thread: 2006-03-06 : Unpopular Idea #2: Punish the Loser
On 2006-03-07, Mendel Schmiedekamp wrote:
In defense of the Death Spiral.
Much like hit points, it doesn't do what you think it does. A self-building process that leads to an ultimate transformation. It sounds just like most of the end-game mechanics people have been finding so useful as of late. The only difference is the diminishing effectiveness of the characters within.
A death spiral is a descent mechanic, what can take it from being annoying to embraced is what happens in the depths. In the metaphor, death is change, and the death spiral is an ideal tool to build the tension and interest as it nears. But to do that the players have to realize that the "death" doesn't mean losing.
In Savagery, my game of social combat, you get three choices in how to play:
Upward spiral, where the characters try to improve themselves.
Making a change, where the characters try to change their lives into something simply different.
Downward spiral, where the characters fall kicking and screaming into madness and depravity.
The later is clearly a death spiral, and yet it forms a compelling type of play. It helps that the death has become madness, and has its own albeit twisted advantages. It's not simply an ending, it's the culmination.
This makes NinJ go "Finding the ending in there is key..."
... because if you know where to cut off the death spiral and say "And we know what happens" rather than making the players make hopeless rolls, then it's maybe done something good.
