character death frequency

[flykiller]

the player has attempted some daring feat of heroism, but has failed a task roll. the logical outcome is death. or an opposing non-player-character has rolled a killing shot against a player character. the logical outcome is death.

how often does the character receive the full consequence of such a result? how often does the character die?

 

[atpollard]

As often as they SHOULD.

 

[Condottiere]

Characters should go out with a bang, not a whimper, unless that's how the player wants to end it, though Traveller tends to lack that epicness.

Go to commercial, and give the rest of the group a toilet break, while the dungeon master discusses the issue with the player, and his wishes.

The alternative could be knocked out for the rest of the scenario, and medical science not quite up to the task of keeping his attributes at the current level.

 

[Enoki]

Sometimes. The circumstances should usually be the player has put the character in a position where death is likely. That falls on the player. It should be rare that the referee be the one, out of the blue, to kill a character. "Oh, too bad, you failed that roll by one and you're dead..." That doesn't usually go over well in a game.

I, for one, like to try and leave players an "out." That is, a way out of a bad situation. It may not be obvious, and usually isn't, but it's there and if you think for a minute about what you're being told you'll see it. But, all-too-often our hero charges off in a blaze of glory instead...

 

[LeperColony]

A lot will depend on the tone of your campaign, but in general I feel that the risk/reward scale should be something reasonably discernible at the time the action is contemplated. There's an example I like to use from one of my own character deaths.

We were playing a Living Campaign module for Legend of the Five Rings, a Japanese inspired fantasy setting. Every other fire-based effect we'd encountered, including magical fire, caused in the neighborhood of 2-3 D10 damage, which is an entirely survivable amount for a healthy character.

I had the opportunity to run through a burning doorway to achieve an objective, so I did. Without any indication that the fire damage in this case would be much more severe (6D10, as it happens). Naturally, I was a little surprised to discover I was incinerated on contact, and thought the GM should have given me a little warning like "as you approach the door, the intense heat of the flames sears the air and makes breathing difficult."

The idea is that an expectation had been formed from previous play. If something is going to deviate from that expectation, I feel the characters deserve the opportunity to understand and evaluate the risk. If you make it clear the risk is high, and they go ahead anyway, then they deserve what they get!

 

[flykiller]

If you make it clear the risk is high, and they go ahead anyway, then they deserve what they get!

star wars armored imperial storm troopers are famous for always dying when hit, even when hit with arrows. but when leia is hit with a rifle "blaster", she reports that "it's not bad".

how about losing a character in combat due to a good shot by an opposing npc soldier/policeman/hitman/whatever? "oh, hey, you're dead."?

If something is going to deviate from that expectation, I feel the characters deserve the opportunity to understand and evaluate the risk.

would you give an npc that opportunity?

 

[atpollard]

would you give an npc that opportunity?

Is that a reasonable question?
I mean, the Player might think that the 'NPC with a pistol' has another 9mm pistol because the Referee didn't mention that the NPC has a 10 gauge Houdah Pistol for killing tigers.

Will the Referee playing the npc not realize that the PC had a sawed off shotgun rather than a 9mm when he drew his pistol?

 

[whartung]

star wars armored imperial storm troopers are famous for always dying when hit, even when hit with arrows. but when leia is hit with a rifle "blaster", she reports that "it's not bad".

And thus the term "cinematic" describing those.

A great Don Martin comic ((in)famous cartoonist from Mad Magazine).

Two cowboys, horde of Indians attacking the wagon, both fire their rifles. Next panel, Indians and horses dropping like flies en masse. Final panel, cowboy #2 says "Darn, missed!"

I watch the LoTR movies, and it reminds me distinctly of a high level D&D character against masses of low level rabble. The system just enabled the Hero to hewn down hordes of creatures like wheat.

Thats what those heroes did in LoTR, with moments of plot complication when appropriate.

 

[pendragonman]

star wars armored imperial storm troopers are famous for always dying when hit, even when hit with arrows. but when leia is hit with a rifle "blaster", she reports that "it's not bad".

Actually, Star Wars doesn't ever detail that the Troopers are dead when hit with a blaster, they are just down. Could be wounded, but we never get a post combat view from the Imperial side so we don't ever find out.

Further blasters are "clumsy and random"

 

[flykiller]

Star Wars doesn't ever detail that the Troopers are dead when hit with a blaster

well I meant it to illustrate the issue. npc's fall left and right, but how often do player characters, who should die, die?

 

[OossraKuuma]

"...Who should die, die?"
I really think that if the player put himself in a situation like that he should die for been there. But yeah... sometimes the character will be lucky and get out of a certain death situation only because of luck or some krazy brilhant idea.

 

[Ackehece]

Logic consequences for illogical actions. If they run in front of the VRF gauss canon and bait the enemy gunner. They are dead.
If they should die for their action logically, logically that is what happens.
otoh, if they do something properly and in a logical manner and botch rolls on top of botch rolls on top of botch rolls (insanely bad luck that is truly improbable) related to that roll should kill them, they usually will live.

 

[Enoki]

All I can tell you is if you're wearing a red jersey, you haven't got long to live... :rofl:

 

[LeperColony]

I think it very much depends on the tone of the game.

Do you run a high flying, cinematic, Hong Kong Action Movie style game? Then PCs shouldn't die very often, despite frequently encountering excessive violence.

Is your game a TNE version of The Day After? Then probably everyone should die, maybe more than once.

No two groups are going to play the same setting or even the same rules set in the same way. Once the tenor of the game has been established, players can form reasonable expectations that provide a baseline to estimate risk of a given action.

To me, it's irrelevant whether Stormtroopers are blind and incompetent blunderers who always miss, or lethal dead eye killers. It's more that the players need to know which one they are, so that when they're contemplating stealing the Death Star plans, they understand what they're up against.

 

[mike wightman]

Game of Thrones effect - my players now know there is no such thing as plot armour, especially since I now have them generate a couple of NPCs who could replace their "main".

 

[Condottiere]

You can always keep a couple of clones on ice, but most players tend to prefer keeping the original, if not in pristine condition, at least fairly minty.

 

[Timerover51]

You can always keep a couple of clones on ice, but most players tend to prefer keeping the original, if not in pristine condition, at least fairly minty.

Unless the clones have a telepathic link to the active character, how is having clones going to be of any benefit? Also, precisely how are they going to have the same skills and training as the character?

 

[mike wightman]

You record the original personality at regular intervals. The clone brain is overwritten with the most recent personality backup.
Your clone now thinks it is the original.
It isn't.

Note that this tech is in T5.

 

[Leitz]

I've been in games now and again where my character will step up into expected death. It's heroic, even if there's a reasonable way out. I usually have a chance to let the DM know that I understand the risks.

I play characters for years at a time. I work hard to build a story and generally work try to help the DM enjoy the game as much as I do. A character dying just because of a dice roll is a bad story, to me. A character dying because they took the fire some others could live, well, that's a story. A character being near death but merely out of action for weeks while high tech medicine does it's thing, that's fine too.

 

[DanDare]

Player characters live charmed lives compared to NPCs, they are the story protagonists and fate is with them. However the players play a aeries of episodes with their characters, knowingly taking risks. If those risks never pan out as character death when taking then the players learn there is no risk. Excitement is dulled and player agency is lessened.

When players face deadly risks I usually favour severe set back as the highest likelyhood. If death is selected by fate I will give a character a chance to convert it to a meaningful success despite loss of character. "You have been mortally wounded. You know you will die in seconds. What do you do?" "I'll press the self destruct button."

My players have experienced some truly legendary deaths over the years, and a small number of ignominious ones.