Taking turn DMing for a group that just had a really good DM

[Book of Vile Derp]

Actually, I would recommend against this. My recommendation would be to just allow healing as standard. Worst-case scenario, it makes your game that little bit easier... but you can correct that easy enough by just using tougher monsters if you wish.

I'm glad to get some specific feedback on that. It isn't intended as a difficulty thing, but more as flavor. I really want deaths in my campaign to mean something. Originally I had said one revive type spell and that's it, but I buckled a little when all my soon-to-be-players got a bit too squeamish over it. I liked the flavor text in revivify because it said that it brings the person back to life before the soul has time to leave the body.
When I looked back at how deaths were handled in the campaign I'm currently in, I didn't want to them to go like that, because it was becoming a joke. Players were keeping count of how many times their character had died, and no one was afraid to kamikaze because even if the cleric was busy he had a raise dead or two prepared on top of a couple revivifies. I don't want that. I want players to be in terror at the thought of their character dying (not that I will try and kill them often. I'll make things challenging but except a select few really important fights, stupidity will be the only path to death). And I'm also pushing hard that house rules apply equally to enemies as they do PCs. I don't like the idea that an enemy would die and my players wouldn't roleplay any fear of him being revived just because "the DM wouldn't do that".

 

[delericho]

I'm glad to get some specific feedback on that. It isn't intended as a difficulty thing, but more as flavor. I really want deaths in my campaign to mean something.

Ah. The Revolving Door of Death. I understand entirely how you feel.

Unfortunately, I think that may be an unfortunate but necessary feature of gameplay.

Here's the thing: the game is most exciting when played on the edge of disaster: the PCs are taxed to their limits (or at least close to them). If they're unlucky, or if their tactics aren't good, or if someone misses a session or... there's a real good chance someone will die.

The problem is, if you're consistently playing on the edge, and if you're playing fair, then sooner or later someone is going to die. That's inevitable - you simply can't be lucky forever.

To a certain extent, the various "raise" spells are intended to mitigate this. Sure, there's always the risk of death, but at least you can come back. And it's costly, in terms of both gold and XP, but at least you've not lost a favourite character forever...

Now, all that said, I can very readily sympathise with not liking the Revolving Door. I don't much like it myself.

But your choices are (1) don't play "on the edge" in this manner, (2) don't play "fair" (effectively fudging to keep PCs alive), or (3) see lots of favourite characters die permanently... and if that happens too often, see your players quit the game.

(FWIW, my fix is mostly #1 - although there's a constant risk of death in my games, they're actually quite few and far between. Although it seems that we've waited a year for one, and now three have come along at once!)

When I looked back at how deaths were handled in the campaign I'm currently in, I didn't want to them to go like that, because it was becoming a joke. Players were keeping count of how many times their character had died, and no one was afraid to kamikaze because even if the cleric was busy he had a raise dead or two prepared on top of a couple revivifies. I don't want that.

Yeah, I would hate that too.

I'll make things challenging but except a select few really important fights, stupidity will be the only path to death).

It's your game, but to me a statement like that raises a warning flag. Most often when I've seen a DM say that, it's been followed by the DM proceeding to fudge lots of dice rolls to keep the PCs alive. Now, I'm not of the school that says that the DM must never, ever fudge a roll, I'm also of the school that prefers to see it used very sparingly.

Of course, it's entirely possible I'm misreading you. If so, I apologise!

 

[timASW]

I'm doing something now where after being revived from death a character has 1 STR and CON and must recover naturally at 1 point a day. No magic can help it.

It seems to have increased the fear of death. No one wants their character on the sidelines for 2 or 3 weeks. It gives me time to do all sorts of nasty things now that the bad guys know someone is on to them.

 

[nijineko]

I'm doing something now where after being revived from death a character has 1 STR and CON and must recover naturally at 1 point a day. No magic can help it.

It seems to have increased the fear of death. No one wants their character on the sidelines for 2 or 3 weeks. It gives me time to do all sorts of nasty things now that the bad guys know someone is on to them.

interesting! and so thematically appropriate too.

 

[Book of Vile Derp]

Ah. The Revolving Door of Death. I understand entirely how you feel.

Unfortunately, I think that may be an unfortunate but necessary feature of gameplay.

Here's the thing: the game is most exciting when played on the edge of disaster: the PCs are taxed to their limits (or at least close to them). If they're unlucky, or if their tactics aren't good, or if someone misses a session or... there's a real good chance someone will die.

The problem is, if you're consistently playing on the edge, and if you're playing fair, then sooner or later someone is going to die. That's inevitable - you simply can't be lucky forever.

To a certain extent, the various "raise" spells are intended to mitigate this. Sure, there's always the risk of death, but at least you can come back. And it's costly, in terms of both gold and XP, but at least you've not lost a favourite character forever...

Now, all that said, I can very readily sympathise with not liking the Revolving Door. I don't much like it myself.

But your choices are (1) don't play "on the edge" in this manner, (2) don't play "fair" (effectively fudging to keep PCs alive), or (3) see lots of favourite characters die permanently... and if that happens too often, see your players quit the game.

(FWIW, my fix is mostly #1 - although there's a constant risk of death in my games, they're actually quite few and far between. Although it seems that we've waited a year for one, and now three have come along at once!)



Yeah, I would hate that too.



It's your game, but to me a statement like that raises a warning flag. Most often when I've seen a DM say that, it's been followed by the DM proceeding to fudge lots of dice rolls to keep the PCs alive. Now, I'm not of the school that says that the DM must never, ever fudge a roll, I'm also of the school that prefers to see it used very sparingly.

Of course, it's entirely possible I'm misreading you. If so, I apologise!

I think you misread me a bit at the end. I don't like to fudge dice rolls, and even if I did, my players can see my dice and I'd have to fudge the mod itself. So I don't intend to fudge. One thing I'm doing to minimize casualties but maximize threat is that more important battles will use the Torn Asunder crit system. So while no one may have gotten below bloodied in a battle, there are still only 6 arms in a party of four when they walk away lol. When I first DM'd over the summer I was really good at making glass cannons and fortresses. So something may have done 100 points of damage in one turn at level 12, but he would die in just a few turns. Meanwhile the things that were going to last didn't do a lot of damage, but they had really cool effects (I ran the boogeyman from PF bestiary 3, and that was a FUN encounter. He would creep around and wait for the perfect time to strike while he was invisible in a room full of traps)

It also isn't dying that's a problem, I do allow revivify, and each character can be brought back by another spell ONCE (maybe twice if I prove more lethal than intended) But i think this will add intensity to less tense situations, and keep players from a kamikaze state of mind. But do keep replying, these kind of debates are why I made this account.
@Morrus;

 

[Book of Vile Derp]

Also, my characters will be dead at negative CON, not negative ten. That helps some.