10-14-2018, 12:51 AM | #61 | |
Join Date: Mar 2014
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
|
|
10-14-2018, 05:23 AM | #62 | ||||||||
Forum Pervert
(If you have to ask . . .) Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere high up.
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
Being cheeky doesn't lend any credence to your point. It just comes across as struggling to make your point valid. Putting "plays chess at skill 15" is less a "stat" and more a "this is one of the few things that a player might be able to deal with." It can also mean "will sometimes let someone beat them at chess, to give them a false sense of security," and I would specifically call that out in the notes with a statement like: "Plays chess at skill 14. If they lose, they allowed the opponent to win to give them encouragement. The next time they play, the skill will increase, cumulatively, by one." Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Dice don't generate drama, they introduce randomness. It is not important for the party to succeed at all endeavors. Failures can move the story in unexpected, interesting directions. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It certainly is easier to figure the results of a contest of strength if there are numbers, but, you're assuming it's a contest. If there's any reason that the party should be able to succeed, then numbers are relevant, but when it's not in the realm of the possible, why waste your time? It's obvious that your mind doesn't work in a way that allows you to run a game without detailed statistics for everything. That's fine. However, that's just you. Not all of us are limited in that way. It doesn't mean your way is better than ours. It isn't. It's just different. Sure, it may be better for you, but it isn't better for everyone. Or, as is evidenced from the thread, pretty much anyone who isn't you. And maybe Anthony. But, he's always hard to read. |
||||||||
10-14-2018, 06:07 AM | #63 |
Join Date: Feb 2016
|
Re: Killing PCs
I generally stat out anything that makes an appearance in a campaign. If a 2,000 CP Demon Lord is going to show up, then it is going to have a stat sheet.
|
10-14-2018, 07:50 AM | #64 | |||||
Join Date: Mar 2014
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
Quote:
Of course it is easier to simply state some vauge fact about the character, but you pay for that in ambiguity, which is part of why I said having stats is better. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have already said that it can make sense not to give every character full stats due to time constraints, so it seems you are just adressing a straw man here when you speculate about what I need to run games. |
|||||
10-14-2018, 10:24 AM | #65 | |
Join Date: Jun 2013
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
As a general rule of thumb, fully statted-out character sheets only matter when points matter, such as for PC's and their Allies/Enemies/etc. Some GM's - like AlexanderHowl, based off his posts - favor building all (or at least all important) characters/creatures on a set number of points, of course. Outside of that, how detailed the "character sheet" needs to be depends on the GM's preferred play style, as well as the role of the character. Directly-confronted adversaries, and allies who make a lot of rolls, need to be closer to fully statted-out, although they can be fairly simplistic. Plot devices really don't need to be anything close to fully statted-out, but some GM's are going to favor more detail than is necessary for other GM's. ... As to the original topic of the thread, the longest-running campaign I ever GM'd, back in That Other Game, had two instances of character death... which I cheated and reversed. The first was a poorly-planned encounter on my part, which also showed one of the failings of relying on DnD's CR system to create encounters. I threw the party up against a group of Shocker Lizards who were, all together, of a CR just a level below the level of the characters. I think I had 8 lizards, which implies level 6 characters, which in turn sounds about right. The lizards managed to sneak up on the characters and blast them with their Lethal Shock... which I discovered to my horror did enough damage to kill every character who failed a Reflex save, and left the rest horribly injured. The text also implied that each lizard could initiate the shock itself. I quickly decided the ability automatically used up the turns of every lizard (not just the one who initiated, or even the 6 involved, but all 8) and was only usable once a day, and I also lied through my teeth about the amount of damage it dealt, calibrating it so the weakest character (or, rather, the character that took the highest damage relative to their HP, after considering the results of the Reflex save) was reduced to single digits. I let the players know what had happened after the fact, and resolved to make certain I checked for things like that in the future before throwing such an encounter at them again. The second instance happened later in the same campaign. Common courtesy at our table was that, when you're really low on HP, you let everyone at the table know that (it's technically metagaming, but not damagingly so). One character got reduced below 0 during a fight, but the rest managed to defeat the enemy. The player never let anyone know how far below 0 he was, so when the last surviving enemy fled, I had the NPC who was helping them (and was set to eventually become the Big Bad, but the campaign ended long before then) pursue. The player then cheerily informed us that his character was dead, as he had failed his last roll to stabilize and reached -10 HP. As it was out of character for the NPC to pursue an enemy when his friend was that close to death, I rewound the clock and had him render aid and stabilize the character instead, allowing the enemy to escape. Were I to run into similar situations in the future, I'd do the same thing again with the lizards (TPK shouldn't be the result of poor planning by the GM), but I'd let the silent player's character die. Granted, I think I'd be better about not having my NPC's metagame (his friend was down and bleeding, he would have probably at least checked on him before pursuing instead of assuming the character was far enough from -10, as the player hadn't warned anyone otherwise), which would have avoided the whole issue.
