Your thoughts on a query?

[JMISBEST]

I have a query about something that I believe could feasibly happen in any RPG and want your thoughts on It. Can you post them along with yours thoughts on this subject?

If The Characters are unlucky enough to be captured by or foolish enough to surrender to a very evil Npc and are stupid enough to instead of trying to escape wait for their allies to ransom them is it fair to have him or her murder to them between sessions simply because its the kind of thing he or she would do?

 

[Anonymous]

In the old days (way back when AD&D was in 1.0 and original S1 Tomb of Horrors was actually played out of the box), most RPGs would consider arbitrary death "fair". Alea jacta est. You rolled up new characters, and next time you tried not to fuck up.

In the current era, it is more common for players to expect the GM to "cheat" the dice, or give them second chance

It's really going to depend on your group. It's something you should discuss before you start playing.

 

[esmdev]

I might take the opportunity to introduce an NPC prisoner who has an escape plan but needs more people. Another option if you don't want to add an NPC into the mix would be to have them over hear that their execution is scheduled for morning starting with (whichever is most attached to their character).

I'm not a fan of merciless cold blooded murder of PCs if there are other options. I find it's generally a turn off for most players.

 

[Old School]

I'm not a fan of merciless cold blooded murder of PCs if there are other options. I find it's generally a turn off for most players.

What about merciless, cold blooded murder of their NPC friends? Considering this for my current campaign.

 

[Condottiere]

You can't kill off a player's character without prior consent.

If players participate in games where combat is potentially sudden death, is somewhat different since consent is implicit for getting killed in a firefight, or doing something monumentally stupid.

 

[Ursus Maior]

I'm not a fan of merciless cold blooded murder of PCs if there are other options. I find it's generally a turn off for most players.

I absolutely agree that player agency as, so to say, should have the final verdict. On the other hand, if players don't act or act to their own detriment, I would argue that suspension of disbelief necessitates a strong reaction of the world surrounding them. By that I mean, to stay in the example given, that a group giving themselves into the hands of an antagonist and not acting upon it, but waithing for the cavalry to come, should expect to hear their clock ticking.

Make it clear that their time is running up. Have their antagonist tell them that they will suffer for whatever he comes up with as their perceived wrong-doing. If they don't react, let them watch the henchmen building a scaffold. If they still don't act upon it, have the henchmen execute a NPC cell mate of the players. And finally lead them onto the scaffold, start putting ropes around their necks, but let them spot that the executioner and his men wear their weapons rather unguarded, so that a last ditch attempt could work.

I really cannot imagine a group not taking action at some point. And if they insist on solving the whole ordeal diplomatically or via clandestine communication or befriending their antagonist's henchmen and minions, all power to them. But they need to act somehow. If your players don't play, the story ends.

 

[CaladanGuard]

Everyone here has answered you in their typically fair and actually informative way. You should listen to them.

Though your query actually asked if it was cool to murder all the PC's -between- sessions...no. Never. Do not murder players between sessions. Turning up to a session and then going, "Right, Lord Imaginary Monsterpants killed you all while you were living your lives, and not actually playing the game."

Stupid, and wrong.

 

[Repairman_Jack]

I have to respectfully disagree with some of these responses, especially since you indicated that the players foolishly surrendered.

Although it's en-vogue these days for the GM to cheat for the players, it actually diminishes them. The GM should stay true to the world that he/she created. If the players can overcome obstacles through smart play and maybe a bit of luck, then they will feel that they earned what they receive. If they know the GM is going to cheat for them, then they know they didn't really earn it. If they do something foolish, then they should live with the results of their foolishness (or not live as the case may be). They will be better players next time, and will enjoy their later successes that much more.

 

[Old School]

Though your query actually asked if it was cool to murder all the PC's -between- sessions...no. Never.

I agree that we shouldn’t kill the player characters off screen, but lets definitely not kill the players. Hard enough to get a Traveller game going as it is.