Death Penalty as "Transformation": Alterations to Raise Dead

[Garthanos]

Tribord VII? LOL, that's an old one from my 1e group.

Patches for a game where you might have 1 hit point even if you were a fighter.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Older editions had a spell called Reincarnation. While you were brought back from the dead, your race would likely change. You could look into that.
As for Raise dead spells, keep in mind that coming back from the dead requires the soul to want to return, or able to do so. Some options for returning could be very campaign/story specific.
PC having it's soul implanted into a Warforged body, or rising as a revenant or Vampire, and so forth.

Yeah, AD&D Reincarnation was another of the weird litany of Gygax trying to gimp every race that wasn't human. Actually I think Dwarves can be resurrected (and halflings definitely can), oddly, but then they have basically 2 class choices and severe level limits, so I guess they'd already gotten their quota. That being said, it was a somewhat amusing exercise, though really all it served to do was get you a good excuse to run some weird race as a PC, like a gnoll or something. The reincarnated character was basically a whole new PC, it was never exactly spelled out in what way it was worthwhile to pay for this spell vs just rerolling a new character. I guess the reincarnated character had some tenuous claim on the old PC's stuff? I dunno...

Not that reincarnation, in the sort of form you're talking about, being in a new body, etc wouldn't be cool! I just never 'got' what was ACTUALLY cool about it in AD&D, nor what was actually cool about elves being dinked out of being rezz'd.

So, I concur, a ritual that brought your spirit back and reanimated some nearby dead body, or created a new body, or gave you renewed life but with slightly sharper teeth, etc. would be cool. In fact it would tie well into the folklore of these sorts of things, which is quite rich!

 

[Garthanos]

I have basically implemented a category of martial practices and rituals which provide flavor only to something the game asumes players already have... ie in general terms power over their characters development. In effect while they have a cost it is a one which is reimbursed.

I am now thinking the raise the dead ritual might belong in this same category.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I have basically implemented a category of martial practices and rituals which provide flavor only to something the game asumes players already have... ie in general terms power over their characters development. In effect while they have a cost it is a one which is reimbursed.

I am now thinking the raise the dead ritual might belong in this same category.

Well, this is getting at the central question of what the game is about. If its about player-centered story and character development, then your conception is entirely in line with that, BUT only in a fairly incoherent sense. That is 'gold' and such things are essentially meaningless in that sort of game. At most the represent a sort of fictional positioning. What DOES matter in such a game is player agenda and what the character values/is/desires. THOSE things can MOST CERTAINLY be taxed by death, although it is really just a natural Story Now scene-framing approach to play. That is, you died, now you pay a 'terrible price' to live again, and that will be something to do with your character's interests.

OTOH if the game is about old-school style dungeoneering and treasure accumulation, balanced against a risk of death to create a game of clever risk mitigation, which is what classic Gygaxian dungeon crawling is about, then a gold piece cost for being resurrected is almost mandatory.

 

[Sunseeker]

If you discuss it with the player beforehand, and they're open to it, I think that's fine. But it's one of the standing issues I've had with "Reincarnate" in other editions. The "Golden Box" around the player character is fairly narrow, and creating a character can often be one of the biggest elements of that. The game intruding upon that with little to no input from the player is IMO, a violation of the "Golden Box" and therefore something that should be avoided, or tread very carefully.

Beyond that, such spells only have a place in settings that actively support these other races or race-variants. In multi-race settings they can even make certain characters completely unplayable: Imagine a Paladin of a human-centric empire suddenly becoming an elf or an orc!, not to mention something completely different from what the player intended: Imagine that said human Paladin was on a mission to show other races that humans weren't all jerks! Well...now that he's not human, there goes his mission!.

In 4E (and some other editions) aside from creating sub-optimal builds, you may completely break character concepts. Tieflings for example have a wide swath of raciap powers...which would all be lost if they were no longer a Tiefling. You could end up essentially demanding more than simply changing a race...to changing a player's entire character concept.

So, enough complaints, here's some solutions:
I have in the past run with two primary solutions:
1: The player is notably scarred in some way. It has no mechanical effect, but it always has a dramatic visual effect. Though they have been brought back to life, this effect is essentially a reminder that something was lost in the process. That there was a cost and they paid it.
2: The player is "touched" in a way relevant to their resurrection. Again, no mechanical effect, but dramatic visual effect. They have been brought back to life in part because the caster gave them some part of themselves. Being brought back by a demon might give them small impish horns, or an angel may leave them with golden glowing eyes, or a druid might leave them with some animalistic features (furred ears, sharp teeth, etc...) and so on.

Sure, these still tread into the "Golden Box" a bit, but dramatically less so than changing the race and potentially, the entire character concept.

 

[pemerton]

Rather than simply imposing the standard -1 to rolls for half a level when a character is raised from death, why not have the player rework the character with a new race that represents the harrowing experience of transitioning from life to death and back again?

<snip>

Anyone do something like this or a variant thereof?

Not as a general change. But as a one-off, yes. (It was initiated by the player of the PC in question.)

 

[Tony Vargas]

Anyone do something like this or a variant thereof?

I suppose one thing slightly close. I gave a party that lacked a Leader an NPC Companion Character who was a sort of 'reanimator' type. His healing temporarily gave you the undead keyword, and could bring you back from death. But, if you didn't get a proper Raise Dead within 24hrs, you became a Revenant.

 

[Garthanos]

OTOH if the game is about old-school style

Any game that gives full blown ability in most cases to duplicate your character has given up that claim. A DM who is enforcing rolling your character and similar may have different point of view but by and large it is far from default.

Admittedly most cases of death and resurrection already may be delayed by the cost and that isnt actually lost simply because the cost will be reimbursed.

Even these reimbursed elements have story cost as well btw, particularly if the payback is somewhat different in form... ie I pay with gold and I recover Karma points or a Magic item etc.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Any game that gives full blown ability in most cases to duplicate your character has given up that claim. A DM who is enforcing rolling your character and similar may have different point of view but by and large it is far from default.

Admittedly most cases of death and resurrection already may be delayed by the cost and that isnt actually lost simply because the cost will be reimbursed.

Even these reimbursed elements have story cost as well btw, particularly if the payback is somewhat different in form... ie I pay with gold and I recover Karma points or a Magic item etc.

Things are rarely just fish or fowl. I think the ORIGINAL intent was to provide a way to recover from a big oops crawling the dungeon. Your buds would haul your carcass back and have it rezzed and it came out of your treasure share, or even sale of some of your goods. There was always a sort of calculation that went on, like is it more advantageous to get back Morty, or just go ahead and start playing his henchman Roger? Roger is probably a couple levels lower, and he might only get a part of Morty's stuff, but it still might be cheaper than paying for a rez and then playing with one less point of CON.

 

[Garthanos]

I think the ORIGINAL intent was to provide a way to recover from a big oops crawling the dungeon.

Kind of beside the point .. ie this is 4e context where the main loss of dying and replacing the character with a new one is likely just a bit of time where the DM and you come up with story for how the new replacement of heroic caliber shows up.... which you build to match your intent are you arguing the DM is recommended in 4e realm to have the replacement be lower level than the party and less well equipped? I suspect you are just flash backing when we are talking 4e.