AluminiumWolf said:

But that's what makes it interesting and forms the attachment. I'm much more likely to be attached to a character that some real growth associated with it, and who has survived some really harrowing and near death experiences, than someone who just breezes through in "god mode".

AluminiumWolf said:

Well, I think these examples both speak more to what people want/expect in MMOs than paint a good picture of why you'd want a TTRPG to be more like MMOs. As I said, they're different things, so why *would* you want them to be the same? Could you imagine the uproar if the Vampire TTRPG has characters that couldn't die and automatically "re-spawned"? I'm telling you now it'd be a lot worse than any uproar that might have occurred about the MMO…

And there are plenty of TTRPG games that cater for that style of play. I'd put any recent edition of D&D (3+) in that category. Hell, once the party gets past about 9th level, there are very few ways to permanently kill or maim a PC, without wiping out the whole party. D&D 4e even had "respawn" mechanics at epic levels.

How is it that this thread, like so many others, has devolved into pissing and moaning about permadeath, and how video games are so much better because they don't have permadeath, and no one wants permadeath.

AND THEN somehow have no-one talk about how one of the best selling games on Steam right now practically has permadeath as a goddamened SELLING POINT!!!

Shameless plug for a remake of the best VG of all time; X-COM: Enemy Unknown is due out next week.

-WJL

PS FTL also rocks hard. And has permadeath.

AluminiumWolf said:

I would argue that if mortality and the threat of character death is going to be a barrier to roleplaying games for someone, then the hobby probably just isn't for them. Nothing wrong with that. It's just what it is. It's an integral part of the storytelling process from back in times of old to even the Michael Bay-gasms of today. Character death happens and mortality is something that needs to be dealt with, and it does need to be able to be pointed at as a reminder from time to time.Whether or not there's a resurrection spell or a spawn point or not is entirely irrelevant. Some games have them, and it makes sense in the logic of the universe. Some games don't, because it just doesn't. Star Wars is one of those universes where the latter happens, regardless of any video game logic.

No more will I say on this issue. How about we get back to the discussion of the Gruesome Injury critical hit?

LethalDose said:

It doesn't count if you can reload a save.

Incidentally, is there anyone here arguing for permadeath who wouldn't make the My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic MMO feature permadeath and full looting? h

Perhaps as a less strong statement, would people agree that not everyone likes permadeath, and there should be a no permadeath option for those as want it?

Or possibly that not all games call for permadeath? I mean, I would say that in an A-Team game, even if you dropped someones car out of plane at 40,000 feet on to a contact fused tac-nuke, they should stumble out of the wreckage looking dazed.

On the gripping hand, did anyone think it was a good idea to kill Chewbacca in whatever poxy EU novel they killed him in?

(On examination, it seems the X-Com remake has an 'Iron Man' mode where you can't save-scum your way through the game. Thing is, ALL TTRPGs are set on Iron Man mode…) g

AluminiumWolf said:

Yes. It was. It set the mood for the series in many ways. Even the family dog is mortal (and Chewie was - sadly - relegated to be the growlig family dog). Good thing they killed off Anakin and Borsk too. On the other hand is was sad that he died, and one consequence now is that Han has been relegated to the odd one, the grumpy old fart that just gets in the way of the glowstick- and Force-bonanza that won't end. It's sad, but that's what you get with a fanbase who prefer glowsticks and robed hippy magicians to scoundrels, crime and intelligent plots. At least that is my opinion, still prefer Aallston, Zahn and others who focus on story, intrigue, plot and intelligence to Denning who can't write for **** and has the worst plot lines and show-down in space opera and fantasy history. Although I know I'm a minority in this regard - which is fine.

