Some believe that Gary was an adversarial DM who reveled in killing PCs. This is not the case. Not only did he play as a player as much as he DMed, and hence knew how it felt on the other side of the screen. He also wanted his players to succeed. He did however believe that rewards earned by overcoming difficulty and real danger were much more meaningful, and not all encounters should be calibrated to be overcome. He also had no patience with players who were not cautious and did not think.
Oh all right: Do I enjoy killing PCs when I GM? A The answer is definitely not in the least, especially if they belong to regular players. There I do all I can to prevent such loss without directly intervening in players' actions for their characters. #2009
RPGs with long term viability do not generally contain rules that are meant to kill the characters. that should be a function of poor play, not the game. [37]
Many a PC has been killed in my campaign, but all those losses were because of very bad luck or like play. I have never set out to eliminate a PC in my campaign, only for special events at cons where the participants expect to have that happen. When a player is distraught about such a loss, I empathise strongly... #7842
Characters died all the time. That’s why Gary Gygax’s characters got names like Xagyg the wizard and Yrag the fighter, and other players contributed Melf the Elf, or (if I remember Mike’s anecdote correctly) Bellus of Telefono. It was the sixties and seventies. Life was cheap, and heroes died. [29]
I have indeed also devised very difficult challenges, singular or modular, for expert players, but never with the purpose of "killing" PCs. [11]
Simply put the GM is there to amuse and entertain the player group. Failure to do so is the worst thing a GM can do, If in so failing he also causes them to reject the game form, that is about as egregious a thing as can happen. That typically occurs when the GM becomes the antagonist of the players. [11]
A poor adventure is one that doesn't challenge the party of PCs, rather bores them or just is not enjoyable for the group. Totally silly material is also bad news. [11]
Tom Champeny's PC died at least 3 times; Ernie's NPC Sertan died once; we wiped out 17 of 20 adventurers in a debacle of indecision and bad planning all around when EGG and I co-Dmed an ill-fated adventure for as many visitors one day; James Ward's and Skip William's PCs "died the Death" (one of Jim's fave sayings, in fact) in my Dark Druids outdoor/beneath ground addie (1975), Robilar came close to death 4 times, I lost my Djinn and Efreet during those singular scrapes; Bob Burman died, Eric Shook lost 6 or 7 PCs in a row (mostly due to rashness, etc. as he was young), and there might be more. Lots of close calls, really close calls in a lot of cases. OH! And Ernie's 2nd PC, ERAC, died of starvation in the castle... [RJK, 42.3]
Adversarial DMing
From trying to make life hard on the players for their increased enjoyment it is only a small step to become adversarial, and that is a BAD THING, as it tends to kill the enjoyment of the game for the players, who also play this game to be heroes and triumph, not just to cower and run all the time. Even Gary fell into this trap, as can be seen by these comments:
As a designer and as a GM I have grown tired of having weak monsters and lavish treasure where the intent was to have potent monsters and skimpy loot. I assume that the GM using the published material will alter the fixed numbers given to suit his campaign style and his preferences as well as those of his players. #6277
By careful play--using thought, consideration, caution and daring in the proper mixture--they will solve the various problems and challenges posed by the dungeon. This, and cooperation among themselves, will assure them of successfully competing against the Dungeonmaster during their first adventure, although there are bound to be casualties... [19] (emphasis mine).
