Murder in D&D...

[Krensky]

As I understand it, that is how things work in the GURPS Transhuman Space game/setting.


glass.

Well, the issue with being a ghost in Transhuman Space is that the human rights of a human derived digital intelligence are nebulous to non-existent. Better then the AI's though, they don't have rights.

 

[Rechan]

Altered Carbon by Richard K. Morgan. First book in the Takashi Kovacs series (Broken Angels and Woken Furies are the others).

Things also were not that simple

Yes, well it's a little hard to nutshell how all of that works in a single message board post.

Thanks for mentioning the other two books. I enjoyed Altered Carbon - a friend loaned me the audio book, so I didn't know there were multiple ones.

 

[inkmonkeys]

Reminds me of a sci-fi novel called "Hard Carbon".

It takes place in the future where a body is merely a meat puppet. Your mind, memory, everything is on basically a chip that is plugged into a body's brain stem.

Jail consists of "We put you on ice, then plug you into a new body". Rich people can rent bodies (especially if you're say, telecommuting, you could just "telecomute" to a planet and get plugged into a body. In one instance, a woman who was in jail had a businessperson riding around in their old body).

The very, very rich? They lived forever because they always bought new bodies/had clones that grew in little vats.

Do you mean Altered Carbon? A very good cyberpunk noir by Richard Morgan.

 

[Rechan]

Do you mean Altered Carbon? A very good cyberpunk noir by Richard Morgan.

Yes, Altered Carbon, my bad.

 

[Drowbane]

... If their faith is supported by donations, perhaps they do perform charitable resurrections. If they don't how do they justify not giving resusurections to people who need it?...

Yours and a couple other points made me think... what would a D&D "life-insurance policy" look like?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

I believe that Raise Dead exists in the game for purely meta reasons - to enable PLAYERS to continue with the same character even after worse comes to worst. When it was introduced into the game the IN-GAME ramifications were never considered, especially the possibility of reversing death on a scale beyond just the PC's. As a result when you think about LOGICAL application of raising the dead the game breaks down rapidly.

I think there's a simple and easy way to deal with this. The DM simply assumes that upon their deaths all sentient creatures are in, or on their way to the afterlife that they expected according to their religious beliefs. With perhaps just a few rare exceptions this afterlife is one that is DESIRED by any individual. So, with but a few RARE exceptions NOBODY wants to be yanked back into the land of the living from the afterlife. PC's would be among those rare exceptions as would any NPC that the DM decides that he wants/needs to continue to use.

You could then cast Raise Dead/Resurrection, etc, on everybody but only 1 in a 100, maybe only 1 in 1000 might actually be willing to return. This would then eliminate the problem of everyone in the game world seeing death as a mere inconvenience. For the vast majority it IS permanent. The only exceptions are PC's and the select few that the DM decides are willing to be raised.

 

[Loonook]

Yours and a couple other points made me think... what would a D&D "life-insurance policy" look like?

Excellent question . I think it depends on the specifics of what life insurance could entail... but if I had to pick anything, I'd go with something along the following:

A large upfront cost, and a backend cost; half the cost of a Raise upfront, and if the Raise is successful, a Future Earnings cost. Let's say a scaled amount based on life expectancy, making up an Annual Percentage tax which could go from 15-45%. Essentially the individuals who purchase such policies put their lives in the hands of a church or other raise-equipped organization... from there, it is just gravy. Indentured servitude for a period of time may also pay for it...

Perhaps a conceit is that with Citizenship comes the benefit of the Second Death. 'Citizenship' is earned through 5 years of service to a polity, which then grants the right to be raised based on what that service amounts to. A talented mage, for example, may be granted past the Second Death if he honors the polity and grants them use of his talents past the date of Service . . .

Other groups may not have a Life Insurance policy so much as a Bring You Back guarantee. I recall the whole concept of signing over your body and mind to the military in the real world... now imagine that those who fall on the battlefield don't get raised so much as they get... changed . A marching band of soldiers is bad, but a group of soldiers you know will come back as ravenous ghouls upon death . . . well, the idea of killing and looting becomes more complicated.

In all, with the many nasty ways to die and come back to the world, I think that death would be LESS common. I mean, the fear that your mortal remains may be subjected to necromantic experiments upon disposal by the enemy, and knowing that your own side may do the same...

Of course, necromancy must be evil, right? Then again, all is fair...

Slainte,

-Loonook.

 

[jmucchiello]

In 3.5, 500 gp is not some absurdly large amount no one will ever get, it's about the average yearly wage of a skilled labourer(+9,+10 in profession, easily available at first level). Yes, many people won't be making that much, and yes it's a different system, but the prices of most mundane items don't seem to have changed much, so I don't see why wages would have changed.

In 3.x raise dead takes 5,000 gp, not 500 gp. Crunch those numbers again and you see it takes decades to earn that money. This is not something that will affect normal folk. Only the truly wealthy
can think in terms of "after I'm raised...."

 

[Scribble]

In 3.x raise dead takes 5,000 gp, not 500 gp. Crunch those numbers again and you see it takes decades to earn that money. This is not something that will affect normal folk. Only the truly wealthy
can think in terms of "after I'm raised...."

My mother had Rheumetoid Arthritis. The operations and medications she had in her lifetime probably cost well over a million dollars, but we never thought about not having that stuff done. The key was insurance sure... Which is why I think if there is a way to bring people back fromt he dead, there will be people trying their best to profit off of it somehow.

But again, I don't think it's the idea of whether or not it can be afforded. It's just the idea that it's possible. I think that concept would realy have an effect on how people see death, and the impact death has on people.

You also bring up another point. Since the very wealthy can afford ressurections, does that make them trivialize killing more?

Oh I killed your son? Ooops. Well just go have him raised. Why are you looking at me like that?

 

[steenan]

I think there's a simple and easy way to deal with this. The DM simply assumes that upon their deaths all sentient creatures are in, or on their way to the afterlife that they expected according to their religious beliefs. With perhaps just a few rare exceptions this afterlife is one that is DESIRED by any individual. So, with but a few RARE exceptions NOBODY wants to be yanked back into the land of the living from the afterlife. PC's would be among those rare exceptions as would any NPC that the DM decides that he wants/needs to continue to use.

You could then cast Raise Dead/Resurrection, etc, on everybody but only 1 in a 100, maybe only 1 in 1000 might actually be willing to return. This would then eliminate the problem of everyone in the game world seeing death as a mere inconvenience. For the vast majority it IS permanent. The only exceptions are PC's and the select few that the DM decides are willing to be raised.

This approach has as important consequences as allowing to raise anybody. If most people don't want to be raised it means that they prefer being dead to being alive. If so, how could you call killing someone evil? Isn't sending him to his desired afterlife rather a favor than a crime? Even more important: if people know that they will go to a better world, what reason at all do they have to fight instead of just letting their enemies kill them? And why would these enemies kill anybody if it just helped those that were killed?

I don't think it is possible to have a coherent setting that allows resurrection. It is possible to play a fun game that implements it, but it won't be a simulationist game and a few issues will have to be handwaved.