The main problem I see with the "instant death" threat is that a lot of GMs don't quite grasp that they don't need to accurately model every last danger out there. Sure, there are caterpillars in South America that can cause paralysis and anaphylactic shock, but putting them in the adventure doesn't make the adventure any more exciting ... unless it's there *specifically* to create a "ticking clock" scenario (find the right medicine and get it to the victim before he/she expires).
In fact, in my experience, putting that kind of threat in adventures only teaches players to behave like PCs. ("Before we go into the empty room, we throw in several flask of oil, then set them on fire. After the fire burns out, we blow flour dust in, to see if anything is moving on the floor or walls. Finally, I put my mirror through the doorway on a stick. Assuming the mirror isn't instantly disintegrated, I use it to check the ceiling for signs of monsters or other potentially dangerous activity.")
Another problem, though, is the binary condition between "succeed" and "fail." PCs fighting on a swaying rope bridge is dramatic, but only if they have to make checks to avoid falling off the bridge and into the lava. If the check is too low, it's not scary. If it's too high, then the PCs run the risk of just plain dying--unless, of course, you introduce either a "partial exposure" rule, or you give characters yet another check to make to see whether or not they catch themselves on something before they are immersed in lava.
Really, I think I would go with something similar to the Warhammer FRP "Fate Point" mechanic, where instant death isn't fatal, but it does put the character at a temporary disadvantage. ("You fall of the bridge, but your foot catches a trailing loop of rope. You're suspended, upside down, about 120 feet over the lava, and about 10 feet below the bridge. As the fight goes on above you, you're swaying back and forth, and you're not sure the rope is going to hold much longer.")
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-02-11 09:52 pm (UTC)In fact, in my experience, putting that kind of threat in adventures only teaches players to behave like PCs. ("Before we go into the empty room, we throw in several flask of oil, then set them on fire. After the fire burns out, we blow flour dust in, to see if anything is moving on the floor or walls. Finally, I put my mirror through the doorway on a stick. Assuming the mirror isn't instantly disintegrated, I use it to check the ceiling for signs of monsters or other potentially dangerous activity.")
Another problem, though, is the binary condition between "succeed" and "fail." PCs fighting on a swaying rope bridge is dramatic, but only if they have to make checks to avoid falling off the bridge and into the lava. If the check is too low, it's not scary. If it's too high, then the PCs run the risk of just plain dying--unless, of course, you introduce either a "partial exposure" rule, or you give characters yet another check to make to see whether or not they catch themselves on something before they are immersed in lava.
Really, I think I would go with something similar to the Warhammer FRP "Fate Point" mechanic, where instant death isn't fatal, but it does put the character at a temporary disadvantage. ("You fall of the bridge, but your foot catches a trailing loop of rope. You're suspended, upside down, about 120 feet over the lava, and about 10 feet below the bridge. As the fight goes on above you, you're swaying back and forth, and you're not sure the rope is going to hold much longer.")
JD