked humanoids with greenish-grey skin hop out from behind a tree! They brandish their swords at you, grunt, and rush in for the attack!" ...versus... GM: "So you're walking through the forest and suddenly three pig-snouted and tusked humanoids with greenish-grey skin hop out from behind a tree! They brandish their swords at you, grunt, and rush in for the attack!" I dunno. I'd certainly realize the former was a random encounter. From the perspective of the narrative, of the story, there's no difference. But from the perspective of the players? Yeah, I think there is a difference. Having seen the GM roll the dice, consult the charts, do some quick stat generation, yeah... I now know that the orcs I'm fighting were a random encounter, that they aren't actually part of the larger story. They're only there because the GM rolled a die and got a specific result. You could have the description planed ahead of time for a random encounter. I feel that is more of a 25% chance of rain/orcs situation. Sometimes it's fun to roll the dice and see if something dangerous happens in the wilderness.
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Jun 22, 2017 6:58:15 GMT -8
I have a question for you: What is a random encounter from the perspective of the players? I'll tell you my answer: there is no such thing. How you choose to generate encounters does not matter. GM: "So you're walking through the forest, and suddenly... *rolls a d6 on the table, sees the result of 1*... you encounter something! Hang on... *rolls a d20, spots the result of 13, looks on the "Random Wilderness Encounter table", sees 1d6 orcs, rolls 1d6 and gets 3, quickly rolls 1d8+1 for each of the orc's HPs* three pig-snouted and tusked humanoids with greenish-grey skin hop out from behind a tree! They brandish their swords at you, grunt, and rush in for the attack!" ...versus... GM: "So you're walking through the forest and suddenly three pig-snouted and tusked humanoids with greenish-grey skin hop out from behind a tree! They brandish their swords at you, grunt, and rush in for the attack!" I dunno. I'd certainly realize the former was a random encounter. From the perspective of the narrative, of the story, there's no difference. But from the perspective of the players? Yeah, I think there is a difference. Having seen the GM roll the dice, consult the charts, do some quick stat generation, yeah... I now know that the orcs I'm fighting were a random encounter, that they aren't actually part of the larger story. They're only there because the GM rolled a die and got a specific result. I would contend that there's no reason a random encounter can't BECOME part of the story.
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Jun 22, 2017 7:08:04 GMT -8
Sometimes it's fun to roll the dice and see if something dangerous happens in the wilderness. Agreed completely. I would contend that there's no reason a random encounter can't BECOME part of the story. They totally do, immediately. But from the *player's* perspective, it's still known that they were a random encounter. It's known that had the GM not rolled a 1 (or whatever), the encounter wouldn't have happened.
|
|
|
Post by lowkeyoh on Jun 22, 2017 9:55:57 GMT -8
To me, a random encounter is one that doesn't have story implication. You're traveling and a wolf comes up to your camp and you have to fight it. Bandits attack. Whatever. They are combats for the sake of combat and don't tie into any story hooks. But Stu Venable is right. Most any 'random' events in a game can be contextualized and drawn into the story, even if they were originally meaningless. Attacked by random bandits and party member killed? There's a note waiting for the party at the inn where they're going with a vague threat by a noble, "This is what happens when you meddle where you don't belong." Random thugs become hired killers. That may shift the political dynamics of the game. Maybe this noble was super unimportant until now. Maybe he was the big bad all along. You're creating new story based on random plot. @joecrack I agree that there's a difference between written fiction and improv fiction in that all decisions in a written story are meaningful. The death of Wash or Cypher or Ned Stark are purposefully constructed to be impact and meaningful to the audience even if they aren't meaningful in the fiction. However it's the GM's job to make the story that's happening at the table meaningful or not. Any event that happens at the table can be revealed later as important, or at least more important than originally thought. A little old lady watching TV can turn out to be a Mage. A Revenant's Sword can be a Cursed Artifact of your Clan's legacy. A wolf attack that killed your party member can be a coordinated attack by a group of evil druids. All it takes is imagination and lateral thinking to create meaningful story ramifications for 'random' events.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Jun 22, 2017 12:16:38 GMT -8
Because that's not everyone's goal. Some people want to mimic life, others want to tell an EPIC story, still others fall somewhere in between. As with so many other things associated with our hobby, there isn't just one way to do it. And that's fine, play how you like but if you play a "gritty game" you can't just ignore the risk of character death since that is one part of that type of game. That's like saying you play DnD but don't use dice, it's not right. Poppycock. Balderdash. There's much more to gritty than character death. It's an atmosphere, a feeling. It's a world without black or white, but instead a million shades of gray. Where demons abound and even the angel's halos are bent, tarnished, and balanced precariously on tamped down horns. A world where true sunlight rarely sees the dirty streets. Streets that even the nearly ubiquitous rain can't wash clean.
|
|