Dealing with a lethal campaign using character trees

[sinanju]

The cheaty traditional role-playing answer is that when Erik the wizard dies, the player introduces Berik the wizard, his twin brother.

 

Personally, I would just ask players to make three characters and play as one of them, giving equal experience to each. If the first one dies, the next can join the party in the next village/city or somesuch.

 

Though I do like the idea of one player having three characters they can switch out every session or so. Then they wouldn't need to adjust to a new character when one of them dies, and the party doesn't need to make an excuse to take on this new member.

 

Plus, this means all the players get to play around with different character archetypes. 

 

The gaming group I was with in Virginia lo these many years ago now did that sort of thing. Every player had a stable of PCs of various sorts, and not just different archetypes, sometimes archetypes from entirely different genres. (The game world had different areas for different kinds of games.) We'd mix and match them to varying degrees, and the GM even had plots worked out with notes to himself about which sorts of characters it was for (or not for--if a PC telepath is in play, murder mysteries are right out). Over time, various PCs developed relationships good and bad, some PCs worked and played well together (and even had relationships that resulted in children), others...not so much.

 

There was no complicated accounting system. Players just introduced new characters when they felt the need for a change, or brought old favorites back when the mood struck. It worked fine.

 

The cheaty traditional role-playing answer is that when Erik the wizard dies, the player introduces Berik the wizard, his twin brother.

 

Personally, I would just ask players to make three characters and play as one of them, giving equal experience to each. If the first one dies, the next can join the party in the next village/city or somesuch.

 

Though I do like the idea of one player having three characters they can switch out every session or so. Then they wouldn't need to adjust to a new character when one of them dies, and the party doesn't need to make an excuse to take on this new member.

 

Plus, this means all the players get to play around with different character archetypes. 

 

The gaming group I was with in Virginia lo these many years ago now did that sort of thing. Every player had a stable of PCs of various sorts, and not just different archetypes, sometimes archetypes from entirely different genres. (The game world had different areas for different kinds of games.) We'd mix and match them to varying degrees, and the GM even had plots worked out with notes to himself about which sorts of characters it was for (or not for--if a PC telepath is in play, murder mysteries are right out). Over time, various PCs developed relationships good and bad, some PCs worked and played well together (and even had relationships that resulted in children), others...not so much.

 

There was no complicated accounting system. Players just introduced new characters when they felt the need for a change, or brought old favorites back when the mood struck. It worked fine.

 

[Lucius]

At first I was expecting my Trollop (female Troll) character in Monster Hunter to get killed, but I'm starting to think she may last a while after all.

 

I do have a back up already made.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Unless the palindromedary ate it.

The palindromedary ate it.

 

But I can rebuild it. I have the Hero Designer program. I can make it better than it was. Better. Faster. Stronger. More XP.