Page 1 of 1
Posted: Tue 10 Jan 2017, 14:32
Really sorry if this has been covered
I have not had a great deal of time to read the game, but I did read a few weeks ago, a mention that the kids in the game can't be killed.
Not sure if it was changed, but what about some consequence to the family/parents if it's a death situation like other rpg's. So the parents suffer for there actions and loose there jobs, or in someway forced out of the setting and therefore taking that kid with them.
Posted: Tue 10 Jan 2017, 14:49
Just a note on Swedish conditions in case a kid is killed. Parents are highly unlikely to lose their jobs, unless guilty of gross negligence, like giving their kid(s) access to restricted areas (Loop tunnels, etc).
Posted: Tue 10 Jan 2017, 21:31
Death can and should be used in game. Look at "Stand By Me" and "Stranger Things", I just don't think it should be used against the player characters (others disagree).
Posted: Wed 11 Jan 2017, 03:33
Sorry if I was not clear.
I thought there was no way that PC's Kids could perish.
I was thinking that this could be ok, but instead of other regular RPG's when a PC would die, this game could instead remove the PC, usually with the family moving. I imagine that some sort of injury might have happened, but not life threatening. The kids parents moving is a narrative think, not necessarily connected to the story, but a consequence. It could be though, kid found to be messing around where he/she should not have been and the parents forced to leave.
Or he/she changes schools and is taken out of the story.
Like i said, I have not really looked at the rules and was only reading a forum thread.
Posted: Fri 13 Jan 2017, 00:34
There's nothing to stop you/the GM from running the game the way that your group wants to. Players and NPCs can die if it's something you want to implement, it's just not a mechanic that will be added to the rules, I guess.
Posted: Sat 14 Jan 2017, 06:15
My suggestion was only to look for other alternatives within the conception of the rules and the genre.
Posted: Tue 17 Jan 2017, 21:33
I agree. The kids should be able to die. It actually bothers me.
Posted: Tue 17 Jan 2017, 23:51
I had a discussion about this with one of my players today.
He said that once he found out that the kid couldn't die, he didn't feel that the game threatened him.
However, I told him, that just because the kid can't die, doesn't mean it can't end up in so much trouble in everyday life that it can be removed from play.
My example was this: Imagine that you keep getting arrested as a kid. Or that you keep behaving badly, sneaking out, doing bad deeds, getting other parents calling about mischief you've done. Eventually, the parents will question whether this school, or even area is good for you.
Ending up in hospital or being the catalyst for bad things over time (bullying etc) might force your parents' hands and they will root up and move.
If you're 15, you can even be punished within the justice system. But even when you're younger than that, if you keep ending up in trouble, this might be reflected upon your parents and you could end up in foster care.
All of these scenarios, derived from your actions in the mysteries, have the consequence that your kid is taken out-of-play.
Even if death is not on line.
Hurt. Social exclusion. Doubt. Splintered family. Parents loosing their jobs.
It can all lead to you being pulled away from Boulder, the Mälar islands or where you have chosen to place this.
I think the problem for experienced roleplayers is that we have played a lot of games where death is pretty much the ONLY real threat that keeps our characters in check. And that we're used to having characters with full agency. Here however, the kids don't have that. Their threats – their "end of the world" are things we as adults would consider mundane, or even necessary – but for them, it's devastating.
As a GM, I think, if you focus on that – you can sell the very real threat of losing your kid to the unyielding society.
After that, he was much more in line with how to feel and how to behave with his "kid".
He felt there was a price to pay for failure. Even though it's not death.
Posted: Sat 21 Jan 2017, 17:31
I'd be the first to say there's no such thing as "BadWrongFun" but if Death is the only threat, then I think you're missing out.
I remember playing Call of Duty a few years ago and there were just some levels I couldn't complete. So, after the 147th time of failing a level, I enabled God Mode and got through the level on my third try. "Third try", I hear you say, "Dude, you suck".
Thing is, the real aim for the level wasn't to survive. It was to guard a small group of technicians or scientists as they ran through a ruined village. The initial stakes were my death. The secondary stakes for the story was the survival of these NPCs. Just because I couldn't die, it didn't mean I didn't have any stakes. And yeah, there was a timing and positioning of the snipers so I could have found a walkthrough and done it that way but that's as much cheating as God Mode.
Anyway. This isn't a simple videogame where the stakes are death and a reset. This is a roleplaying game and in my roleplaying game, the narrative side of things is much more important than anything resulting from the dice.
(In fact, I'm toying with a mechanic where, if the players all contribute a Luck point together, they can take over the narration of the scene. It all just goes to plan.)
Posted: Sat 21 Jan 2017, 19:05
So this is when forums should have "like" buttons.