Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > The Fantasy Trip > The Fantasy Trip: House Rules

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-03-2018, 02:00 PM   #1
ecz
 
ecz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default re-joining the party after a death

the rules do not cover how to handle the death of a PC in a group where all adventurers are already seasoned heroes.

It seems unfair and not funny if the new PC re-borns as a 32 points ordinary starting hero. This new PC could be too weak if compared to his colleagues adventurers possibly with an average of 38-40 points or even more.

So we decided that who (re)joins an already existing party starts his/her new hero at the level of the lower active PC in the group furtherly decreased by one.

So if for example Carsten dies and Gino -the player- creates a new hero to rejoin the group including Zev (40 points) Evah (37 points) and Ricov (36 points), Gino's new PC will have 35 points.


Of course the level of the dead hero works as a cap for the new one ( to avoid that the newborn hero have more points of the hero just deceased changing the unfortunate event in a lucky one). If Carsten had 34 points, the new PC taking his place cannot exceed that number.

This is the most easy and fair house rule I have adopted, largely appreciated by the players.

Opinions?
__________________
VASLeague Tournament Director
www.vasleague.org
ecz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 02:27 PM   #2
Rick_Smith
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Coquitlam B.C.
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecz View Post
the rules do not cover how to handle the death of a PC in a group where all adventurers are already seasoned heroes.

It seems unfair and not funny if the new PC re-borns as a 32 points ordinary starting hero. This new PC could be too weak if compared to his colleagues adventurers possibly with an average of 38-40 points or even more. ...

Opinions?
Hi ecz,
Back in my killer GM days, I started out saying, "Tough! you start at 32 attributes!"

Eventually I went to, "You start at 34 attributes."

Then I tried, "You start at half of your attribute gains." So if you were a 42 attribute figure, (10 new attributes), you started with 32+5 attributes. I played that for a long time. However, as my campaign gradually because less dangerous, and attribute bloat turned into a problem, this turned into...

"Tough! You start at 32 attributes!"

In practice, the other PC's protect the new player, and the threats are more dangerous for the new guy so he gets experience (XP) at a faster rate than the others. (A ho-hum encounter which is worth 10 XP for the main players I might give out 35 XP for the new guy. So they close the gap to 4 or 5 attributes behind the rest of the party fairly fast.

Warm regards, Rick.
Rick_Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 02:42 PM   #3
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecz View Post
It seems unfair and not funny if the new PC re-borns as a 32 points ordinary starting hero. This new PC could be too weak if compared to his colleagues adventurers possibly with an average of 38-40 points or even more.

So we decided that who (re)joins an already existing party starts his/her new hero at the level of the lower active PC in the group furtherly decreased by one.
I advance all the PCs at exactly the same rate. Rewards for story things, like what some people might put under "good role playing" benefit the whole group.

So that's what I recommend, which would mean starting new PCs at the same place everyone else is.
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 04:48 PM   #4
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Above all, I tend to like my campaign games to be self-consistent, and dynamic. I want what happens during play to determine the situation in play, and I want play to be able to go in unpredictable directions.

Part of this has me want players to need to earn positive outcomes such as wealth, good fame, and character improvement, and I want there to be major negative outcomes for them to avoid, and one of the worst of those is dying.

I want the PCs to be able to be die, and for that to have the full natural consequences. The character dies and probably stays dead. Maybe possibly sometimes on gets revived... and loses 5 attributes. I do not want the fact a PC died to result in some meta restoration of the party, except in ways that are entirely natural in the game world. I do not want the player to get to start at the experience level of the dead character.

What we used to do, is start all new characters as beginning characters, and/or let players whose PCs died start playing an NPC who is already an ally of the party and is already nearby. We tended to have many NPCs along with our parties, so this was a natural resource to use. We would also sometimes do that when one of the PCs was merely so injured they needed to rest, but healthy PCs wanted to continue adventuring. If the player then wanted to start a new character, they could introduce them when it made sense for a new person to meet the party. The party was under no responsibility to welcome or trust them, however, but usually that was not an issue.

I don't remember doing it in TFT back in the day, but what I might now do is have play continue (with the player taking one of the already-present NPCs, or not) and then when the party next has occasion to add more members or followers, let them play that out somewhat generically, and when they do add someone, let the PC-less player detail a character to fill that role. The point level could then be appropriate to the person joining the party, and might then logically be more than 32 points.

The "lowest PC minus one point" guideline seems fairly reasonable for that, but I don't want players to feel entitled to start a replacement character at a certain point level.

I think it's generally a lot of fun to start new people at 32 points anyway, though. A loyal well-played 32-point character doesn't need to be entirely overshadowed even by 40-point allies.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 05:27 PM   #5
ecz
 
ecz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post

(...)

What we used to do, is (...) let players whose PCs died start playing an NPC who is already an ally of the party and is already nearby. We tended to have many NPCs along with our parties, so this was a natural resource to use. We would also sometimes do that when one of the PCs was merely so injured they needed to rest, but healthy PCs wanted to continue adventuring. If the player then wanted to start a new character, they could introduce them when it made sense for a new person to meet the party. The party was under no responsibility to welcome or trust them, however, but usually that was not an issue.

