D&D 5E Why penalize returning from death?

[Ymdar]

This could be a general question as well but let's go with 5e because it is the newest and most modern version of D&D.
So why penalize returning from death from a game design perspective? It used to be poorly defined 'loss of level' in previous editions, now it is only the gold cost.

In most games I've played (maybe it is a regional thing) if your character died and there was no option to somehow return them to life you just created a new character who would be at the same level as the others and would gain the appropriate starting money based on the wealth by level tables. So if you died there were two options:

• Raise you character from the dead: Lose a lot of gold (and perhaps levels) thus be weaker than other characters, be grateful to a random cleric (or your party's cleric) and even have an obligation to that cleric to go on a random adventure which may or may not distract the campaign. Additionally you might need to roll up another character anyway for the duration of obtaining a sufficiently expensive gem for the spell.
• Roll a new character: Who could have exactly the same stats, abilities, items and personality as your previous one with a different name, no questions asked.

So my question is: Why is the hassle needed to return from the dead? By dying you potentially lose a lot of game time spent building up that character also adventure hooks etc. It would be much more fun not penalizing character death to this extent.

Obviously I understand that sometimes you want to end playing with your character and move on in which case this rant is pointless because if the player wants their character die they don't have to continue playing with him/her.

 

[Horwath]

Because, if there is no penalty than death is meaningless unless it's a TPK. If foes are defeated and only one player remains then party will get up on it's feet in day or two.

Resurrection should age you in game mechanics. Like you age by 5% of your race old age number. Means little to players but it would give reality to the idea of death even in high magic setting.

Gold is there just to remind that death isn't temporary cheap obstacle, rather the condition you should try to avoid by all means.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[iserith]

This could be a general question as well but let's go with 5e because it is the newest and most modern version of D&D.
So why penalize returning from death from a game design perspective? It used to be poorly defined 'loss of level' in previous editions, now it is only the gold cost.

In most games I've played (maybe it is a regional thing) if your character died and there was no option to somehow return them to life you just created a new character who would be at the same level as the others and would gain the appropriate starting money based on the wealth by level tables. So if you died there were two options:

• Raise you character from the dead: Lose a lot of gold (and perhaps levels) thus be weaker than other characters, be grateful to a random cleric (or your party's cleric) and even have an obligation to that cleric to go on a random adventure which may or may not distract the campaign. Additionally you might need to roll up another character anyway for the duration of obtaining a sufficiently expensive gem for the spell.
• Roll a new character: Who could have exactly the same stats, abilities, items and personality as your previous one with a different name, no questions asked.

So my question is: Why is the hassle needed to return from the dead? By dying you potentially lose a lot of game time spent building up that character also adventure hooks etc. It would be much more fun not penalizing character death to this extent.

Obviously I understand that sometimes you want to end playing with your character and move on in which case this rant is pointless because if the player wants their character die they don't have to continue playing with him/her.

It's a setback to advancement which gives character death some teeth absent any other game-specific context. Since a player most likely wants to see the character advance in power (requiring both levels and, in theory, gold), a death penalty of levels and/or gold is another incentive to pay attention and make good decisions during play. Whether or not it's a good incentive is debatable.

Raise dead or similar spells are really just solutions to the problem of iteration time in D&D, that is, how long it takes a player whose character dies to get back into the primary mode of participation with the game.

For my part, if your character dies in my games and you choose not to get raised, you're creating a new character at 1st level. At the same time, you're free to have multiple characters. So most of my players have two or three characters that they swap out when appropriate so that if one of them dies, one or more backups have a few levels under their belts.

 

[TwoSix]

Depends on the game type. In your classic dungeon-crawl, no death penalty becomes an issue because it obviates the challenge of the dungeon. You can simply go through the dungeon room by room, clear what you can, and spend whatever time you need figuring out how to get around traps by throwing yourself at it enough times.

In a more modern game, like an adventure path or a sandbox, easy ways to bypass death can hamper verisimilitude. If the PCs can come back to life because of a 1st level cost-free ritual, you have a world-building issue based around the fact that people never die. (Restricting the ritual to only work on those who died of trauma or disease could alleviate some of those concerns, maybe.)

