I was talking with one of my players the other day and they said that they don't know what they would do if one of their characters died. They said that they put so much into each character that they play (they play other TTRPGs with other groups) that if they had a character die they don't know if they could make a new character to continue with that specific group. At the very least, they said, they would need to take a good amount of time away from the table before they'd be able to play again. A few of my other players have said similar, though much less extreme, things about their characters.
When one of my players had their character leave the party (not even die, just leave for a little while) most of the table was in tears. This is not something that I have experienced personally. If one of my characters dies then I'm good to move to the next character. Whenever I make a character I don't tend to get that attached to them so I was curious if there was something that other people have experienced or if its just something that I am doing wrong.
For a bit of context, we are a group of 20-somethings who have been playing this particular game for close to 5 years where I have been the DM. I understand there is a certain amount of investment when you've been playing the game and those characters for so long but this was a conversation about a character from a game that they just started.
Character deaths happen. It's a part of the game. You have to go into an RPG expecting that a series of bad rolls/good rolls can end your character at any time. Does it suck? Sure, especially if you were really happy with the character you wrote up or the build you'd made.
But if you're so attached that losing a DnD character causes legitimate, incapacitating, emotional distress, then role-playing games may not be for you. If it's that concerning and you still want to play, then just a II at the end of the name and keep playing them as a new character who is the exact same character and pretend it never happened.
With our group, it's always a session 0 discussion on the campaign, "How do you feel about character deaths?" In our main campaign, we all agreed we would be OK with them, yet when we had them (twice now a PC has actually died) we took extraordinary measures to bring that character back. In fact, upon seeing how much panic we felt from the first, when the second PC died, we were all but immediately provided a "solution" to preserve the body well enough to have it brought back. It struck us all as strange how attached we got after a year of playing the characters and how our minds had changed as to what we would do in event of character death.
I believe it's something important to discuss at session 0, as the DM then knows how to handle things when it's about to happen. If he/she knows the players are fine with it, then carry on and let the character die. If they know the players are not REALLY ok with it, they can provide a workaround, allowing a chance of bringing the character back in some fashion. I know some will claim "EZMODE" or some such, but honestly, with erasure of PC stats and such, we've gone from a game, where mechanics, rules and numbers are important to it, to a hobby/pastime, where the story, time invested and enjoyment are number one, with details being secondary and ignored when inconvenient. I don't believe either method is wrong, as both have a place, so I don't have a side per say. By keeping in mind it's a group adventure and making sure we all stay within the expectations and desires of he entire table, we all have more fun, which is what D&D is supposed to be about.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
You are certainly not doing anything wrong; each person just has their own level of investment!
Have you asked why they're so protective of this current character? I mean everyone puts work into characters to some level and just because you go bullet points over a novel backstory doesn't mean you don't both care deeply about a PC. I hesitate to say they're being dramatic without more information but maybe there's a reason this character is the one to rule them all as they're acting currently about them; is this just trying to stay immersed so if the PC dies they feel they have to kind of take time away as well to bring the emotional impact as it were?
Do they know that death is part of the game?
It's already hard to permanently kill a PC in 5e, or at least it seems that way unless you're trying to do it, so I don't think the player as as much to worry about as they think, but still it's part of the game. True you can chose to "toggle off" that option like people toggle off Encumbrance but the more I play the game the more I feel you're missing out on potential story points by doing that. If the PC dies than this might set up a Resurrection quest for the group and so they get character moments and a chance to pour out how they fill about the dead PC; when/if the PC comes back there things to explore such as where did they go, how did they feel about being pulled back into this world, and are they more at peace dying now knowing what's possibly ahead.
Yes, it is a shame when a PC you love dies and maybe you need some time to process that and that's okay, but to never play again...it makes me ask if there's more to this than just experiencing really the story. Does the player respond this way when their favorite character in a book or show dies? If not then why and if yes then why?
On the plus side, it sounds like your players care about each other as a group which isn't always the case on some TTRPG groups - they're just there to kill things and get money (maybe there's some care but not always a guarantee) so there's that!
