Element of Risk v. Character Development

[White_Drake]

Okay, my question: do you think that it is better to have low mortality rates, and to make it difficult for a character to die without doing something stupid, because it encourages in-depth character development and role-play, or do you think that the game is boring if there isn't a real risk of TPK, even if the party is played well, and basically guaranteed destruction without well-applied tactics and teamwork? Personally I prefer more risk; I want to remove True Resurrection from the spell lists.

[Righteous Doggy]

I like risk, I think its almost unthinkable to raise a PC rather without special intervention rather than reroll and try anew, but I'm also used to deaths being in groups that honestly have no access to any of those raise spells. I also think TPK is almost unthinkable unless the group has honestly done something incredibly stupid. I dislike DMs who are entirely willing to cause a TPK with a single trap or kill one or two pcs in an intense encounter just to milk it for drama.

It depends on the group though, as does anything.

[Averis Vol]

i really dislike the notion that since your the main character/s that you can't die. your supposed to be the hero (or villain) and hero's (or villains) die valiant deaths (or not quite so valiant). yes theres weeping and yes it sucks to reroll but every party of heroes that loses a member will swear vengeance on (insert BBEG here) and recruit someone new devoted to the cause to fill that whole.

in short. yea you should run the risk of death, if i don't have a chance to die, whats the point of NOT flying right into every situation with reckless abandon and treat my character like a frenzied berserker?

[NichG]

Generally my rule as a DM is that if I all I have to hold over a PC is death, I've failed somewhere along the line. Consequences that have to be fixed or adapted to are more interesting than just 'Death; make a new character', but require work to make sure that the various characters are invested in something, that something is actually on the line for them.

For example, power-hungry PC does something stupid and becomes wanted for his crimes in a kingdom. The kingdom could just execute the PC if they capture him (read - deal enough damage to KO/kill him), but its more interesting if he's captured and the other PCs have to get him out of jail. Or even more interesting in the case of a partial failure, where the kingdom runs him off and he fails to get whatever treasure he wanted (which is still there, just asking for him to make another shot at it).

Or, the difference between a demon killing a PC outright with an attack or the demon's 'killing' blow instead capturing and sequestering an important part of that PC's soul, manifest in the loss of some range of experience of the world (colors are muted, love feels false, whatever). One ends plot, the other drives it.

Now, sometimes the thing on the line just has to be death, and its clear from the context, but consequences are generally more interesting than the relatively consequence-free 'roll up a new character' option.