PDA

View Full Version : "You can't roleplay when you're dead"



ImperatorK
2011-07-22, 12:18 AM
How true is that statement?

Strawberries
2011-07-22, 12:30 AM
It depends on the GM and the setting, I suppose. If the setting does have an afterlife, then the GM can decide if sending you there when you die and make you keep roleplaying there. (Roy style :smalltongue:)

Laura Eternata
2011-07-22, 12:33 AM
There's Ghostwalk, though that only works if the DM decides to incorporate it into his or her game.

Giggling Ghast
2011-07-22, 12:34 AM
It's true. After our buddy Jon died last year in a car accident, me and the other guys in our gaming group tried digging him up and sitting him at the table, but he doesn't really participate anymore.

Once we thought he was shaking his head in response to something the DM asked, but that turned out to be a centipede crawling around in his skull. It scuttled out of his eye socket and none of us slept for a week after that.

Quietus
2011-07-22, 12:47 AM
It's true. After our buddy Jon died last year in a car accident, me and the other guys in our gaming group tried digging him up and sitting him at the table, but he doesn't really participate anymore.

Once we thought he was shaking his head in response to something the DM asked, but that turned out to be a centipede crawling around in his skull. It scuttled out of his eye socket and none of us slept for a week after that.

Well played, good sir.

Arbane
2011-07-22, 12:49 AM
The folks who made Wraith: the Oblivion and Lost Souls would surely disagree.

Hiro Protagonest
2011-07-22, 12:49 AM
It's true. After our buddy Jon died last year in a car accident, me and the other guys in our gaming group tried digging him up and sitting him at the table, but he doesn't really participate anymore.

Once we thought he was shaking his head in response to something the DM asked, but that turned out to be a centipede crawling around in his skull. It scuttled out of his eye socket and none of us slept for a week after that.

Heh heh, pretty funn

DukeofDellot
2011-07-22, 12:50 AM
Just as well, whenever one of my player's character, the player doesn't shut up about it, and most of that rubbish isn't too different from roleplaying.

I'm pretty sure that if I died, but retained by ability to make everyone else perfectly aware of how adverse I was to the condition, I would definitely take advantage of it.

Esprit15
2011-07-22, 01:49 AM
It's true. After our buddy Jon died last year in a car accident, me and the other guys in our gaming group tried digging him up and sitting him at the table, but he doesn't really participate anymore.

Once we thought he was shaking his head in response to something the DM asked, but that turned out to be a centipede crawling around in his skull. It scuttled out of his eye socket and none of us slept for a week after that.

Comrades, I believe that this thread has already been won.

Xanmyral
2011-07-22, 02:18 AM
-Snip-

First, what this man said is hilariously awesome.

Now, to get on the point... It depends on the setting really. The DM as well. The good side to setting up RP when the character is dead is to still allow said player to do something while he waits to be rezzed. The bad side is that it can also lead to distractions, and bog down the living characters RP. If you can easily RP in notes with one player while you do the main thing with the others, this concept would be rather doable. Depending in the setting however will determine if said RP is all suger and rainbows, like Roy's in the comic, or a horrifying place full of black ichor leaking terror.

Vultawk
2011-07-22, 02:26 AM
I usually give my PC's an entourage of NPCs to play just in case. Heck, even playing as the Druid's animal companion can be fun now and then.

Mastikator
2011-07-22, 02:34 AM
Not when I'm DM, go ahead and make a new character.

Totally Guy
2011-07-22, 03:53 AM
The situation in which your character say "this is something I'm willing to risk dying for" is a point I strive for with respect to roleplaying.

If the character is killed, it still said something powerful about what that character was about, who he was. The story just happened to be a tragedy this time.

Gabe the Bard
2011-07-22, 06:45 AM
Is it harder to roleplay being dead if you're undead?

Gardener
2011-07-22, 07:40 AM
While not strictly true, the exceptions are narrow and unpleasant enough that I create my characters with at least a passing nod to self-preservation. It's not that nothing is worth dying for, but if they're going to risk their lives regularly it only makes sense that they're pretty good at keeping it.

gkathellar
2011-07-22, 07:41 AM
Is it harder to roleplay being dead if you're undead?

