[TML] Which combat system do you prefer?

[Richard Aiken]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 7:33 PM, Anthony Jackson <ajackson at iii.com> wrote:
> Richard Aiken wrote:
>
>> He may have been picking off the NPCs, but T2K was deliberately
>> designed to make PCs invulnerable to casual death.  According to
>> Loren, PCs in that game were only supposed to die for important
>> reasons.  This is a valid sentiment, one I heartily endorse.  But I
>> don't think it should be reflected by tweaking a combat system to make
>> PCs special.
>
> If you make it so that PCs only die for important reasons, they will
> cease to fear dying due to random chance. If you're willing to accept
> that cost, you might as well build it into your combat system.

<shakes head sadly>  I guess I'm just too used to having to deal with
at least one rules lawyer in every group.  If the game rules say that
his character should die from a random bullet and I let him live
instead, the rules lawyer knows I've been merciful.  He may not truly
*appreciate* it, but he'll let it slide.  But If the game rules say he
can take that random bullet and several more just like it with no
consequences, the same rules lawyer will decide to do something like
charge entrenched troops, simply because the rules will let him
survive it.  So I prefer games with lethal written rules, so the
players know stupidity can still kill them.  Heck!  It might even be
dramatically appropriate, given the right perspective:

PC #1, hanging his head in sorrow: "Bob gave his life charging those
guns for us, making a distraction so we could get away."
PC #2, looking puzzled: "Eh?  I thought I heard him shout, 'They can't
hurt me!'?"
PC #3, grabbing PC #2's arm urgently: "Shhhh!  Don't speak ill of the dead!"

-- 
Richard Aiken

"Never insult anyone by accident." Robert A. Heinlein