Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7302193" data-attributes="member: 6919838">&quot;There are times, say, in the middle of a dungeon or an already existing quest, where the players (and DM) would just like to get the character back on his/her feet so continue on with the mission at hand.&quot;That seems to run directly at odds with the &quot;heroic and memorable&quot; goal, doesn't it?Also in 5e barring disintigrate type effects you have the low level revivify for just dead now, which i put in a different category from raise dead and the like which i thought was the focus of your question. I myself treat rev as more the magical CPR putting the body back in working order before the spirit moves on.My last 3.5 game used afterlife scenes and had cults that views coming back as special or abominations etc and it was lots of fun. The way i did it was between session, not during, often by email, though a few times it started the next run. Usually, the battles that resulted in PC death were the big ones and by the time the fight ended the session was over anyway so no real interruption overall. Any follow-up&nbsp; side quests then would be worked in with the existing storylines by the characters.i did not have anymajor disruptions by dint of making the specifics play well with the existing storylines and add more. This was easy as every major storyline was directly tied to the PC's personal backstories.Honestly, i do not think just adding another accounting attack does anything to add heroic or memorable. It just puts one player's fun on the back of another and makes the caster choose between a cut back to their own fun or looking like a jerk.Consider this, if you make the &quot;cost&quot; enough to be meaningful, memorable then you **will** hit cases where someone decides &quot;no,&nbsp; i dont want to lose that. I wont raise him.&quot; That might be very much the case if the casyer had already paid the price once or twice and the &quot;memorable&quot; was starting to cut into their own character playability.You think that player's choice to tell another player &quot;you dont get your character back&quot; is going to help your game and player dynamics?If so go with the 1-2 con and i hope it works out and gives you all you hope it does.Sent from my VS995 using <a href="http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93205" target="_blank">EN World mobile app</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7302193, member: 6919838"] "There are times, say, in the middle of a dungeon or an already existing quest, where the players (and DM) would just like to get the character back on his/her feet so continue on with the mission at hand." That seems to run directly at odds with the "heroic and memorable" goal, doesn't it? Also in 5e barring disintigrate type effects you have the low level revivify for just dead now, which i put in a different category from raise dead and the like which i thought was the focus of your question. I myself treat rev as more the magical CPR putting the body back in working order before the spirit moves on. My last 3.5 game used afterlife scenes and had cults that views coming back as special or abominations etc and it was lots of fun. The way i did it was between session, not during, often by email, though a few times it started the next run. Usually, the battles that resulted in PC death were the big ones and by the time the fight ended the session was over anyway so no real interruption overall. Any follow-up side quests then would be worked in with the existing storylines by the characters.i did not have anymajor disruptions by dint of making the specifics play well with the existing storylines and add more. This was easy as every major storyline was directly tied to the PC's personal backstories. Honestly, i do not think just adding another accounting attack does anything to add heroic or memorable. It just puts one player's fun on the back of another and makes the caster choose between a cut back to their own fun or looking like a jerk. Consider this, if you make the "cost" enough to be meaningful, memorable then you **will** hit cases where someone decides "no, i dont want to lose that. I wont raise him." That might be very much the case if the casyer had already paid the price once or twice and the "memorable" was starting to cut into their own character playability. You think that player's choice to tell another player "you dont get your character back" is going to help your game and player dynamics? If so go with the 1-2 con and i hope it works out and gives you all you hope it does. Sent from my VS995 using [URL=http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93205]EN World mobile app[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification