I don't, actually, intend for Dark Fantasy X to be a survival horror, characters die half a dozen per session type of game, although it can be depending on how its run, and is more likely to be if the Hardcore Mode options are used. That said, I am more sympathetic to old school dark fantasy almost horror-like tone in my fantasy games, and Dark Fantasy X deliberately aims for that. I actually believe that games that have too much lethality kind of go around the bend from the horror tone/mood and become silly. The risk of character death has to always hang over your head, but if frequent character death becomes almost a certainty, then it's not something to be feared anymore, it's just something to be played up for laughs.
Which is fine. That's actually a fun way to play. But it's not very horrifying. That's frequently my complaint about Call of Cthulhu as written. It needs to be played in a way that players want their characters to survive, that they believe that they can survive if they try and care and exercise good judgement, and the GM has to make that possibility a reality. Then threats become actually threatening, because you do care enough about surviving them that it raises the tension. If you just want to flame out and have a good laugh, because you're sure to die anyway, that's a completely different mood.
So, I think there's a fine line to be walked in terms of deadliness for your game, and sometimes that horror mood can come via different things that simply threat of death. This is one of the reasons Sanity works; it's a bit of a slow burn as the threat builds and you lose more of it, but its also something else that threatens your character besides death.
So, although Professor Dungeon Master talks frequently about player death and how to utilize it, we may not be quite on the same page exactly on this issue, I've thought many times in the past. Then again, earlier today he posted a Walkthrough "review" of his own product, Deathbringer, and I'm shocked at how many specific details we did the same between Deathbringer and Dark Fantasy X.
Where it differs is that while Dark Fantasy X is stripped down, it's not a stripped down interpretation of D&D, so I had to add back in stuff that was unique to my setting. That's a pretty significant difference, but curiously, when we get into the mechanics, they seem to be less different than I would have imagined.
He also has the same approach I do; he wants an OSR-like experience in tone and mood, or maybe even specifically a Warhammer FRP experience, but with something more like the consistent modern D&D rules. That's exactly the reason I adapted m20 too.
Although he keeps all six stats (while m20 condenses them down to 3) he did away with the 3-18 stat and uses the modifier as a stat (like I did). His hit points scenario is a little more traditional; I did away with rolling for most hit points, but the range is more or less the same, and if anything, mine is a bit on the lighter side than Deathbringer in terms of how many hit points you have. (I don't particularly like drawn out combats. They're not fun because they last longer.) On the other hand, I prefer a flatter hit point curve, so Dark Fantasy X has you with more hit points at the beginning and less further down the line. Deathbringer makes a big deal of the idea that you could have a 1 hit point character at first level. That's a pretty old skool idea, but I never liked it. And I do have a little bit of grace with regards to a "death save" like mechanic.
I also have a much more humano-centric game than D&D normally does, like Deathbringer, but not quite as extreme as his where there literally isn't anything other than humans available. His Deathbringer dice seem to work in a way much like my Heroic Points as well as how I use advantage/disadvantage. He also talks very specifically about not being "caged" by "I can't do that because it's not on my character sheet" using Deathbringer dice. I've also addressed that specific issue, although not exactly in the same way.
I also like his background and misery chart. I also encourage quick and dirty "backstories" rather than highly detailed ones, but I do so in a less structured way, and I don't have any charts for it. His feels very WFRP-like. He also talks specifically about classes not being super important, because although he has classes, their abilities are modest, and anyone can do (to some degree) anything; just that classed characters are a little bit better than characters who aren't in a class designed to be good at that.
His spellcasting works very similar to mine as well, although since it's clearly Lovecraftian/Warhammer-like, that's not surprising. I got some of my ideas from those same sources. The idea of finding every spell that you get is also part of what I have, as is the idea that spellcasters are illegal and are likely to get lynched if they give away their magical ability.
I dislike his corruption as a replacement for alignment, because I think the game shouldn't try to enforce any kind of morality with the system itself; if the GM and players are OK with an "evil" or seriously violent anti-hero Punisher-like character, then play an evil character.
And finally, he reiterates his glee at how normal modules in 5e will turn into a meatgrinder under Deathbringer rules. I've already addressed that.
