Saelune said:
Tension is overrated. Most movies, most games, you know the heroes win.
Movies: yes, games: you can still lose. I'll touch more on that in a bit.
Its fine if people have different preferences, but there is too much subjectivity in what people find fun. Im interested in everyone's idea of it, but I feel its too often presented as the "correct way" and its off putting.
Before going on, let me just clarify something real quick: your topic asked how other table-top gamers approach player-characters dying. So that's what I did: tell you how I approach death in games, everything else has just been my justification/reasoning behind it. I'm not trying to assert that this is how things should be done and if you're not doing it this way then you're doing it wrong.
And my players like combat. Sure, I myself could go an entire campaign with no combat, and even sometimes prefer to have smaller fights be verbally roleplayed than rolled and moved on a board but they want their fights, and I accommodate that. There is value in how you succeed as much as if you do at all too. I and alot of others prefer to reload a battle in Fire Emblem if even a single person dies. Some people think it nullifies the point of the game, but really it adds a new layer of challenge.
And I'd disagree with you on the notion of "it adds a layer of challenge". All you're doing is hitting the reset button on RNG until the story comes out the way you want it. I'd argue real challenge is moving forward knowing that your badass just died. I'd go so far as to say that you could get the same value out of just waiting for someone to post a plot synopsis and reading that rather than spending money on a game which you seem to be treating as a visual novel with combat mini-games.
Again, though, don't take this as me telling you that you're doing it wrong. I'm just explaining the reasoning behind my point of view. You do you, whatever makes the games you play (video game or table top) more enjoyable, then by all means: go with that.
Plus I mean, what about fight anime? There is little tension in if they will win, but people like the spectacle of how.
Again, though: anime, movies, books...these are all non-interactive activities. The heroes always win because that's a demand of the story, tension is built in a different way because the person experiencing the story is just along for the ride. In games, however, there is a second layer of tension: the tension that comes with possible failure. Not only do you have the story building tension as it would in an anime or movie, but there's also the possibility that you'll screw things up yourself.
On that note, I'd disagree with your notion of "there's as much value in how you succeed as there is in whether or not you succeed at all." If you can't fail to begin with, then the means to your ends make little difference. It doesn't matter how your players killed the giant ogre Gorthok, the Mountain Crusher because in the end they're going to do it anyways. Did your Pegasus rider hit him with a fireball or a REALLY BIG fireball? Who cares: he's still dead. Did your dark hentai tentacle summoner rip him limb from limb or just manage to choke him out? Doesn't really matter, the heroes were going to win anyways. Did your climber-dropper manage to crush the ogre's skull or did he just bounce off his shoulder? Not important, the fight's going to be won regardless.
My over-all point is that if you ask me, per your tastes as you've described them: I'd say you shouldn't be bothering with dice and what-not at all. Just take it in turns to tell your part of a story, because that's all you seem to be interested in doing. Which once more brings me to the overall point of my perspective:
RJ 17 said:
In games: there's always a chance that you'll lose. In stories: the heroes always win.
...seriously though, if you reset Fire Emblem every time someone dies then you're doing it wrong.