I find your self-assumed right to define "most gamers/players" is abhorring and borderline anti-social. You prove again and again that you have no interest in the discussion you start in any other way than to regurgitate some notion of "gamer vs gamer" debate you have inside your own head - or perhaps with your gaming group - any new insight offered here is promptly ignored or disregarded - its impolite and destructive to the subject you want to discuss. You speak of who is the most "hardcore" gamer - as if that has any meaning or value to anyone who actually enjoys role playing games - as opposed to quasi-rpg of the video game genre (and that "competitive" business? isn't rpgs about cooperation and creating stories? or is it about booting your friends about with imaginary axes, blaster and bolters?). Those games are only glorified first person shooters/slasher (or sometimes third person) with more choice in the game mechanic than which gun, but also - "skills", "talents" and if you're lucky "mods" to your weapon, either tech or magic - that's not to say that they are not fun, entertaining or good video games, its just to point out that its something else than what used to be conventional roleplaying games - now it's the odd one out (how the tables have turned) - but the ttrpg is still, to some degree at least, true to its origin, it focuses on storie, danger, adventure, horror, paranoia, social interaction and collaborative story telling in a shared imaginary space.

You say that stories and the risk of dying does not encourage roleplaying - what is roleplaying to you? Run about and "win" with your friends while gloating on unsuspecting and "noob" NPCs the GM throws at you? Get the best gear, the coolest collection of stuff? Some jokes on those stupid a$$ NPCs that didn't see you coming from miles away because they "were all like.. NOOB! LOLZ!" ? While this is FINE (and strictly not roleplaying, its the same a picking up chips from a rigged game of poker) and lots of people probably play that way since WoW and other perversions entered the homes of young socially isolated kids - BUT its not what I (as a socially isolated young boy) wanted, got or now desire out of a ttrpg - and I do not think that I am so peculiar or strange that I am alone in this desire to crave something more than a backwards replication of video game traits… and most boring of them too - for as we have discussed earlier, computer games have many good traits. "Permadeath" is a term that comes with computer games and online games - its a notion that playing a game and loosing makes it a bad game - instead of seeing it as a challenge and a reason to become a BETTER GAMER.

Its laughable that some people complain about the possibility of dying in a game, especially a ttrpg. Of course you have games like Feng something-something, 4th edition dnd and other games that focus on "playability" rather than roleplaying - which strictly speaking means playing a role, a character, in an unscripted story, or series of events, set within a framework - ie setting (with its internal logic) and a rule system. And while gamers scream online for no-permadeath games, they are hardly representative for all gamers, they are the perverted minority that screams the loudest because their parents didn't raise them properly. It's because of that lot we now had FPS that are tracked on-way circuits with green and red lights showing us the way (you can't get lost in a computer game anymore f f#€£ sake), health bars on bosses and other tools to appease the rascal multitude. This lot is not "most gamers" - its the vocal gamers, the multi-celled organic blob that is never appeased or happy, that always screams for something else than they got - because they don't know how to appreciate what they get, what they already have.

It seems to me you have not quite understood the difference between the two types of games that you want to discuss, nor are you interested in the distinction between the two. Nor that both come in many different shapes and forms. You write as if there is ONE golden recipe for making games "as they should be" - which is both ignorant and stupid.

AluminiumWolf said:

Because dying permanently due to lag or a bugged spawn is stupid and a lot less likely to happen at a gaming table. Seriously, can we drop this 'RPGs should be like video games' argument? We heard it already. We disagree. Enough is enough.

Besides, being captured does not equal losing or dying. That's just postponing the winning 'till later. Sure, you can't surrender to a wolf or a zombie (let alone a zombie wolf), but an Imperial garrison would probably accept a surrender unless your GM is an ass.

As an aside, you might not realize it, but most computer games have perma-death. You get shot in Gears of War? Game over. You get killed in Neverwinter Nights? Too bad. You lost. That you get a chance to go back in time and try again doesn't really change the fact that the death is quite permanent. The only CRPG I can think of that did this differently was Planescape: Torment. Also, if you want an RPG without perma-death (not counting the various raise dead options in D&D) you should check out Demon: the Fallen.

But this is Star Wars. You're not playing an immortal angel, nor is there magic that can yank your soul back from Elysium. In Star Wars, the fear of death and the ambition to overcome mortality played a significant role in Anakin's fall. Palpatine devoted his entire life to the mere possibility of immortality. There are games that offer what you seem to want. Star Wars doesn't. And shouldn't.

