PDA

View Full Version : Character survivability vs. good story telling



Starchild7309
2017-02-20, 10:04 AM
So what is everyone's opinion on this idea? Is it better to have a good story, where one of your characters meets a tragic ending or are you more in the camp of it's only a good story if my character survives? I am a kind of caught up in a situation like that right now. Playing a 5th edition game based on the Hoard of the Dragon Queen/Rise of Tiamat books.

My character has found this artifact, one that is insanely powerful, that out of game I know will end up possessing or killing my character, but in game its sneaky and is just slowly changing my personality. According to my DM I have yet to unlock everything it does, but so far it gives me +3 to spell attacks, reroll any 1's for damage of spells, it has unlimited 5th level spell slots (though if I use more than one a day I have to make wisdom saves and my personality changes, unknown to me), and once per encounter I can unleash a 120 ft ray to strike a target for 10d10 damage and it creates a 15x15 dead magic zone around me for an hour and have to make a Con save (only did it once and made the save). All this leads to me out of game knowing this is a bad idea to have this artifact, but in game its bad ass.

One of the leaders of the Lord's Alliance has asked me to hand over the artifact as its too dangerous to hold onto and offered nothing in return, but expects my group to go defeat Tiamat. The smart meta game thing would be to hand over the artifact an save myself, but I am interested in if anyone else would continue to use the artifact at the peril of their character? It makes for a better story I think having to deal with the possible repercussions and even possibly losing control of the character than just playing in safe and turning over the artifact.

What would you all do? I am true Neutral and a wild mage sorcerer, I have this artifact that half the campaign has focused around in one way or another to find, now that I have it, someone wants me to give it away. So do I play it safe or do I risk it and hope I can control it? Do I go for character longevity or a more dramatic story? What are your thoughts on it?

Jay R
2017-02-20, 11:29 AM
So what is everyone's opinion on this idea? Is it better to have a good story, where one of your characters meets a tragic ending or are you more in the camp of it's only a good story if my character survives?

First, ask the right question. Would you (not me, not anybody else) have more fun playing with the item or without it?

You don't have to care which is a "better story". The issue is which one would be more fun. If "better story" is more fun for you, great, but remember that the goal is fun.

And part of that is character-driven. Does he value power more than safety? Is he driven by curiosity? How willing would he be to just walk away from a mystery without ever learning more about it?

Several specific issues:
1. You don't know whether you are more likely to meet a tragic ending by carrying the item or by facing Tiamat without it. So I don't assume you know which choice is more likely to lead to a tragic ending and which one is better for character survival.

2. Your character knows it's dangerous; he's already had to make saves against it. Deciding whether to take the risk isn't a meta-game decision. [At least in my world, you'd know. Ask the DM if your character knows he fought off some bad effect when that happened.]

3. You don't know what will happen if the PC's character changes. It might become [I]more fun to play.

4. "Dangerous" and "deadly don't mean the same thing. The danger might be changing to a personality that is more fun to play. The item may be a lich's phylactery (frankly, I think this is a real possibility). If he escapes, then fighting him is the next adventure.

If it's a phylactery, and you decide to get rid of it, you probably want to either destroy it or give it to somebody who will.

Who are the Lord's Alliance? Do you trust them? Specifically, do you trust them with that kind of power? You can only get rid of it by giving it to somebody you can trust with absolute power, or by casting it into that world's equivalent of the Cracks of Doom.

And when somebody offered to take it from you for nothing, why not say, "well, actually, one of your rivals has already offered me a powerful staff for it"? For that matter, you can go to one of his rivals and say, "Lord Fitzwilly wants me to give him this powerful item. But he won't give me anything in return. Is that a good idea?"


What would you all do? I am true Neutral and a wild mage sorcerer, I have this artifact that half the campaign has focused around in one way or another to find, now that I have it, someone wants me to give it away. So do I play it safe or do I risk it and hope I can control it? Do I go for character longevity or a more dramatic story? What are your thoughts on it?

Character longevity has no value unless that character is significantly more fun than the new character you would play if he dies. And you don't know if one of its abilities is to keep you alive somehow.

I would continue to play with it, just to find out more about it. In general, I don't turn down plot hooks without finding out more about them. And that's a decision you can change later. You can use it for awhile and then later decide to get rid of it, but you can't get rid of it and later decide to use it.

