How many have killed off PCs?

[HumAnnoyd]

I am in a campaign that is being run by serial GMs.  In the first story my player jumped into several combats and over 10 or so sessions suffered maybe 3 points of stress.  Ironically that same character ended up sacrificing himself to save the world but it was all narative without him being taken out or anything.   

After the first storyline wound down the new GM explained right up front that his game might be much more deadly and that our choices could have more consequences than the previous one. In fact in the first session my character ended up with  Minor and Serious consequences and several points of stress.  I was quite pleased by this announcement because it gave the players fair warning about what to expect and ramped up the danger level quite a bit. 

[Shadowman17]

Tedronai, I'm not sure that my rule necessarily conflicts with the narrative focus, though. I will concede that yes, there exists the possibility of conflict, but we haven't seen that so far (then again, are campaign is only a few sessions old).

My rule is actually closer to your point than you think. Does it make narrative sense for a BCV (a normal one, not a master like Mavra) to just leave a fallen enemy where they are and move on? I don't think so. They feed, and thus would kill my players that they defeated. Now, I'm not going to let that happen if there are other players still up and running and able to stop it. But if every one of them was taken out, and they weren't able to get out of there, you better believe that I'm going to show my players the consequences of going into a fight unprepared.

[MorkaisChosen]

If you're playing a game where you know that your character will not be crippled or killed - then where's the stakes? I'm not saying it needs Call of Cthulhu levels of PC death, but if you know that your PC will never die then where's the drama?

Except...

When Harry Dresden goes into a fight you know that people can get hurt and maybe die.  Over the series some reoccurring characters have been hurt, crippled, or killed.  Sometimes the innocent victim can't be saved.  Sometimes bystanders get hurt.

And yet Harry hasn't died. There are more ways to lose than being killed; sometimes losing a character who's mportant to the PC can be just as bad, or worse. I'm not saying that works for all games, it depends on the predilections of the group; but for some groups, it's the best way to do things. If I've spent a lot of time working on a character, I'd have a lot more fun if he fails tragically than if he dies, in general.

Exceptions exist- I have an L5R character who I'd be quite happy with dying in one particular plot thread, because it'd be deliciously tragic- but in general, I prefer my characters to fail, not die.

Your group may prefer the risk of the character dying, and that's fine- but it's not the case for everyone.

[Richard_Chilton]

And yet Harry hasn't died. There are more ways to lose than being killed; sometimes losing a character who's mportant to the PC can be just as bad, or worse. I'm not saying that works for all games, it depends on the predilections of the group; but for some groups, it's the best way to do things. If I've spent a lot of time working on a character, I'd have a lot more fun if he fails tragically than if he dies, in general.

But he was crippled - forced to take an extreme consequence involving his hand and a fear of fire magic.

And if you replace "PC" with "Reoccurring Character" then there have been deaths and cripplings.  Murphy's partner - I thought he'd be wisecracking to the end of the series, but he went down in book two.  Knights of the Cross have constantly put themselves in the line of fire and (as of Small Favors) two of the swords lack welders.  Susan - who would have thought that the girlfriend who pushed her luck time after time would ever run out of luck and become RCI? Or Thomas, who's "All right, I'm captured" concession led to torture?

Think of those reoccurring characters as PCs and you'll see where the drama comes from.

Richard

[tymire]

Actually you could say Thomas became an NPC after the torture sessions since after he no longer fights with his demon and finally accepts what he is.  Now Harry is making some progress with bringing back his human side but not much and it's taking a long time. 

Really what all these conversations come down to is if the player thinks the character(s) are more important to the story or a consistent/realistic setting is more important. 

I myself am perfectly fine with the characters being a bit special, however this can easily be taken to extremes like what is done with the other wizard named Harry.  Am sorry but there is no way in heck that a group of teens that are effectively freshman to match or beat a group of adults in a magical fight, if the adults were such that they put the rest of the "world" in a state of constant fear.  And if the characters are actually supposed to be that special they better have some type of prodigy aspect that relates to it and have a crap ton of fate points  .

So guess what I am saying is it really comes down to the point where your BS meter starts ringing too hard to ignore.  Hehe the older I have gotten the lower it has become here at least. 

[evileeyore]

When Harry Dresden goes into a fight you know that people can get hurt and maybe die.  Over the series some reoccurring characters have been hurt, crippled, or killed.  Sometimes the innocent victim can't be saved.  Sometimes bystanders get hurt.

