About Death and Resurrection

[Toryx]

(I always thought it would be cool if raising someone cost OTHER people XP, like, say, 200 XP/level of the dead character, which had to be paid for voluntarily. So the party would need to 'chip in' their XP to raise their buddy...or just let him rot.)

I quite like that idea. That'd be awesome. I might have to home rule that one someday.

 

[Reynard]

Yes, but the other half of the internet culture of people making ridiculous statements using dubious logic with a questionable factual basis. . . is for other people to call them out on it!

Did I wake up in bizzarro world today?

The text says exactly three things:

1) Death will be different in 4e than in 3e.
2) If a player's heroic tier character dies, he rolls a new one.
3) #2 is not true of Paragon or Epic tier characters who can be brought back to life.

How in the hell is my interpretation "dubious logic"?

EDIT - in fact, "interpretation is entirely the wrong word. it is a logical conclusion based on reading the words that are there, in the oder they appear, with the meaning they have in the English language, without adding new words before, after or among them.

 

[Gort]

Hey, wouldn't it be cool if dying meant you had to fight your way out of hell (or the land of the dead, or whatever) - maybe heroic tier characters just aren't hard enough to take it on, paragons would have trouble, but epic guys are just too good to keep in hell.

Though from what they've said, it may just be an experience penalty that heroic tier characters haven't got enough to pay, is a big deal for paragons, but is a drop in the bucket for epics.

 

[Reynard]

Hey, wouldn't it be cool if dying meant you had to fight your way out of hell (or the land of the dead, or whatever) - maybe heroic tier characters just aren't hard enough to take it on, paragons would have trouble, but epic guys are just too good to keep in hell.

The fluff about the Shadowfell suggests that more powerful characters can "hang on" longer before being drawn to their god's domain or the "elsewhere" where souls depart to. perhaps once characters become paragon level, they have enough internal power to hang around in the Shadowfell long enough to allow a ritual to open the door back to their bodies.

I do like the Orphean themes suggested in the Shadowfell and the idea of having something crawl back into your skin with you is made of pure win.

 

[kennew142]

Though from what they've said, it may just be an experience penalty that heroic tier characters haven't got enough to pay, is a big deal for paragons, but is a drop in the bucket for epics.

I'm pretty sure that the designers have done away with xp penalties in 4e. I hope I'm not wrong about that. If I am, I'll just house rule it away, like I always do.

 

[ThirdWizard]

How in the hell is my interpretation "dubious logic"?

You aren't taking into consideration that they might be stating generalities? You're taking it as written gospel. Perhaps, and I find this more likely, they were trying to get across the feel of how resurrection will play out in most 4e campaigns without going into the mechanical implication of that goal.

 

[Cadfan]

Death Matters Differently: It's generally harder to die than in previous editions, particularly at low level. When a heroic-tier player character dies, the player creates a new character. A paragon PC can come back from the dead at a significant cost. For epic-tier characters, death is a speed bump. Being raised from the dead is available only to heroes, and it's more than just a spell and a financial transaction. NPCs, both good and evil, don't normally come back to life unless the DM has a good reason.

When a heroic tier character fights a lich, he dies. When a pragon tier character fights a lich, its an epic and climactic battle. When an epic tier character fights a lich, its a speed bump on the way to fighting a demon god.

Clearly my comments mean that it is literally impossible for a heroic tier character to defeat a lich. I must be asserting the existence of a line of text in the rules that says "Heroic tier characters automatically lose versus a lich." Its impossible that what my quote means is that a heroic tier character is not powerful enough to compete effectively versus a lich, and will almost certainly lose- no, it must be an ABSOLUTE GUARANTEE of failure, added through the most awkward rule possible.

 

[Sitara]

Well, since rings now work on pc's level 11+, I guess this could be possible! (especially considxering there was an item called Ring of Resseruction...)

 

[Reynard]

Clearly my comments mean that it is literally impossible for a heroic tier character to defeat a lich. I must be asserting the existence of a line of text in the rules that says "Heroic tier characters automatically lose versus a lich." Its impossible that what my quote means is that a heroic tier character is not powerful enough to compete effectively versus a lich, and will almost certainly lose- no, it must be an ABSOLUTE GUARANTEE of failure, added through the most awkward rule possible.

Your rebuttal argument smacks of taking things to a ridiculous extreme, as opposed to actually referencing the text. Most likely because if you referenced the text, you wouldn't have an argument.

Inventing a system where raising the heroic tier PC is understandable: 4E promises you pure awesomosity, and permanent death doesn't sound much like awesome. However, it really has frak all to do with the information we have so far. Now, if there is other references that bring your argument in to context, by all means please bring those to bear so we can discuss it. Otherwise, what you are doing is deciding that *gasp, horror* a 4E rule implied by a "teaser" doesn't sit well with you and since you can't imagine having a fundamental issue with a 4E rule, you are inventing a rule (or lack thereof) that doesn't offend you so much.

I am not asserting that 4E heroic characters absolutely, positively cannot be raised: I am asserting that the text in question, both in its concise and specific language and the structure of that language, lends itself to the logical conclusion that 4E heroic characters cannot be raised, that it is difficult and costly (in a in-game sense) to raise a dead paragon tier character, and that it is neither difficult nor costly to raise an epic tier character. Why? because that's what the text says.

 

[Counterspin]

This is a standard misinterpretation of what a WOTC employee is saying, going from a generality to an exact rule. This is why we have people wandering around who think there will be rules constraining combat encounters within the points of light. Just because a WOTC employee is trying to give you a feel of how the new system should generally run does not indicate that there is a rule that prevents the opposite.