D&D 5E Killing a Teammate

[Desh-Rae-Halra]

Someone who feels so hopeless that they want to die, knowing full well that they will be fully cured in a month or two is not in their right mind.

I suppose this is another point up for interpretation, but if they are at Int 0, are you then saying that somehow they can abstract the future? To say that they can think and abstract that in X number of days, a cleric could cast a spell, or a scroll be purchased and used, does not really seem like Int 0 behavior.
My version of Int 0 would be that they can only pay attention to the immediate now at best. They are purely reactionary to their stimulus (internal and external).

 

[HardcoreDandDGirl]

Someone who feels so hopeless that they want to die, knowing full well that they will be fully cured in a month or two is not in their right mind.

except no one knows they will be fully cured ina month or two...ever...

 

[Maxperson]

I suppose this is another point up for interpretation, but if they are at Int 0, are you then saying that somehow they can abstract the future? To say that they can think and abstract that in X number of days, a cleric could cast a spell, or a scroll be purchased and used, does not really seem like Int 0 behavior.
My version of Int 0 would be that they can only pay attention to the immediate now at best. They are purely reactionary to their stimulus (internal and external).

Nobody is arguing that you can ask that PC what they think. The argument was that if you could ask them, they might prefer to die rather than wait a month or two for a cure that they know they could get. My response is that only an insane person would opt to die in those circumstances.

 

[Maxperson]

except no one knows they will be fully cured ina month or two...ever...

In this case the PCs do. The know that they will be in a city with someone that can cast a restoration spell in a month or two.

 

[Desh-Rae-Halra]

Nobody is arguing that you can ask that PC what they think. The argument was that if you could ask them, they might prefer to die rather than wait a month or two for a cure that they know they could get. My response is that only an insane person would opt to die in those circumstances.

Yes, and that makes the choice very binary and ignores human experience.
Its probably not worth it to play "What if", because that extends the possibilities ad infinitum.
if you have known anyone that has suffered real world debilitation, particularly psychological, you might have discovered that they have days/times where they think they cant go on, even if you say "Hey, by March this will be ok".

If your players dont mind the stuttered campaign, then go for it, leave the Underdark and walk all the way back to town, get homey healed, then go back to where you left off.
And especially if this is at the GM's insistence, then please dont go pressing on about how important getting to whatever is in the Underdark is.

If you could narrate that happening then fine, take 15 minutes, but if you are talking about the player sitting out for a bunch of sessions, that seems lame and about some out of game control issues.

 

[EscherEnigma]

In this case the PCs do. The know that they will be in a city with someone that can cast a restoration spell in a month or two.

Wait, so the guy that says Raise Dead is unreliable because the GM can arbitrarily decide it is, thinks that it's guaranteed that they'll be able to get a Greater Restoration spell in a certain time period?

Dude, not only is that pretty heavy-handed metagaming, both spells are 5th level. If the PCs can get Greater Restoration in two months time, then they can probably get Raise Dead as well. The two plans rely on the same thing: finding a high enough level caster.

That said... many people have "do not resuscitate orders". And everyone should spend time talking with their families about what to do if someone winds up in a coma, vegetative state, etc. Just because you don't like someone else's decision ("pull the plug") doesn't mean they're insane. It just means you don't like their decision.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, and that makes the choice very binary and ignores human experience.
Its probably not worth it to play "What if", because that extends the possibilities ad infinitum.
if you have known anyone that has suffered real world debilitation, particularly psychological, you might have discovered that they have days/times where they think they cant go on, even if you say "Hey, by March this will be ok".

Right. I'm not playing the what if game. I'm saying that it's murder to kill someone who will recover just to make it easier on yourself. Given that the party can just ditch the PC at any time, there's no good reason to murder her.

If your players dont mind the stuttered campaign, then go for it, leave the Underdark and walk all the way back to town, get homey healed, then go back to where you left off.

Who said anything about leaving and then coming back? The OP made it sound like they were continuing on and that's why it would be a month or two.

If you could narrate that happening then fine, take 15 minutes, but if you are talking about the player sitting out for a bunch of sessions, that seems lame and about some out of game control issues.

Agreed. The player should not be made to wait a bunch of sessions. That doesn't justify the murder, though. It just means that a different means of getting the player back into the game should be engaged. A new PC for the time being, a cure, or something else.

 

[Maxperson]

Wait, so the guy that says Raise Dead is unreliable because the GM can arbitrarily decide it is, thinks that it's guaranteed that they'll be able to get a Greater Restoration spell in a certain time period?

Raise dead has built in strong unreliability. Unless something really unforeseen happens, they will get to town again. If we're going to justify murder because they might, possibly, maybe, not reach town and be able to engage that 100% reliable restoration spell, then the party should just all kill themselves because they might, possibly, maybe die in 2 months.

The only way they fail to cure that PC is if the PC or party dies. Otherwise it happens in 1 month, 2 months, a year or whenever. Raise dead is always very uncertain.

Dude, not only is that pretty heavy-handed metagaming, both spells are 5th level. If the PCs can get Greater Restoration in two months time, then they can probably get Raise Dead as well. The two plans rely on the same thing: finding a high enough level caster.

Restoration = 100% success rate. Raise Dead = less than 100% success rate. Them's the facts.

 

[EscherEnigma]

So, meta-game assumptions that makes Greater Restoration a "guaranteed" thing is a-ok, but meta-game assumptions that makes Raise Dead a "guaranteed" thing is double plus un-good.

Yeah, that makes sense.

 

[Maxperson]

So, meta-game assumptions that makes Greater Restoration a "guaranteed" thing is a-ok, but meta-game assumptions that makes Raise Dead a "guaranteed" thing is double plus un-good.

Yeah, that makes sense.

What is this metagame you speak of. What I am arguing is 100% in character. There is no game world failure chance for restoration, but there is a game world failure chance with raise dead. The PCs know this. Metagame doesn't come into this.