No more so than is you're deathless.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-22, 07:51 AM
No more so than is you're deathless.

Bah, Deathless are undead with a good PR campaign.:smallsigh:

gkathellar
2011-07-22, 11:37 AM
Bah, Deathless are undead with a good PR campaign.:smallsigh:

As opposed to the undead, who have an Evil PR campaign.

These puns aren't even terrible. They're just ... meh.

Mando Knight
2011-07-22, 12:45 PM
It's true. After our buddy Jon died last year in a car accident, me and the other guys in our gaming group tried digging him up and sitting him at the table, but he doesn't really participate anymore.

Once we thought he was shaking his head in response to something the DM asked, but that turned out to be a centipede crawling around in his skull. It scuttled out of his eye socket and none of us slept for a week after that.

Yeah, sorry about that, we haven't worked out all the bugs in trans-mortal communication yet.

LansXero
2011-07-22, 02:42 PM
I too let them handle NPCs when they die and their new character is yet to be introduced. Or constrol monsters :D (shows you who metagames and who doesnt, and lets them bicker against them instead of against me :( )

Ravens_cry
2011-07-22, 02:54 PM
As opposed to the undead, who have an Evil PR campaign.

These puns aren't even terrible. They're just ... meh.
I know I am an infamous punologist on this forum, but that wasn't meant as a pun.

Jay R
2011-07-22, 03:51 PM
It's not that big a problem, since most players can't roleplay when their characters are alive, either.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-22, 03:57 PM
It's not that big a problem, since most players can't roleplay when their characters are alive, either.

<insert sting (http://instantrimshot.com/classic/?sound=rimshot) here/>

Morithias
2011-07-22, 11:45 PM
My character died recently, but she had an ability (last breathe of Bhaal) that let her come back to life an hour later.

He had me roleplay my way through about 5 minutes of dialog in the LE afterlife. Needless to say, no one believed her that she was leaving.

Next time I die he's going to roll a d10 to see where I end up.

1-9 that level of baator
10 - the god of assassin's afterlife (he rolled this first time).

I look forward to arguing with Asmodeous, it's something this wisecracking changling would do.

Shep
2011-07-23, 03:39 PM
One of my characters in my 4e game sacrificed himself in a ritual to banish the undead from the land for a thousand years. He was a servant of the Raven Queen, and she resurrected him as her servant, grooming him to be a demigod in her pantheon (the PC's hit epic level with the conclusion of the campaign.) He can't die permanently unless he is killed in the Shadowfell. He can still adventure with the group, but to join them on the material plane they have to summon him with a ritual (which, coincidentally, costs the same as it would to resurrect him). There are also limits to the number of times they can summon him.

Lycar
2011-07-23, 03:51 PM
I believe the OP is more about

'sometimes you have to sacrifice RP for survival'.

As in, sometimes you, as a player, know that a decision, which would be the logical and true choice for your character, would put him into harm's way. Or even outright kill him.

Do you then sacrifice playing the character, as you believe he should be played, to save him now, to be able to RP him later?

Or do you go down the doomed path, knowing full well that it might cost you the chance to play this character anymore, so that you can be true to him until the bitter end?

ImperatorK
2011-07-23, 04:20 PM
No, I'm more about: If your character is incompetent (you don't optimize) he will die quick and you won't have a chance to roleplay (play the game).
It's an often used argument from pro-optimization crowd in discussions against anti-optimization "thru roleplayers" crowd. And a good one, IMO, but I'd like to know other peoples opinions.

Strawberries
2011-07-23, 04:35 PM
No, I'm more about: If your character is incompetent (you don't optimize) he will die quick and you won't have a chance to roleplay (play the game).
It's an often used argument from pro-optimization crowd in discussions against anti-optimization "thru roleplayers" crowd. And a good one, IMO, but I'd like to know other peoples opinions.

Oh, that. In my humble opinion, that's not such a big problem as it's made out to be. It just depends from the general level of optimization in the party: if everyone is unoptimized the same way, it becames a false problem.

I, for instance, absolutely hate optimizing. That's not because I consider myself a "thru roleplayer", simply because it's no fun for me, and it becomes for me a pointless exercise in frustration. My solution is simply playing with people who optimize as little as me. That way, assuming the DM scales the encounter considering the party ability (and usually good DMs do) I don't have to worry about dying any more or any less than if I was playing an optimized character in an optimized party against optimized npcs.

