- Aug 25, 2010
Archon, we've discussed difficulty curves in games, player willingness to accept character mortality and the attendant personality types of the play styles.Archon said:Is it too much to ask for D&D that plays like Conan, the Black Company or Game of Thrones, and not the Belgariad or Wheel of Time?
All I want is for my player characters to die of gangrenous infections when their hit points drop too low. Is that so much to ask?
I just wanted to point out this from a website I think you have mentioned:
http://arsludi.lamemage.com/index.php/78/grand-experiments-west-marches/West Marches said:The environment is dangerous. Very dangerous. That?s intentional, because as the great MUD Nexus teaches us, danger unites. PCs have to work together or they are going to get creamed. They also have to think and pick their battles ? since they can go anywhere, there is nothing stopping them from strolling into areas that will wipe them out. If they just strap on their swords and charge everything they see they are going to be rolling up new characters. Players learn to observe their environment and adapt ? when they find owlbear tracks in the woods they give the area a wide berth (at least until they gain a few levels). When they stumble into the lair of a terrifying hydra they retreat and round up a huge posse to hunt it down.
The PCs are weak but central: they are small fish in a dangerous world that they have to explore with caution, but because they are the only adventurers they never play second fiddle. Overshadowed by looming peaks and foreboding forests yes. Overshadowed by other characters, no.
Anyway, we've seen the principle of the first sentence there in several iterations, games and real life - and the PC's being small fish part of a larger world not dependent on them for it's story is something certain player "types" will love, and some - the kind of people who love , for example, the Wheel of time, or what MovieBob went on about in his superheroes-vampires-wizards "rant" - would probably NOT like.
If I may digress yet again, as many of these same posters have been in the other threads where I have mentioned this, I had a campaign that was becoming "epic political" where the PC's were party-wiped ( and it was their fault on top of bad luck ) - and yet chose to continue the campaign because they were more attached to the campaign than to their specific characters ( quite the opposite of the modern emphasis on near-unkillable characters)
Obviously, different types of players would or would not have tolerated or enjoyed that.
It's interesting to me that I had just mentioned in the previous response M-U npc's - we had one that was the daughter of minor nobility, had been involved with a party that had wiped, and ended up married to one of them.
all of the players continued as the children of their old characters a generation later ( it was a campaign with alot of non-combat event ) - the Lady in question had gone from NPC apprentice to non-adventuring "patron"( mother, in fact) NPC wizard, and was now a force in her own right...
bu tin the "rags to riches" RPG mold, most of the players could remember the previous campaign when they'd known her as the little "girl" they'd escorted who had to hidden behind a "wall" in encounters and might be there to identify magic items or such - at best - when the dust settled.