rd350lc

I agree. It is for that reason that I run a low risk, low reward game. 

I like the players to survive, and it is for that reason that I run a low risk game. I do tend to put in humourous aspects in my game, that the players may appreciate (or may not). One of the funniest ones I have put in was having a dungeon created on polar graph paper-and I describe the corridors as being rectangular. It was amusing (from the gamemaster's viewpoint, at least) in seeing the players find rooms where they could not fit in.

This is a new subject for game masters.

I tend to be a low risk, low reward game master. This is a thing I did that really annoyed the players, but certainly was not dangerous.

When the gaming genre started over 40 years ago (I remember the time), most of the scenarios were in underground settings, and the maps were drawn using graph paper. I still do this to an extent. One of the most infuriating things that I did (but fun for the game master) was to lay out a dungeon using polar graph paper, and describe it as regular rectangular co-ordinates. The players got really annoyed when the map they were creating did not work out-in that there were rooms in places where there should not have been a place for these rooms. I really had fun playing this out. And there was no cheating, such as placing teleport areas, and the like.

21 minutes ago, StephenMcG said:

Stephen's Principle: do not allow the dice to rob your game of a cool moment.

If a moment occurs in your game that would be cool and memorable and one or two tragic rolls mean that RAW the moment cannot happen, then negotiate with the players to allow the cool moment but with consequences.  For example, it is the denoument of the scenario and the Flintnail Dwarf calls on his powers of stasis to hold the gate closed against the marauding trolls while the rest of the party secure the escape of the royal family.  The dice don't go well and he fails while the trolls critical.  What should then happen is that the trolls get in and among the royal family but that feels like too much of a failure for what should have been a heroic moment. You then pull out of play.  Chatting with the players I offer them four options.

1 - the Doors blow open and the trolls flood in.  The dwarf recognises his failure but remembers the stories of the troll invasion of Pavis and calls on his ancestors to collapse the roof of the buildings around the, sacrificing his life but securing the escape of the rest of the group along with the Royal Family.  I will allow this as a fait accompli if the player of the dwarf character is content to sacrifice his character.

2 - the Doors blow open and the trolls flood in (gotta be true to the dice!).  The group recognise that their survival is secondary to the Royal Family.  They turn and sell themselves dearly to give the Royal Family escape.  They are captured and ransomed back to their temple (no need to play that out) with damage both physical and spiritual that we can work out later.

3 - the Doors blow open and the trolls flood in.  The party turn to fight and we game it out (this is risky in a game like RQ)

4 - the Doors blow open and the trolls flood in. The players they come up with something else cool.

I like the first alternative the best-but I make sure that I make it up to the player of the dwarf character.

19 minutes ago, styopa said:

It doesn't ALWAYS have to be unloaded.  I mean, the Head of Vecna is a thing, and it's hilarious.

True enough. But, I don't like killing off a character just because he is playing in CHARACTER.

1 hour ago, styopa said:

A corollary (maybe already mentioned, there are a lot of good thoughts in this thread) is that as a GM, you need to roll with the lethality TOO.  Call it the anti-Anthropic principle: don' t be afraid of letting the characters win, even if it's faster than you'd intended.

PCs can get killed suddenly, we all know that. (I advocate training new players by killing a handful of premade training characters to drive that home before they make their own toons.)

...but GMs need to accept that they are merely the entity that executes the rules of the world.  It's not "you vs the players"...if the players DO happen to nuke your BBEG in one lucky shot, let them exult in it, revel in it, and celebrate it OOC with them. 

Don't (as I've seen far too often) get surly about it and REALLY don't fudge crap to keep the BBEG alive.  To do so utterly takes away the joy for the players.  You have infinite resources; if you (contrary to advice here) have invested tons of design in a fascinating multi-session adventure with that BBEG, maybe he/she has a lieutenant who'd been just waiting for a chance to take over.  Personally, I'd say that this should still throw your whole thing into at least some disarray (thus giving the characters an ongoing reward for their good fortune) but that lieutenant my be even MORE brilliant and MORE evil than their former boss.

I agree with this. I am not afraid of letting the characters win, but I do try to be fair. And, if the characters happen to get lucky in combat, or take out my main opponent in one shot-so what. I don't care, and I will celebrate with them. I try to be completely impartial.

I follow the advice that Eric Wujick had told me during a seminar that he had. In his game (and in mine), there are only two ways for a character to get killed. They are 1) through character actions (and I do try to provide hints when there is a potentially lethal situation), or 2) through combat.

If, in a fantasy setting, a character finds a pistol, puts the barrel in his mouth, and pulls the trigger, thinking that this is some kind of magic item that will improve his character, and the player is playing the character IN CHARACTER-well, the pistol will happen to be unloaded. The PLAYER may know what a pistol is, but the CHARACTER would not. That is an example that Eric gave.

Combat is another thing. Runequest is a dangerous game, and smart players will avoid combat.

On ‎9‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 11:55 AM, Pentallion said:

Survivability Tip:  Runequest is a dangerous game.  Random crits can kill even the toughest player.  The tension of this high risk game is one of its strongest attractions, but there is a price.  A high attrition rate not only slows down games rolling up new characters, it causes players to lose interest.  Balancing the tension of life or death struggle on the one hand and the need for character continuity on the other is the greatest challenge of a Runequest GM.  To ease this and allow character growth to not be nipped in the bud by an untimely roll of the dice, it is best to quickly introduce into your campaign a means to resurrect characters.  One of the first magic items the group should gain is something that can resurrect dead PCs.  Make sure they also have the social connections to recharge the item on holy days.  These social connections can then lead to plot hooks.   Death must always be an option, however.  Never let the players feel their characters are as good as immortal.  Keep the tension great enough that they are always on the edge of their seats.  Their characters become more important to them if they've survived by the skin of their teeth and such victories become memorable.

I do have to agree, Runequest is a dangerous game. In my campaign, I have had players take down a high power Vampire with one blow. This happened twice while I was gamemaster. A critical hit to the head for maximum damage will take out almost anybody.

In the classic game (2nd edition), the cults of Chalana Arroy and Seven Mothers have Resurrection as a reusable 3 pt Rune Spell, so Resurrection is possible. Not sure about other editions, as I prefer the 2nd edition, with minor tweaks.

Also, the supplements Cults of Prax, and to a lesser extent, Cults of Terror, form some of the best gaming rules that exist. Not only do they give additional rules for play, but they give BACKGROUND for these rules, which I have found to be rarely done. Some other game systems do give background, but the rules are lost in the background, so I find this of limited use.