Is RAISE DEAD (etc.) too readily available in most D&D campaigns?

[VirgilCaine]

On the comment about only a person playing a game would want to leave bliss to come back to earth:

Coming back from the afterlife to continue fighting evil sounds like a very large personal sacrifice to me. I could easily see a very Good character doing it.

 

[Treebore]

It easy to "justify" raising characters from the dead in my campaign. Its in the Players Handbook as several successively powerful spells.

Since my campaign world has plenty of clerics who can cast them, they are available.

Besides, characters in my games only come back because the player wants to keep playing the character. If they don't want to keep playing it, they roll up a new PC that they want to play.

Pretty easy.

All these arguments about consistancy and realism are just people who demand too much consistancy and realism in their FANTASY RPG. The key to fantasy is breaking the rules of "reality" and throwing out "consistancy" here and there. Much like horror flicks such as Nightmare on Elm Street.

If you want consistancy and realism play the CSI board game. Turn it into an RPG, if it hasn't already been done.

 

[Korgoth]

All these arguments about consistancy and realism are just people who demand too much consistancy and realism in their FANTASY RPG. The key to fantasy is breaking the rules of "reality" and throwing out "consistancy" here and there. Much like horror flicks such as Nightmare on Elm Street.

If you want consistancy and realism play the CSI board game. Turn it into an RPG, if it hasn't already been done.

If light crossbows did 50d6 damage and longbows did 1d4 damage, the players would ask why the Elven Legion uses longbows. And they'd expect an answer that wasn't "Shut up, it's fantasy."

So why can't they ask, when one of the Four Warlords dies on campaign, why one of the several capable clerics of his retinue doesn't just Raise him? Should I just say "Shut up, it's fantasy"? Or should I simply, as a DM, not be allowed to run a game where that happens. Perhaps if I'm running D&D I should have to say he died of old age or of a Disintegrate, because those are the only two ways rich people ever die in every D&D world.

I don't think asking why the game makes absolutely no sense implies that they should quit D&D and play Gurps: CSI.

 

[Storyteller01]

It easy to "justify" raising characters from the dead in my campaign. Its in the Players Handbook as several successively powerful spells.

Since my campaign world has plenty of clerics who can cast them, they are available.

Besides, characters in my games only come back because the player wants to keep playing the character. If they don't want to keep playing it, they roll up a new PC that they want to play.

Pretty easy.

All these arguments about consistancy and realism are just people who demand too much consistancy and realism in their FANTASY RPG. The key to fantasy is breaking the rules of "reality" and throwing out "consistancy" here and there. Much like horror flicks such as Nightmare on Elm Street.

If you want consistancy and realism play the CSI board game. Turn it into an RPG, if it hasn't already been done.

It isn't realism I'm after (at least not for this arguement). It's a certain involvement in the story you won't get if there's that big a safety net involved.

 

[molonel]

All of these are specialized circumstances that happen due to the story itself.

-Conan: not really familiar with that one.

-Gandalf: Demigod brought back by higher powers.

-Jesus: God goes home (not going into religious debate here).

-SG-1: Technology used by beings believed to be gods, with uses limited to location, dealing with the owners (favors owed, making enemies with owners enemies, some quest, etc), as well as number of units (the To' Kra apparently don't have one).

Even Stargate: Atlantis can't make full use of the cities medical facilties, and the friendly aliens (Asgard in particular) tacticly avoid giving away similar equipment.

-Bacta Tanks: Tanks don't work once you've degraded past a certain point. The rebelion would have gone much differently if it did. Might explain where all the strom troopes went though...

None of the above examples match D&D's 'there's a character in the party with knowledge and a rare gem' or 'the church in the next city will do it for 5,250 gp [or 10,490 gp]'. The first is less than the cost of a +2 weapon, the second not much more.

Okay, look. Your request was, "Again, you show me a movie where they consistently get a character resurrected (and please don't mention the quest for spock) and I will gladly give your argument a bone."