That's what has always worked for me, at least. :smallwink:

Saph
2011-07-23, 05:09 PM
No, I'm more about: If your character is incompetent (you don't optimize) he will die quick and you won't have a chance to roleplay (play the game).
It's an often used argument from pro-optimization crowd in discussions against anti-optimization "thru roleplayers" crowd. And a good one, IMO, but I'd like to know other peoples opinions.

It's a fairly bad argument because your character's optimisation level does not necessarily have any connection with his life expectancy. Experienced GMs typically scale the difficulty of encounters to match the optimisation level of the party. If you're playing Superman, you'll get matched against Darkseid.

Optimisation is only really important in regard to how optimised you are in relation to the rest of the party. An underoptimised character in an optimised party is deadweight. On the other hand, an overoptimised character in a normal party is a pain in the neck - because now everyone else and the GM have to play the arms race game to keep up.

Mastikator
2011-07-23, 05:21 PM
No, I'm more about: If your character is incompetent (you don't optimize) he will die quick and you won't have a chance to roleplay (play the game).
It's an often used argument from pro-optimization crowd in discussions against anti-optimization "thru roleplayers" crowd. And a good one, IMO, but I'd like to know other peoples opinions.

Most deaths comes from bad in-game decisions, not underpowered character.

Shep
2011-07-23, 05:31 PM
I believe the OP is more about

'sometimes you have to sacrifice RP for survival'.

As in, sometimes you, as a player, know that a decision, which would be the logical and true choice for your character, would put him into harm's way. Or even outright kill him.

Do you then sacrifice playing the character, as you believe he should be played, to save him now, to be able to RP him later?

Or do you go down the doomed path, knowing full well that it might cost you the chance to play this character anymore, so that you can be true to him until the bitter end?

Oh, sorry. In that case, it depends on the character I play and how attached I am to him. I'm currently playing a lvl 6 cavalier in Pathfinder who offered to turn himself in in place of another PC who staged a daring breakout of several condemned prisoners (but another character talked him out of it). The local police were arresting people (who weren't heard from again) and the only way my character could think of to protect the innocent was to give himself up. I play the cav as willing to sacrifice himself for the group at every turn, because he's LG and order of the Dragon (always loyal to his friends). Oh, and he also has an INT and WIS of 10. If he dies for his (possibly misguided) beliefs, so be it.

ImperatorK
2011-07-23, 05:45 PM
It's a fairly bad argument because your character's optimisation level does not necessarily have any connection with his life expectancy. Experienced GMs typically scale the difficulty of encounters to match the optimisation level of the party. If you're playing Superman, you'll get matched against Darkseid.

Optimisation is only really important in regard to how optimised you are in relation to the rest of the party. An underoptimised character in an optimised party is deadweight. On the other hand, an overoptimised character in a normal party is a pain in the neck - because now everyone else and the GM have to play the arms race game to keep up.
Most folk who use that argument are strict DMs who always build and play their monsters as competent as possible or people who like to play with such DMs. In one thread here on GitP I suggested that unoptimized parties can still play very well, because the DM can just tone down the encounters. Of course a follower of "You can't roleplay when you're dead" said that it's cheating or somehow wrong. *shrugs*

Saph
2011-07-23, 07:21 PM
Most folk who use that argument are strict DMs who always build and play their monsters as competent as possible or people who like to play with such DMs.

I've played a few campaigns like that, but generally the DMs with that kind of playstyle (or at least the good ones) put clear warnings on their campaign ads - the equivalent of a sign saying "Your Optimisation Level Must Be At Least This High To Enter". So in practice it usually isn't a problem - the players who don't feel like putting in that much homework see the sign and find a different game.

ImperatorK
2011-07-23, 07:36 PM
Some DMs don't give warnings. They don't know that they should. This style of play is default for them and they don't know (or care) that you can play differently.
If I would DM a game, I would say straight up front that optimization isn't needed in my game. It is encouraged, but not necessary.