(...)
The "lowest PC minus one point" guideline seems fairly reasonable for that, but I don't want players to feel entitled to start a replacement character at a certain point level.

I think it's generally a lot of fun to start new people at 32 points anyway, though. A loyal well-played 32-point character doesn't need to be entirely overshadowed even by 40-point allies.
The idea of a group of NPC in/around the party to change in a new PCs as necessary is very good. We did this once, when a player openly requested to take the role of a close friend of the group.
But I would leave this possibility only upon a specific request.

About the fact that it is generally a lot of fun play a 32 points hero from start I agree.
In fact in my games players were always free to decide if restart from 32 or use the house rule I mentioned.
But nobody decided to restart from 32 if he had the chance to start with a few more points.

Also I'm not sure that a 32 points hero can happily stay in a group with people with 6/8 more points of average.

The weak PCs tend to gain less exp for combat, that - in my games - is where most exp comes from.

Besides young heroes tend to die more often than the though -seasoned colleagues, at least in my games. I realize that depends on the playing style, however.

Finally an asimmetrical party can create more problems to the GM for the balance of the adventures and the things he puts into .

For example if the players at a certain moment must climb a wall while a pack of dire wolves is running behid them, a 4d/DX for non climbers will probably kill the 32 points hero, while the 40+ points adventurers should be able to clear the obstacle.

As GM then I must think in advance a B plan to let to everyone the same fair chance to survive. ( in our example any player could notice with a 4d/IQ a different escape path not requiring the hard DX saving roll, like a big three that everyone can climb rolling 2d/DX). The 32 points PC could go there while his friends go for the wall. They will quietly target the wolves with bows and crossbows once they are in safe in a higher position.
__________________
VASLeague Tournament Director
www.vasleague.org
ecz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 05:35 PM   #6
David L Pulver
AlienAbductee
 
David L Pulver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: In the UFO
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

TFT "as written" tends to kill characters far more than GURPS fantasy settings or D&D (for example) and also low-point characters aren't proportionately THAT much weaker to medium point ones, at least up to circa 38-40 points. So most parties were mixes of point totals, but it didn't really hurt. Having an 32-point character in a group of 38-pointers is much less unbalancing then, say, a 1st level character in a group of 5th level D&D characters.

One extra solution, though, is the classic "have the character leave a will to the next character" ("high, welcome my cousin/wife/son/whatever) so that his magic items and cash are transferred.

I also recommend running two characters per player, or at least alternating PCs, though. I can't think of any TFT campaign we ran with single player characters per player, but then again, my TFT group was only a couple of players at the time.
__________________
Is love like the bittersweet taste of marmalade on burnt toast?
David L Pulver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 05:53 PM   #7
JLV
 
JLV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Arizona
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecz View Post
the rules do not cover how to handle the death of a PC in a group where all adventurers are already seasoned heroes.

It seems unfair and not funny if the new PC re-borns as a 32 points ordinary starting hero. This new PC could be too weak if compared to his colleagues adventurers possibly with an average of 38-40 points or even more.

So we decided that who (re)joins an already existing party starts his/her new hero at the level of the lower active PC in the group furtherly decreased by one.

So if for example Carsten dies and Gino -the player- creates a new hero to rejoin the group including Zev (40 points) Evah (37 points) and Ricov (36 points), Gino's new PC will have 35 points.


Of course the level of the dead hero works as a cap for the new one ( to avoid that the newborn hero have more points of the hero just deceased changing the unfortunate event in a lucky one). If Carsten had 34 points, the new PC taking his place cannot exceed that number.

This is the most easy and fair house rule I have adopted, largely appreciated by the players.

Opinions?
I like your rule here, but I think you're going to have to change it radically under the new rules. XP will probably be a great deal more important than Attribute Points in the new version.
JLV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2018, 01:01 AM   #8
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecz View Post
...
Finally an asimmetrical party can create more problems to the GM for the balance of the adventures and the things he puts into .

For example if the players at a certain moment must climb a wall while a pack of dire wolves is running behid them, a 4d/DX for non climbers will probably kill the 32 points hero, while the 40+ points adventurers should be able to clear the obstacle.

As GM then I must think in advance a B plan to let to everyone the same fair chance to survive. ( in our example any player could notice with a 4d/IQ a different escape path not requiring the hard DX saving roll, like a big three that everyone can climb rolling 2d/DX). The 32 points PC could go there while his friends go for the wall. They will quietly target the wolves with bows and crossbows once they are in safe in a higher position.
I prefer not to balance things as if the universe should provide challenges balanced to the party's ability levels.

Rather, the situation and the players' choices lead to logical results. The more competent PCs, if they like their less experienced comrades, can take care not to get them into situations where they will die. This has been a consistent theme over the decades of play - what can you do to keep you and your comrades alive, so that they can go on to more adventures and become more capable and so on. But I think it's precious to keep that organic and in the hands of fate, circumstances, and effective play by the players.