Jesus was a joke. But in SG-1, even in the first three seasons, the Egyptian coffins were used SEVERAL times to bring main characters back. You can nitpick anything you want, but I fulfilled your request, and you still can't grant what you said you would.

So I'm done with you. Arguments involve give and take. You just want to be completely right. Have a nice argument.

Have you been stuck in d20 all of your life?

Why no, I haven't, but thanks for asking. I've played a variety of systems since I started gaming in 6th grade, which is longer ago than I care to remember. Shall I attack your character and experience now, or shall we remember that this is a game we're talking about, and chill out?

This mechanic is used in various other games such as Shadowrun, battletech and Serenity Firefly. The introduction of a separate hero dice pool is nothing new to rpgs and has been used for 2 decades. Call a cat a dog to prove your point but comparing action/fate points to fudging shows a naivety and lack of knowledge of RPG history.

Action and fate points are fudging. I'm sorry, but the fact that you prefer one form of fudging to another doesn't make you more worldly-wise and knowledgeable about RPG history. Story continuity requires the same characters for the majority of the storyline. High mortality and grittiness are flavor elements, but the fact is if you toss all of your characters into a meat-grinder on a regular basis, a sort of cynicism and non-caring starts to set in. So different games provide various mechanics to cheat death and allow this continuity.

How you get there is unimportant, because it's all unrealistic fudging. Call it "heroic luck" or ooga booga, or resurrection, or a bacta tank, or whatever. It's a plot device that allows a character that would otherwise be dead to continue.

You prefer your fudge. I prefer mine. Yours is no better, and no more realistic.

IN your examples, think about how special and important those things were when it happens. Heck one spawned a whole religion. Your examples really point to the effect of how special ressurection is. Again though, give me one example of a media where it is repeated. Even with STargate, Dr. Jackson has repeatedly stated how much he gave up to come back and escape death.

Dr. Jackson actually said that going through the coffin process was invigorating and addictive. There was an episode where he did so regularly, and he started to burn out. Nothing was taken from him by the process. The process itself was so effective that it became a sort of drug.

You guys are pretty much going to keep tailoring your question and refining it until you get what you want, so I'm dropping this line of question.

I was asked for a story plotline where resurrections are used on a regular basis. I provided not one, but two: Stephen Brust and Stargate SG-1. You can niggle all you want, but I answered your question.

Again, your 1st edition remark is another good example. Remember, the first edition of the game spawned from wargaming, where it was customary to have a mechanic to gain more units/troops. I'd like to think the game has evolved past the typical board game mechanics over the last three decades.

Blah blah blah. It's all geeks with warrior fantasies swinging big swords and acting like elves, dwarves and big bad warriors, or wizards in robes. If you want to think of this as some sort of sophisticated hobby, go ahead. I'm here to have fun.

It comes down to suspension of belief, which in a fantasy realm is already pretty high. My players are too much into logical stories to believe in a world of ressurection "laws" and spells.

Okay. So play with your players, and your rules, and do whatever suits your story best. But your statements about games other than yours have no basis in reality. The things you say are impossible are possible, and I've done them.

 

[Treebore]

If light crossbows did 50d6 damage and longbows did 1d4 damage, the players would ask why the Elven Legion uses longbows. And they'd expect an answer that wasn't "Shut up, it's fantasy."

So why can't they ask, when one of the Four Warlords dies on campaign, why one of the several capable clerics of his retinue doesn't just Raise him? Should I just say "Shut up, it's fantasy"? Or should I simply, as a DM, not be allowed to run a game where that happens. Perhaps if I'm running D&D I should have to say he died of old age or of a Disintegrate, because those are the only two ways rich people ever die in every D&D world.

I don't think asking why the game makes absolutely no sense implies that they should quit D&D and play Gurps: CSI.

Well, the crossbow analogy isn't factual to begin with.

As for the Warlord, they tried. His soul said no, he wanted to stay dead. You want reasons as to why he wanted to stay dead? Use your DMing power of creativity.