There are certainly ways around these issues if you really don't want a death penalty. Maybe the characters are under a holy geas, and their bodies always recreate at dawn if they are killed. Maybe raise dead is cheap, easily available spell, which is reflected in the setting. (See Brust's Vlad Taltos books.) The main reasons to add harsh consequences for death are fundamentally verisimilitude (death is a pretty harsh consequence in real life, after all) and a desire to encourage careful, cautious play (which I personally don't like, which is why my characters die so often. )

 

[Sacrosanct]

As has been pointed out, coming back with a new PC at same level is a houserule, and more of an exception IME. I more often see starting out at level 1 (or maybe 2 or 3, depending on how far along everyone else is). Also, if there is no penalty for death, then what's the risk? Why bother tracking HP, or combat in general if at the end of it everyone just goes back to normal? Seems just like an exercise in math and that's it if there is no risk to the PCs

 

[alienux]

As everyone has said, there has to be a penalty that makes death a big deal, otherwise it takes a lot of (good) tension out of the game.

The other aspect is that if someone is really attached to a character that dies, even if you house rule that they can have a new character at the same level, the character they've been playing might just important enough to them to accept the penalty to have them brought back.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I believe there used to be an old system shock rule in older editions that explained coming back from the dead as a traumatic experience and could result in some mechanical representation of that.

But honestly I think it depends on the kind of game you're playing. If you are playing a more story driven game, character death can be its own consequence because of the potential for player investment. Losing that character and having to roll a new one can be a loss, and the party may RP their experience of grief as well as having this new person join them out of necessity to get the job done. Or if you can raise the character, then the experience of dying and coming back can have RP consequences and change.

A more "game" driven game may require a more mechanic consequence because their is lower player investment in characters, since they are more interchangeable sets of stats and mechanics.

But over course, this also exists on a spectrum and may include more extreme examples and more in-between examples.

But I think it really just depends on play style at your table.

 

[Wulffolk]

So my question is: Why is the hassle needed to return from the dead? By dying you potentially lose a lot of game time spent building up that character also adventure hooks etc. It would be much more fun not penalizing character death to this extent.

There is NO hassle in my games. Returning from the dead simply does NOT happen at all. Without death what is the purpose of life? Do your NPC's or monsters constantly revive each other? What about the BBEG, does he just keep coming back for more every time he is defeated? Or is resurrection a privelege only available to PC's? A game in which death can be easily overcome is a game not worth playing, in my opinion. If you don't want your character to die then play more intelligently and plan for contingencies.

What does happen when a PC dies is that the player has a chance to assume the role of an NPC that they have had previous contact with that might be a suitable companion to the other party members. Worst case scenario, I would allow them to create a new PC of considerably less power and experience.

But, if you have fun playing a game with no consequence for failure, then rock on. So long as you are having fun you are playing the game right. I just couldn't play at the same table as you and enjoy myself.

 

[Sacrosanct]

There is NO hassle in my games. Returning from the dead simply does NOT happen at all. Without death what is the purpose of life? Do your NPC's or monsters constantly revive each other? What about the BBEG, does he just keep coming back for more every time he is defeated? Or is resurrection a privelege only available to PC's? A game in which death can be easily overcome is a game not worth playing, in my opinion. If you don't want your character to die then play more intelligently and plan for contingencies.

What does happen when a PC dies is that the player has a chance to assume the role of an NPC that they have had previous contact with that might be a suitable companion to the other party members. Worst case scenario, I would allow them to create a new PC of considerably less power and experience.

But, if you have fun playing a game with no consequence for failure, then rock on. So long as you are having fun you are playing the game right. I just couldn't play at the same table as you and enjoy myself.

Yeah, but your location says you're in Detroit. You guys are hard core, with roving bands of dogs attacking people and facing death every day. It stands to reason why you'd have a hardline stance


FWIW, that is very similar to how we played, with the exception of we did raise players from the dead via available spells, but there was always a cost. Unless you were higher level, you pretty much took over an NPC until a replacement low level PC could be introduced.