I purchased a copy of the book on Saturday, ran a game on Sunday (the one out of the book for 0-level adventurers).
My family and I had a lot of fun with it and I'm looking for more 0-level funnel adventures.
We especially enjoyed the fact that the rooms were deadly, had deadly puzzles or traps that could be avoided through being clever rather than brutal luck.
Any recommendations?
Bonus points if you can link to an adventure available online, and if it's available for free, even better :)
Otherwise, advice on creating my own, what makes a good 0-level funnel adventure, etc, is greatly appreciated!
I am unfamiliar with the system. What is a 0 level funnel
In DCC you generate 4-8 "Zero Level" illiterate peasant shit-shovelers with 1d4 HP. They then go through a meat-grinder adventure, and out of the poor slobs who survive you pick one to graduate to first level and get a real character class to become your character.
It's a fucking blast. Seriously.
I played the "Sailors on a Starless Sea" one. We fought a bunch of Warhammer-ish beastmen. It was groovy.
That sounds fun. :)
Sounds like fun but I don't know what DCC means. Unless it's Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders. Which would be an interesting setting for an RPG.
Edit: Duh. Missed the thread title. Color me embarrassed.
The 0-level funnel idea is brilliant because it provides you with a light hearted encouragement to play a roleplaying game in a way that is actually fun. Games that are not actually dangerous to the player characters are just boring. And the way you know something dangerous and exciting is happening is that one or two or eight PC's get butchered. This is essential to what makes lots of old games fun - Boot Hill, original Gamma World, early D&D played without training wheels, etc. DCC's designers are just re-introducing the world to how fun it is to play with something at stake.
You can use pretty much any 1st level adventure for a funnel, just triple the number of monsters and sprinkle in a few extra traps. The real funnel magic is that players have 4-5 PCs and it's expected that most will die, so you just need enough monsters (or higher level ones) to make that happen.
If no PCs get butchered as a result of poor decisions, I'm not interested! :D
As far as free 0-level funnels available online as pdfs are concerned, look for Tomb of the Ghast Queen
http://rpgknights.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Tomb-of-the-Ghast-Queen-DCC.pdf
The Hypercube of Myt
http://www.goodman-games.com/downloads/DCCRC1-%20The%20Hypercube%20of%20Myt.pdf
Death by Nexus
http://www.goodman-games.com/downloads/RC2_Death_by_Nexus.pdf
There are also a number of decent-to-good adventures (funnels and otherwise) available on DriveThruRpg for dirt cheap. Scroll down this list and you'll find several available for a few bucks at most. "Prince Charming, Reanimator" is available in a "pay what you want" format and it's pretty weird and fun.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse.php?keywords=dungeon+crawl+classics&author=&artist=&pfrom=&pto=&x=0&y=0
I'd like to find some more funnels as well. They are great for a one-off or even to start a campaign, and a nice change of pace. The dark humor of watching characters die through a combination of bad luck, grizzly traps, and incompetence is hilarious. It's sort of D&D meets Paranoia. I rate "Sailors on the Starless Sea" as one of my top 5 published adventures of all time.
You could just play 1st level characters in any pre-3E edition of D+D; played BtB it is basically a funnel. Unless the DM is a total wus.
Quote from: Madprofessor;970331The dark humor of watching characters die through a combination of bad luck, grizzly traps, and incompetence is hilarious.
This is one of the great pleasures of being the GM. I've heard cautionary tales about players who are very precious about the PCs they've arduously crafted and created 20-page backstories for (at 1st level) who then fall face-first into a spiked pit, but fortunately I only play with people who can laugh at what predicaments they've gotten themselves into.
I sometimes get the feeling that 90% of DCC gamers never do anything other than 0-level games, which I think is a stupid waste of such a great system.
Technically, I've only ever run ONE 'funnel', which was the very first adventure of my DCC campaign. Since then, that game has been going for like 4 years now, and new characters just jump in the deep end to try to survive whatever the party is going through.
Quote from: RPGPundit;971032I sometimes get the feeling that 90% of DCC gamers never do anything other than 0-level games, which I think is a stupid waste of such a great system.
It's true, but it's partly because DCC adventures can be pretty lethal. At least that's true for the way most of the Goodman ones are written. Of course, in the end it ultimately depends on the GM and players. The Funnel is great, but what brings me back to DCC are the classes, the magic, and the tables.
But as to the OP, I've had a great time with
The Hole In The Sky. I even reviewed it on this site...here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?35310-Dungeon-Crawl-Classics-86-The-Hole-In-The-Sky).
Quote from: Larsdangly;969978DCC's designers are just re-introducing the world to how fun it is to play with something at stake.
Except nothing's actually at stake. Those 0-level NPC's aren't real, and nothing that happens to them really matters. They're indistinguishable, so it doesn't even matter which of them survives to the end to be promoted to 1st level. You could treat the entire group of them as one character with 3 "extra lives", video game style, and it wouldn't make the slightest difference.
The funnel's fun, and it's a great tutorial for new players, but let's not pretend that a bunch of arbitrary numbers and random die rolls constitute "something at stake".
Quote from: daniel_ream;971078Except nothing's actually at stake. Those 0-level NPC's aren't real, and nothing that happens to them really matters. They're indistinguishable, so it doesn't even matter which of them survives to the end to be promoted to 1st level. You could treat the entire group of them as one character with 3 "extra lives", video game style, and it wouldn't make the slightest difference.
The funnel's fun, and it's a great tutorial for new players, but let's not pretend that a bunch of arbitrary numbers and random die rolls constitute "something at stake".
That doesn't match my experience. The auger and occupation give each character a certain flavor that any capable player will have fun with. Players will often have one character with great stats that they really, really want to have survive above the others. That can add a lot of tension to the game.
If you see these characters as meaningless numbers, then you'd have the same issue with a 1st-level character or a 10th-level one. Then again, I generally with play with people who can't play a boardgame without roleplaying.
Quote from: RPGPundit;971032I sometimes get the feeling that 90% of DCC gamers never do anything other than 0-level games, which I think is a stupid waste of such a great system.
Technically, I've only ever run ONE 'funnel', which was the very first adventure of my DCC campaign. Since then, that game has been going for like 4 years now, and new characters just jump in the deep end to try to survive whatever the party is going through.
The way I see the game pitched it's always basically using the funnel as the game's selling point. Extra lethal, super simple, fast to run.
I am not really sure how to handle half of the stuff that happens after that, like introducing new PCs.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;971107I am not really sure how to handle half of the stuff that happens after that, like introducing new PCs.
Our GM usually brings in new PCs as a batch of level zeros (rescued prisoners, hirelings, lost pilgrims, interdimensional castaways)... but there's also a 'virtual funnel' he'll point Players toward as an option to start with a 1st level PC.
He also let's people keep extra surviving level zeros as a second string 'stable' that can be used as needed.
All this results in a party that is a churning mix of different levels. My 5th lvl wizard is currently the highest, but there are often some lvl zeros along too, which will hit 1st if they survive a battle or two.
Some of us also end up running multiple PCs past the lvl zero stage. I've got a 3rd lvl cleric as well, which I took over when another Player abandoned her.
It sounds chaotic but it's been pretty smooth and we've got a very chill GM.
Don't people feel like they're just spectators when they are level 0 or 1 and someone else is 5?
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;971260Don't people feel like they're just spectators when they are level 0 or 1 and someone else is 5?
You mean in combat? Doesn't seem that way to me. The level 5 has saved the day a couple times... but most times it's the lower level PCs delivering the death blows.
Plus, since the level 5 is my PC and I choose to adhere to the rules suggestion that new spells should be found and learned... she hasn't had her full complement of spells for much of the campaign. Needing to find them, then find the time to learn them. The rules don't have a quick and easy way to swap out known spells... so I've passed on some grimoires I've found but didn't want to learn.
Quote from: Baulderstone;971094If you see these characters as meaningless numbers, then you'd have the same issue with a 1st-level character or a 10th-level one.
My point is that players have no more and no less at stake when funneling PCs than they do in any other character generation method. The only thing a player is truly expending that can't be recovered is time. The rest is all just make-believe.
If you want to see
real stakes, have each player put a ten-spot on the table for each character, and if a character dies the money goes to the beer fund or the United Way or something. Watch how the play changes.
Quote from: daniel_ream;971078Except nothing's actually at stake. Those 0-level NPC's aren't real, and nothing that happens to them really matters. They're indistinguishable, so it doesn't even matter which of them survives to the end to be promoted to 1st level. You could treat the entire group of them as one character with 3 "extra lives", video game style, and it wouldn't make the slightest difference.
The funnel's fun, and it's a great tutorial for new players, but let's not pretend that a bunch of arbitrary numbers and random die rolls constitute "something at stake".
I kind of agree. Sounds like it might be fun in a "soda and pretzels" way but not really my cuppa. But I'm not very Old School (which I guess means I'm one of spoiled Special Snowflakes by the standards of this board. :D)
Quote from: daniel_ream;971320My point is that players have no more and no less at stake when funneling PCs than they do in any other character generation method. The only thing a player is truly expending that can't be recovered is time. The rest is all just make-believe.
I played in a zero level funnel last night and the Players definitely invested imagination and emotion into their soon to be dead PCs. One of the first to die was one of mine that I particularly liked and was rooting for... and had up to that point been a source of much amusement.