And yet I still consider him a Mary Sue, just one in a very abusive relationship with the author.   

[devonapple]

And yet I still consider him a Mary Sue, just one in a very abusive relationship with the author.   

Well, "Gary Stu", "Larry Stu", or "Marty Stu", but yes.

There some forgivable examples of "Marty Stu" out there, which is usually determined by how much the character laughs at himself, and how beaten up he can get.

[Tedronai]

I'm not saying that character death should never be possible.  I'm saying that it should be weighed against the needs of the story.  I'm saying...

There are more ways to lose than being killed

^This.


A taken out result means that the character has lost.  It does not necessarily mean that the character has been killed, even if that was their opponents' goal.



As for Dresden being a Marty Stu...  He's definitely taken his licks, up to and including, y'know,

(click to show/hide)

getting himself shot dead.

  He has been far from completely successful in a number of conflicts.  What more defense is there?

[evileeyore]

As for Dresden being a Marty Stu...  He's definitely taken his licks, up to and including, y'know,

(click to show/hide)

getting himself shot dead.

  He has been far from completely successful in a number of conflicts.  What more defense is there?

Getting beaten is up is not the "only way to seperate the real characters from the Mary Sues"... in fact it's a poor way to define them.


To me a Mary Sue is the character who keeps getting all the power, or all the interesting bits in the story, they always save the day, never suffer a real defeat... the worst are the two-sword weilding magic totem cat sidekicked dark skinned only Good member of my Evil race types... but they aren't the only ones.


Yeah, Wolverine, I'm looking at you, and your little friend Elric of Melniboné...

[Richard_Chilton]

This reply is completely off topic both for the subject and the forum, but I felt compelled to write it:

Elric suffered real defeats.

Richard

[Tedronai]

To me a Mary Sue is the character who keeps getting all the power, or all the interesting bits in the story, they always save the day, never suffer a real defeat... the worst are the two-sword weilding magic totem cat sidekicked dark skinned only Good member of my Evil race types... but they aren't the only ones.

Let's take that point-by-point, then.

Other characters don't gain power?  Yes.  Susan.  Fix.  The Alphas.  Marcone.  And oh-so-many others, all gain significant power through the course of the novels.
Other characters don't get 'interesting bits of the story'?  Really?  See above.  Add the list of characters that LOSE power.  The characters that suffer, struggle, and even die.  Or maybe you just want them to get equal 'screen time'?  Well I'll give you a hint: it's not 'the Dresden's Friends' Files'.
Harry always saves the day?  Tell that to Justine.
Harry never suffers a real defeat?  Tell that to

(click to show/hide)

Harry's corpse

.

[Sanctaphrax]

I think a new thread might be appropriate for the discussion of Dresden's possible Marty Stu-ishness. Probably on a different section of the forums.

For the record, I think that being a Mary Sue requires that you be a bad, uninteresting character. Dresden isn't a bad and uninteresting character, therefore he isn't a Marty Stu.

Of course, that conclusion requires that you accept my definition of Mary Sue. Which not everyone will.

Also, I mostly agree with Tedronai about the effects of being taken out.

I think that being taken out might not even mean losing, if your allies remain in the fight.

[evileeyore]

This reply is completely off topic both for the subject and the forum, but I felt compelled to write it:

Elric suffered real defeats.

Richard

Of course he did.  He suffered every single one of them, each worse than the last, until finally he couldn't even kill himself properly... whilst ohers flourished and rose and succeeded.

It was very much sort of the point of the Anti-Conan Mary Sue he was.  The first of the Battered Spouse Mary Sues.   

[Roxy Rocket]

Harry is the star in a story about a Wizard Detective. Let's leave it at that.


I don't think players should be automatically trusted with some choices. Not every GM is much of a story teller just like not every GM is a good actor or able to do voices or remember the rules, but they're the GM.


Plus, if the GM needs your permission to make you go splat whatever is going on behind those black, piggy eyes of theirs is much less scary.

[Tedronai]

Harry is the star in a story about a Wizard Detective. Let's leave it at that.


I don't think players should be automatically trusted with some choices. Not every GM is much of a story teller just like not every GM is a good actor or able to do voices or remember the rules, but they're the GM.


Plus, if the GM needs your permission to make you go splat whatever is going on behind those black, piggy eyes of theirs is much less scary.

If the table decides to delegate that authority to the GM, then more power to them.  But in FATE/DFrpg, that's a power for the table to exercise or delegate as it will, not merely for the GM to assume.