Real Danger and Challenge
Adventures lacking the sense of danger brought on by actual risk of character loss are not worthy of playing. Those that enjoy them are true munchkins regardless of time spent RPGing. Rather than bawl about my DMing they should be playing a children's boardgame...and cheating so as to assure a win. #8570
No challenge often meant no enjoyment, loss of interest in the campaign. That is why option 3 is the best, assuming the new material is created so as to make the adventures following very challenging, perilous, and filled with hair's-breadth successes. [11]
How I detest namby-pamby whiners that expect to play a real RPG without threat of character death or loss of a level, stat points, or even choice magic items! Without such possibilities, what it the purpose of play, a race to see which character can have the greatest level, highest stats, and largest horde [sic] of treasure? That is just too flaccid for words. #2300
Of course the lazy, greedy, and cowardly lot of PCs will do their best to make their adventure a cakewalk, but the GM is there to see the matter is dangerous and demanding [11]
Perhaps also a result of the developing contest between the GM and his players, the former devising more demanding encounters for his more sophisticated and experienced players whose PCs are more capable, eager to loot and pillage [11]
In his later home campaign and con sessions he ran in the orginal dungeon, he tried to help with the high mortality rate of first level characters by starting them on second and third level.
When I play OD&D I prefer to use the original little booklets, altering them with whatever seems right at the time, but not including thieves, I do give clerics a spell at 1st level usually, or else start that as 2nd level PCs. #892
Don't expect free wins
That isn't all bad...as is the current notion amongst players that every encounter they meet is defeatable, that their PCs won't meet an untimely end unless they are ready to think carefully...or have their team flee in haste #4680
I do indeed find over-powered and badly played PCs annoying, so if the player with such a character foolishly allows his PC to get into a situation where loss of potent magic itesm, levels, and/or life can occur, the dice are rolled in the open; whatever occurs from the result syands without and "judge fudge" to prevent it. #6586
Chance and Competence
If mere chance is the cause of the impending failure, I modify the situation to have the adversarial side be likewise blighted by ill fortune. If I over-powered the NPCs/monsters I do indeed reduce these capacities in some way so as to enable the party to succeed. [11]
In the case of sheer foolish play on the part of the players, I let the chips fall where they may [11]
Only the poor players or the exceptionally unlucky ones lose their PCs in my campaign games. Indeed, "poor" refers to the rash and/or unthinking. [11]
I am usually prone to giving regular players in a campaign I am running a break in regards to loss of their character, or a severe diminishment of that game persona due to level drain or similar loss. That does not apply to players with characters that I judge to have uwarranted levels, cocky ones that ignore warnings, those that play foolishly, or the magic items of any character whatsoever [11]
With my regular group there was seldom a PC loss...after they became veterans. (That applies to my own PCs as well, although a rew raise dead and wish spells were needed to maintain the major characters I played; as it true of the players' PCs in my campaign). Players that took foolish chances, ignored warnings, lacked the proper wherewithal to take on a problem or fight an opponent were likely to suffer PC loss. #6855
The whiners claiming my dungeons are "killer" are likely not very clever in their play. Perhaps they prefer play-acting to thinking and assuming an heroic persona bent on action and adventure. That all of the dungeons I designed were play-tested, and the play-test groups had a high survival rate gives the lie to assertions to the contrary. The only dungeon I designed to be nearly impossible to defeat was the Tomb of Horrors. Failure to survive the others stems from bad luck, or more probably, bad dungeoneering skills. #6764
I really hate to see players that are doing things well, thinking, having their PCs interact as a group, with the environment, lost their characters because of bad luck, sheer chance. I will do my best as the DM to see that does not happen, save to a PC that is better off eliminated, a new and better one then created to take his place. That is rare... #6576
What were some of the tactics that constituted "doing things well"?
Run from Danger
Groups not used to my DM style tend to lose many, if not all, their PCs because they don't have their characters flee when things are looking grim. "He who runs away lives to fight another day." #1250
Well, my regulars learned to say "Run away!" pretty quickly. Even the best came to a fatal situation with their main PCs now and again. That's what high level clerics and wish spells are for, of course. The compliment was returned when I played. Most of the regulars had several OCs, and the secondary and below ones were more expendable. Some were allowed to end their careers just to allow the creation of new low-level PCs for fresh approaches to like adventures. Seldom did I allow non-regulars to start above 2nd level. Regulars could start new PCs at 3rd or 4th level, as they clearly had experience to manage such characters. Personally, unless the group demanded a "jump-started character," I enjoyed playing a new PC from 1st level on. #254
Most of the players in my campaign, all of my own PCs, were never too proud to take to their heels when the opposition was clearly overwhelming. In fact, a good bit of thrilling adventure went into some of the ensuing chases. When Mordenkainen and Bigby met their fate at the hands of Rob's super iron golem, it was because they hadn't the means to escape quickly, not that they didn't wish to beat feet #5706
All of the sensible players in my campaign knew well the strategic retreat, and my own PCs were often winging their way away from danger. Quoting Monty Python was usual: "Run away! Run away!" #3887
Hire Help
In OD&D the 1st level PCs did do several things to help extend their chances--hire men-at-arms, use missile weapons (including flaming lamp oil, that is kerosene), and run away when things appeared to be too dangerous to stay and fight. #8048
My own PCs and those of a couple of others I DMed for were often followed by a train of henchmen, typically when the session involved only one or two players and the situation at hand was demanding. [11]
In another thread someone was wondering how 1st level PCs in the original game survived. Some responses mentioned the "run away" tactic--the one we commonly used. None I read, though, considered the hiring of mercenaries to assist in the encounters. All the early play groups I knew of, those in 1972 and on through 1974 surely did that so as to give their low-level PCs a better survival chance. It worked very well. #996
Hired men-at-arms or like follwers can be relatively inconsequential in loss, but never henchmen or associated NPCs. To a PC of strong Good alignment, any such loss should be lamentable. #4481
...especially when the number of actual PCs involved in the adventure is limited and the perils involved are great. In point of fact, having "flunkies" along in such missions is only common sense. The PCs involved pay for that by gaining fewer XPs in the adventure. #4461
Let me go back a bit to the approach of original D&D players. Most such initial players came from military miniatures gaming where commanding a force of warriors was the norm. It was a natural thing for a PC group to hire men-at-arms, form a mercenary company and adventure thus. As the background experience of the players became less wargame oriented, the focus of play shifted from the compamy to the core party of PCs. this was in a sense an evolution, the realization of the uniqueness of the RPG form apart from the military miniaturtes one. Designing adventure material for a party of PC is certainly easier than doing the same for a party plus mercenary forces. Thus modules assumed the former, and the concept of the adventuring company was further removed from the game. #1074
Be Cautious
Any non-chaotic PC party should exercise a good deal of caution, investigate and prepare, before setting forth to assail any potential foe, provided they are not in service to a leige lord that directs them to venture out immediately. Prudence is not an ethical trait, rather one of general understanding--intelligence and wisdom. #6168
In regards to the merits of difficult dungeons. Even if one loses one's PC therein, the enjoyment of relating the circumstances of that demise to a group of gamers that had similar experiences is well worth the loss IMO. I managed to get Yrag and several of his cohorts through a dungeon similar to Tsojcanth, one that Rob Kuntz created and DMed. I foolishly had the party seek out an orange area of the map I glimpsed, and the lot were nearly incinerated when I finally managed to stumble upon the sole means of ingress to the chamber. I quit that sort of fudging after that. Those that claim using various means of discovering deadly areas, flunkies, animals, even a 10' pole, is not "thinking" are certainly not themselves rational. It requires planning and thought to do that... #5661
Surely those that whine about my killer dungeons--other that Tomb of Horrors which is supposed to be just that--are inept players that failed to use caution and forethought when playing and this looked foolish as they lost their PCs. #8570
Be stealthy
When I DMed NPCs and monsters tended to stay where they were unless something drew their attention and brought them out. Thus, and of the options you note above might come into play. It was up to the PC team to manage. If they crept about and attacked with relative stealth, the adversaries would not act in concert. Likewise, they could bypass most of the opposition. The groups I DMed through the module tended to seek bypassing, although one very strong party made a point of wiping out all the enemy that they could find. #832
Keep moving
Fie upon the girlie-men that are averse to having encounters with random monsters! No wonder the current generation of RPGers die in droves when faced with real challenges in adventure scenarios :eek: A bunnch of coddled PC wimps expecting to power-game over everything. #3695
Whenever time passed, players were dilatory in acting for their PCs, or they persisted in doing something both time-wasting and pointless we would check for a wandering monster encounter. That at least gave something interesting for the DM to do and entertained the less sedentary PCs of players desiring something active to do;) The short answer is indeed we always employed random encounters, and I still do. #3695
Work together
If the group is playing cooperatively, the others protect the low-level m-u most assiduously knowing that later on he will be the one that will carry the day for them #7980
Raise the Dead
With the campaign set as it was in the vicinity of the city of Greyhawk, getting brought back to the land of the living wasn't much of a problem, only costly, very costly. All of the major PCs bit the dust one way or another--petrified as was Mordenkainen, poisoned as was Bigby, etc. Wish items were greatly prized and carefully hoarded, reserved for use in such extremis. On the rarest of occassions a particularly ill-fated adventure would be chalked up to a collective bad dream. Exactly two: Rob got one, and Rob allowed one other. [11]
I allow any Good alignment cleric to cast resurection/raise dead on a like N/PC, with the "donation" varying from reasonable to quite otherwise depending on regree of alignment difference--and the relationship of the two deities served, if different. [11]
PC death was pretty common. Lower level ones were generally written off. Higher level ones able to pay the cost, or with a Wish spell were brought back. Yrag died several times, and the same is true with most of the "famous" PCs from my campaign. Thus magic items enabling use of a Wish or Wishes were highly prized and generally reserved for bringing back a beloved character. The rule about being brought back no more than a number of times equal to the character's constitution was not fluff, but meant to restrain the more foolhearty players in risking their PCs. #1238
Very few of the regulars in my campaigns have lost their characters ater the initial stages of building them. Those that did have them slain had either vary bad luck or else played foolishly. I am very generous in regards to mitigating a run of bad luck when play has been solid. I must point out that I have lost several of my better PCs, used wishes and spells to have them restored to life, and I have not boo-hooed about the DM that was managing the adventures in which that occurred. #8570
Level Draining
I still am wholly behind loss of levels from undead and certain magic items. As you note there are sufficient counters to such loss as to mitigate the worst effects if the PC party is played well.
In my experience most of the players that whine about level draining are either not truly skillful ones or pure power gamers. #8313
You pegged the reason for my adding that to the system. The threat is potent, yet does not actually kill the PC. There is even a clerical restoration possible, that costing much in the way of monetary and magical items likely, thus getting them out of play and giving more reason to PC to keep adventuring.
That said, when I was playing I dreaded seeing level-draining undead monsters, and thus they added as much excitement to the situation as might a death-dealing dragon #2300
No I don't agree with those wimpy whiners who are afraid of a few living dead :p There were always plenty of them in the adventures I ran, and likewise in those that I was playing in. For example, in one Jim Ward scenario, the first monsters we encountered were liches attacking us with rods of cancellation. This was likely in revenge for some of the perils Jim had to face with me as DM, such as when a vampire had his PC trapped. Darned if Jim didn't roll well enough to force the vampire to dust-mote form while I couldn't hit his PC no matter what. #1920
First, a cleric or two with a party means the threat is lessened dramatically. Second, m-us have plenty of long-range spells to deal with undead. Third, most other PC types have enough armor to make hitting them pretty difficult. In general the alert and wary party will not be surprised by undead, be able to stay at a distance to make touch by the undead difficult. Wise players know when to have their PCs run away. In extremis, lost levels can be restored by use of wishes and clerical spells, Next those cry babies will be moaning about being turned to stone. #1920
Of course magical and clerical means of restoring lost levels were provided--excellent ways for DMs to be rid of wishes and to drain treasure from PCs hoards and into clerical coffers. The last special group of gamers to visit me from a distant place, summer before last, so as to go on a wild adventure across the Flanaess of Oerth had a run-in with some super-wights that drained one of their PCs. Luckily for them they were near Veluna, visited a temple there, and for only about 90% of the wealth they had acquired along the way, those lost levels were restored. If they'd have had a cleric in their party they would have been much richer at adventure's end... #1936
Convention games
Things were different at convention games, where there should have been no investment into the one-off characters used. It is interesting that Gary thought if you bring your PC to such a convention game, and it dies, then you need someone to revive him in another game. That is, the PC is not seen just as a stat block to be used in the game, there is an assumed continuity, where the PC lives (or dies) independent of the groups and games they enter into, a reality of that PCs experiences as an ongoing thing. The same idea he holds for dungeons, where several groups of PCs over the course of multiple conventions met his Old Guard Kobolds in Greyhawk Castle, and led to incrementally strengthening them. The dungeon has a reality that survives the individual play sessions and groups that explore it.