__________________
GURPS Overhaul |
|
10-14-2018, 11:46 AM | #66 | |||||||
Forum Pervert
(If you have to ask . . .) Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Somewhere high up.
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
The one time I made a claim about my method being "better" than your method was in direct response to your argument "In some works of fiction, they blatantly change depending on the direction the author wants the plot to go at the time, to the detriment of the quality of the work." In that case, it is better to have comprehensive notes than to have stats, as the notes will give you a framework for what the character has done in the past and what they could, potentially do in the future. Stats indicate that it is possible for the character to have failed the roll previously, and their abilities might actually fluctuate depending on the roll of the dice. This is why many shows and comic series have production bibles and not detailed character sheets from a variety of RPGs. For RPGs, the two methods are simply different. You are making the claim, and if you want that claim to be taken seriously, you must prove your point. You keep making claims which I debunk. You attempt to claim victory when the opposing side articulates that you are free to do what you want. I clearly stated "If you feel that it needs a skill level, then go for it." Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'm addressing the way you posit the need for full stats. |
|||||||
10-14-2018, 12:35 PM | #67 |
Join Date: Jan 2011
|
Re: Killing PCs
RE: Killing PCs. Honestly, in 25 years of GMing, I can honestly say I've never deliberately set out to kill a PC, and it rarely happens in my games for the same reason that the star of the movie rarely dies; it's just a lot more fun if the heroes survive the threat through luck, skill, and a bit of BS, then tell the tale at the tavern/bar/water cooler afterward. The point is to tell a great story with interactive protagonists, not toss everyone in a meat grinder just because the GM can. On the other hand, if someone is leaving the group, or wants to change characters, then absolutely you can and should sketch out an "exit scene" as much as possible [within constraints of the dice inevitably making things go pear-shaped, of course].
RE: Stats vs. No Stats. Stats matter if you are requiring the NPC to compete with the PCs. I don't stat the bartender who might talk to them in passing, because they aren't likely to fight her. I don't stat the disembodied voice that haunts them, because they can't affect it - it's just a plot point. But if there is a thug to fight, or a ghost to banish, or a demigod to haggle with, and the PCs skills are to mean anything, then the NPC needs stats, even if it's just a "Monster" style crib sheet. If you aren't going to use stats and skills, why play GURPS, a stat- and skill-oriented game? What do you do in the even that one of your PCs is a super-skillful Action Movie attorney? Tell them, "Don't bother rolling, you can't win"? I'm not a fan of "you can't influence this situation, because GM Ex Machina says the NPC is unbeatable", if only because it makes a lot of players want to prove you wrong, which derails the story. And if the "Ultimate Law Skill" isn't going to come up in the game, why bother including it at all? It just sets a bad precedent, and sucks all the fun out of the game, because why even bother trying to deal with something you can't ever have a hope of defeating/foiling, because the GM says you can't? Last edited by Purple Snit; 10-14-2018 at 12:39 PM. |
10-14-2018, 12:55 PM | #68 | ||
Join Date: Mar 2014
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
No, that is not a straw man. In order for it to be a straw man, it would have to be a missrepresentation of your previous claims in the discussion. As far as I know, you had not made the claim that margin of victory doesn't matter for plot devices. It is also not something that is an obvious property of plot devices. Thus it is not a straw man. Quote:
etc. |
||
10-14-2018, 02:29 PM | #69 | |
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: On the road again...
|
Re: Killing PCs
Quote:
As an example: In D&D 3.5, their Planescape book gave the Lady of Pain (basically a plot device for keeping the gods out of the central city, Sigil) stats. At a convention, a table of power gamers made epic-level characters designed to defeat and destroy her. They succeeded because the GM was going "by RAW", which meant going by her stats. The PCs basically decided to go up and defeat "God", and won because they gave God stats. I've met dozens of players that are "if it has stats, I know how to counter those stats and kill it." Half of them are able to back that up. This is why for the high-level plot device characters (like Death!) I don't give them stats. Someone somewhere will decide "removing Death from the world/universe will be a good thing", and if Death has stats they will try and half the time succeed! If Death doesn't have stats, then the GM is free to say "okay, you killed a physical manifestation, but Death still lives" when the PCs try the stunt.
__________________
"Life ... is an Oreo cookie." - J'onn J'onzz, 1991 "But mom, I don't wanna go back in the dungeon!" The GURPS Marvel Universe Reboot Project A-G, H-R, and S-Z, and its not-a-wiki-really web adaptation. Ranoc, a Muskets-and-Magery Renaissance Fantasy Setting |
|
10-14-2018, 04:51 PM | #70 |
Join Date: Jan 2017
|
Re: Killing PCs
If Death is required of Life, is it really possible for Death to die?
|
|
|