Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="N'raac" data-source="post: 6703152" data-attributes="member: 6681948">There's a divide between some games where the replacement character comes in matching the current party if the old character retired, but comes in a level lower if he replaces a dead character.&nbsp; I'm more inclined to a model that sets the bar the same for any replacement character, whether the prior character died, retired or whatever than one that favours just replacing a character &quot;because I feel like a new character&quot; over &quot;because the old character died&quot;.I can recall a 1/2e game where replacing a dead character was penalized less than just switching characters for some other reason.&nbsp; This sometimes lead to a character who was played out being &quot;marked for death&quot; between player and DM because the DM was OK with the reasons for replacing the character (ie not &quot;I wish I could do this so I want a new character&quot; but &quot;the character's story is told and he is played out&quot;).Given the 3e xp model, it's also interesting to note that the character who starts out a level below the party may leapfrog the higher xp characters due to the xp system.&nbsp; Pathfinder replaced &quot;losing a level&quot; with &quot;a negative level&quot; (two from Raise Dead).&nbsp; You don't earn those back - you need them restored.&nbsp; So the disadvantage may be reduced (the character will need to spend some gold) but it also won't later reverse into an advantage.PF also ditched the xp cost for many spells, and for item crafting, two other means of being just a bit behind the rest of the group (and then leapfrogging ahead when xp is next awarded).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="N'raac, post: 6703152, member: 6681948"] There's a divide between some games where the replacement character comes in matching the current party if the old character retired, but comes in a level lower if he replaces a dead character. I'm more inclined to a model that sets the bar the same for any replacement character, whether the prior character died, retired or whatever than one that favours just replacing a character "because I feel like a new character" over "because the old character died". I can recall a 1/2e game where replacing a dead character was penalized less than just switching characters for some other reason. This sometimes lead to a character who was played out being "marked for death" between player and DM because the DM was OK with the reasons for replacing the character (ie not "I wish I could do this so I want a new character" but "the character's story is told and he is played out"). Given the 3e xp model, it's also interesting to note that the character who starts out a level below the party may leapfrog the higher xp characters due to the xp system. Pathfinder replaced "losing a level" with "a negative level" (two from Raise Dead). You don't earn those back - you need them restored. So the disadvantage may be reduced (the character will need to spend some gold) but it also won't later reverse into an advantage. PF also ditched the xp cost for many spells, and for item crafting, two other means of being just a bit behind the rest of the group (and then leapfrogging ahead when xp is next awarded). [/QUOTE]

Verification