Re: Re: DeathQuest

From: Julian Lord <jlord_at_...>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2003 12:01:31 +0200


Dougie Punk & Trotsky :

> >We get a load of twaddle about the frex Bison
> >Rider (paraphrasing as I�m in a Net Cafe sans
> >rules) "realising that he is far from home and
> >if he kills this guy he musst kill everyone and
> >so will get a Hate Everyone flaw" &%$%%&!!!!
> >This is a Praxian "savage" who in IMG would
> >happilly flay any ground-sticker, stake him out
> >in the Wastes and lay bets with his mates on
> >whether the sun, the scopians or the vultures
> >will get him first, just to pass the time...
> >
> The examples of play are just that, IMO - examples, not cast-iron rules.
> It's inevitable that *any* such example is going to clash with someone's
> GMing style somewhere.

That's so : if I can just add something here, well, the "Dying" result means just that : the character is dying.

If nothing's done he's going to snuff it ; or, if this is the Evil Bad Guy, if nothing's done he won't.

I personally think that the list of examples was overdone, but I also agree that killing someone _is_ basically a moral decision, whatever your moral system happens to be. I think it would have been more useful to emphasise certain basic RPG facts : if you don't personally ensure that the Evil Bad Guy is DEAD, then the GM is perfectly entitled to have him crawl off, heal up, survive and return in many scenarios to come.

But I think that the main point here is that all PCs will get another chance - provided they have a friend around to help them !

So it goes both ways, and I like both.

YGWV Julian Lord

Powered by hypermail