Here is one that is "real". He has caused enough death in his life and he doesn't want his soul tainted with any more death's. Plus his death will also hasten the end of the war and ultimately prevent more deaths than his returning and keeping the war going.

Here is another "real" one. The love of his life died long ago and refused to come back to life. He is now ready to join her, let someone else carry on in his place, he has plenty of capable replacements.

Here is another one: He has lost many good friends in many of the battles over his career, many loved ones. He is with them again and is content to wait for his currently living friends and loved ones to follow him into death.


How do I know these are "real"? These are slightly altered reasons my Grandfather gave last October when he refused treatment for his heart attack and told us why he wanted to die. The doctors would likely have saved him if he had accepted treatment. He was so determined and committed to his decision he never wavered for the 4 very painful days it took him to die.

So there are plenty of "realistic" reasons why Raise Dead and Ressurections would not work. I don't remember reading a rule that says unwilling recipients of these spells come back against their will. Only in the case of an evil cleric raising someone would they force someone unwilling to come back, and even then the recipient got to make a save.


Sure, there are certain rules or game elements that need better explanations or revisions, but not everyone wants to come back to life when they die.

So that is why Raise Dead and Ressurections are available, but not everyone is coming back to life. They are happy to be in the "afterlife", which everyone has plenty of proof to believe exists in a D&D world.

So I leave it up to the choice of the players, or if I have further need of an NPC. Otherwise they choose to stay in the afterlife.

Simple.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Dr. Jackson actually said that going through the coffin process was invigorating and addictive. There was an episode where he did so regularly, and he started to burn out. Nothing was taken from him by the process. The process itself was so effective that it became a sort of drug.

IIRC, very long-term usage of the sarcaphagus caused mental problems over time. There was an episode where a king kept getting resurrected over a long period of time (decades? centuries?) and had degenerated into senility. I think the bottom line was that occasional, accidental deaths could be prevented with the sarcophagus but it isn't a device for living forever.

 

[Storyteller01]

Okay, look. Your request was, "Again, you show me a movie where they consistently get a character resurrected (and please don't mention the quest for spock) and I will gladly give your argument a bone."

Jesus was a joke. But in SG-1, even in the first three seasons, the Egyptian coffins were used SEVERAL times to bring main characters back. You can nitpick anything you want, but I fulfilled your request, and you still can't grant what you said you would.

So I'm done with you. Arguments involve give and take. You just want to be completely right. Have a nice argument.

That wasn't me friend.


Several times in three years (more by the series' timeline) is still far less often (and more story dependant) than what you see in D&D. A party can make 20th level with 3 years real time.

 

[Storyteller01]

IIRC, very long-term usage of the sarcophagus caused mental problems over time. There was an episode where a king kept getting resurrected over a long period of time (decades? centuries?) and had degenerated into senility. I think the bottom line was that occasional, accidental deaths could be prevented with the sarcophagus but it isn't a device for living forever.

Except that it doesn't seem to effect the aliens it's meant for. How long did the sarcophagus maintain the aliens life in the first movie? We're talking tens of thousands of years.

 

[DonTadow]

It easy to "justify" raising characters from the dead in my campaign. Its in the Players Handbook as several successively powerful spells.

Since my campaign world has plenty of clerics who can cast them, they are available.

Besides, characters in my games only come back because the player wants to keep playing the character. If they don't want to keep playing it, they roll up a new PC that they want to play.

Pretty easy.

All these arguments about consistancy and realism are just people who demand too much consistancy and realism in their FANTASY RPG. The key to fantasy is breaking the rules of "reality" and throwing out "consistancy" here and there. Much like horror flicks such as Nightmare on Elm Street.

If you want consistancy and realism play the CSI board game. Turn it into an RPG, if it hasn't already been done.

