D&D 5E Revivify - where did that come from?!?

[The Crimson Binome]

But that was your point: stabilizing the dying at range with a bonus action.

Yeah, except stabilizing was only a tiny part of 3E, because monster damage scaled with level and your ten-point buffer did not. Close Wounds was useful if it stopped death from auto-kill, just like Revivify in 5E is useful because it can un-do death effects (like a beholder's death ray, which bypasses the normal death save mechanic).

Ranged stabilization belongs to a mode of play which is mostly absent from the 3E era.

 

[Mouseferatu]

One of my favorite ways of making resurrection (and the like) risky was how they handled that spell in 13th Age, with various possible repercussions. I keep meaning to transfer that into 5E, and keep forgetting when the time comes.

 

[pukunui]

I handle resurrection in my games like in Game of Thrones. That is, instead of being saddled with an annoying mechanical penalty that goes away after a few days, I've made it so that being raised from the dead is a traumatic experience that permanently changes you. You lose a bit of yourself in the process. Your flaws are amplified, or you gain a form of indefinite madness, or something along those lines. Depending on how the character is revived, as well, it might result in them having permanent physical injuries (missing eyes, missing limbs, etc).

As a DM, I find it much more fun to maim my players' PCs than kill them outright, though it does still happen from time to time.

 

[Edwin Suijkerbuijk]

Killing someone has always been a bad way to kill someone in a magical world.

If you want them to stay dead you have to brutalize the body and in some cases, the soul.

If you need to have an important person die when your party has access to powerful restorative magic, then you need to do more than stick them with a butter knife.

And just knocking them unconsious is even worse.
In DnD a unconsious character is just 1 spell away from being a treat again.

It seems to make a lot od difrence in how deadly DnD 5th is dependent onif the enemies go for the kill and attack uncounsous oponents.
any melee attack against a uncounsious player is 2 failed death saves.

 

[happyhermit]

The component cost, as mentioned, makes the spell not a problem for my purposes.

How available are diamonds in this particular place and time? Strangely enough, right about as common as they need to be to make things work

Granted, I would prefer they had used distinct components, even if a restriction in one particular area leads to some interesting party choices.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Also note the other piece of raise dead missing from revivify: the requirement for an available and willing soul. Combo with gentle repose for perfect prisoner transport. Well, until someone casts true resurrection.

 

[spectacle]

My group has always played without Raise Dead and similar spells, in every edition of (A)D&D. We don't like what it means to society when the rich and powerful can regularly cheat death.

In 5E we've made an exception for revivify though, due to the extremely short time window to use it. I figure that it doesn't actually undo death, but it can bring someone back from death's doorstep. Similar to how with modern medical techniques doctors can save patients who would have been declared dead 50 years ago.

 

[KahlessNestor]

You could always do what they do on Critical Role and combine the spell with a skill RP challenge. It was rather tense and dramatic.

 

[Sunseeker]

And just knocking them unconsious is even worse.
In DnD a unconsious character is just 1 spell away from being a treat again.

It seems to make a lot od difrence in how deadly DnD 5th is dependent onif the enemies go for the kill and attack uncounsous oponents.
any melee attack against a uncounsious player is 2 failed death saves.

I don't really like the way the death rules in 5E work, they're convoluted. Why have negative HP, if a successful attack on your downed body is a failed death save? Why even mention that if all attacks on your body are auto-crits and then point out that all crits are two failed death saves? It's like they couldn't decide if bad guys should need to puree your body in order to kill you, or just smack you up a little.

I made some simple modifications that make it a lot deadlier and a lot simpler.
When you reach 0 you start making death saves. You need 3 successes before 3 failures.
Attacks on your corpse have advantage (as you are prone) but are not auto-crits and don't have anything to do with death saves.
You have negative Con score HP.

One good hit could kill you outright. No need to affect your saves.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*