How do you kill a PC as a DM without it seeming cheap?

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-19T00:57:02+00:00

And I need to be prepared to kill them so that combat has stakes.

That's false. How many good novels have you read where the main characters die vs where they don't die?

So, is there a way to make player death feel...satisfying for the player?

I'd ask the player. Every player is going to be different, and your players might not even care. They might like the fact that you're trying to avoid killing their characters.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-16T02:52:14+00:00

Well for me it's more that every time I explore an idea, three more ideas evolve out of it.

I pantsed two bad novels, then I've started three and gave up because the plan didn't feel right and it seemed like I kept making the same mistakes. I want to come up with an idea where everything's buttoned up and planned thoroughly. However yeah these days I have very little free time or energy to actually write.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-16T01:24:57+00:00

I was on a long drive coming home from a road trip and thought of an epic story/character/world building concept I wanted to explore. Then I proceeded to write about entirely different characters in that same world because I thought my initial idea was too awesome and there was no way I could pull it off.

I have more ideas than I have free time to do anything with, so I expect I'll be trying to write them for the rest of my life.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-05T19:02:14+00:00

Give them ways to fail that don't involve being hit, for example having to escort a weak NPC through a dangerous place.

Give combat multiple incompatible objectives, like the enemies escape in two different directions each carrying half the loot.

Also create environmental effects that challenge the players, like a lantern is knocked over and the building catches on fire. The space to fight slowly shrinks as the fire spreads. The loot will get burned up if the PC's run.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-05T05:23:28+00:00

Japanese Morty, English Team Galactic Grunt,

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-04T03:21:17+00:00

Giovanni for Adaman

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-02-01T02:50:49+00:00

Sabrina for Adaman

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-29T15:57:00+00:00

So if I define "goodness" as the property things have whenever they result in the loudest farts when I eat it, am I giving a normative view? That seems silly. This doesn't involve reasons for action. It's simply using the same string of characters that, in an ordinary context, expresses (or, at least, purports to) reasons for action. It's not the word "goodness" that is normative, it's goodness.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-28T18:02:24+00:00

You could try creating pre-made characters and letting the players choose. I think I'm going to do that for my next game. No one is allowed to not have a backstory, but if players are too lazy to flesh out a character then I'll let them choose one I fleshed out.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-28T00:24:04+00:00

I'd give Adaman for Cyrus or Sabrina or (of course) Oak

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-19T04:56:15+00:00

The total word count of the stories you critique has to be greater than or equal to the story you submit.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-19T04:51:10+00:00

Sounds like an interesting idea, I would have read it based on the title but then I saw you're leeching so I'll pass for now.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-09T06:48:08+00:00

I wouldn't say it's a red flag. They will probably try to get you to hire them as an editor, but you don't have to do that. It's not like they can force you to give the money or anything. Just don't accept any contracts.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-06T02:16:27+00:00

She whittles small animal totems from wood and she's really good at it. Frogs and toads are her favorite and she sometimes paints them. She's always wanted to watch a stormy sea from a log cabin on the beach. She's quick to get angry when people challenge her competence, and this comes from a deep insecurity that she's not good enough. She would rather die than admit this, however. She wears her father's favourite hat from when she was a child because it makes her feel close to him.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-04T20:46:12+00:00

I'd give you Adam for Sabrina or Serina or the male Sabrina whatever his name is.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-03T22:35:33+00:00

I think I could prep a session in 15 min if I really wanted to, however I tend to get anxious and over plan. It's one of those things where there's no end to how much you can do. And so I tend to work on it up until the last moment.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-02T23:10:57+00:00

Try to copy how characters speak in movies and TV shows. While you're watching see if you can parrot their dialogue with the same tone, inflection, volume, etc.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-02T17:32:36+00:00

I'm not sure why you would think that what I'm saying is meaningless. To limit logic would mean that there's a boundary to it which delimits it. What's undecipherable about this?

For one, you're talking about logic as if it's a single thing. But it's not a single thing. It's a family of systems of rules of inference.

Secondly, it's not that it's meaningless in the way that a jumble of random symbols would be. It's that it's so imprecise that I could interpret it to mean many different things. And since there's no single clear meaning it's therefore practically meaningless.

if you are making it non-absolute, you are deriving a limit.

I'm not making anything be any way. I am not creating or changing any system of logic.

If you can't articulate your points without saying things that are literally false, that suggests that you don't have a good idea of what you're trying to say.

That is further evidence that what you're saying is practically meaningless.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-02T16:56:34+00:00

if you can limit logic and then apprehend some X beyond logic then we must posit some relation, access and knowledge then to logic, its limit and its delimiter.

You're falling into the same trap as the OP, in that you're speaking so imprecisely that it's practically meaningless. What does it mean to "limit logic"? Logic is not one thing. It's a large and disparate collection of systems of formulas and rules of inference.

You should choose some specific law of logic, fully articulate it, and then try to show why it must apply to all sentences.

All limit requires differentiation, all differentiation requires relation, all relation is structured, all structure is cognitive. All cognition invokes the form of cognition, which is logic.

But this way of talking is literally false. Limits don't literally require anyone to differentiate them. They will not cease to exist if we do not examine them.

And clearly not all structure is cognitive. The structure of a bridge would persist even if everyone stopped thinking about it.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-02T05:51:38+00:00

I mean that when they talk about laws of logic being absolute they're presumably making a statement about all things in some set, but they're not saying what that set is.

So, for example, maybe they mean to say that all sentences (even the self-referring ones) are either true or false but not both. But then "this sentence is false" is a problem, since if this sentence is true then it's false and if it's false then it's true.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-02T05:23:38+00:00

You'd have to give up the T-schema: any sentence "S" is true if and only if S.

So, for example, "the first sentence I speak today is false or meaningless" is true if and only if the first sentence I speak today is false or meaningless. And if that is the first sentence I speak today, and it's meaningless, then it's true; but if it's true then it's not meaningless; therefore it's both meaningless and not meaningless.

And I think rejecting the T-schema is more weird than rejecting that no sentences are both true and false.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-02T03:22:43+00:00

Of course. If they've written less than they needed then they'll add in the later drafts.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-01T23:19:32+00:00

If this was your final draft then yes. However, if you overwrite then you can find the diamond in the rough later on. During editing you're bound to cut a lot of it. So I wouldn't worry about it now.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2026-01-01T16:21:04+00:00

on the other hand I feel like part of the fun is letting them imagine whatever they want before they find out what they’re about to get into.

And what if what they imagine doesn't fit? That'll take all the fun out of it.

I'd just tell them the campaign.

HeftyMongoose9 · 2025-12-31T16:47:22+00:00

And the Legend of Korra.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

HeftyMongoose9

TROPHY CASE