Of course, if you die from it in the meantime, you can't change your mind about keeping it. All choices have risks.

And getting rid of powerful but dangerous magic makes more sense after facing Tiamat than before facing her.

But whatever you do, I strongly urge you to keep watching the DM. His reactions to your decisions are your best clue about what you're risking. (I don't care if one of the Lord's Alliance wants you to give it to him. Does the DM want you to do so? That's the real meta-game data.]

Max_Killjoy
2017-02-20, 11:45 AM
So what is everyone's opinion on this idea? Is it better to have a good story, where one of your characters meets a tragic ending or are you more in the camp of it's only a good story if my character survives?


IMO, don't worry about "story". Worry about what your character would do and what you'd enjoy.

Also, don't fall into the false assumption that "tragic ending" = "good story". The two issues are entirely tangential.

Darth Ultron
2017-02-20, 01:23 PM
The powerful artifact that ruins or ends a characters life is a classic.

Though you should always do what is the most fun.

But keep in mind that ''doom'' is not the only outcome....there are others.

Quertus
2017-02-20, 01:38 PM
First response is to the title: character survivability isn't opposed to good stories, it enables good stories. If the entire cast of characters changes 20 times between the start of the campaign and the end, there is no continuity. And that makes telling a good, coherent story impossible really hard.

As to your specific question, I'm of the opinion that Superman killing a gun-toting Batman for control of a crime syndicate inherently can't make a good story, because good stories start with consistent characters. So I pretty much always side with "WW_D?", where "_" is your character's initial.

And, if that looks like it won't produce a fun result - for you or your group - then it's time to discuss things OOC, to find a way to make "fun" and "in character" align, so that good times, good memories, and good stories can be had by all.

Starchild7309
2017-02-20, 01:46 PM
First, ask the right question. Would you (not me, not anybody else) have more fun playing with the item or without it?

You don't have to care which is a "better story". The issue is which one would be more fun. If "better story" is more fun for you, great, but remember that the goal is fun.

And part of that is character-driven. Does he value power more than safety? Is he driven by curiosity? How willing would he be to just walk away from a mystery without ever learning more about it?

Several specific issues:
1. You don't know whether you are more likely to meet a tragic ending by carrying the item or by facing Tiamat without it. So I don't assume you know which choice is more likely to lead to a tragic ending and which one is better for character survival.

2. Your character knows it's dangerous; he's already had to make saves against it. Deciding whether to take the risk isn't a meta-game decision. [At least in my world, you'd know. Ask the DM if your character knows he fought off some bad effect when that happened.]

3. You don't know what will happen if the PC's character changes. It might become [I]more fun to play.

4. "Dangerous" and "deadly don't mean the same thing. The danger might be changing to a personality that is more fun to play. The item may be a lich's phylactery (frankly, I think this is a real possibility). If he escapes, then fighting him is the next adventure.

If it's a phylactery, and you decide to get rid of it, you probably want to either destroy it or give it to somebody who will.

Who are the Lord's Alliance? Do you trust them? Specifically, do you trust them with that kind of power? You can only get rid of it by giving it to somebody you can trust with absolute power, or by casting it into that world's equivalent of the Cracks of Doom.

And when somebody offered to take it from you for nothing, why not say, "well, actually, one of your rivals has already offered me a powerful staff for it"? For that matter, you can go to one of his rivals and say, "Lord Fitzwilly wants me to give him this powerful item. But he won't give me anything in return. Is that a good idea?"



Character longevity has no value unless that character is significantly more fun than the new character you would play if he dies. And you don't know if one of its abilities is to keep you alive somehow.

I would continue to play with it, just to find out more about it. In general, I don't turn down plot hooks without finding out more about them. And that's a decision you can change later. You can use it for awhile and then later decide to get rid of it, but you can't get rid of it and later decide to use it.

Of course, if you die from it in the meantime, you can't change your mind about keeping it. All choices have risks.

And getting rid of powerful but dangerous magic makes more sense after facing Tiamat than before facing her.

But whatever you do, I strongly urge you to keep watching the DM. His reactions to your decisions are your best clue about what you're risking. (I don't care if one of the Lord's Alliance wants you to give it to him. Does the DM want you to do so? That's the real meta-game data.]

I was going to parse out each little piece I liked of this reply, but I like it all. So let me make a few points on what was said that I either need to clarify or reply to.