The last to die was a PC everyone had felt protective of, had been played with color and verve, was that Player's sole remaining PC, AND he died in a particularly horrible way that shocked everyone.
The whole session was like that, everyone involved was playing their characters to the hilt.
It wasn't 'just' chargen.
Maybe, as always, it makes a difference who you play with... if they just see numbers and short lifespans or if they can breathe life into those brief details and let them live, if only for a moment.
And if you can't enjoy playing a lvl zero... I'm going to wonder how much fun you'll bring to any other PC you play, if all that matters is the numbers and mechanical competency.
Quote from: daniel_ream;971320My point is that players have no more and no less at stake when funneling PCs than they do in any other character generation method. The only thing a player is truly expending that can't be recovered is time. The rest is all just make-believe.
If you want to see real stakes, have each player put a ten-spot on the table for each character, and if a character dies the money goes to the beer fund or the United Way or something. Watch how the play changes.
'
Its' a different attitude about games and their purpose. I guess I can kinda of understand. I play and enjoy Slasher Flick and most of the characters in it are fated to die horribly. Hell, some of them are dubbed Secondary Characters and are more less currency to expend to power up the Final Girl for her showdown with the Killer if it comes to that. It feels different but that is totally subjective. I could also playing something like Tomb of Horrors as a one shot just to see how far you got as a way to kill an evening. So I guess its not that alien. As a chargen process I don't think I'd really get into it but its not Badwrongfun.
Quote from: Simlasa;971385I'm going to wonder how much fun you'll bring to any other PC you play, if all that matters is the numbers and mechanical competency.
I wouldn't go that far. Personally, I've played Joe Average characters in Beyond the Supernatural "victim" style games. For me, its about "power", its the feeling of it particular as a method of character generation. Sounds like you run these randomly created (something I personally dislike) through a deadly and arbitrary (there's no reason or premise behind it) gauntlet to test your luck and your abilities (not really the characters aside from necessary rolls). And if things work out you earn the ability to play them as fully fleshed out characters?
That just doesn't sound that engaging to me. But like I've said I'm not really an old school guy.
Quote from: Nexus;971392through a deadly and arbitrary (there's no reason or premise behind it) gauntlet
Who said that, that's 100% your assumptions and biases. You know how prior to being an adventurer, all adventurers were, at one point, non-adventurers and then
something happened? Well, this is that something.
Quote from: Nexus;971392to test your luck and your abilities (not really the characters aside from necessary rolls).
Trying to make use of the character's background skill and equipment is part of the "funnel experience". We know how experienced adventurers would react and what tools they would have to solve the problem, how are these people gonna do it?
Quote from: Nexus;971392And if things work out you earn the ability to play them as fully fleshed out characters?
Umm...you have...at some point in your life actually thought of things from the point of view of the character in the setting, yes? The characters that survived have been through something most people never go through. Sure, maybe some would want to go back to being a peasant gongfarmer, but in that case we don't care what happens for the purposes of the campaign. These characters are different people now after having been through their ordeal.
Quote from: Nexus;971392That just doesn't sound that engaging to me.
It's not, but since no one is actually doing what you described, that's a good thing.
Quote from: Nexus;971392But like I've said I'm not really an old school guy.
That's true, you're a Hippy Storygamer :D, but the reason you're not Old School has nothing to do with why you think you're not Old School.
Quote from: CRKrueger;971394Who said that, that's 100% your assumptions and biases.
That's all I've ever heard about it whenever its been described. "The Funnel" is something you run handfuls of characters through to see if you get to play them. I've never heard that it as premise or "reality" as far the rest of the game goes. Does it?
QuoteTrying to make use of the character's background skill and equipment is part of the "funnel experience". We know how experienced adventurers would react and what tools they would have to solve the problem, how are these people gonna do it?
Ok. I didn't say it was bad, I said I wouldn't enjoy it. Its an old school mindset that its the players ability not the character's that matter. That's fine just not my cuppa.
QuoteUmm...you have...at some point in your life actually thought of things from the point of view of the character in the setting, yes? The characters that survived have been through something most people never go through. Sure, maybe some would want to go back to being a peasant gongfarmer, but in that case we don't care what happens for the purposes of the campaign. These characters are different people now after having been through their ordeal.
Fuck you. Seriously fuck you. You're ridiculous assumption that anyone that doesn't play like you play is somehow "not role playing" or some bullshit is annoying as Hell. Like I said, as far as I know the whole "funnel" thing is OOC, a meta construct to test the player and isn't actually a part of anything,. I've tried to be even hand and keep it a matter of taste but fuck that noise now. If you'd actually describe where I had some misconceptions and heard wrong intead of coming on with your usual condescending bullshit because you're too damn insecure and thin skinned to tolerate that somebody, some where might not like what you like this might have been a productive conversation or at least an interesting one instead of another CK Rage shitshow.
