In message <8k5a33pjnoskkp9bch8g0v48nc61adqclj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Ed Chauvin IV <edcfour@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Mere moments before death, Peter Knutsen <peter@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> hastily scrawled:
>
> >gleichman wrote:
> >> "Ben Finney" <bignose+hates-spam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>If "PC death" means "PC is removed from the game", that's something
> >>>that should only ever happen when it's appropriate to the fun you're
> >>>trying to have, not something that should be left to the throw of the
> >>>dice.
> >>
> >> It can be fun to leave it to the throw of the dice.
> >
> >Yes. Not only that, but I find it *intensely* un-fun when the decision,
> >about whether a PC shall live or die, is made by a metagame entity.
>
> Such decisions are *always* made by a metagame entity. You always
> make a choice to play at a given level of script immunity, whether
> it's through system choice or pure DM fiat doesn't matter. You can
> hide the decision behind layers of game mechanics, but it is always
> made by the players and not the game.
The nice thing about leaving it to a die mechanic, though, is that it
tells
all players ahead of time exactly how likely a death is under given
circumstances. You can even calculate the probability. Leaving it to the
'whim' of a GM means you don't know for sure until it happens, even if
that
GM is a paragon of consistency.
Having to rely on the GM in this way was one of the things that put me off
diceless Amber. To reuse a famous phrase of Douglas Adams', when it comes
to
character deaths, I want 'rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty.'
--
Simon Smith
When emailing me, please use my preferred email address, which is on my
web
site at http://www.simon-smith.org
|
