If I remember correctly, hitting wounds 0 doesn't mean a character has died, correct? He merely passes out and takes a critical wound?
I had to double check mostly because I've been having a hard time overcoming what I call 'GM Guilt'. The feeling of guilt associated with "killing" a PC because the balance was off for the encounter. My players seemed to be breezing through every scene by resorting to combat and winning it with hardly a scratch (nothing a stim or repair patch couldn't handle). I up'd the difficulty and ended up nearly one-shotting one of them, then I nerfed my Boss NPC to compensate, but this made him too weak and he was the one that got one shot...
Now my PCs are getting a bit reckless (or perhaps desperate?) and are about to attack an encampment with at least 8 guards up in guard towers, a dozen or so on patrol, and 2 barracks of reinforcements. This was described to them as they survey'd the area with binoculars, so they're fully aware of the risks. They're armed with a few strips of armored clothing, a couple blaster pistols, and a sword. I've steeled myself against nerfing the NPCs, and will be going forward with the stats I had planned. I suspect this will spell the downfall of the PCs.
But! As long as Wounds = 0 isn't dead, the story can go on.
How do other GMs balance the desire to provide consequences for reckless decisions against the guilt of ruining a players fun by killing/unconcious'ing his character? Something which could mean him sitting out for 1 to 2 hours of game time?
(Edit - I count wounds down, because I play on Roll20 and like the visual of the red bar getting smaller vs. the bar getting more full)
Edited by NorrecV, 04 August 2014 - 08:16 AM.