Edit: to everyone else, sorry. I don't like to rant like this but he caught me on a bad day and I've had it with his shit.
Quote from: Nexus;971392Sounds like you run these randomly created (something I personally dislike) through a deadly and arbitrary (there's no reason or premise behind it) gauntlet to test your luck and your abilities (not really the characters aside from necessary rolls).
Their stats are randomly generated... but you bring their personality and name them and decide if they're brave or cowardly, foolish or careful, craven or kind... AND the funnel ALWAYS has a reason/premise!
There's a reason all these ordinary folks have chosen (or were forced by fate) to pick up the tools at hand and risk their lives. It's still a full fledged adventure... just with not-yet-heroic PCs.
QuoteThat's true, you're a Hippy Storygamer :D, but the reason you're not Old School has nothing to do with why you think you're not Old School.
Actually, I don't like the majority of what you guys call "storygames" they don't provide the experience I like and feel too "meta" for my tastes Not to mention the voice they're written in often pretentious as Hell. But I guess we all have unfounded assumptions, huh? My favorite rpgs is Champions/Hero System. Last time I heard that isn't a "hippy storygame". I am not old school because I do not enjoy the old school mindset. I know this due to having a lousy time in old school games and finding the description of them unappealing. I'm pretty sure I actually experienced all that so... no, the reason I am not Old School is I have tried Old School and did not like it.
Quote from: Simlasa;971404There's a reason all these ordinary folks have chosen (or were forced by fate) to pick up the tools at hand and risk their lives. It's still a full fledged adventure... just with not-yet-heroic PCs.
Ah, I see. I'd gotten the impression is was a strictly out of game thing. I stand corrected. Thanks.
Quote from: Nexus;971403That's all I've ever heard about it whenever its been described. "The Funnel" is something you run handfuls of characters through to see if you get to play them. I've never heard that it as premise or "reality" as far the rest of the game goes. Does it?
Ok. I didn't say it was bad, I said I wouldn't enjoy it. Its an old school mindset that its the players ability not the character's that matter. That's fine just not my cuppa.
Fuck you. Seriously fuck you. You're ridiculous assumption that anyone that doesn't play like you play is somehow "not role playing" or some bullshit is annoying as Hell. Like I said, as far as I know the whole "funnel" thing is OOC, a meta construct to test the player and isn't actually a part of anything,. I've tried to be even hand and keep it a matter of taste but fuck that noise now. If you'd actually describe where I had some misconceptions and heard wrong intead of coming on with your usual condescending bullshit because you're too damn insecure and thin skinned to tolerate that somebody, some where might not like what you like this might have been a productive conversation.
I'm the sensitive, thin-skinned one? Sheesh.
Look, the funnel is just another adventure. Period. It's set in the same world and setting as everything that comes after. It's no different than say playing the Prelude in Vampire:The Masquerade. It's playing the Backstory instead of writing it. That's it.
There is no OOC meta-construct, funhouse aspect, whatever., inherent to the rules. I think people do funnels at cons because they find them fun, but that just means it's "0-level DCC adventure" instead of a "3rd-4th Level DCC adventure".
Because it's a specific type of adventure, people might be running them by themselves, and doing nothing but funnels, but that's not the default assumption as laid out in the book.
Quote from: Nexus;971408Actually, I don't like the majority of what you guys call "storygames" they don't provide the experience I like and feel too "meta" for my tastes Not to mention the voice they're written in often pretentious as Hell. But I guess we all have unfounded assumptions, huh? My favorite rpgs is Champions/Hero System. Last time I heard that isn't a "hippy storygame". I am not old school because I do not enjoy the old school mindset. I know this due to having a lousy time in old school games and finding the description of them unappealing. I'm pretty sure I actually experienced all that so... no, the reason I am not Old School is I have tried Old School and did not like it.
Hey to Ream, that's a badge of honor. :D Yeah I know you're not a dyed in the wool forgie, but you brought up Slasher Flick, you gotta own at least a little Storygameyness. What I meant was, you just like a
little more OOC control in your RPG.
That not badwrongfun or objectively superior or inferior, but to have those meaningful conversations, you need to define terms. I'm perfectly happy roleplaying as close to 100% in-character as possible. You give me OOC mechanics, I don't like them, they bother me. You like a little bit of OOC input, expressed primarily through chargen, which I expect is why the most detailed, pointbuy system there is, is your favorite. It gives you near total control over the character you are going to play.
That core difference in chargen, between me and you, Lifepath vs. Point-Buy is also the reason you like Slasher Flick and I'd maybe play it the way I'd play any party game. When it comes to roleplaying, I do it from one point of view if possible, you possibly do it from two, which I actually think is probably the dominant paradigm currently. I try to think as the character in the setting, you think both as the character in the setting and about the character as a character in the game. Not to the point that you want or need mechanics to operate in that headspace, because you play a game without them and don't like games that operate heavily in that headspace, like Fate.
Still, that's enough of a difference to cause us to look at certain things differently, and it can be fundamental enough to lead to misunderstandings when we're not coming from the same place. Again, not a value judgement, just a difference.
I got snappy in my reply, after all the "OSR Taliban, Talmud, Holy Writ" horseshit lately, you triggered me with this characterization of the funnel that's not supported by the game text itself. It seemed like yet another incorrect "common OSR wisdom" thing coming out of left field. My bad.
Quote from: CRKrueger;971420Hey to Ream, that's a badge of honor.
You're just, like, too entrenched in your dominant paradigm, man, you don't understand the....*cough* what were we talking about?
Quote from: daniel_ream;971428You're just, like, too entrenched in your dominant paradigm, man, you don't understand the....*cough* what were we talking about?
Clyde Caldwell portraits.
Quote from: daniel_ream;971428You're just, like, too entrenched in your dominant paradigm, man, you don't understand the....*cough* what were we talking about?
Just talkin' bout old school.
We can dig it....
Quote from: daniel_ream;971078Except nothing's actually at stake. Those 0-level NPC's aren't real, and nothing that happens to them really matters. They're indistinguishable, so it doesn't even matter which of them survives to the end to be promoted to 1st level.
That might be true in games that are just funnels.
In my experience running a long-term campaign, people create personas for their 0-levels really quick.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;971260Don't people feel like they're just spectators when they are level 0 or 1 and someone else is 5?
Not in my experience. But they do feel like newbs.
I think 0-level DCC characters are really not that different from beginning characters in pre 3E editions of D&D (and similar games), or brand new, untrained characters in original Runequest (e.g., Rurik the Restless in his first encounter), etc. It has become common to think any character worth writing up should be exceptional and likely to survive and succeed at his or her first adventures, but there are dozens of older games where this is not the case.
Quote from: RPGPundit;971858Not in my experience. But they do feel like newbs.
Maybe it's more of a D&D thing then.
It seem common to look at having mixed level parties as some sort of offense.
Quote from: Simlasa;971385And if you can't enjoy playing a lvl zero... I'm going to wonder how much fun you'll bring to any other PC you play, if all that matters is the numbers and mechanical competency.
Again, you're missing my point. The stakes are no higher or lower when playing a gang of 0-level dung farmers or a 3rd-level Dark Sun PC. It's all just make-believe. The only thing a player truly has invested that can't be mulliganed is the time spent playing, which is the same either way. None of this is real, it's just make-believe and to claim that "the stakes are higher" with a 0-level funnel is approaching "BLACK LEAF!! NOOOOO" levels of confusing the game with reality.
To my understanding in the the funnel you run more than one PC at a time?
Quote from: Nexus;971980To my understanding in the the funnel you run more than one PC at a time?
You can, and usually do, but it is not required. The expectation is that something like half of the PC's will end up dead, so running more than one gives you a reasonable chance of having at least one survive, and that one becomes your main character. But it is not that important that you do it specifically this way. Actually, this is another way in which DCC is not very different from my experience of low-level D&D play. My groups have always had multiple PC's per player.
Quote from: Larsdangly;971907I think 0-level DCC characters are really not that different from beginning characters in pre 3E editions of D&D (and similar games), or brand new, untrained characters in original Runequest (e.g., Rurik the Restless in his first encounter), etc. It has become common to think any character worth writing up should be exceptional and likely to survive and succeed at his or her first adventures, but there are dozens of older games where this is not the case.
This is something that seems to have changed over my decades of RPG gaming. In the early days we expected our inexperienced characters to die like flies and often rolled up several at a time just so as to have replacements ready. These days there seems to be a very strong "no kill" bias in RPGs. Some games go so far as to take character death off the table unless the
player consents to having their character die.
We expected the same risk of death for involved character creation systems like FGU as we did for Basic D&D.
Quote from: Larsdangly;971989You can, and usually do, but it is not required. The expectation is that something like half of the PC's will end up dead, so running more than one gives you a reasonable chance of having at least one survive, and that one becomes your main character. But it is not that important that you do it specifically this way. Actually, this is another way in which DCC is not very different from my experience of low-level D&D play. My groups have always had multiple PC's per player.
Generally, my groups and I personally, never run more than one PC at the same time though sometimes some might have more than one character in the same setting. Its one of the aspects of Slasher Flick that I didn't enjoy though I understood the point of it.
Quote from: daniel_ream;971977Again, you're missing my point. The stakes are no higher or lower when playing a gang of 0-level dung farmers or a 3rd-level Dark Sun PC. It's all just make-believe.
Sure, OK, whatever... was that really a point that needed making?
I was only arguing against the notion, if not yours then someone elses, that level zeroes are somehow a lesser form of play.
Quote from: daniel_ream;971977Again, you're missing my point. The stakes are no higher or lower when playing a gang of 0-level dung farmers or a 3rd-level Dark Sun PC. It's all just make-believe. The only thing a player truly has invested that can't be mulliganed is the time spent playing, which is the same either way. None of this is real, it's just make-believe and to claim that "the stakes are higher" with a 0-level funnel is approaching "BLACK LEAF!! NOOOOO" levels of confusing the game with reality.
That's only true if you invest no emotional attachment to any of your PCs and just view the game as just a poker night.
I ran "Hole in the Sky" for my group and it went quite well. Here is my review of it (http://d20art.com/reviews/review-hole-in-the-sky/).
I found that the 0 level professions, lucky signs and the like were enough for players to develop personalities for their characters really quickly. Two players, one with a rutabaga farmer, and another with a parsnip farmer, quickly came up with a sort of Hatfields vs McCoys type dynamic.
Quote from: DavetheLost;971997This is something that seems to have changed over my decades of RPG gaming. In the early days we expected our inexperienced characters to die like flies and often rolled up several at a time just so as to have replacements ready. These days there seems to be a very strong "no kill" bias in RPGs. Some games go so far as to take character death off the table unless the player consents to having their character die.
We expected the same risk of death for involved character creation systems like FGU as we did for Basic D&D.
I have never understood emotional investment in a character you've either not played or barely begun to play. But I'm coldhearted as I really don't care if my PC dies no matter how long I've been playing him as long as it was fun. Usually I only have myself to blame anyway, or at worst bad luck with the dice. But I consider that part of the fun. Tales of unlikely deaths are as much fun to recount as those of bold deeds.
Quote from: daniel_ream;971977Again, you're missing my point. The stakes are no higher or lower when playing a gang of 0-level dung farmers or a 3rd-level Dark Sun PC. It's all just make-believe. The only thing a player truly has invested that can't be mulliganed is the time spent playing, which is the same either way. None of this is real, it's just make-believe and to claim that "the stakes are higher" with a 0-level funnel is approaching "BLACK LEAF!! NOOOOO" levels of confusing the game with reality.
No. If you lose a higher level PC, you lose the ability to keep playing that higher level PC. It's not just X amount of time playing, it's what character you're playing and what you can do with that character.
Also, you might actually be roleplaying and like that particular character. Weirder things have happened.
Quote from: CRKrueger;972059Also, you might actually be roleplaying and like that particular character. Weirder things have happened.
That's my thing... maybe it's naive/dumb, but I'll just about always jump into PCs with both feet. I might not always find a bond... and I certainly don't pitch a fit if the PC gets snuffed... but it feels like it's the nature of the game that I should connect with the character best I can, right from the start.
Quote from: Simlasa;972064That's my thing... maybe it's naive/dumb, but I'll just about always jump into PCs with both feet. I might not always find a bond... and I certainly don't pitch a fit if the PC gets snuffed... but it feels like it's the nature of the game that I should connect with the character best I can, right from the start.
Its not naive or dumb or Badwrongfun just a different outlook. For me when someone hands me a character and says "Play this." it feels more like an assignment than something I'm doing for fun even if that someone is fate/luck what have you. That might now make sense to some folks but that's just the way I'm wired. I can do it but its not very fun for me. Its a task to complete. It might be an interesting task in some cases but its really 'fun' or something I'd want to do on a long term basis. I won't care that much if the character dies but I won't care that much if it lives either.
Edit: and I admit the "You're expendable nobodies." style doesn't grab me very often unless the rest of the game's premise is interesting. I don't have to be Capt. Hero savior of the Universe (every day and twice on Sunday) but I like playing characters that matter to some degree. For example, one game I'm right now Silent Earth, our PCs are among the few people left after...something happened to almost everyone. We're just average doofuses (my character was part owner of an FLGS) but they're embroiled in an intriguing (to me) premise.
Quote from: Nexus;972070I admit the "You're expendable nobodies." style doesn't grab me very often unless the rest of the game's premise is interesting. I don't have to be Capt. Hero savior of the Universe (every day and twice on Sunday) but I like playing characters that matter to some degree.
I guess I feel like even the lowliest PC has a part to play... if not saving the world then saving his buddy.
