Kill All the Hostages! (We'll bring them back...)

[Kraedin]

Res

Well, if this is the way you want to run your games when you're DM, that's fine. But I hope you're able to deal with the other situaitions that crop up when death loses its sting. Undying kings and nobles, normal folks who demand resurrection magics when they see their loved ones fade and die, villains who never really die but just get raised by their cohorts and allies when they are overcome. Overpopulation of the earth, the depopulation of heaven and hell, the possible wrath of the gods--all of these are cans of worms I would rather leave closed. That's why in my campaign life-restoring magics are very rare and only infrequently used. In my mind, if being killed results in just a minor inconvenience (and being completely healed 10 minutes later doesn't reflect a nasty wound as you claim but an injury of paper-cut severity), then things have degenerated into a level of silly that I don't even want to contemplate.

I don't run my games that way. But it seemed to me that the DM in question here does run Raise Dead by the rules as written, therefore my original point stands. Even if everyone was Raised, by the way, you wouldn't have overpopulation and immortal nobles, you cannot Raise someone who dies of old age. Also, my villans do get Raised, or are liches. After all, no villian is going to be stupid enough to actually face the PCs unless his death is meaningless, right?

 

[hong]

Well, if this is the way you want to run your games when you're DM, that's fine. But I hope you're able to deal with the other situaitions that crop up when death loses its sting. Undying kings and nobles, normal folks who demand resurrection magics when they see their loved ones fade and die, villains who never really die but just get raised by their cohorts and allies when they are overcome.

Thinking too hard about D&D is bad.

 

[Wolfspider]

Thinking too hard about D&D is bad.

Oh, I agree. Funny thing is that I didn't have to think very hard at all to come up with this argument. It's just so...obvious.

 

[Darklone]

hehehehe

Are you saying that the rouge and the girl should just make up? That the DM should just gloss over the entire affair? That's hardly the foundation of justice, you know.

Yes, I'm shameless, but you won't see me blush....

LAUGH!

Well guys, nice discussion and yes I do agree with Wolfspider about the problem if raises are too common. Having played a mud for some years and do you know what happens if several players who get raised with a little XP loss start to kill each other over and over and over and over and over again? It's certainly not fun.

And at least I am still playing for fun.

About this whole situation. The rogue shot at the villain. WRONG MOVE. He deliberately endangered the hostage. Why didn't he take the horse down, thus giving a mage or whatever a chance to stun or paralyze the distracted villain who probably had other things to do than killing her (such as not breaking his neck?)

No, he had to shoot at the villain. He didn't try to free the girl, he wanted the villain. Sure, raises are for free. But I still think that's a good tendency towards evil alignment.

Since I included permanent damage (eye or finger or hand losses e.g.) in my games, my players are more cautious. Mental flaws can be added as well. That way you don't joke about the 23nd raise of the day anymore.

Raises are possible in my games but noone longs for them. Sometimes innocents die, but your players actually didn't even try other methods to save them. That's deadly laziness and a lack of creativity. Things that tend to be punished in my campaigns.

 

[hong]

Re: hehehehe

Well guys, nice discussion and yes I do agree with Wolfspider about the problem if raises are too common. Having played a mud for some years and do you know what happens if several players who get raised with a little XP loss start to kill each other over and over and over and over and over again? It's certainly not fun.

(boggle)

Gaming on MUDs and MMORPGs is different to p&p gaming. If your p&p group tends to self-destruct in this way, there's a lot more to fix than just resurrection magic.

 

[Darklone]

Re: Re: hehehehe

(boggle)

Gaming on MUDs and MMORPGs is different to p&p gaming. If your p&p group tends to self-destruct in this way, there's a lot more to fix than just resurrection magic.

Sorry hong for not stating correctly what I wanted to express: The behaviour I experienced in muds is quite the same ecological system as a world with many highlevel guys. (Please don't start ranting about FR now.... though it IS something like that). I just wanted to say: If you got that situation with raises, people will behave like that. Wolfspider said more about it and expressed it better, I just wanted to agree.

Hmm. Another try: It's not that my p&p group would play that way, it's that I think the WORLD we play in would behave that way!

 

[hong]

Re: Re: Re: hehehehe

Hmm. Another try: It's not that my p&p group would play that way, it's that I think the WORLD we play in would behave that way!

It behaves in that way only if you want it to behave in that way. That's the great thing about make-believe; if you want something to be so; it _is_ so.

As I said: thinking too hard about D&D is bad.

(Or if your ability to suspend disbelief is just too wimpy to handle self-imposed limits on raising the dead, see my post earlier in this thread about limiting resurrection to "heroes" and other significant figures.)

 

[Darklone]

Re: Re: Re: Re: hehehehe

It behaves in that way only if you want it to behave in that way. That's the great thing about make-believe; if you want something to be so; it _is_ so.

As I said: thinking too hard about D&D is bad.

(Or if your ability to suspend disbelief is just too wimpy to handle self-imposed limits on raising the dead, see my post earlier in this thread about limiting resurrection to "heroes" and other significant figures.)

Right about thinking too hard... I think very hard about how those worlds we play in are shown as realistic. And I like to handle those worlds due to my perhaps limited experiences in real life... I got no problems with raises since i scarcely use them. And I think my players would not dare to have hostages killed and try to raise them later.

 

[xjp]

Yes, in different gaming worlds with different consequences there may have been a better course of action. But in their world, with the rules they were under, they came up with a very sensible solution. Pretty cool.

 

[Wolfspider]

Sensible? I dunno. Seems like the most sensible option would be to have shot the horse out from under the villian, as someone recently suggested. That would surprise the villian for a moment and render him unable to escape. Seems a much better plan than trying to shoot THROUGH a hostage....