Strawberries
2011-07-24, 02:18 AM
Some DMs don't give warnings. They don't know that they should. This style of play is default for them and they don't know (or care) that you can play differently.
If I would DM a game, I would say straight up front that optimization isn't needed in my game. It is encouraged, but not necessary.

Well, it isn't only up to the DM, but to the players too. As a player, if you are aware your optimization level is somewhat sub-optimal, it is fair to warn the DM beforehand, and see if s/he thinks you are a good match for the game. At least that's what I usually do.

Lord Vukodlak
2011-07-24, 05:13 AM
Most deaths comes from bad in-game decisions, not underpowered character.

Often times the underpowered character survives becasue he never does anything to become a threat.

gkathellar
2011-07-24, 07:42 AM
GITP Forum Rule #X: All threads will become optimization threads.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2011-07-24, 10:00 PM
GITP Forum Rule #X: All threads will become optimization threads.Well, when the OP steers it in that direction, I wouldn't be too surprised. Sadly, most "optimization threads" are moral harangues about optimization (both ways) instead of the actual act of optimizing something, which at least might provide new information to someone. Now, on to hypocrisy...

When I DM, I heavily encourage players to make characters together. This helps two ways: they tend to intertwine backstories more (easier hooks, yay) and they tend to have more similar levels of optimization. If the rest of the team is adamant on Monk, Samurai and Aristocrat, the DMM Persisting Cleric will have a large social incentive to either tone it down or switch to group buffs. On the other hand, if the rest of the team is adamant on optimizing a Wizard, Druid, and Artificer respectively, the Monk is more likely to shape up and switch to USS, or Tashalatora, or something similar. Those who don't respond to said social incentives are also easier to point out.

All of that said, I find in my limited experience that properly challenging an unoptimized party has a higher chance of TPK, while properly challenging an optimized party has a higher chance of individual kills. If I misjudge the strength of an encounter relative to an unoptimized party, generally they have no recourse except to flee (usually on foot) or parlay, and sometimes neither is available except by stinky fiat. If I send an overpowered encounter against the optimized party, they learn pretty quickly (often after a party member gets one-shotted or quickly incapacitated) and either 'pull out all the stops' and win anyway or find an effective way to escape and regroup.

Kaun
2011-07-25, 07:47 AM
How true is that statement?

Deadlands = not always true :smalltongue:

onthetown
2011-07-25, 08:37 AM
Most deaths comes from bad in-game decisions, not underpowered character.

The Waterdhavian Herald recently spoke with undead specialist Ricky T. Bones regarding the influx of recent deaths around the city, particularly of adventurers. "This is becoming more and more of a problem in today's society," Bones, a 20th level Dread Necromancer, told us in his interview. "A lot of time and money is being invested into finding out just why it happens, but here's the simple version: it's not that people aren't training hard enough, it's that people are ignoring their Int stat." He went on to say that the research facilities (though he wouldn't say where) have found that as many as 90% of deaths around the globe are happening because people are just making stupid decisions on the fly, even though they're perfectly capable of handling the encounter.

(Sorry, that's all I could think about when I read your post. :smalltongue: I'm pro-rp, but I'm sure as hell not going to let my characters and their stats, classes, etc waste away just for the purpose of it.)

Roderick_BR
2011-07-27, 01:58 PM
The folks who made Wraith: the Oblivion and Lost Souls would surely disagree.
Unless they are currently playing a system that doesn't use any of that. As a poster above said, depends on the system being used.

JonRG
2011-07-27, 02:21 PM
The title of the thread + Candle Jack's win made me think of this (http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=814).

Jude_H
2011-07-27, 02:38 PM
It's nonsense. People show up to a game because they want to play. Telling someone to go home because they rolled a 1 on Black Leaf's search check is silly. Typically, death means playing an existing npc or a newly-introduced stand-in.

Then there are games that completely ignore death as an obstacle, like Fiasco, where players continue through flashbacks, or Deadlands, where dead characters can come back through supernatural means.

In terms of optimization arguments, it's a punchy one-liner, but it's largely insubstantial. As has been mentioned, in combat games, it's the GM's job to calibrate fights against the group. High optimization promotes rocket launcher tag, which has a tendency to cut characters' lives short.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-27, 02:48 PM
While people don't pack their bags and go home in my experience on a characters death, what you describe is hardly, playing an NPC, is hardly typical in my experience. Though I have heard of it, Fear the Boot had some pod-casts debating the pros and cons, I really never liked the idea.

