SET UP:  
Last night in my face-to-face group we were discussing the game and some issues about it.  The game is powered 5e HERO, and, so, it's a point-based system.  New characters were being brought in the game at 50% of the points of existing characters, and this caused difficulties in the encounters.  Another player and I suggested that maybe new characters should start at 75% of existing characters.

The GM's response to this was this, "players should be penalized for their character's death."

I did a cartoon head shake and immediately challenged that statement, and asked him why he thought that players should be punished for their character's death.  After talking a bit, it turns out that he was afraid that players would intentionally commit suicide if they didn't like their character just to create another character.  

Whatcha got?

Well, that doesn't make sense:)  Why would someone not like their character if built with a point buy system?

Mind you, I'm sure I've said some dum things as GM in my time and I've heard plenty from others.  Nothing immediately springs to mind, however.

I read this in White Wolf mag some time ago.

GM : The guard fires a warning shot through your heart.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Fiasco;335743Well, that doesn't make sense:)  Why would someone not like their character if built with a point buy system?

This.

In other words, in a game where the players start with exactly, or pretty much exactly, with the character they want, it doesn't make sense to expect them to commit suicide to change characters.

Why not *ask* the GM to change your character if you don't really like it, in the first place? Is that a "no-no" at the game table (if so, this is the problem right there)?

However, penalizing character death might make sense as a way for the players to live with the consequences of failure. After all, what's the point of the game if you can just reroll characters endlessly until you defeat the dragon? That's why you have a level penalty when brought back from the dead - so that there is a consequence to character death in the game that makes the player go "I really don't want my character to die again!"

Also, in some games, like AD&D, where you might not start with stats allowing you to play a Paladin, but instead allow you to play a Fighter, some players  might be tempted to just kill off their characters to change it. In that particular game, it's supposed to be part of the fun to just run with whatever stats you got and make the character you want out of it. That's where the GM's scenario above might become true. But then, I can't help but think that a player who would just commit suicide in this way wouldn't fit an AD&D game to begin with. He would be happier playing something else.

Something like a point-buy Hero game.

Quote from: David R;335754I read this in White Wolf mag some time ago.

GM : The guard fires a warning shot through your heart.

Regards,
David R

Actually, that just sound cool

Quote from: Fiasco;335743Well, that doesn't make sense:)  Why would someone not like their character if built with a point buy system?

At first blush, this was my thoughts as well.  However, the GM/game dynamic is creating an atmosphere where if your character isn't 100% combat maximized then character death is more than likely.  I've seen this spiral before in a long running 3e GURPS game.  Encounters were fierce and very deadly.  Replacement characters, built on lower point total, had to min-max for a 100% combat effectiveness just hang with the big boyos.

Quote from: David R;335754I read this in White Wolf mag some time ago.

GM : The guard fires a warning shot through your heart.

Regards,
David R

Pure awsomeness!  If this was set up as a competition, then this would the front runner for a gold medal.

Quote from: Benoist;335759But then, I can't help but think that a player who would just commit suicide in this way wouldn't fit an AD&D game to begin with. He would be happier playing something else.

Something like a point-buy Hero game.

Honestly, I am not sure what to make of these statements and so I asking  you to please clarify.  Is this some kind of dig at people who play point-based games?  Is this some kind of class-and-level elitism?  I'm asking because this seems out of character for you buddy.  Am I just misreading this?

Quote from: Drohem;335774Honestly, I am not sure what to make of these statements and so I asking  you to please clarify.  Is this some kind of dig at people who play point-based games?  Is this some kind of class-and-level elitism?  I'm asking because this seems out of character for you buddy.  Am I just misreading this?

Yes, I think you are misreading me. It wasn't a stab at the theoretical player I was talking about, and it wasn't a stab at point-based games. Not at all. What I was trying to say was that if a player commits suicide in an AD&D game to change characters, then I believe he actually isn't playing the kind of game that would make him happy. If he was starting with a leveled playing field with game points that allow him to exactly come up with the character he wants, the suicide scenario would not happen, and he would end up a much happier player at the game table.

Seems logical, to me.

In a modern game which, the GM said, was meant to be "realistic":

"Those are the rules, and they are not bendable, however logical your argument."

Quote from: Benoist;335781Yes, I think you are misreading me. It wasn't a stab at the theoretical player I was talking about, and it wasn't a stab at point-based games. Not at all. What I was trying to say was that if a player commits suicide in an AD&D game to change characters, then I believe he actually isn't playing the kind of game that would make him happy. If he was starting with a leveled playing field with game points that allow him to exactly come up with the character he wants, the suicide scenario would not happen, and he would end up a much happier player at the game table.