If you want to wade through puny mortals with impunity, I can recommend Exalted. You will never risk death from even armies of regular folk. If you want death to be an inconvenient, yet ultimately temporary, setback, Demon: the Fallen offers a setting where this actually makes sense.

Enjoy.

Jegergryte said:

AluminiumWolf said:

Then write it yourself and make a blogg about it.

I seriously doubt that any of the game developers are personally offended by these "mainstream" things you mention, on the other hand they might not be satisfied with them, and rightly so - if not they would not need to make anything, since its already made.

How do you, rationally and factually, base your claim that FFG and/or anyone not doing what you consider to be the "right thing" are making games for people who want to "use roleplaying [to] get away from popular culture" ? Its simply not true, its a very misguided and narrow minded claim - this game is not "going away from popular culture" at all - such a claim is not founded in rational or reflective thought, its based in a lack of intellect. For all your whining about video game elements lacking in rpgs, what you are actually talking about is linearity, lack of choice, lack of thinking, lack of creativity - lack of "the game" in the game… What you actually write about - in the terms you use and in the way you write about it - is not what makes those games good or memorable or enjoyable; its not the fact that one respawns or cannot actually die that makes these games good and memorable, its the fact that one managed to defeat some enemy or challenge. The convenience of saving or check points only help to achieve this, but makes the feeling of triumph less - since there was no actual risk of not managing it.

As Slaunyeh said, play Exalted or Demon - its what you're after. You don't want to play Star Wars - you only think you do…

And your misguided statement about "people not staying dead" for long… Chewie still has, from time to time, an impact on the story - what you're saying is, yet again - simply not true, if you actually think about it instead of knee-jerking and reacting. This goes for many other stories too. In some cases you are right, which we are all aware of so you're in some cases preaching to the choir, but in other cases you're dead wrong. Stop your whining and start coming with something useful, rational and related to this game - or better yet, start a blogg!

Perhaps look on the bright side? If the PCs can't die, the players might be easier to convince to be okay with Bad Guys being alive at the end of a fight so you can get in some recurring villain action.

Course, players hate leaving enemies alive almost as much as they hate running away and surrendering, so maybe not.

It is just… Take Firefly. Mr. Whedon was really careful not to kill off anyone he thought would make a good character down the road. Sure, Mal kicks the dude in to a jet engine, but everyone else - the Fed, the Russian Mafia Dude, Christina Hendricks, the Bounty Hunter - all stay active to be used later in the series. I mean, he kills Book and Wash in the movie, but that was a special case, and I don't think anyone was enormously happy with either demise. h

Re: Reloading saved games. X-Com has IRONMAN MODE. One save per game, automatically saves after each move is made.

THERE ARE NO RELOADS IN HELL!!!!!!!

-WJL

AluminiumWolf said:

AluminiumWolf said:

Pencil-and-paper RPGs and computer RPGs feed off each other. D&D begot Diablo. Diablo begot D&D 3.0 (rather blatantly, and openly). RPGs will change, evolve and bring in newer concepts. In the information age this will occur at a much higher rate than before. People still play OD&D, but I certainly prefer the newer versions. Things change, and that is why we are testing out another version of a Star Wars RPG.

RPG need to keep changing, or they will die out. Taking good ideas from other places, is . . . well . . . good.

The fact is most TT gamers want permadeath in their games. There are TT games out there where death doesn't happen, but for the most part most gamers expect it to be there.

darkrose50 said:

darkrose50 said:

Agreed.

For me FFG Warhammer was the big new change. I was all into complete simulationist and tactical combat of RPG's before. Once I learned the narrative form of Warhammer as a GM I was quite happy. Making maps for planned encounters and managing all of the forces (see here ) once took up so much time that play dragged and time between sessions grew. The only problem with Warhammer was it had this great idea on one hand but went overboard and made it too complicated on the other (a.i. too many systems to easily grasp and slightly too many bits and pieces). It was a good thing on all accounts, just too much of a good thing on all accounts. EotE seems to be on board with the basics of Warhammer without over-complicating it.

Simple narrative plus a few bits and pieces playaids is the new good change for me.