But I do generally favor more personal, lower-powered games and stories. I like the first half of Stripes/Ghostbusters/Spiderman/Etc. more than the second.
Quote from: Simlasa;972073I guess I feel like even the lowliest PC has a part to play... if not saving the world then saving his buddy.
But I do generally favor more personal, lower-powered games and stories. I like the first half of Stripes/Ghostbusters/Spiderman/Etc. more than the second.
Like I said, It doesn't have to be saving the world every adventure. For supers, i actually prefer more street level city focused games than the the world spanning Avengers style. but I do want want to be more than another solider in the trenches saving their pal until the both die in the meat grinder. hat can make for a fine story but its not what I want from an rpg. But there's nothing about larger scale PCs and games that makes less personal by default. At least not in my experience. My high power PCs have as developed a personal life as my lower powered ones.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;972017That's only true if you invest no emotional attachment to any of your PCs and just view the game as just a poker night.
Yes. I invest no emotional attachment whatsoever in my made-up elf for a game about crawling around in a hole looking for shiny things.
That's not sarcasm. There are things in life that deserve emotional investment, like family, friends, career, legacy; elfgames about tomb robbing are not one of them.
Quote from: CRKrueger;972059No. If you lose a higher level PC, you lose the ability to keep playing that higher level PC.
No, you don't. There is no force in the universe that can stop me from taking that PC and playing them at another table or another game. There isn't even a force in the universe that can keep me from saying "no, my PC doesn't die; that's dumb" to the DM. Whether he goes along with that is up to him, but then what happens in the game fiction (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Jm_eUQSYAk)was
always just an informal,
unenforceable agreement between the people sitting at the table.
This isn't Diablo III on Hardcore mode where if you die, the game deletes your save. It's all made up.
Quote from: daniel_ream;972167Yes. I invest no emotional attachment whatsoever in my made-up elf for a game about crawling around in a hole looking for shiny things.
That's not sarcasm. There are things in life that deserve emotional investment, like family, friends, career, legacy; elfgames about tomb robbing are not one of them.
No, you don't. There is no force in the universe that can stop me from taking that PC and playing them at another table or another game. There isn't even a force in the universe that can keep me from saying "no, my PC doesn't die; that's dumb" to the DM. Whether he goes along with that is up to him, but then what happens in the game fiction (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Jm_eUQSYAk)was always just an informal, unenforceable agreement between the people sitting at the table.
This isn't Diablo III on Hardcore mode where if you die, the game deletes your save. It's all made up.
I'll take my character to another game and not have all the connections that character had with the setting and campaign of that table. If for you PC=Playing Piece on Paper, you have a point. If for you, PC= a person in a specific imaginary world that you are roleplaying, your contention is laughable.
Quote from: daniel_ream;972167Yes. I invest no emotional attachment whatsoever in my made-up elf for a game about crawling around in a hole looking for shiny things.
So you find no connection with any character in any work of fiction... you're totally numb regarding their fate... or do you read fiction or watch movies at all... because if you don't care a wit about any of the characters why would you?
Quote from: CRKrueger;972208I'll take my character to another game and not have all the connections that character had with the setting and campaign of that table. If for you PC=Playing Piece on Paper, you have a point. If for you, PC= a person in a specific imaginary world that you are roleplaying, your contention is laughable.
Some people have a stronger connection/interest in the character than the specific setting. I've run into that quite bit when playing. If the character dies in one imaginary world they take it to another and works for them. They still prefer that character and how they see it without regarding it as playing piece. I don't know if that's how Daniel Ream feels but it does happen.
Speaking for myself, I think once again I'm somewhere in the middle. I'd be disappointed even a little saddened if a valued character died but I wouldn't consider it a permanent injunction against playing that character again. I've moved PCs between campaigns before and I'd do it again. Though usually its been when the game folded rather than the character dying.
We had a player in our high school group who always insisted on playing the same character. It didn't matter what the game system was, he would convert the mechanics and play that character. He showed up in D&D, in Traveller, in RuneQuest, what ever we played there was Kessel.
I've known plenty of other players who really never formed an emotional attachment with their characters. Some would refer to them as "my guy" and even have to look up things like what class they were.
There are as many ways of playing elfgames as there are players. Me, I haven't had a chance to be a player in more than a one shot in decades. I made the mistake of being a decent GM.
Quote from: DavetheLost;972287We had a player in our high school group who always insisted on playing the same character. It didn't matter what the game system was, he would convert the mechanics and play that character. He showed up in D&D, in Traveller, in RuneQuest, what ever we played there was Kessel.
I've known plenty of other players who really never formed an emotional attachment with their characters. Some would refer to them as "my guy" and even have to look up things like what class they were.