You said you're 20 somethings and have been playing for 5 years, so using my bad math that means you started in high school so again maybe there's some real life influences to this comment? Like the PC dying means the end of that chapter of their life and it was all better then? I'm assuming they know that if the PC dies it doesn't mean they themselves have to leave the game so yeah maybe it's emotional content beyond the game driving the intention to bubble wrap the PC? Maybe it's just they love the build they did and the ideas they have coming to make it even better and starting all over again would be a bummer to lose that? It's fair to grieve a character if they die and it's fair to be bummed about all your hard work and these things you want to reveal to see reactions are gone but to hinge the game all on one PC is unfair to the game and it would be sad to see the player miss out on other cool moments with the group because their sadness was holding them back.
It is possible to have an extreme attachment to a character at jump so while it's not a 5 year run yet they're hoping it will go that far and so yeah length doesn't mean anything when you have someone who's just passionate about something.
For my table, we're pretty mixed - some want to bubble wrap their PCs because of the emotional attachment to them and parts of self they put in while others could care less if they burn through an entire folder of PC options because it's about the overall story not who they play by the end and then there's middle ground players who do care about their PC but also aren't devastated if they die. The middle ground my cry as it happens and have a moment at the table but give them next session or even a hour into this session depending on when you start and they'll have someone new because again they lean more story and time with friends than putting everything on one PC to make or break the experience for them.
For me personally, I'm a middle ground person - I would be sad to see some characters go (admittedly some people are created just so I have someone to play until I can come up with a more RP style concept I like) and I might even shed a tear but now days I'm fine with a PC dying if it happens because death doesn't mean dead ironically in 5e. Ha
Even if you do have to do a whole new character it's okay because again it's not like you have to leave the game yourself if it happens because that would be hardcore and definitely worth tears!
then just a II at the end of the name and keep playing them as a new character who is the exact same character and pretend it never happened.
Ah II - a classic move. Ha
Also classics, the twin sibling. Clones. If time travel is possible in the game, it's the PC from the past!
"I believe it's something important to discuss at session 0" - agree Falwith; and it's never too late to do a check in with the group!
Also there's the option of bubble wrapping just that PC. Yes, it is more work for the DM to keep up with whom they can kill without fear and whom they can never let die but it is an option. Who knows maybe through exposure to how it's not that bad of an experience in the game and how you can still have fun post that PC death the player who wants to be bubble wrapped will see it's okay to take some layers off until the DM list goes away and everyone is either all protected (because the opinion didn't change) or all playing without fear of PC death.
I've not lost one yet...but it would suck. If you've been playing for 5 years with the same one, that would also be worse. Just remember that the point of the game is to have fun. If they would enjoy losing a character less than if death was a possibility...don't kill them. That might go epagaihst your ethos, but it's important that they get what they enjoy.
Perhaps next time you start a campaign, you can do a session 0 and explain that you want to do a more deadly game. They'll invest less into their characters...and you kill them. Obviously not TPK or even a kill every session, but a kill often enough to remind them and normalise them to the idea that their character could die. Would that be more fun? I don't know. But it's better than killing their deeply invested characters and causing an upset. By informing them before hand and reminding them of the lethality of the world, you can get them accustomed to not having their world tied to one character.
In the other hand, you could just continue protecting them. Just do what's fun for the table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I get highly invested in each and every character I play. However, I started playing D&D in 2e when life was cheap, so I don’t get nearly so upset as all of that if one of my PCs dies. I lost count decades ago of how many of my characters either died or otherwise became unplayable.
My players know that each encounter we do is a deadly one. They are on board with that and they also all know that if anything happens that they are concerned about they are allowed to take a look at my notes. We talk all the time about the game and debrief about what we liked and didn't like about what happened in the game. So we are very open and communicate all the time.
My question was more about am I missing something to connect to my characters the way they do.
My question was more about am I missing something to connect to my characters the way they do.
I don’t think so. As one of my best friends puts it, “you really know your character when you can describe what’s in their pockets without having to check your character sheet.” What she means by that is that people carry whatever they feel is important to them to have anywhere and everywhere in their pockets. That says something about the person’s character and personality. If you’re knowledge of your PC is as intimate as your knowledge of yourself in terms of daily habits, etc., then you are pretty darned connected to your character. The fact that you wouldn’t be as upset as your players by a character’s death has more to do with your ability to disassociate from them. That’s healthy.
