Resurrection Complications

WayOfTheFourElements

Hero

• Jan 18, 2019

• #1

I've never been happy with the way resurrection worked in D&D. I always wanted it to have a greater impact on the character and story. So wrote up a rough daft containing a little table of resurrection complications. Let me know what you think.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1mxkPOiC13HSgsfS84qA_bQtP9AbtnXjT

 

Attachments

• Resurrection ComplicationV0.2.pdf

  408.2 KB · Views: 456

Last edited: Jan 19, 2019

log in or register to remove this ad

L

lowkey13

Guest

• Jan 18, 2019

• #2

*Deleted by user*

 

I

Immortal Sun

Guest

• Jan 18, 2019

• #3

These have good impact on the story, but all seem pretty "big deal". I'd suggest some smaller things too, like terrible scars from whatever killed them or a dead limb or something that can never be healed. Not every death needs to result in dramatic consequences. I've seen players go to much greater lengths to overcome being ugly than being dead.

 

aco175

Legend

• Jan 18, 2019

• #4

I would most likely get player buy-in before using at the table. They seem fine though, except I would have Queen play music instead of Bowie, but its fine anyways. Kind of a Deck of Many Things in randomness and if players want to die to maybe get cool things.

 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

• Jan 18, 2019

• #5

While I as a player would love it and all the character definition and drama it would bring, I've also gamed with plenty who would be "so I can either have a permanent negative to my character, or just roll up a new character? Pfft, new character".

Which means that all the character arcs, bonds with other characters and NPCs, and all the rest go away.

Now, for any particular table this may be a moot point. You know your table best, this may not affect them. In which case you're fine.

If it could be an issue (or for wider adoption), I'd suggest either/both:

1. Increase the frequency of the good results, so that players feel they have a chance to get something good. (And hope you don't have the type of player who will go for it, and then intentionally "accidentally" kill them off if they roll poorly.)

2. Have that replacement characters come in with some disadvantage (say, one level below the lowest level party member.)


As a separate suggestion you might have some lesser effects - ones that linger for days or a level or until a remove curse / greater restoration but aren't permanent. And some mixed - you detect as undead and trigger anti-undead things, but undead aren't immediately hostile to you...

EDIT: I wouldn't have these come up for the Revivify spell.

 

5

5ekyu

Hero

• Jan 18, 2019

• #6

In my last 3.5 game, where five of six PC died - some more than once - I gave each a personal after-death journey with options and turning points to make coming back meaningful. Each character who died came back with renewed focus and intent driven by those choices.

I also added as part of the eorld cults (same goddess) who either revered or reviled those who came back and feat trees unlocked bybthe "brush with death" etc.

These led to a major significance and impact for each death, in the character and the story.

After the campaign wrapped the player of the "same undestructsble dwarf I always play" commented he regretted never getting that experience due to his build plus conservative playstyle.

It was a lot of fun...

I often wonder how many people see "penalty" as a synonym for "impactful" or "meaningful"?

 

D

Dausuul

Legend

• Jan 18, 2019

• #7

Blue said:

I've also gamed with plenty who would be "so I can either have a permanent negative to my character, or just roll up a new character? Pfft, new character".

Which means that all the character arcs, bonds with other characters and NPCs, and all the rest go away.

Click to expand...

Yeah, this exactly.

As a player, I always have more character ideas than opportunities to play them. Rarely am I so invested in a particular character that I prefer resurrection to making a new PC. Adding a bunch of drawbacks would just push me from "rarely" to "never."

As a DM, on the other hand, it's a real hassle when a player makes a new character. Suddenly I have to figure out how to bring this new character into the existing campaign, and all the work I did on relationships and connections for the old character is down the drain. I really do not want to make that occurrence more common.

What I prefer is to say, "When you are resurrected, you come back Changed. Roll up a new character, but keep the old character's race, appearance, memories, and social connections. You can keep as much or as little of your old personality as you like." It has the same overall flavor, where you are altered by your passage through death, but it doesn't punish the player for saving the DM a lot of work, and it lets the player try out a new concept.

 

jasper

Rotten DM

• Jan 18, 2019

• #8

I disagree with [MENTION=20564]Blue[/MENTION] about the replacement level. I would say avg of party or equal to lowest level. And [MENTION=44305]da[/MENTION]usiil I have no trouble bringing new pcs. Some times you were two days short before you fell on the nade. Aka Game Over Man.
Oh the Chart I would add some bad with the good. Like vulnerability to necrotic. But nice chart except for using the second most hated die.

 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal

• Jan 18, 2019

• #9

jasper said:

I disagree with @Blue about the replacement level. I would say avg of party or equal to lowest level.

Click to expand...

Just looking for clarification, are you disagreeing with the specific level-1 I posted, or are you disagreeing with the concept that there needs to be some penalty for creating a new character otherwise there are players who will always sidestep the chance for resurrection penalties, to the detriment of the game in other ways.

 

P

Pauln6

Hero

• Jan 18, 2019

• #10

I recall an article in Dragon magazine about the possible side effects of coming back from the dead.

More logically what is the legal status of resurrectees? What happens to their wealth? Family members would certainly not be happy if Great Uncle Dogbert marched back in to claim his mansion after 60 years.

In my campaign only priests of the death gods can bring back the dead. Nerull demands an equivalent life in exchange, while Wee Jas demands magical items. Those that return are marked by the gods - a tattoo somewhere on the body. A shameful secret to hide, perhaps? The rich merchant who doesn't want his family to find out that they've already inherited?