Inverting the Severe Injuries rules

[shootingwomprats]

[Rusharn]

I don't like to run systems that give the players an out when the dice finally turn against them. I run a fair game, if you plan and prepare, odds are things will go good for you. In games where their is a player safety net, I notice that players get more reckless because they know that net is there.

[Naaman]

[Naaman]

[Naaman]

In other words, if the players know that bad guys have a safety net, they will just run away, and not fight, even if they have every reason to fight.

Or do we believe that Luke intentionally fell into the ventillation chute after vader cut off his hand?

And Han, Obi, and Luke intentionally arrived at Alderaan right after it blew up instead of getting caught in the blast?

And its a good thing the stormtroopers on Endor only took Han/Leai captive (didn't just kill them on sight for some bizare reason), and then Chewie showed up.

The PCs absolutely get plot armor... especially if you hope to have a sequel.

[Rusharn]

For me, the bad guys do not get plot armor, if the dice turn against them the bad guys die. Its why I make sure my mastermind villains are smart, they plan things out, have contingencies and the players have chances to learn what those contingencies are. If the players can outsmart the villain, good for them.

But one of the key elements that differentiates a story from an RPG is that random uncontrollable element. When a player picks up the dice they are always chancing fate and that is were the excitement comes from. Not knowing for sure what the outcome will be. That moment creates tension and causes that silence at the table when that player's hero is trying for that moment of glory and everyone watches intently for each die to come to a stop and tell all, GM and Player alike where the games goes from there.

Systems that allow for buy outs from the result of the die lose that edge, the element of excitement, and risk, and it then just breaks the game down to resource management or worse just going through the motions of predestine outcome.

But that's why I enjoy RPG's. My poison doesn't have to be your poison

[Dredwulf60]

I always roll for 'maiming' every time one of my player's character's get close to death. I use a hit location chart that has got a few degrees of damage for each body portion.

So far I've had one player lose a knee; he replaced the leg.

I've had another player take a deep slash to the throat that severed muscles to his jaw. (he's had surgery to maintain his ability to chew and speak etc, but he'll always have the scar.)

I've had another player take grievous intestinal injuries; he had to be monitored for sepsis for quite a while, but it's now been surgically corrected.)

Another character wore an eye patch after being shot in the head. No cybernetics for him yet.

The players just know it's best not to get shot at all if they can help it.

Getting shot to incapacitation is never a small thing.

[Naaman]

[Naaman]

[garhkal]

[Rusharn]

[Naaman]

The only reason I limited it to one method was to cut down on the one-upping that will naturally develop when a point is made about the dice being the end-all be all.

Basically, I say, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If a GM TRULY wants the PCs to be subject to the same rules s the bad guys, then he should ceaft each bad guy with no knowledge of the PC's plans or abilities, and be required to do his own research and take the same risks the PCs do when learning what he is up against.

In other words, no latter how a GM justifies it, he is giving the BBEG plot armor, even if he says he isn't.

[MrNexx]

[Rusharn]

Maybe I run my villains differently but I do roll for their off screen endeavors especially when facing off with other powerful NPC groups. Business men roll Business checks, Generals roll tactics checks, etc for whatever they are doing. Why would I just say a Villain does x without checking to see if he could do it? Why would I just say allies of the players just accomplish something without making the most basic of rolls to see if they succeed. No one is flawless and NPC's are no exception. Some times NPC plans go awry and if the players are watching they can take advantage of it.

I mean if a evil business man isn't going to have to check his business skill why give it to him in the first place? All my NPC's either follow a generic template reflecting how good they are or if they are important enough they get their own custom stat block. But if they are doing something to x level of proficiency they better have the skill to back it up, and I check that skill to see if they fail or succeed, even if they are working off screen.

I track major groups and how well they succeed and fail against each other. I keep a simple, but in my opinion an effective, track of what type of assets, strength, finances all the major organizations have, and those fluctuate during game play off screen based on the dice that they roll, and if players pay attention to the news they can get hints of when an enemy might be weak, when a specific group might be open to outside help with an issue, or of an opportunity because of a shift in economics or politics.

It could be just the way I view things but I don't protect villains from the rules. If the dice say they fail, they fail. On screen or not. If they have an escape route that they can use to escape a battle, they had better be in good enough shape to get to it, and if the player do enough diligent research they can learn it is there. If the villain is incapacitated then they aren't escaping unless someone else carries them away, and those people had better be around, and not already killed by the players. If my players are through the Villain is defeated once and for all. Villains can and are replaced, and the death of a powerful villain can cause a power vacuum that itself can escalate in something even worse.

It is why players in my games invest in Knowledge skills, so they have a good understanding of what the balance of power is like, so when they do something major they have at least a general idea of what the fallout might be like. I have had players spare a villain because they learned he was the only thing keeping a bigger villain from moving in. In other cases the players have worked for villains under the old adage 'my enemy's enemy is my ally' because they knew a bigger villain was coming, because they kept up on galactic news.

All this, because in the background the NPC's still have to work for their successes and aren't immune to failure and act like they are not immune to failure.

I might just have a different style of play that developed from when, I as a player have too often been robbed of victory because a GM decided this was not the time for their villain to die, even though the group has them dead to rights. I also detest GM's that ambush players regardless of the levels of preparation and information gathering they have gone through simply because they have scripted an ambush. Giving villains plot armor is unfair and to me personally goes against the grain of what a table top RPG is.

It is why I play table top RPG's instead of video games. I should be able to out smart the villain, to get the drop on him, be able to lure him into a trap. I should be able to look at a map and have the group's scouts be able to check choke points, blind spots, and kill zones for ambushes and actually be able to find them ahead of time because we we smart enough to look and the skills to find them. I don't want it done to me, so it's something I don't do to my players.

This is why table top gaming will always be superior to a video game in respect for choice and opportunity of outcome. No amount of foresight and programing will allow a video game to account for everything a player can or will do. But a GM can adapt to any choice the players make, and allow the players' own ingenuity, cunning, and experiences to be used to push characters beyond their paper stats into being something epic and create memories that will last a lifetime.

Shattering plot armor on NPC's allows for full range of outcomes, which include surprises for player and GM alike and allows table top games to transcend into a deeply moving experience.

That's just my 2 cents though.

[garhkal]