D&D 5E D&D 5e death and consequences?

[Woas]

The spell also gives a new meaning to the wedding tradition of giving a wife a diamond ring. The 'husband' goes off to war/adventure/explore, the 'wife' has a diamond on to use for resurrection if needed.

I put husband and wife in quotes cause, well it's 2014 and D&D... doesn't necessarily have to be the man going off to explore of course

 

[Daniel Russell]

My question (one of legitimate inquiry, not skepticism) was, in practice, how likely are players to want undertake such a quest, with the afflicted player now playing a new character, and then return to the old character after completing the quest? (Assuming that you don't tell the player to just sit the next few sessions out and you'll call when the other players manage to pull off the resurrection. Which would be somewhat fiendish.)

How have these sorts of things worked out in your campaigns?

I have found that having the dead player work with me, running monsters and such, is a fun way to have them "sit out" without stopping them playing. They are still very gald to get their PC back that way and don't miss any games.

Also is a good intro to DMing for people who haven't done it.

 

[The_Gneech]

The spell also gives a new meaning to the wedding tradition of giving a wife a diamond ring. The 'husband' goes off to war/adventure/explore, the 'wife' has a diamond on to use for resurrection if needed.

Brilliant!

-TG

 

[The_Gneech]

I have found that having the dead player work with me, running monsters and such, is a fun way to have them "sit out" without stopping them playing. They are still very gald to get their PC back that way and don't miss any games.

Also is a good intro to DMing for people who haven't done it.

Also brilliant!

-The Gneech

 

[Nivenus]

Like a lot of people I think abstract and story-based costs are more interesting and more useful than simple numerical values like "x amount of gold" or "x amount of XP cost." I mean, those are valuable too, insofar as they do provide a baseline for what resurrection costs, but I think they're much more interesting and meaningful when they're backed up by narrative elements (though that may come from the fact that I prefer to play D&D as a story than a tactical simulation).

Such potential costs might look something like this:

1) The character has towant to come back. This is a fairly basic requirement and one that probably doesn't need to be mentioned for player characters. But for important NPCs a party might want to revive? Definitely a factor.

2) If the character's revived with a divine spell (such as by a cleric) then the god the caster serves also has to be a willing participant. Again, probably not a problem in most cases, but a lawful good god might object to raising a chaotic evil character (or vice versa). In cases where a god might be less than willing the resurrection either fails or perhaps the god places certain restrictions on the raised character, such as a ward against their killing innocents or some kind of claim on their soul. The details, of course, should best be left up to the players and the DM. Alternatively, the party can seek out a different cleric (though that might be easier said than done).

3) On the other hand, if the character's revived with an arcane spell (such as a bard) then the resurrection might have unintended effects. Possibly some of the ones that were mentioned earlier in the thread - lost weight, accelerated aging, invisibility to the undead, etc. Think of it as something like the wild surge chart.

Those are just a few ideas that rolled around in my head. Others can (and already have) think of different ones, some of which may be better. But the point is that I don't really think death needs to have material consequences - they're generally boring and are either trivially easy to overcome or unnecessarily aggravating for players. On the other hand, there's a lot of potential to be had in softer, narrative consequences, especially if they're negotiated between the player and DM.

 

[farsearcher]

My preference is that a character who has died and is resurrected comes back at the midway point of the level below. If the character was at 1st level lose a point from constitution.

Another thought is for the resurrected character to have disadvantage on all rolls for a period of game time, or at least not be able to use any advantage the character may be entitled to.

Perhaps the character gains a phobia about the creature/situation responsible for the death and is considered to be in a frightened condition. (Multiple deaths from different scenarios could make for a very nervous character!)

I do think that character resurrection should carry some sort of consequence.

Perhaps though if the character has an inspiration point that could be spent to avoid the consequence?

 

[Paraxis]

My preference is that a character who has died and is resurrected comes back at the midway point of the level below. If the character was at 1st level lose a point from constitution.

Another thought is for the resurrected character to have disadvantage on all rolls for a period of game time, or at least not be able to use any advantage the character may be entitled to.

Perhaps the character gains a phobia about the creature/situation responsible for the death and is considered to be in a frightened condition. (Multiple deaths from different scenarios could make for a very nervous character!)

I do think that character resurrection should carry some sort of consequence.

Perhaps though if the character has an inspiration point that could be spent to avoid the consequence?

Welcome to the boards, always great seeing new people post.

I would say there are already consequences to being brought back.

Revivify, it is in combat, takes an action, target comes back at only 1 h.p, and is laying on the ground. In a fight where companions have already started to fall, these are pretty hefty consequences. Ohh and the 300 gp component that gets used up.

Raise Dead, the character comes back with a -4 penalty to all checks and this is reduced by 1 after each long rest, so it takes 4 days for the character to be back to full performance, and the 500 gp component.

 

[KarinsDad]

Players love it when it works for them but when they have to kill the bad guy for the 100th time it gets kind of old.

Too bad 5E no longer has Contingency. The dead bad guy teleporting away got really old fast back in the day.

 

[KarinsDad]

Agreed, 100%.

Now, I know that someone will see those changes as an improvement. D&D is, after all, a game, and permanent penalties are usually seen as not fun.

OTOH, fear of PC death does lead to more "realistic" gameplay in the sense that that fear is a handy substitute for a survival instinct. That makes a PC more than a mere piece in a boardgame.

To me, coming back from the dead SHOULD have consequences. However, in the light of myriad volumes of fantasy literature out there that touch on such a subject, perhaps that consequence should not be a single outcome hard baked into the rules, but rather, something more fluid. And maybe not limited to the target of the power, but also to the caster.

Perhaps the spell or whatever read raising mechanism would state that using it would say the returned character (and possibly the caster) now has N Minor and/or Major Consequences. Examples of said consequences would be listed in a non-comprehensive section of the DMG, so the DM could tailor the effects to the spell used, the nature of the caster, the campaign world, the manner of death and whatever else the DM felt relevant. And- importantly- not all consequences would necessarily be negative, or at least, not purely so. Perhaps the consequence results in an increase in the power of the returned PC...but simultaneously, he has some magical taboo that affects his actions. For example, the returned PC becomes a bound thrall to the person who brought them back. He is compelled to aid his benefactor in all situations.

And, to keep the fear of PC death "alive", the player wouldn't necessarily be aware of what the PC's Consequence was...

I think that "consequences" like these are too punitive.

I'm playing my PC, I don't want to play my PC that's permanently or long term temporarily gimped (i.e. modified so that he is not quite still the same PC) by some hair brained DM idea about how a spell should work.

Quite frankly, I'm playing a game. When my PC dies, it still typically takes upwards of an hour or so of real time, and potentially hours, days, or weeks of game time for him to be brought back to a town and raised. Even if the party Cleric can do it quickly after the current encounter, the penalties of Raise Dead seem sufficient as an inducement to try not to get my PC killed again.

Remember, it is the DM setting up the encounter that resulted in the PC death in the first place. Some portion of the responsibility for that PC death has to be taken by the DM who created the encounter and decided NPC actions during that encounter. For example, if 4 NPC archers fire at the PC wizard and the PC wizard dies, why exactly is the DM then further punishing the player of that PC?

This is just as heavy handed by a DM as some adventure railroading sometimes is.

DM: "Ooh, you died. What can I do with your PC now?" <evil chuckle>

Meh.

 

[Thank Dog]

Too bad 5E no longer has Contingency.

Err, yeah it does. Page 227 of the PHB. Can't do the teleport trick because Teleport is a 7th-level spell and Contingency is limited to 5th or lower, but the Contingency spell is definitely in 5e.