Seems logical, to me.

Cool, thanks for clarifying it for me.

However, I can see the scenario in a point-based game where the player would want to commit suicide to create another, more effective character.  Without going into too much detail and boring everyone else, my character in this game is one that started with half the character points than the established characters.  I created my character to be balanced, and to emulate a real person in this fictional world.  Consequently, I spread points out between several areas, and didn't concentrate them all in one narrow field of expertise.  I didn't want to create a one-trick pony who was severely handicapped in every other area except that single expertise.  

As a result of these circumstances, my character was effectively useless in combat compared to the established characters who were focused in a single area of expertise; i.e combat-orientated one-trick ponies.  I would never think of having a character intentionally commit suicide, no matter the circumstances because I'm a stubborn S.O.B. and will go down swinging no matter the odds. :banghead:  Although, that doesn't mean that I didn't have a brief moment of weakness where I thought it would be easier just to let this character die and create another, more specialized and focused character.

Quote from: Drohem;335789Cool, thanks for clarifying it for me.

However, I can see the scenario in a point-based game where the player would want to commit suicide to create another, more effective character.  Without going into too much detail and boring everyone else, my character in this game is one that started with half the character points than the established characters.  I created my character to be balanced, and to emulate a real person in this fictional world.  Consequently, I spread points out between several areas, and didn't concentrate them all in one narrow field of expertise.  I didn't want to create a one-trick pony who was severely handicapped in every other area except that single expertise.  

As a result of these circumstances, my character was effectively useless in combat compared to the established characters who were focused in a single area of expertise; i.e combat-orientated one-trick ponies.  I would never think of having a character intentionally commit suicide, no matter the circumstances because I'm a stubborn S.O.B. and will go down swinging no matter the odds. :banghead:  Although, that doesn't mean that I didn't have a brief moment of weakness where I thought it would be easier just to let this character die and create another, more specialized and focused character.

Yeah, but right there, you've got a character spread out, and with half the character points. So you've got a pretty valid reason to want to change characters if every other player has double the character points and an optimized character. Did you try talking it over with the GM?

Quote from: Benoist;335790Yeah, but right there, you've got a character spread out, and with half the character points. So you've got a pretty valid reason to want to change characters if every other player has double the character points and an optimized character. Did you try talking it over with the GM?

Yeah, that was the discussion before the session where the GM made that statement.  It actually went rather well, and it was a good discussion where all four players and the GM really talked without any drama or hurt feelings.  It felt real good actually to have that discussion even though I was hesitant to bring up my concerns since I was fairly new and I didn't want my concerns to be misconstrued or misinterpreted.  The GM agreed to let new characters start at 75% of points of existing characters.  He even gave me and another player the difference in points between 50% and 75%, which I wasn't really looking for at all but was nice just the same.  After all, who's going to turn down free points or XP?  We also discussed the deadliness of his encounters and resource management, and some other things.  All in all, it was a good discussion where the GM listened to our feedback and took it in the spirit it was given.

Quote from: David R;335754GM : The guard fires a warning shot through your heart.

In some settings, that is a perfectly valid warning. Not many, but some.

GM: You can't possibly have any way of knowing that yet.
(Think about it...)

And there is the famous internet story of the GM that had the villains rush out and attack the heroes because they saw the heroes' shadows on the walls of the tent as they snuck up. At night. The tent that had a lantern inside.

GM: Hydrogen is incredibly rare.
(Appears in KODT, but i had heard the story long before.)

Quote from: Gordon Horne;335865And there is the famous internet story of the GM that had the villains rush out and attack the heroes because they saw the heroes' shadows on the walls of the tent as they snuck up. At night. The tent that had a lantern inside.

That would totally work in the movies.

Shadows on tent: Austin Powers.

If the game was Vampire, I guess you could have guards fire a warning shot through a PCs heart, since it wouldn't be considered "Aggravated damage" (my knowledge of Vampire is sadly dated.)

Quote from: Fiasco;335743Well, that doesn't make sense:)  Why would someone not like their character if built with a point buy system?

As incredible and crazy as it may sound, I can see it myself. Sometimes, we end up liking our characters in actual play less than we thought we would. We imagine our characters would do this and that but in actual play they behave differently. Yes, with a point buy system it shouldn't happen too often, but I think it might.

What I don't get is this: "he was afraid that players would intentionally commit suicide if they didn't like their character just to create another character" :confused::idunno:. What's the point of making a player have a character he doesn't like? If you don't like your character anymore, make another!

That said, when we played Rolemaster, if a character died the next one had one level less than the others. We liked it.