There's fantasy and then there's that unicorn from the dungeons and dragons cartoon. Resurrection is not a fantasy element. It doesn't belong there in a non-epic fashion. It's a game mechanic that weeded its way in in the early days. It only has one purpose, to let players play dead characters. It's not something DMs use, because using it too much or too little poses serious story problems for most campaigns. There's 24 1st season and then there's 24 this season. 24 first season is dungeons and dragons without resurection. A little unbelievable but engrossing enough to stay with. Then there's this season, where it makes no sense to kill and destroy things in epic battles if they are going to be back the next week.

Okay, look. Your request was, "Again, you show me a movie where they consistently get a character resurrected (and please don't mention the quest for spock) and I will gladly give your argument a bone."

Jesus was a joke. But in SG-1, even in the first three seasons, the Egyptian coffins were used SEVERAL times to bring main characters back. You can nitpick anything you want, but I fulfilled your request, and you still can't grant what you said you would.

So I'm done with you. Arguments involve give and take. You just want to be completely right. Have a nice argument.

Not a fan of SG1? Sarcophaguses never brought anyone back from life on the show. As a matter of fact, there are several episodes that emphasize how important it is to get someone to them before they die. I thought you were talking about the Jackson "assendings" which weren't really resurrections. There was never a body or death. He was essentially beamed away at the point of death. So again, give me an example? I'm not nitpicking, we're talking about a body is dead they take to someone, he brings them back and this happens reoccurring with no big deal. You joked with the Jesus reference, but its proof that resurrections should be epic occasions. Note, in a debate never bring up instances, even as jokes, where it goes against your very point.

Why no, I haven't, but thanks for asking. I've played a variety of systems since I started gaming in 6th grade, which is longer ago than I care to remember. Shall I attack your character and experience now, or shall we remember that this is a game we're talking about, and chill out?

Well your comments sounded a little new. In the RPG world, fudging is considered cheating. So calling someone a cheater is a big deal. Thus when you call certain mechanics "cheating" it really is offensive to a lot of people. A rules mechanic is apart of the game. Saying that actoin die and fate points are cheating is like saying adding your skill bonus is cheating. It's just offensive and showed a lack of understanding of various rpg systems and mechanics. It reaks of (I don't understand this, its cheating, you're a cheater. ).

Action and fate points are fudging. I'm sorry, but the fact that you prefer one form of fudging to another doesn't make you more worldly-wise and knowledgeable about RPG history. Story continuity requires the same characters for the majority of the storyline. High mortality and grittiness are flavor elements, but the fact is if you toss all of your characters into a meat-grinder on a regular basis, a sort of cynicism and non-caring starts to set in. So different games provide various mechanics to cheat death and allow this continuity.

How you get there is unimportant, because it's all unrealistic fudging. Call it "heroic luck" or ooga booga, or resurrection, or a bacta tank, or whatever. It's a plot device that allows a character that would otherwise be dead to continue.

You prefer your fudge. I prefer mine. Yours is no better, and no more realistic.

Again this shows a lack of understanding of the mechanic. There's no "plot device" involved. The DM is never in charge of how a fate point is used. The majority of the time, their used for trivial rolls and extra spell slots for the day.

However, you vaguaely touched on something important. INstant death is very easy in D and D and is a game problem. The game itself is equipped with raise dead and resurrections spells to balance save or dies. YOu use these fantasy unrealistic resurrection spells as a way to cheat death. A very time consuming, game like mechanic to do so that breaks a realistic world. DMs usually hand wave a lot of requirements for these so they can move on with the adventure, plot, module.

We use fate, luck, action points as a way to balance save or dies. From a story way, it fits in with most fantasy media where the hero pulls something out of the air to escape what should have been death. There is no character downtime, the DM did not step in and place a cleric here or there or provide diamonds in loot that otherwise would have none. There is no record keeping that needs to take place and the risk of death is still there. Resurrection, in most campaigns, is almost certain. Using an action card is a certainty to avoid death. If you're down 50 hit points it would take 10 action cards to survive. If you're down 30, you'd need six. Its a game mechanic hidden in a shroud of fantasy realism.