It seems to me that having the game world ramp up undermines that and really isn't needed if the players take their responsibility for their PCs' (and NPC friends) seriously.


Oh, another notion too is having multiple characters per player. ITL briefly mentions this mode of play, which can be a bit tricky to handle and presents its own issues (a separate topic - I don't want to hijack this one), but if you're doing that, then it seems even clearer that a PC death is not something you'd need to bend the universe about.


And "oh" again, ecz mentioned it seemed unfair to have someone whose PC died start at 32, but it rather seems the opposite to me. That player built up a character through play, and then lost that character, so it seems entirely fair the experienced character would be dead and gone. Meanwhile, the characters who did not have their PCs die seem to me to entirely logically and rightly enjoy getting to have those characters be alive, and enjoy the benefits of whatever they gained during their successful play to that point. Any extra boons given to a replacement character to help them catch up to the players who kept their characters alive, by just giving them new characters who are experienced without playing to get that experience, would instead seem to me to be "unfair" to those players. It would also undermine the meaning of their successful (non-dying) play.

Last edited by Skarg; 08-04-2018 at 01:10 AM.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2018, 05:29 AM   #9
zot
 
Join Date: May 2018
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skarg View Post
And "oh" again, ecz mentioned it seemed unfair to have someone whose PC died start at 32, but it rather seems the opposite to me. That player built up a character through play, and then lost that character, so it seems entirely fair the experienced character would be dead and gone. Meanwhile, the characters who did not have their PCs die seem to me to entirely logically and rightly enjoy getting to have those characters be alive, and enjoy the benefits of whatever they gained during their successful play to that point. Any extra boons given to a replacement character to help them catch up to the players who kept their characters alive, by just giving them new characters who are experienced without playing to get that experience, would instead seem to me to be "unfair" to those players. It would also undermine the meaning of their successful (non-dying) play.
I respect this style of handling XP. It's just as valid as mine and a lot of people enjoy it, but I don't view XP as "earned" in any way whatsoever. I view XP as "story progression", as in:

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dramatic Voiceover
"Despite the fact that we spent no time in combat for several months, I was able to spend much of my free time honing my battle skills. There were things my master tried to teach me but which I had never understood until that intense practice during those months. I practiced by myself, against only shadows and imagination, looking back on my life and experience, and I was able to learn several crucial points which could not be taught by facing opponents but only through meditation, solitude, and rigorous training. Alone..."
So, from my point of view (story progression, not earning), a PC's starting XP, and also advancement, is "what makes sense" in that story and "what is the most fun" for all the players. Howard's ITL sidebar makes a good point: the job of a GM is, first and foremost, to be an entertainer.

If the players find building up from 32 points to be fun, and that's what they want to do, that's fine. If it's a drag and a grind for them when everyone else is playing 38-point characters with loads of talents, I'm happy with them making a character at the same level. These days, since everyone has the same XP anyway, it makes sense just to introduce a character with the same amount of XP.
zot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2018, 09:28 AM   #10
Skarg
 
Join Date: May 2015
Default Re: re-joining the party after a death

Interesting. Yes, every gamer is a bit different and many are very different in their tastes and ideas.

To me, the "reward" aspect is sort of secondary, but I wanted to mention it because I have the "fairness" idea opposite from how ecz wrote about it in the first post. And I write about it because I think it's interesting how we can be so opposite, and want to share my own perspectives.

More than "reward" for staying alive, I see it as one of the main natural goals of play, and one I enjoy in many types of games (also, for example, wargame campaigns). That is, I really like games that track a deadly situation with many characters (and/or military units) over time, where one of the main goal is to try to use tactics to keep your people alive, and they acquire experience, equipment, and injuries as a result of play.

In fact, I often add this as a self-applied goal to games that don't specifically emphasize it, but that have some sort of experience system.

It is sort of a reward of successful play to have the better experienced people, but the reason I don't want to (usually/automatically) get replacements that are at/near the same level is that it undermines the interesting & cause-&-effect aspect that the experience comes from actual play.

The high risk/danger and therefore high effort requirement that results in a non-maimed veteran increases my attachment to the characters and my sense that I've accomplished something and that those characters are very valuable things to be cherished and kept alive if I can manage to continue to do so. That's really compelling to me.

So if/when a game starts doing things like giving you replacements with experience on par with the characters I was trying to hard to keep alive, it tends to greatly undermine that effect and interest for me.

Also there is the aspect of near-zero consequences or even reward for dying. Browsing RPG threads for other games, a fairly common lament is the GM who gives out strong replacement characters, but has one or more players who don't care about their PCs and get them killed and then want their twin or a conveniently useful replacement of the same power level to magically happen to show up and join the party as soon as that happens.

Almost worse is when the game world automatically scales up the threat/experience level of everything I meet to match (or be slightly less than) whatever the PCs' experience level is - that's like a surreal nightmare to me.
Skarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.