Oh yah! I forgot you said it was a con adventue. Those are quite different, and offing PCs is de rigeur for most participants. Otherwise they seem to feel they didn't receive the GMs full attention #7574
For gaming conventions I have created scenarios where elimination of the PCs is most probable, and players know that, get a signed character sheet stating that their PC was slain or survived the trials. [11]
It is absurd for a player to be upset of a pre-generated or just-created PC is lost in a tournament adventure. If it is that person's longest-lived PC, then it should not be risked, or some provision for return made before agreeing to play is. Munchkins do relate far too closely with their usually-over-powered PCs, but that is generally forgivable because they are immature youngsters. A mature person what has a munchkin mentality is actually to be pitied...although offing their PC might bring a dark delight to the GM. In all cases I urge gamers to have many PCs, and remember at all times they are just make-believe personas. This typically falls upon deaf ears if the one being lectured is immature. #7582
It never happened with my regular group, but running tournaments and special games I have racked up a few TPKs. Let me rephrase that: The players have managed to get all their PCs killed;)
In the ToH those of my players who dared enter did it mainly with their PCs being alone save for hirelings. Robilar's use of his orcs is pretty well known, with all slain in the initial entrance, and he then going on alone to find the demi-lich's lair, grab the treasure and run away without any combat #1247
Some hundreds of thousands of PCs have adventured in the ToH, and not many have made it successfully, so it is most demanding of real skill. You can quote me from this post, if you like, for we ran the module as a tournament at a Spring or Autumn Revel, or a Winter Fantasy con here back in the day. There were, IIRR, eight teams, and one of them absolutely obliterated the demi-lich by using the crown, putting it on his head, and touching the "wrong end" of the scepter to it. Russ Stambaugh was the DM for that team, and he asked me if that would work. I was astounded at how clever the players had been, said so, and gave them the top spot for their innovation. Again, as I recall, several of the other eight teams made the cut, destroyed Acecerak. those were veteran dungeoneers, of curse. #4422
I have run a party of local gamers through the ToH, and they made it with the loss of a couple of the PCs. It was many years ago, so I do not recall player names and details--way too many gaming sessions under my belt in the 33 years I have been a GM for such recollections... #4422
It has since sent a large number of adventurers to their doom when rolled on behalf of my OD&D game "Old Guard Kobolds." The ninth party of six or more 2nd level characters fell to them at JanCon last month. Lest some reader think I always seek to kill PCs, rest assured that it is only at cons, and mainly to prove the point that running away is often a good idea. A second group playing in the original AOD&D dungeons bypassed the kobolds, went down to the third level, slew many a monster in the process, and didn't lost a single member #1890
However, rather like playing "giveaway checkers," such a session can be fun and challenging as a convention game where arbitrary means of having characters meet their demise are out of the question. The last session I played like that was at GenCon 2002, and darned if one of the nine PCS didn't manage to save her PC from death, so the team beat me as the GM. #2009
When running a tournement we always used prepared material so as to have as much continuity as possible between GMs managing the competing groups. Only in a final round was any innovation allowable...and used #4675
[References: see Greyhawk References]
No comments:
Post a Comment