Page 1 of 2

Invincible Players

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:56 pm
by Ruffnut
As me and Lorian hate losing our characters (only though nerf resets so far) as we build epics around them in our spare time. We instead of killing them just make them lose items and a lot of skill and luck. Anybody else do this? We have voted.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 4:57 pm
by Ruffnut
Me and lorian will vote

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 6:06 pm
by shintokamikaze
My players are pretty weak, so no need yet, but it is a good plan for the future :lol:

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:49 pm
by Nuvole!
I run a campaign heavily inspired by Galaxy Express 999 saga and, while there were no major objects to lose, I reduced permanently one point of LUCK when the outcome was negative and the characters should have died or be lost.
After all, the objectinve of the campaign was to reach Promethium with 12 of LUCK to undergo the transformation.

In most other campaigns, however, I'm ruthless but in Galaxy Express 999 you can't really replace the characters without messing up completely the storyline.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2016 8:57 am
by Ruffnut
I like to build epics around the players

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:21 am
by dcpchamber
I'm also tended to build epic campaigns around players. After all, I don't mind much a player having a high skill, you can always drop their SKILL values with critical hits. In one adventure, 4 average orcs killed two powerfull players, all because of the multiple oponent rules and some really lucky criticals

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:52 am
by Bronn
I voted 'no.'

As a player, I feel less invested in my character if survival is assured. As a GM, I like to see my players sweat when faced with tough odds. Risk of death lends choices weight, and far greater impact, if overcome. If anything, I like to increase the peril of Titan, with starting characters having fewer points to spend and experience points few and far between.

Also, it wouldn't feel like FF if random and ignominious death wasn't on the cards. Childhood lessons at Jackson and Livingstone's knee endure.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 4:05 pm
by Ruffnut
Bronn wrote:I voted 'no.'

As a player, I feel less invested in my character if survival is assured. As a GM, I like to see my players sweat when faced with tough odds. Risk of death lends choices weight, and far greater impact, if overcome. If anything, I like to increase the peril of Titan, with starting characters having fewer points to spend and experience points few and far between.

Also, it wouldn't feel like FF if random and ignominious death wasn't on the cards. Childhood lessons at Jackson and Livingstone's knee endure.
What if you planned a quest based around a hero and he/she dies at the start?

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:57 pm
by Eddie
Ruffnut wrote:
What if you planned a quest based around a hero and he/she dies at the start?
in reality the answer to that is "Don't"
it is a mistake I and, probably, many other if not all GM's/DM's have made in the past.

there should always be other ways to continue the story on.
after all, in a similar vein, what if the player decides after a while they don't like the character and want to create a new one?

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 8:58 pm
by Ruffnut
Let them. You can't build epics around character that will die sooner or later I think it is stupid to kill them off, unless it is temporary.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:04 pm
by Eddie
how is the situation different though?
I mean "I built a vast epic around John's character and then he randomly died due to bad luck (actually bad player choices) but I will save them to continue my story"

is surely the same as "I built a vast epic around John's character but now he has decided he wants to make a new character so I will not be able to continue my story"?

I mean in the first instance maybe John can just "re-skin" his character: okay so he has been an ex-soldier but you don't find the combat all that fun and would rather play a wizard or priest, how about your character is still from the army but was the squad mage or priest?
we can re-write history so this is always how he has been, you keep the character and the story continues.

but in the alternative view he no longer wants to play a human combat character, yearns to play a goblin stealthy type who avoids combat wherever possible: the "re-writing history option" is just not here and the epic has been lost anyway.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:07 pm
by Eddie
in relation to the question I have voted No.

I dislike random deaths for no purpose, although it does reinforce the FF world, I would never have a "an orc archer shoots you and you die" moment like the books!!

characters acting according to their behaviour in a way they know will kill them should in fact kill them.
characters making bad decisions should have bad consequences, one of which could be death.

but capture by orcs or goblins should lead to slavery with a chance to escape possibly, same as many of the evil races as they all seem to keep slaves.
I doubt a wizard or sorcerer would be kept though as they'd be too dangerous and, maybe, a priest too (unless they can hide their abilities through RP etc.)

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:27 pm
by Ruffnut
I would make it so instead of death they are captured and then new character will soon (hopefully) free them so then the heroes choose who they continue as.

Checkmate.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:11 pm
by Bronn
Ruffnut wrote:
Bronn wrote:I voted 'no.'

As a player, I feel less invested in my character if survival is assured. As a GM, I like to see my players sweat when faced with tough odds. Risk of death lends choices weight, and far greater impact, if overcome. If anything, I like to increase the peril of Titan, with starting characters having fewer points to spend and experience points few and far between.

Also, it wouldn't feel like FF if random and ignominious death wasn't on the cards. Childhood lessons at Jackson and Livingstone's knee endure.
What if you planned a quest based around a hero and he/she dies at the start?
I don't plan adventures around particular characters. The world exists independently of them, full of conflict, cataclysm and intrigue. Situations will resolve for better or worse without hero involvement. If they do get involved they have a chance of imposing their will upon the world, but it won't be easy. They may fail. They may die. That's the risk, and a big part of the fun.

Re: Invincible Players

Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 4:19 pm
by Ruffnut
Bronn wrote:
Ruffnut wrote:
Bronn wrote:I voted 'no.'

As a player, I feel less invested in my character if survival is assured. As a GM, I like to see my players sweat when faced with tough odds. Risk of death lends choices weight, and far greater impact, if overcome. If anything, I like to increase the peril of Titan, with starting characters having fewer points to spend and experience points few and far between.

Also, it wouldn't feel like FF if random and ignominious death wasn't on the cards. Childhood lessons at Jackson and Livingstone's knee endure.
What if you planned a quest based around a hero and he/she dies at the start?
I don't plan adventures around particular characters. The world exists independently of them, full of conflict, cataclysm and intrigue. Situations will resolve for better or worse without hero involvement. If they do get involved they have a chance of imposing their will upon the world, but it won't be easy. They may fail. They may die. That's the risk, and a big part of the fun.
I would make it so instead of death they are captured and then new character will soon (hopefully) free them so then the heroes choose who they continue as.