It's very true that I have no idea if this artifact is more or less likely to kill me vs. with or without against Tiamat. That makes me think, keep it and go for the gusto.

I have spoken with my DM and he has specifically told me that I do not know if I have thrown any sort of effect off with the saving throws, as well I do not realize my personality has changed.

The artifact is the Karse Stone....the last remaining physical parts of Karsus, the Netherese Arcanist that destroyed the weave originally. I am sure from what I have gathered out of game that its him trying to be reborn through the artifact and my character. I also know out of game that the stone is Wulgreth's Phylactery, so it could be a lich also.

I am pretty sure that whenever the big "change" happens my character will revert to an NPC if not be destroyed outright. I am willing to accept that as long as it happens after the battle with Tiamat.

The leader of the Lord's Alliance is a woman, Chosen of Mystra, Larel Silverhand. I offered to give it up for an item of comparable power and she refused me. Later told me that after the battle with Tiamat she would do all she could to take it and destroy it, no matter the cost.

On a side note since I was kicked out of the Lord's Alliance for a political difference I have been recruited by the Zhentarim. I think that makes an interesting party dynamic since we have been fed the line that that Zhents are bad bad people.

I think I am going to have fun with this. If I go into the battle without the stone I think my chances are low at survival. Also, I think the recruitment and the changes the stone causes will make r/ping interesting and I truly enjoy that more than the hack and slash of the fights.

Anyone have any more to add I will be happy to read it and reply.

Thanks.

CatofRiddles
2017-02-20, 01:50 PM
I don't worry about survivability too much. Your character could die at any point in the adventure.

What are the effects of the curse? You say personality change and possession? Did the DM give you specifics on how the curse affects your character in terms of Roleplay?

The decision to keep or ditch a cursed item is usually a meta decision, and you can get rid of it when your DM allows you to.

If you want a bit more roleplay out of it, Ask your DM if he'll let your character to make an Insight or Perception check to have a moment of clarity. This way your character can make the decision rather than just you.


Personally, I would milk it for all it is worth. Look for a "point of no return" in the curse's effects.

To me, it depends on how it affects your character's personality. If it moves your alignment, ask yourself how much of your character's "soul" you are willing to give up? Are you willing to go from Lawful to Chaotic? What about Good to Evil?

Assuming it affects your alignment, If i were to start with a Lawful good alignment, I would stop somewhere in the realms of Neutral alignments. Since you are Neutral already, if it puts you in chaotic neutral and starts pushing you towards evil, this is the time to ask yourself if you are willing to play an evil character. if so, pick a point of no return after that. Chaotic Evil can be a stopping point, but in my opinion, this is probably where you WILL be possessed.

Once you reach your point of no return, keep in mind you are walking the fine line between free will and possession. Ask yourself if you're willing to risk it, magical benefits or no. If not, ditch the item next chance you get.

Cluedrew
2017-02-20, 03:26 PM
And, if that looks like it won't produce a fun result - for you or your group - then it's time to discuss things OOC, to find a way to make "fun" and "in character" align, so that good times, good memories, and good stories can be had by all.This is an important issue, in fact the separation of these two has a name: my guy.

Also an important note that most characters have a ready made in-character feature that allows them to make reasonable decisions without breaking character. Its called the will to live. Very few characters want to die, or are even indifferent to it and so will make a deliberate effort to not die.

And, assuming for a moment that the best story you can tell at your position involves a tragic end (it may not), you have to live long enough to actually get there. There are matters of pacing and build-up to consider. I don't think anyone cried over Romeo's mother.

Max_Killjoy
2017-02-20, 03:27 PM
This is an important issue, in fact the separation of these two has a name: my guy.

Also an important note that most characters have a ready made in-character feature that allows them to make reasonable decisions without breaking character. Its called the will to live. Very few characters want to die, or are even indifferent to it and so will make a deliberate effort to not die.


True.

"WW_D" should include "try to not die" as a default for most characters.

Starchild7309
2017-02-20, 03:46 PM
I don't worry about survivability too much. Your character could die at any point in the adventure.

What are the effects of the curse? You say personality change and possession? Did the DM give you specifics on how the curse affects your character in terms of Roleplay?

The decision to keep or ditch a cursed item is usually a meta decision, and you can get rid of it when your DM allows you to.

