Jump to content



Photo

Death?


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#21 Askold

Askold

    Member

  • Members
  • 66 posts

Posted 17 January 2014 - 04:07 AM

If the squad has already completed some missions and gained a reputation as tough fighters and people who get stuff done you could use that as the justification that they get more promising recruits or even experienced replacements.

 

And the one rule of thumb that I've seen used is to give the new character 50% of the exp the most experienced character has. (Maybe more if you're replacing the squad leader.)



#22 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 936 posts

Posted 17 January 2014 - 05:19 AM

And the one rule of thumb that I've seen used is to give the new character 50% of the exp the most experienced character has. (Maybe more if you're replacing the squad leader.)

I've used this a lot. Not in OW, but in a variety of other games, including RT.

The idea is that XPs are a reward for succes - you're not punishing the unlucky guy, you're rewarding the ones who managed to keept their characters alive.

 

My current OW campaign (in which I am a player, not the GM) builds new characters on the same XP total as your dead character. And when we take in a new player (recently necessary, due to players leaving, stupid RL), they simply get the XPs that everyone else has. Which currently means our new medic has 100 XPs more than my sharpshooter, because I missed an early session and didn't get full XPs for it. Do I begrudge him? Not at all, he (the player) seemed more bothered about it than I was.

 

In a game as focused on physical combat as OW (atleast our campaign), I can see the point of having characters fairly close in ability. If I was the GM, I'd probably simply hand out the same XP as everyone else had, rounded down to the nearest multiple of 1000 XP. Still an incentive to not just suicide run as mentioned above, without being crippling.

 

This all being said, I should perhaps mention that I'm a bit bothered by all this insistance on "party balance" and the like. Many of my most enjoyable gaming experiences have involved wildly unbalanced situation, but where the GM (and players) managed to overcome and even use their differences. When we play Ars Magica, Master and Apprentice seems to be a common theme, and those certainly have a difference in power levels!



#23 Askil

Askil

    Member

  • Members
  • 336 posts

Posted 18 January 2014 - 07:36 AM

Well, because it's not about the character, but the player. I don't care how much nonsense I have to make up to get them a character with similar experience, although in OW it's easy: The entire regiment is fight, EVERYONE is gonna have roughly the same XP.[...]

 

It isn't about the player though, XP is earned by characters, and like RL their knowledge dies with them.

 

Any XP granted to a new character is a boon given at the GMs discretion.

 

Only a very harsh GM would give you a fresh scrub recruit, but having no penalty for death just invites abuse, diffuses tension and breaks immersion.

 

As for the "whole regiment fights" argument, yes the whole regiment fights, but probably not at the same time. Injuries, duty rotations and replacements mean there a number of members of a regiment who wouldn't be serving on the front line. Which is for the best really or they'd have no reserves to commit.

 

Obviously those members who are free for re-assingment to a new squad would often have been out of the action for some time and not have gained as much field experience.


Edited by Askil, 18 January 2014 - 07:44 AM.

  • Tenebrae likes this

#24 Ansalagon

Ansalagon

    Member

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 19 January 2014 - 12:15 PM

Well, i would say, always have your players have the same amount of Exp...

 

Have your players make backup characters... or have the characters make several characters, and decide which one they plays in the given situation. then they can always switch another character, that they already now and like :)

 

Well, you can have a lot of fun making several unique character that the you offer the player, in case their own character dies, and they haven't made a back-up, and then they can choose to play it or make a new one when the oppertunity arrises...



#25 venkelos

venkelos

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,110 posts

Posted 19 January 2014 - 02:22 PM

Having backups is nice, certainly, but I might have problems knowing what to make.Specialists are, at least by some GMs desires, more "as needed" than real characters, and some of the trooper classes are "only need one". I make a heavy; should I now make two more heavies, in case I die? I might like a Sergeant, but we hopefully already have one, and if they aren't dead, I doubt we need two. I see Operator in the same light, whether driving a transport or not. Weapon Specialist and Heavy are really the only "multiple applicants requested" jobs, IMO. Medics and Operators, not so much, and Sergeant is special.

 

Granted, this would be my limitation with or without backups, so I'm just speaking to babble, at this point ;)


  • Tenebrae likes this

#26 Askil

Askil

    Member

  • Members
  • 336 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 03:01 AM

One idea me and my GM were toying with was for players wh9ose characters die to assume control over a comrade, using a preset template of flat 30 stats (+/- regiment modifiers) and equipped with standard regimental gear.

 

Then after the session the player can roll "proper" stats, pick a spec and spend any XP he has.



#27 Lynata

Lynata

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,764 posts

Posted 21 January 2014 - 06:52 AM

^ That sounds like a good solution to me. As the Comrade is essentially following the same Speciality, it's like a "bonus life" - only that it never actually depletes, since you're bound to get a new Comrade soon after taking over your first one.

