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

[Wombat]

Not in all D&D campaigns that I have heard of (and certainly in none of mine), but if far too many that people have told me about -- simple too much resurrection goin' on.

The problem seems to be the concept of "lives" in video/computer/console games -- you never die just once, but potentially hundreds of times. This has been too prevalent in tabletop rpgs for far too long, especially with less experienced GMs and pushy players.

Coming back from the dead should be rare.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Coming back from the dead should be rare.

So should death then.

In most books, comics, manga, anime, etc..., characters DON'T die due to 'bad rolls' or bad judgement calls because they're written that way.

RPGs do not have that safety net.

Remove one and the other should be removed no?

 

[molonel]

But, again, there are so many ways around this. Kill the enemy king in combat, and take his head home samurai style. Poof, need Ressurection at least to bring him back. Heck, taking the heads of your enemy is hardly "comic book", and mutilating the dead was done in many, many cultures. Perhaps enemies killed in single combat like that are cremated. At the very least, you don't give the body back. Winner take all and all that. There, now you need True Res to bring back that king. And, again, that's not all that difficult to block. People make things far more difficult than they need to be. Simply following the rules works most of the time.

And unless you run a Monty Haul world, not everyone has 25,000 gp diamonds sitting around. It will encourage enemies to take, and possibly even keep whole the bodies of powerful foes after they kill them. For ransom, for extortion, for the threat of having the body raised and the man or woman tortured alive.

It also allows for different story arcs. In the Rome series, imagine how things might have been different if the King of the Gauls had been executed before Ceasar at the ceremony, and then after his body was thrown away and discarded like so much trash, they were able to bring him back. It works, symbolically, whether he stayed dead or is brought back. It's totally a matter of flavor and choice.

I'm all for different types of stories and plotlines, but acting like anyone who plays it by the rules is turning D&D into a video game is rather pretensious, IMNSHO.

 

[DonTadow]

See this, to me, is like the people who say, "I run low magic games, but then I pepper the treasure hoards with non-magical +3 weapons that I call Lunar Steel" or somesuch. You have Raise Deads, Resurrections and True Resurrections, but you simply call it something else.

Use whatever you want, and call it whatever you want, but I've played with the 3rd Edition rules and only modified the XP hit, and my players still talk about the times they've had to bring someone back from the dead. The rules are a coat rack to hang you story on. The mechanics work just fine, and have never felt like a video game or putting the game on save, or cranking quarters in.

The though of having clerics roll Will saves just to cast their spells strikes me as extreme micromanagement on a level that would drive me to seek another game, if I had a DM do that.

But they hardly feel like any fantasy book, movie or television show that I've seen. Multiple deaths ruin the immersion factor of the game. Fate points or action cards, are exactly what they are, luck (which isn't but should be an attribute. Most cards add 1d6 to a dice roll.

 

[DonTadow]

So should death then.

In most books, comics, manga, anime, etc..., characters DON'T die due to 'bad rolls' or bad judgement calls because they're written that way.

RPGs do not have that safety net.

Remove one and the other should be removed no?

Thus the game should have some type of "luck" attribute. However, we really do not know how much death and destruction the character averted because of a bad roll because of their extreme luck. I can think of LOTR and think of a half dozen action cards Frodo must of used.

 

[molonel]

But they hardly feel like any fantasy book, movie or television show that I've seen. Multiple deaths ruin the immersion factor of the game. Fate points or action cards, are exactly what they are, luck (which isn't but should be an attribute. Most cards add 1d6 to a dice roll.

Let's call "luck" what it is, shall we?

It's fudging. It's a means of ignoring the die rolls on the table and the obvious conclusion that your character is dead.

You fudge your way. I'll fudge mine.

 

[Storyteller01]

So should death then.

In most books, comics, manga, anime, etc..., characters DON'T die due to 'bad rolls' or bad judgement calls because they're written that way.

RPGs do not have that safety net.

Remove one and the other should be removed no?

Why? The best stories and memories of the game come from situations where the character might not come back.

 

[shilsen]

Why? The best stories and memories of the game come from situations where the character might not come back.

Doesn't that depend on the individuals involved? For me, personally, whether a character might or might not come back has no bearing on the memorability of a game story or memory.

 

[Storyteller01]

See this, to me, is like the people who say, "I run low magic games, but then I pepper the treasure hoards with non-magical +3 weapons that I call Lunar Steel" or somesuch. You have Raise Deads, Resurrections and True Resurrections, but you simply call it something else.

Use whatever you want, and call it whatever you want, but I've played with the 3rd Edition rules and only modified the XP hit, and my players still talk about the times they've had to bring someone back from the dead. The rules are a coat rack to hang you story on. The mechanics work just fine, and have never felt like a video game or putting the game on save, or cranking quarters in.

The though of having clerics roll Will saves just to cast their spells strikes me as extreme micromanagement on a level that would drive me to seek another game, if I had a DM do that.

It's not the same at all. You get one 'get out of jail free' roll. Just one. When you die, roll a d20. That's how many hit points you have left. Use it to get out of dodge or die for real. The 'god roll' has several other uses, so if you rolled to improve your odds somewhere earlier in the game...

Most definitely not a free res.

The game is supposed to be about flexibility among players. I don't want stories centering around 'remember when you died that time' unless it's tied to 'and the crap we had to go through to pull it off!'. Because of this my players play smarter. They use cover, a player has taken max ranks in heal, and they co-operate more than 'launch the fireball while I charge in'. The 'golden hour' becomes one of the most suspenseful parts of the game (can we stablizie him in time?).

Clerics rolling saves to cast: both our divine casters like the change. The rule is that you don't have to memorize spells, but you have to Will save to cast. One worships luck, so it works for his concept. The spell may or may not work, and he has his luck domain rereoll if needs be. The other hates the fact that folks worshipping a god have to memorize spells ahead of time. To him, this change better represents how those praying for miracles would receive them; on the fly and not always when you ask for it.

You don't have to play my way if you don't want to, but don't insult the system if the players using it enjoy it.

You folks can come down on me for how I play the game but, again, my players enjoy it so far.

 

[Storyteller01]

Doesn't that depend on the individuals involved? For me, personally, whether a character might or might not come back has no bearing on the memorability of a game story or memory.

It doesn't seem to. Upping the odds has tended to make memorable games for everyone all around. The ones that don't like it also tend to be power gamers less interested in the story, more interested in getting mechanical advantage. Just my experience. YMMV.

Last thing I want tot here in my game is, 'don't worry, we can bring him back into town if he dies'. There is no impact if there's nothing to lose.