Too many people equate Player to PC, and that’s unhealthy. You can see it whenever people talk about not allowing players to use their PC’s skills against another PC and they use terms like “no PvP.” In a video game, like an MMOFPS, your character is an avatar in that world, so whatever you do in game reflects on you directly as a player. That’s because that character represents you in that game world. But in D&D, your characters represents themselves, not you as the player. They have their own personalities, backstories, families, home lives, careers, hopes, dreams, goals, and aspirations. So if a PC uses Stealth or Sleight of Hand or whatever against another PC, that’s not really “PvP,” but more “CvC” (Character Vs Character). That’s okay because it’s two fictional characters interacting with one another, just like the rest of everything that happens in D&D. When people blur the lines between Player and Character, and cannot disassociate from their PCs, that’s not always healthy. Is it normal to be upset if a PC dies? Of course, just as it’s okay to be upset whenever a favored character in a book/tv show/movie dies. But when it’s “too upsetting to continue,” that can be a problem.
Having a healthy disassociation from one’s PC is a good thing IMO, and you’re demonstrating that you have that.
I was pretty upset when my character died recently, but part of me was like, meh. I liked him, but I think mostly there was a little regret that I didn't get a chance to see how far I could get him (was Level 5), and I missed using his full abilities etc when he was alive.
But, onto the next one. I've got a different character now (my Wizard died, now have a bard), just so I'm not trying to do a rinse and repeat thing - I need a clean break. Maybe try a wizard later.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Odo Proudfoot - Lvl 10 Halfling Monk - Princes of the Apocalypse (Campaign Finished)
Becoming invested in my character is extremely important to my overall enjoyment of the game, as a player. Death should be feared and that definitely is true when I love my character. I have played characters I do not care about and that is reflected in my character decisions. I do not think that players who are not invested are playing wrong though. Everyone plays for different reasons. But in my opinion, they are missing out on a delicious piece of the pie. When you care about the PCs, you care about the relationships they form, and therefore you care about other PCs when they die. It builds on itself for a fuller experience in my opinion.
My players know that each encounter we do is a deadly one. They are on board with that and they also all know that if anything happens that they are concerned about they are allowed to take a look at my notes. We talk all the time about the game and debrief about what we liked and didn't like about what happened in the game. So we are very open and communicate all the time.
My question was more about am I missing something to connect to my characters the way they do.
Do you want to connect with your characters in that way? Is that something you desire? Or are you wondering if you're doing something wrong?
If the latter, then I'd say not necessarily. Different people play differently, not everyone gets superemotional. And that's perfectly normal. So long as you're enjoying it, that's all that matters. Obviously, we can't tell how connected you are, and I think you should be connected at least somewhat, or your not invested and therefore not getting the whole potential out of the game, so I can't authoritatively tell you that you are getting everything you can out of the game. However, just because you're not as connected as they are, that doesn't mean that you're losing out either.
If you mean the former, you're feeling that you're not as connected as you'd like and seeing their connection and wanting it for yourself, then that's a valid desire. We (as in, those on this forum) can discuss that and suggest ways to improve your connection to your characters, how you can feel more attached and invested into them.
Let us know where you're coming from.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
They are a bunch of graphite scratches on a page, or 1’s and 0’s. If the 1’s and 0’s run out then go get some more. It’s a game of fantasy make-believe. Getting upset over it would be like crying when your monopoly token gets sent to jail.
There needs to be a separation of player and character. Obsessions over anything are most often detrimental. It's very unhealthy to gamble one's emotional health to dice.
The dice do not consider a person's attachment to a character, and enough bad rolls in the open that a DM just cannot fudge can pile upon a character, leading to the character's demise without exposing plot armo(u)r to keep the character alive, which takes all risk out of the game and one might as well just forgo the dice altogether.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I don't think I've ever gotten so into a character that I couldn't deal if they died. In fact, my ranger is level 13 and I keep thinking of other characters that it would be fun to play with that group if my ranger were to die. The dm even took me aside and was like "hey, you mentioned other characters a few times, do you want your ranger to go on a side mission while you play someone else for a while?" I was kinda taken aback since I do enjoy my ranger, but that's just how my mind works, always coming up with new character concepts.