ImperatorK
2011-07-27, 03:00 PM
Typically, death means playing an existing npc or a newly-introduced stand-in.
Not everyone has a spare char. just in case main one dies, and not everyone likes to play some random NPCs.


Then there are games that completely ignore death as an obstacle, like Fiasco, where players continue through flashbacks, or Deadlands, where dead characters can come back through supernatural means.
For some people it might work, others won't like it that the DM is forced to divide his attention between the live PCs and the one dead PC.

Silverlich
2011-07-27, 09:34 PM
It's not that big a problem, since most players can't roleplay when their characters are alive, either.

"As they say in the vernacular, 'Zing.'"

Talya
2011-07-28, 02:10 PM
It's true. After our buddy Jon died last year in a car accident, me and the other guys in our gaming group tried digging him up and sitting him at the table, but he doesn't really participate anymore.

Once we thought he was shaking his head in response to something the DM asked, but that turned out to be a centipede crawling around in his skull. It scuttled out of his eye socket and none of us slept for a week after that.

Duh. You forgot to animate him, first.

Ravens_cry
2011-07-29, 09:10 AM
Duh. You forgot to animate him, first.
They were out of black onyx and the jewellers were on strike.

Andorax
2011-08-01, 01:38 PM
Ran a FR Play by Post once, several years back. Pacing was slow, as is typical for PBP games. Had a character death fairly deep in a dungeon, and knew full well it'd be over a month in real-time before he'd have a chance to "do anything" again.

Not wanting to inflict this on him, I created a separate RP thread, and kept the role play right on going, with him interacting with other individuals on the Fugue Plain. Coming to terms with his death, and where in the afterlife he might well be headed.

Player had a chance to keep right on role-playing, and worked it into his character after being raised...went on to multiclass into Cleric (of Tempus, the deity/church responsible for bringing him back).

Drascin
2011-08-02, 07:01 AM
It's nonsense. People show up to a game because they want to play. Telling someone to go home because they rolled a 1 on Black Leaf's search check is silly. Typically, death means playing an existing npc or a newly-introduced stand-in.

Given I have never seen that thing with controlling NPCs, this is probably not as typical as you think.

Yes, dying in the middle of an arc is a very real problem, because generally, due to luck or choices or whatever, players die out of nowhere even in balanced encounters sometimes, unless you're like me and downright add mechanics to the game that make unlucky deaths impossible whenever you're a GM. And most times, from what I've seen, a character death is a cue to start making another character while the game continues, or to get out your DS while your party finds a way to resurrect you, depending on whether the system has a resurrection mechanic. So players will go against their characters for a while if it means having to save themselves the two hours of chargen again, yes.

Craft (Cheese)
2011-08-02, 08:34 AM
Most folk who use that argument are strict DMs who always build and play their monsters as competent as possible or people who like to play with such DMs. In one thread here on GitP I suggested that unoptimized parties can still play very well, because the DM can just tone down the encounters. Of course a follower of "You can't roleplay when you're dead" said that it's cheating or somehow wrong. *shrugs*

"Just starting on your adventure (at level 1), you walk out of the tavern to find... 8 Great Wyrm Red Dragons attack you all at once!"

...Yeah.

Ksheep
2011-08-02, 12:48 PM
I tend to remember in one dungeon crawl, we got to the BBEG at the end of the dungeon, and within a couple rounds half the party was down. So, as the battle raged, the fallen party members awoke... in their religion's afterlife. It was a rave. And so, they were raving during the battle, waiting to be rezed.

In a similar situation, the party had found several sacks filled with mushrooms, among other things. They knew that the lower part of the dungeon was filled with baddies, so they decided to smoke them out by making a large bonfire in the main room. They threw the bags of mushrooms on it, along with other stuff. Turns out it was hallucinogenic mushrooms. One of the characters passed out (can't remember if they were just unconscious or actually dead), and so as the player was sitting around, he made a sock puppet that started talking with the other players. The DM rolled with it and said that the sock puppet was a hallucination. Combat got really interesting as the sock started talking to random people as they were fighting.