A style difference

[Russell Wallace]

Interesting thread on rpg.net:

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=336850&page=3

In particular, an issue that came up that I haven't seen referenced very
often before: is it more exciting if you win on your last hit point? I
come down on the 'no' side, but I've met people who come down on 'yes'.

[psychohist]

In a permanent death game where the dice are not fudged, I certainly
think it's more exciting to win on one's last hit point. On the other
hand, I think it's the kind of excitement most players could live
without.

Warren J. Dew

[Ed Chauvin IV]

Post by psychohist
In a permanent death game where the dice are not fudged, I certainly
think it's more exciting to win on one's last hit point. On the other
hand, I think it's the kind of excitement most players could live
without.

/nod

[Simon Smith]

Post by psychohist
In a permanent death game where the dice are not fudged, I certainly
think it's more exciting to win on one's last hit point. On the other
hand, I think it's the kind of excitement most players could live
without.

/nod

Never mind the players, that's certainly something the GM can live without.
It's very hard to achieve that level of precision without fudging. And it
rapidly becomes apparent that you're fudging after this happens for the
second or third time.

I suppose the most reliable way to do it would be to use a slightly weaker
villain who goes down a little earlier, and then keep using 'incremental
fudges' to keep him going until the PC is on his last legs, then finally
allow the villain to drop. But if the PC's dice luck fails at the last
minute, this can all go horribly wrong requiring yet more fudging in the
opposite direction. And this sort of fudging behaviour is relatively easy to
spot.

The whole thing is just an exercise in generating false drama, isn't it?
Cheesy. Not my cup of tea either.

Actually I have a player who almost never retreats and never surrenders, and
he's won more than a few fights at the last gasp. But I think that's bad
play on his part, and it's cost him some needless losses. And I tend to feel
that most PCs who insist on hanging around to the last gasp are being played
badly - they should have retreated or surrendered before then. And so too
should the bad guy under the same circumstances. For all these reasons, I
tend to view a victory on the last hit point as bad rather than good, both
for in-character and gamist reasons. It's only a good idea from a dramatist
viewpoint, and I feel even then it should be used very sparingly, otherwise
it becomes cliched.

[gleichman]

Post by psychohist
In a permanent death game where the dice are not fudged, I certainly
think it's more exciting to win on one's last hit point. On the other
hand, I think it's the kind of excitement most players could live
without.

Nothing to really add, the concept of arranging games to produce that
result is very Wick- and very much something that I don't think is
worth the trouble or the outcome.

This of course is from someone who has a significant number of such
events in his games. But I don't aim for them nor alter events to
create them. Nor do they happen all that often really, but they do
tend to be remembered when they do. I think any well ran game would
naturally produce these once in a while.

[Russell Wallace]

Post by gleichman
This of course is from someone who has a significant number of such
events in his games. But I don't aim for them nor alter events to
create them. Nor do they happen all that often really, but they do
tend to be remembered when they do. I think any well ran game would
naturally produce these once in a while.

*nods* No game will naturally produce them as a regular occurrence, but
when such an event happens to occur naturally that's cool.

[Erol K. Bayburt]

Post by psychohist
In a permanent death game where the dice are not fudged, I certainly
think it's more exciting to win on one's last hit point. On the other
hand, I think it's the kind of excitement most players could live
without.

Yes.

At best it's an "exciting once" type of event, sort of analogous to a
"funny once" joke.

[Magister]

Post by Russell Wallace
In particular, an issue that came up that I haven't seen referenced very
often before: is it more exciting if you win on your last hit point? I
come down on the 'no' side, but I've met people who come down on 'yes'.

Winning on the last hit point suggests to me a very close fight, which
would normally be exciting. But I would have to believe that my
decisions
were all appropriate (e.g., not running away with half of my hit
points intact,
or not stopping for healing); I don't find a game of chance exciting,
unless betting on it was a reasonably rational decision.

I can imagine game systems or genres where winning on one's last hit
point would be very likely or even certain, but they would inevitably
make that result unexciting, like the movie time bomb that can't be
disarmed until the final five seconds before detonation.

--
Magister