There are as many ways of playing elfgames as there are players. Me, I haven't had a chance to be a player in more than a one shot in decades. I made the mistake of being a decent GM.
We had a guy that always played the same character. No hyperbole. Always. But he'd never say it was the same character even going so far as to submit proposals and backgrounds for PCs that seemed different but once the game started it was some obnoxious clown right down to physical appearance (as lose as he could get in the background and if there was anything like bodysculpting in the setting it was the first thing he went for) and name. Always Kevin, Paul or Alex, one time he really stepped outside his comfort zone with Alexander.
I've played with 'same guy' guys but they've still all obviously cared, to some degree, when their PC bought the farm. Not to the ridiculous 'Blackleaf!' nonsense... but not indifference either.
Despite my own emotional investment in my PCs I want to know my they can killed, and it's not like I'm shedding tears when they are.
Quote from: Simlasa;972306I've played with 'same guy' guys but they've still all obviously cared, to some degree, when their PC bought the farm. Not to the ridiculous 'Blackleaf!' nonsense... but not indifference either.
Despite my own emotional investment in my PCs I want to know my they can killed, and it's not like I'm shedding tears when they are.
"He is Simlasa, a Cimmerian. He won't cry. So I cry for him."
(http://www.aveleyman.com/Gallery/ActorsL/10563-3762.jpg)
DCC certainly seems to have one of the most active, enthusiastic and friendly communities in the OSR. They also produce loads of adventure content. The secret of their success?
Quote from: Voros;972538DCC certainly seems to have one of the most active, enthusiastic and friendly communities in the OSR. They also produce loads of adventure content. The secret of their success?
Good question. There are games that have a fantastic base of fans- friendly, helpful, and yeah, enthusiastic. All the folks over at Basic Fantasy come to mind here. Great people, great game, awesome community of people pulling together and creating awesome material for the game.
Then there are some games that seem to attract the opposite, the games are good, but the community around them is fractured and bitter or something. They just seem angry and want to tear everything apart. I don't know what makes some games pull in certain types.
Quote from: darthfozzywig;972444"He is Simlasa, a Cimmerian. He won't cry. So I cry for him."
(http://www.aveleyman.com/Gallery/ActorsL/10563-3762.jpg)
I do make a point of pushing for funerals/wakes/memorials for fallen PCs... mine and others... because I think it adds to the atmosphere/continuity, and I always like stories that refer to fallen characters we never get to see, like 'Horsehead' in Time Bandits.
I had a Deadlands PC who was a personal chronicler of one of the other PCs, saw to it that he always got write-ups in the local paper when he came to a town and hired mourners and a band for a fancy funeral procession when he thought his Patron had been killed (a damn fine send off, spoiled only by the arrival of the supposedly deceased)... all in the interest of pushing the 'legend' he had proprietary access to.
Quote from: Simlasa;972306I've played with 'same guy' guys but they've still all obviously cared, to some degree, when their PC bought the farm. Not to the ridiculous 'Blackleaf!' nonsense... but not indifference either.
Despite my own emotional investment in my PCs I want to know my they can killed, and it's not like I'm shedding tears when they are.
Oh Kevin/Paul/Alex cared. Maybe a little too much.
Quote from: Voros;972538DCC certainly seems to have one of the most active, enthusiastic and friendly communities in the OSR. They also produce loads of adventure content. The secret of their success?
They embrace the logical extremes of D&D's weirdness.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;971942Maybe it's more of a D&D thing then.
It seem common to look at having mixed level parties as some sort of offense.
Certainly not to me. Every OSR game I run ends up having mixed-level parties. If you die, you start again at level 1 (or level 0, in DCC).
Quote from: RPGPundit;972911Certainly not to me. Every OSR game I run ends up having mixed-level parties. If you die, you start again at level 1 (or level 0, in DCC).
I imagine that forces the players to plan things out more thoroughly and actively avoid PC death, then.
Quote from: Voros;972538DCC certainly seems to have one of the most active, enthusiastic and friendly communities in the OSR. They also produce loads of adventure content. The secret of their success?
I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it is modules. I was a fan of Goodman long before DCC. They publish modules -short, densely packed, content heavy, fluff-trimmed, game-night ready-to-play, easy to adapt or steal from modules. Love em.
Yeah I dig the modules although I don't use the system.
Anyone used Purple Sorcerer modules? They look a cut above in terms of art and maps and the monsters and setting seems tradish but imaginative.
Quote from: Nihilistic Mind;973310I imagine that forces the players to plan things out more thoroughly and actively avoid PC death, then.
It's definitely a good motivator. It makes the game more exciting, too. You know that if your 8th level guy dies you don't just get to "respawn" another 8th level guy.