I also try never to be too invested in a character too early on. They start out fairly basic with one or two juicy backstory things, and the journey is what makes them unique and interesting to me. My investment in the character depends on my investment in the story/world.
I get attached my characters, whether they are PCs or NPCs. As a GM, I do not have to worry about my NPCs dying, because those that die are clearly enemies I want to be killed off. And even if I change my mind later, undeath is always an option to bring any dead ones back and challenge the PCs again.
This is really just something to hammer out in session zero. Nothing wrong with people being attached or unattached to their characters.
After over 40 years of play and at least 50 different characters you do get invested in them the longer you play them and I still have several from 40+ years ago that I would hate to see die. Others from recent games I play as if the character has a fear of death but I the player don’t have a fear of them dieing. Since ve been both playing and DMing for so long I have moved those OG early characters out of regular play and into NPC status in my own world which gives them a plot armor all their own. Getting too attached and invested in a fictional character is not healthy but people who do it are also often not open to discussing why it happens and what internals are behind it so watch your step if you talk to them about it.
Perhaps it's from having played 1e, where we just assumed that our characters were more likely to meet untimely ends than succeed in finishing a campaign, but I think that has inoculated me somewhat from being too upset if a character dies. Also, from those early games it's always given me the sense that the possibility of death must exist to give the characters' survival meaning. I believe it was H.G. Wells who said, "If anything is possible, then nothing is interesting." If I know there is no chance of my character dying, that (for me) almost breeds a kind of not caring about what the party does, because the worst possible outcome isn't death.
All of that said, I do agree with everyone about discussing this sort of thing up front, preferably with the group in a session 0.
I think I do want to be more attached to my characters. Not in a way that would emotionally destroy me if they died, but in a way that allows me to better understand them and enjoy the game.
I was talking with one of my players the other day and they said that they don't know what they would do if one of their characters died. They said that they put so much into each character that they play (they play other TTRPGs with other groups) that if they had a character die they don't know if they could make a new character to continue with that specific group. At the very least, they said, they would need to take a good amount of time away from the table before they'd be able to play again. A few of my other players have said similar, though much less extreme, things about their characters.
When one of my players had their character leave the party (not even die, just leave for a little while) most of the table was in tears. This is not something that I have experienced personally. If one of my characters dies then I'm good to move to the next character. Whenever I make a character I don't tend to get that attached to them so I was curious if there was something that other people have experienced or if its just something that I am doing wrong.
For a bit of context, we are a group of 20-somethings who have been playing this particular game for close to 5 years where I have been the DM. I understand there is a certain amount of investment when you've been playing the game and those characters for so long but this was a conversation about a character from a game that they just started.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
Character deaths happen. It's a part of the game. You have to go into an RPG expecting that a series of bad rolls/good rolls can end your character at any time. Does it suck? Sure, especially if you were really happy with the character you wrote up or the build you'd made.
But if you're so attached that losing a DnD character causes legitimate, incapacitating, emotional distress, then role-playing games may not be for you. If it's that concerning and you still want to play, then just a II at the end of the name and keep playing them as a new character who is the exact same character and pretend it never happened.
With our group, it's always a session 0 discussion on the campaign, "How do you feel about character deaths?" In our main campaign, we all agreed we would be OK with them, yet when we had them (twice now a PC has actually died) we took extraordinary measures to bring that character back. In fact, upon seeing how much panic we felt from the first, when the second PC died, we were all but immediately provided a "solution" to preserve the body well enough to have it brought back. It struck us all as strange how attached we got after a year of playing the characters and how our minds had changed as to what we would do in event of character death.
I believe it's something important to discuss at session 0, as the DM then knows how to handle things when it's about to happen. If he/she knows the players are fine with it, then carry on and let the character die. If they know the players are not REALLY ok with it, they can provide a workaround, allowing a chance of bringing the character back in some fashion. I know some will claim "EZMODE" or some such, but honestly, with erasure of PC stats and such, we've gone from a game, where mechanics, rules and numbers are important to it, to a hobby/pastime, where the story, time invested and enjoyment are number one, with details being secondary and ignored when inconvenient. I don't believe either method is wrong, as both have a place, so I don't have a side per say. By keeping in mind it's a group adventure and making sure we all stay within the expectations and desires of he entire table, we all have more fun, which is what D&D is supposed to be about.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
A four year campaign ended recently because life happened... I grieved for six weeks over my favorite character to date. Long live Äïkaterina Karolya.
You are certainly not doing anything wrong; each person just has their own level of investment!
Have you asked why they're so protective of this current character? I mean everyone puts work into characters to some level and just because you go bullet points over a novel backstory doesn't mean you don't both care deeply about a PC. I hesitate to say they're being dramatic without more information but maybe there's a reason this character is the one to rule them all as they're acting currently about them; is this just trying to stay immersed so if the PC dies they feel they have to kind of take time away as well to bring the emotional impact as it were?
Do they know that death is part of the game?
It's already hard to permanently kill a PC in 5e, or at least it seems that way unless you're trying to do it, so I don't think the player as as much to worry about as they think, but still it's part of the game. True you can chose to "toggle off" that option like people toggle off Encumbrance but the more I play the game the more I feel you're missing out on potential story points by doing that. If the PC dies than this might set up a Resurrection quest for the group and so they get character moments and a chance to pour out how they fill about the dead PC; when/if the PC comes back there things to explore such as where did they go, how did they feel about being pulled back into this world, and are they more at peace dying now knowing what's possibly ahead.
Yes, it is a shame when a PC you love dies and maybe you need some time to process that and that's okay, but to never play again...it makes me ask if there's more to this than just experiencing really the story. Does the player respond this way when their favorite character in a book or show dies? If not then why and if yes then why?
On the plus side, it sounds like your players care about each other as a group which isn't always the case on some TTRPG groups - they're just there to kill things and get money (maybe there's some care but not always a guarantee) so there's that!
You said you're 20 somethings and have been playing for 5 years, so using my bad math that means you started in high school so again maybe there's some real life influences to this comment? Like the PC dying means the end of that chapter of their life and it was all better then? I'm assuming they know that if the PC dies it doesn't mean they themselves have to leave the game so yeah maybe it's emotional content beyond the game driving the intention to bubble wrap the PC? Maybe it's just they love the build they did and the ideas they have coming to make it even better and starting all over again would be a bummer to lose that? It's fair to grieve a character if they die and it's fair to be bummed about all your hard work and these things you want to reveal to see reactions are gone but to hinge the game all on one PC is unfair to the game and it would be sad to see the player miss out on other cool moments with the group because their sadness was holding them back.
It is possible to have an extreme attachment to a character at jump so while it's not a 5 year run yet they're hoping it will go that far and so yeah length doesn't mean anything when you have someone who's just passionate about something.
For my table, we're pretty mixed - some want to bubble wrap their PCs because of the emotional attachment to them and parts of self they put in while others could care less if they burn through an entire folder of PC options because it's about the overall story not who they play by the end and then there's middle ground players who do care about their PC but also aren't devastated if they die. The middle ground my cry as it happens and have a moment at the table but give them next session or even a hour into this session depending on when you start and they'll have someone new because again they lean more story and time with friends than putting everything on one PC to make or break the experience for them.
For me personally, I'm a middle ground person - I would be sad to see some characters go (admittedly some people are created just so I have someone to play until I can come up with a more RP style concept I like) and I might even shed a tear but now days I'm fine with a PC dying if it happens because death doesn't mean dead ironically in 5e. Ha
Even if you do have to do a whole new character it's okay because again it's not like you have to leave the game yourself if it happens because that would be hardcore and definitely worth tears!
Ah II - a classic move. Ha
Also classics, the twin sibling. Clones. If time travel is possible in the game, it's the PC from the past!
"I believe it's something important to discuss at session 0" - agree Falwith; and it's never too late to do a check in with the group!
Also there's the option of bubble wrapping just that PC. Yes, it is more work for the DM to keep up with whom they can kill without fear and whom they can never let die but it is an option. Who knows maybe through exposure to how it's not that bad of an experience in the game and how you can still have fun post that PC death the player who wants to be bubble wrapped will see it's okay to take some layers off until the DM list goes away and everyone is either all protected (because the opinion didn't change) or all playing without fear of PC death.
I've not lost one yet...but it would suck. If you've been playing for 5 years with the same one, that would also be worse. Just remember that the point of the game is to have fun. If they would enjoy losing a character less than if death was a possibility...don't kill them. That might go epagaihst your ethos, but it's important that they get what they enjoy.
Perhaps next time you start a campaign, you can do a session 0 and explain that you want to do a more deadly game. They'll invest less into their characters...and you kill them. Obviously not TPK or even a kill every session, but a kill often enough to remind them and normalise them to the idea that their character could die. Would that be more fun? I don't know. But it's better than killing their deeply invested characters and causing an upset. By informing them before hand and reminding them of the lethality of the world, you can get them accustomed to not having their world tied to one character.
In the other hand, you could just continue protecting them. Just do what's fun for the table.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
I get highly invested in each and every character I play. However, I started playing D&D in 2e when life was cheap, so I don’t get nearly so upset as all of that if one of my PCs dies. I lost count decades ago of how many of my characters either died or otherwise became unplayable.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
My players know that each encounter we do is a deadly one. They are on board with that and they also all know that if anything happens that they are concerned about they are allowed to take a look at my notes. We talk all the time about the game and debrief about what we liked and didn't like about what happened in the game. So we are very open and communicate all the time.
My question was more about am I missing something to connect to my characters the way they do.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
I don’t think so. As one of my best friends puts it, “you really know your character when you can describe what’s in their pockets without having to check your character sheet.” What she means by that is that people carry whatever they feel is important to them to have anywhere and everywhere in their pockets. That says something about the person’s character and personality. If you’re knowledge of your PC is as intimate as your knowledge of yourself in terms of daily habits, etc., then you are pretty darned connected to your character. The fact that you wouldn’t be as upset as your players by a character’s death has more to do with your ability to disassociate from them. That’s healthy.
Too many people equate Player to PC, and that’s unhealthy. You can see it whenever people talk about not allowing players to use their PC’s skills against another PC and they use terms like “no PvP.” In a video game, like an MMOFPS, your character is an avatar in that world, so whatever you do in game reflects on you directly as a player. That’s because that character represents you in that game world. But in D&D, your characters represents themselves, not you as the player. They have their own personalities, backstories, families, home lives, careers, hopes, dreams, goals, and aspirations. So if a PC uses Stealth or Sleight of Hand or whatever against another PC, that’s not really “PvP,” but more “CvC” (Character Vs Character). That’s okay because it’s two fictional characters interacting with one another, just like the rest of everything that happens in D&D. When people blur the lines between Player and Character, and cannot disassociate from their PCs, that’s not always healthy. Is it normal to be upset if a PC dies? Of course, just as it’s okay to be upset whenever a favored character in a book/tv show/movie dies. But when it’s “too upsetting to continue,” that can be a problem.
Having a healthy disassociation from one’s PC is a good thing IMO, and you’re demonstrating that you have that.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I was pretty upset when my character died recently, but part of me was like, meh. I liked him, but I think mostly there was a little regret that I didn't get a chance to see how far I could get him (was Level 5), and I missed using his full abilities etc when he was alive.
But, onto the next one. I've got a different character now (my Wizard died, now have a bard), just so I'm not trying to do a rinse and repeat thing - I need a clean break. Maybe try a wizard later.
Odo Proudfoot - Lvl 10 Halfling Monk - Princes of the Apocalypse (Campaign Finished)
Orryn Pebblefoot - Lvl 5 Rock Gnome Wizard (Deceased) - Waterdeep: Dragon Heist (Deceased)
Anerin Ap Tewdr - Lvl 5 Human (Variant) Bard (College of Valor) - Waterdeep: Dragon Heist
Becoming invested in my character is extremely important to my overall enjoyment of the game, as a player. Death should be feared and that definitely is true when I love my character. I have played characters I do not care about and that is reflected in my character decisions. I do not think that players who are not invested are playing wrong though. Everyone plays for different reasons. But in my opinion, they are missing out on a delicious piece of the pie. When you care about the PCs, you care about the relationships they form, and therefore you care about other PCs when they die. It builds on itself for a fuller experience in my opinion.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Do you want to connect with your characters in that way? Is that something you desire? Or are you wondering if you're doing something wrong?
If the latter, then I'd say not necessarily. Different people play differently, not everyone gets superemotional. And that's perfectly normal. So long as you're enjoying it, that's all that matters. Obviously, we can't tell how connected you are, and I think you should be connected at least somewhat, or your not invested and therefore not getting the whole potential out of the game, so I can't authoritatively tell you that you are getting everything you can out of the game. However, just because you're not as connected as they are, that doesn't mean that you're losing out either.
If you mean the former, you're feeling that you're not as connected as you'd like and seeing their connection and wanting it for yourself, then that's a valid desire. We (as in, those on this forum) can discuss that and suggest ways to improve your connection to your characters, how you can feel more attached and invested into them.
Let us know where you're coming from.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
They are a bunch of graphite scratches on a page, or 1’s and 0’s. If the 1’s and 0’s run out then go get some more. It’s a game of fantasy make-believe. Getting upset over it would be like crying when your monopoly token gets sent to jail.
There needs to be a separation of player and character. Obsessions over anything are most often detrimental. It's very unhealthy to gamble one's emotional health to dice.
The dice do not consider a person's attachment to a character, and enough bad rolls in the open that a DM just cannot fudge can pile upon a character, leading to the character's demise without exposing plot armo(u)r to keep the character alive, which takes all risk out of the game and one might as well just forgo the dice altogether.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I don't think I've ever gotten so into a character that I couldn't deal if they died. In fact, my ranger is level 13 and I keep thinking of other characters that it would be fun to play with that group if my ranger were to die. The dm even took me aside and was like "hey, you mentioned other characters a few times, do you want your ranger to go on a side mission while you play someone else for a while?" I was kinda taken aback since I do enjoy my ranger, but that's just how my mind works, always coming up with new character concepts.
I also try never to be too invested in a character too early on. They start out fairly basic with one or two juicy backstory things, and the journey is what makes them unique and interesting to me. My investment in the character depends on my investment in the story/world.
I get attached my characters, whether they are PCs or NPCs. As a GM, I do not have to worry about my NPCs dying, because those that die are clearly enemies I want to be killed off. And even if I change my mind later, undeath is always an option to bring any dead ones back and challenge the PCs again.
This is really just something to hammer out in session zero. Nothing wrong with people being attached or unattached to their characters.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
After over 40 years of play and at least 50 different characters you do get invested in them the longer you play them and I still have several from 40+ years ago that I would hate to see die. Others from recent games I play as if the character has a fear of death but I the player don’t have a fear of them dieing. Since ve been both playing and DMing for so long I have moved those OG early characters out of regular play and into NPC status in my own world which gives them a plot armor all their own. Getting too attached and invested in a fictional character is not healthy but people who do it are also often not open to discussing why it happens and what internals are behind it so watch your step if you talk to them about it.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Perhaps it's from having played 1e, where we just assumed that our characters were more likely to meet untimely ends than succeed in finishing a campaign, but I think that has inoculated me somewhat from being too upset if a character dies. Also, from those early games it's always given me the sense that the possibility of death must exist to give the characters' survival meaning. I believe it was H.G. Wells who said, "If anything is possible, then nothing is interesting." If I know there is no chance of my character dying, that (for me) almost breeds a kind of not caring about what the party does, because the worst possible outcome isn't death.
All of that said, I do agree with everyone about discussing this sort of thing up front, preferably with the group in a session 0.
I think I do want to be more attached to my characters. Not in a way that would emotionally destroy me if they died, but in a way that allows me to better understand them and enjoy the game.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."