Monday, March 14, 2016
The Threat of Death
I'll be discussing different gaming systems, some in a favorable light and others not so much. The topic is infusing mortality into a game. The fact is some systems do this and other systems just suck at it. This is not a declaration that one system is better than the other, but better at developing a sense of mortality. Danger! Some got it. Some don't.
A sense of mortality is an element that is ever present in my game. I GM a semi-realistic world, with a medieval European, and Asian, historical influence. Literary wise, the books that most reflect my way of thinking are the Thieves World books, The Warhound and the World's Pain and throw in nearly any story of Dostoevsky or Kafka and you'll get a snapshot of where I am coming from. Dark, gritty and unforgiving with occasional elements of wonder.
Some rule systems are more forgiving than others. Off the top of my head I can think of the last two editions of D&D with their healing surges. The party can go head-to-head with a batch of giant flaming skeletal, vampires mages, take a short break (or as I call it, taking a knee) a and jump back into the next fight. This aspect of the game eliminates consequences of a battle. I personally disdain this mechanic.
These systems favor a heroic fantasy. The system encourages epic battles and campaigns. The mechanics allow a character more chances to get to the point of some epic accomplishment. Absolutely nothing wrong with this. I love Dragon Age. I really enjoyed playing 5th edition D&D, but it wasn't until we started playing Pits & Perils that I felt that rush of "Oh shit, this could be it."
But even Pits & Perils is a more forgiving than old OD&D. Pits & Perils works on a simple, but elegant system of hits. A fighter has 10hp + say 3 armor (2 for chain mail and 1 for the shield). Weapon damage is either a 1 or 2. That means a 1st level fighter can take between 7 to 13 hits before dying. And they die once they hit 0hp. None of this death saving throw. No minus your Con score and then you are really dead. Nope, 0 is dead, dead. Amen! But, look at an OD&D fighter with about 8hp, weapons do an average of 1d6. So 2 hits can send your character into the afterlife. And again, 0 hit points means its time to roll up a new guy. Getting into a a fight can be very deadly.
And if you look at the healing mechanics for both these games, it is not easy to recover from a battle. If the party gets into a big fight they can't just take a knee and then charge into the next battle. It takes a couple of days to recover, often longer. Characters have fewer healing resources to burn through and they are not replenished as often. So when they take on that ogre, a party using these systems has to consider the consequences because it may delay their travels for a week.
Some may complain this sounds boring. It is definitely a matter of taste. And there are also arguments about what hit points really represents, which I will not get into, because when you run out of them you're dead, not tired.
Combat is of course the most obvious. I also like having poison where it is save vs. death. I often include disease in my games. Imagine playing a game where the Black Plague is the backdrop. Every village, home or encounter could end with infecting the party members. Again, in newer versions of D&D, a cure disease or a paladin can take care of it fairly quick. While in Pits & Perils and OD&D these curing disease options are fewer. While a cleric can cure a person that takes up precious spell slots.
Again, this is my overall preference. Going into a village infected with a plague become a lot more interesting if the party feels they could be next. Some may find this kind of game boring, I can see their point. Sometimes you just want to be the badass and wade into battle, damn the consequences because its not a matter of life or death, but how many you kill and how much you drink to your many victories. But for me, for the victories to mean anything, there has to have been a chance, a big chance, that I would fail. And failing can be interesting, it is often more interesting that succeeding.