If you want a bit more roleplay out of it, Ask your DM if he'll let your character to make an Insight or Perception check to have a moment of clarity. This way your character can make the decision rather than just you.


Personally, I would milk it for all it is worth. Look for a "point of no return" in the curse's effects.

To me, it depends on how it affects your character's personality. If it moves your alignment, ask yourself how much of your character's "soul" you are willing to give up? Are you willing to go from Lawful to Chaotic? What about Good to Evil?

Assuming it affects your alignment, If i were to start with a Lawful good alignment, I would stop somewhere in the realms of Neutral alignments. Since you are Neutral already, if it puts you in chaotic neutral and starts pushing you towards evil, this is the time to ask yourself if you are willing to play an evil character. if so, pick a point of no return after that. Chaotic Evil can be a stopping point, but in my opinion, this is probably where you WILL be possessed.

Once you reach your point of no return, keep in mind you are walking the fine line between free will and possession. Ask yourself if you're willing to risk it, magical benefits or no. If not, ditch the item next chance you get.

The insight check is a good idea...I will try that.

The alignment change has been my own choices. Our group has been put in pretty desperate situations. Therefore, we have made some pretty desperate decisions. We already sold our souls to devils. That was much of what changed our alignments. I kind of like the idea of walking the line between control and losing it with this character. He has always been a walk on the edge type.

Starchild7309
2017-02-20, 03:51 PM
And, if that looks like it won't produce a fun result - for you or your group - then it's time to discuss things OOC, to find a way to make "fun" and "in character" align, so that good times, good memories, and good stories can be had by all.

I have talked about this with the DM. Unfortunately, we have many payers who can't separate character knowledge from player knowledge and a conversation about this would make meta gaming go insane. My DM has a few ideas on how to handle this, none that he has shared with me yet, but we both agree a sit down with the payers and saying hey, the sorcerer may or may not turn into the BBEG at some point, is that ok with you, or some version of that would cause more problems than it may solve. It has been thought about though.

Starchild7309
2017-02-21, 01:00 AM
OK so now I am confused as my DM has told me that that the campaign would end if either our Wizard/fighter or I were to die. Not that it would be impossible, but that the story lines would collapse as all of the other players have all recently rolled up new characters after an almost TPK. So I am not sure if I should push this because if I lose control of the stone and all that then I would effectively be ending the campaign. I asked him about how that would play with the rest of the group and he was very lukewarm. GRRRR.

HidesHisEyes
2017-02-21, 11:55 AM
Decide what your character would want to do, make that your goal as a player and aim to make it happen. The story that emerges from that is the story, and it's a good one as long as it emerges organically. That's the way I see it.

Quertus
2017-02-21, 08:24 PM
This is an important issue, in fact the separation of these two has a name: my guy.

Never heard of this. Can you explain in more detail?


I have talked about this with the DM. Unfortunately, we have many payers who can't separate character knowledge from player knowledge and a conversation about this would make meta gaming go insane. My DM has a few ideas on how to handle this, none that he has shared with me yet, but we both agree a sit down with the payers and saying hey, the sorcerer may or may not turn into the BBEG at some point, is that ok with you, or some version of that would cause more problems than it may solve. It has been thought about though.

Well, sometimes, just discussing it with the DM is sufficient. Depends on the problem, and what needs to happen to get "fun" and " in character" back in alignment.


OK so now I am confused as my DM has told me that that the campaign would end if either our Wizard/fighter or I were to die. Not that it would be impossible, but that the story lines would collapse as all of the other players have all recently rolled up new characters after an almost TPK. So I am not sure if I should push this because if I lose control of the stone and all that then I would effectively be ending the campaign. I asked him about how that would play with the rest of the group and he was very lukewarm. GRRRR.

And, sometimes, survival is required for coherent stories. Not sure that this implementation is exactly what I meant by that...


Decide what your character would want to do, make that your goal as a player and aim to make it happen. The story that emerges from that is the story, and it's a good one as long as it emerges organically. That's the way I see it.

yeah, that's pretty close to my opinion / play style. Pretend I said this, too.

Cluedrew
2017-02-21, 08:46 PM
On My Guy: It refers to (in some circles) people doing things that are actively unfun for the game because "that is what my character would do". And it often is in character. Sometimes it is a genuine mistake, people putting to much important into staying in character, but other times it is a justification for other disruptive behaviour. Two main solutions: express the character differently or make a better character for the game.