 

Essentially, it's as if the player character is training his or her own replacement, no? Kinda fitting, thinking back to various war movies and their rookie-elder pairings ...


current 40k RPG character: Aura Vashaan, Astromancer Witch-Priestess
previous characters: Captain Elias (Celestial Lions Chapter), Comrade-Trooper Dasha Malenko (1207th Valhallan Ice Warriors), Sister Elana (Order of the Sacred Rose), Leftenant Darion Baylesworth (Rogue Trader Artemisia)

#28 Askil

Askil

    Member

  • Members
  • 336 posts

Posted 28 January 2014 - 02:26 AM

Note that I didn`t say "their comrade."

 

Whose comrade you assume control of is determined randomly by the GM, (by rolling a scatter seems fairest) this way despite having an "extra life" on missions the squad still suffers from casualties by losing comrade bonuses until they can get new comrades back at base.



#29 Traejun

Traejun

    Member

  • Members
  • 284 posts

Posted 21 March 2014 - 01:04 PM

Well, because it's not about the character, but the player. I don't care how much nonsense I have to make up to get them a character with similar experience, although in OW it's easy: The entire regiment is fight, EVERYONE is gonna have roughly the same XP.

Not that your way is particularly bad. I could easily live with that, as a player. Flat-out 5000xp behind the rest? That I'd resent.

 

Same, for the most part.  When characters die - which is often, since I don't allow fate burns on death - the player rerolls a new character at roughly the same xp as the living characters have at that moment.  A significant xp-gap will end up feeling like reroll-punishment to the player.  Who wants that?



#30 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 936 posts

Posted 21 March 2014 - 04:16 PM


Same, for the most part.  When characters die - which is often, since I don't allow fate burns on death - the player rerolls a new character at roughly the same xp as the living characters have at that moment.  A significant xp-gap will end up feeling like reroll-punishment to the player.  Who wants that?

So... same effect as burning fate points, but with more wasted time?

Isn't that just a reroll-punishment? ;)



#31 Traejun

Traejun

    Member

  • Members
  • 284 posts

Posted 21 March 2014 - 05:27 PM

Same, for the most part.  When characters die - which is often, since I don't allow fate burns on death - the player rerolls a new character at roughly the same xp as the living characters have at that moment.  A significant xp-gap will end up feeling like reroll-punishment to the player.  Who wants that?

So... same effect as burning fate points, but with more wasted time?
Isn't that just a reroll-punishment? ;)

Nah. Actually killing the character has an important rp effect on the players and squad. Everything is rp first, the wasted time is never wasted if it affects the rp positively.
  • exseraph likes this

#32 Tenebrae

Tenebrae

    Member

  • Members
  • 936 posts

Posted 22 March 2014 - 05:23 AM

 

 

Same, for the most part.  When characters die - which is often, since I don't allow fate burns on death - the player rerolls a new character at roughly the same xp as the living characters have at that moment.  A significant xp-gap will end up feeling like reroll-punishment to the player.  Who wants that?

So... same effect as burning fate points, but with more wasted time?
Isn't that just a reroll-punishment? ;)

Nah. Actually killing the character has an important rp effect on the players and squad. Everything is rp first, the wasted time is never wasted if it affects the rp positively.

that ... really depends on the group.



#33 Traejun

Traejun

    Member

  • Members
  • 284 posts

Posted 22 March 2014 - 11:04 AM

Same, for the most part.  When characters die - which is often, since I don't allow fate burns on death - the player rerolls a new character at roughly the same xp as the living characters have at that moment.  A significant xp-gap will end up feeling like reroll-punishment to the player.  Who wants that?

So... same effect as burning fate points, but with more wasted time?
Isn't that just a reroll-punishment? ;)

Nah. Actually killing the character has an important rp effect on the players and squad. Everything is rp first, the wasted time is never wasted if it affects the rp positively.
that ... really depends on the group.

I... don't waste my time with groups that wouldn't be affected by something like that. Your response suggests you probably do. I recommend against it.

#34 Cail

Cail

    Member

  • Members
  • 371 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 04:02 AM

Give them the same XP or GTFO personally. I hate giving anyone in the party more or less XP than any other member with a passion. Its a team game, and creating an XP gap (either through rewards for roleplaying, or player death) has in my considerable experience done nothing but lessen the fun for everyone behind the bell curve.

The starting character will lose any equipment and personalisation the other character has had time gathering. Thats enough of a set back.


Edited by Cail, 30 March 2014 - 04:05 AM.

  • exseraph likes this
  • Intellect is the Understanding of Knowledge.
  • Sentience is the Basest Form of Intellect.
  • Understanding is the True Path to Comprehension.
  • Comprehension is the Key to all Things

 





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS