bladestorm wrote:Okay, then replace "sucky" with "non-dramatic" and "heroic" with "dramatic", if that makes you feel any better. Cubbins had a whole page spread for his "Pop a cap" or whatever it was called, and there was quite a build-up leading to the fall of the tower. There were a lot of posts in the forums after his apparent demise. He's not croaked. Drama has no equation to permanence. You could expect something like that from a game with rules and mechanics based upon a story; spending "Cool Points" to add a dramatic effect to a roll result, spending Fate Points or Force Points to enhance a roll during a dramatic point in the story, or bonus xp for driving the drama of the story. This is a story based upon a gamelike world with rules and mechanics already in place, and none of them seem to be concerned with drama -- just stats, numbers, and combat. One unit can do four points of damage to another unit and shove a sword through its head. If the unit that was hit has five HP before the attack, it survives. No drama, just Numbers. Another unit can advance on an opponent who is on a lower hex, make a three foot jump downward, and croak due to the Fall mechanics. Still no drama, just Numbers. I'm not convinced that the Rule of Cool is in effect, or that any croaking has any significance aside from raw battle calculations.
You have some good points there. I wasn't thinking of the gaming factor. You're right there, if you don't make your save in a game, you can still die from a kobold hitting you with a stick.
I suppose it all depends on the author. Because after all, the author is the one determining all the rolls. I am an avid lover of stories in many different formats, so I know lots of different styles and strategies that storytellers use. For me, the thing to consider isn't how the world works, but how the author wants things to go (unless the author wants the rules of the world to always be considered when he writes, which can well be the case). If the author wants things to proceed with a considerable amount of unpredictability- if he wants it to be the type of story where you understand a character can die at any time- then that's the way things can proceed. If the author wants a more drama-oriented story, where important characters die on their own time and with such deaths blending into his narrative(which is usually what authors go for), then death usually has weight and purpose. That was the angle I was examining. By the way, I'm not quite referring to dramatic as in exaggerated, I'm referring to... how to put it? Resolution, quality of writing, circumstance? When I'm saying "drama" here, I'm referring to it in its stage terms: a story, tale, narrative.
And yes, Cubbins did have a quite big fake-death. But there are several flavors of such things. The mundane, where a character simply dies but then turns up later. The dramatic, where a character seems quite solidly to be dead but isn't. The disappearance, where a character vanishes and is assumed dead. Among others. I don't equate drama(as in "eventfulness") with permanence, but there are many stories which do. You get my drift? I derive much enjoyment from seeing and analyzing the various mechanisms which authors use. They're very interesting and very varied. And that analysis drove my original post.
Also, the point of my original post was not that I was betting Jack was actually alive. The point was that any way things went, I was going to think he was dead for now so the author could work whatever magic he wished. I added my analysis of death to explain my view.