Opinions about Raise Dead, Resurrection, Reincarnation...

[OmniChaos]

Well personally its a case by case thing for me. I mean people die of old age in which case there is no point to bring them back. Some are killed in such a way that bring them back is to hard for some casters unless they are really powerful. Also not everyone is faithless so when some people die they end up going to the realm of their god in which case they wont or cant leave and so cant be pulled back to life by just a spell. I mean you could go to the gods plane and drag someone back from there but thats something else lol.

Also you have to look at the caster. Some gods have priest that are restricted in who they can bring back and for what reason. Also not all priest will just take money and bring someone back its dependent on their own way of thinking. They may want a favor or something else.

Put simple its never a easy thing to bring people back. Also depends on how you have things set up. But their is one thing about bring people back that I am unbending on. Never ever Reincarnate me because I have been stuck as a yes I joke you not roach. -.- I was not a happy roach I assure you.

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

I've worked up a variation on the 2e sphere system for my games, so the only clerics with access to raise dead have to have moderate access to the Life sphere (which 2 gods grant), and to have access to resurrection or true resurrection you have to have major access to that sphere (which only 1 god grants). The clerics of the latter god are quite happy to resurrect anyone and everyone, because their god is very anti-death, but there are many more gods with the Death sphere who have been whittling down the number of priests who can resurrect, and keeping them dead.

If you manage to find one of the 19 or so clerics in the world who can resurrect you, they'll happily resurrect or true resurrect you if you pay the component with no questions asked, but if you want that you have to look really hard. In contrast, it's hard to keep someone dead at all if you don't have soul-binding magic and the person will accept a raise dead.

 

[Dragonnety]

I am totally with you. I have "banned" these spells from the very begining. The DM who taught me D&D had banned them as well. And the reasons are those you mention. However.....House Rule : Characters of extreme power may sacrifice something great (extremely great) to ressurect someone (perhaps with the cost of his own life or more?). And of course you can always ressurect someone for the story.

I donlt like it when I see "Staff of Ressurection, never leave your homes without it". Yes I have seen it. And it was ugly (at least for me).

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I leave the spells in as they are, although I'm thinking of eliminating the level loss entirely. IME, the players usually die for being heroic or sacrificing themselves for the sake of the party, not for being idiotic (although I guess some old school players would cal that idiotic...). Bottom line, I don't like punishing players for that. There's also the issue of plot continuity. I HATE seeing characters get retired, and new ones coming in, it really wrecks not only the story, but also my familiarity with the party and how to challenge them. If there were no "death penalty," but making a new character in place of one who died still cost a level, sticking to your old one would be a lot more appealing.

I'm considering switching to the power components houserule, though, and turning it into a quest to acquire the needed item to revive a PC.

I also heavily endorse spells like Revivify from spell compendium (by mentioning it, and by enforcing a party pool of money to buy scrolls of it, and other healing items), which must be cast immediately after "dying" (before the soul has completely left, according to the fluff), but instantly raise the person at no level loss and to fighting-capable hp. To me, using spells like that makes it seem like the person never died. You're not undoing the most powerful force of nature with a cheap magic trick. You're rescuing him/her from the brink of it.

As for Reicarnate, I hold to the ruling that it DOES hit "restart" on the life meter. I like the idea of groups of ancient druids keeping themselves alive in various animal forms with it. Most people don't like that, though.

As for previous threads, I have no search function, but there have been VERY long threads on this in the past.

 

[Dragonnety]

A character should retire sometime. Why? Because he can't go forever, because he found what he really searched for, because it is just time, because the player wants to try something new and many many more reasons.

Sacrifice. The greatest and most noble of deaths. If he can be ressurected the whole concept of self-sacrifice is gone. Then it is a discomfort. When the palyer knows that if he dies he WON'T come back, and yet, jumps to the bridge holding a necklace of fireballs ready to explode and wait for the enemy horde to blow everything up, then he is more than another character in a game. He is a true Hero that every player and character in my games will remember and aknowledge. And yes, I am proud to say that my player's are like that.

Plus, death is not a punishment for being stupid. It is just what compels the players (and the DM) to be better at what they do and keep things interesting. If ressurect is like an overused chewing-gum then it is gonna be like "Ancient Red Dragon leading Orcs? Let's check it out, what's going to happen to us? Die? We'll get them next time, or next time or next time......etc"

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

As oppossed to going after the same too powerful red dragon with entirely new groups of PCs ad nauseum, dying every time? Sounds like a strawman to me.

Yes, the characters retire eventually. It's called the end of the campaign. Not that certain characters can't continue on in future campaigns, but it's a good time for it. And I've seen plenty of characters retire or move on to other pursuits mid-campaign WITHOUT dying. Using death as an impetus for character retirement is what seems artificial to me.

As far as sacrifice, my groups have had moments like that. Deaths so amazingly heroic that they will live on forever in our memories. In games that allowed raise dead spells. And in a good portion of those cases, even with the availability of said magic, the player of the dead PC chose to not raise him, because he liked how the PC went out. Some want the PC to come back, though. If you think the regular raise dead spells are too lame for that, you could quest for a power component. Or do it ancient Greek style and have a session where the PC frees himself from Hades. Whatever. But as for the standard rules on character revival, I'm glad it's nice and simple, with just a spell casting. I always have the option of doing those more exotic things in my game, but if I don't feel like it, I have rules right there to do it the easy way (in terms of DM prep).

 

[Dragonnety]

That backfired good. But it is not what I meant. The party should be careful with its moves. And yes escaping from the clutches of Hades is the epitome of heroic ressurection (Greek here), but if anyone can do it....it is just not impressive. It should be selective and ONLY in limited situations.

Imagine a party devastated by the death of a dear companion to find out only days later that he escaped from Death's cold hand but he is being hunted by demons who want to drug him right back to the grave. EPIC! Now imagine "Oh Randall, welcome back we keeped your place, tell us how is Cerberus doing?".

Or don't you believe that there is a difference?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

There's a difference. I just have never been in a campaign with frequent PC death. Most I've ever seen is 3 in a 8 month long game. A few campaigns have had none at all. So IME, a PC death is rare enough that such Hades-escaping wouldn't seem common. But I guess for others, if PCs die often, it would look like that.

And I totally didn't notice your location!

 

[Amazing Mumford]

I leave the spells in as they are, although I'm thinking of eliminating the level loss entirely. IME, the players usually die for being heroic or sacrificing themselves for the sake of the party, not for being idiotic (although I guess some old school players would cal that idiotic...). Bottom line, I don't like punishing players for that. There's also the issue of plot continuity. I HATE seeing characters get retired, and new ones coming in, it really wrecks not only the story, but also my familiarity with the party and how to challenge them. If there were no "death penalty," but making a new character in place of one who died still cost a level, sticking to your old one would be a lot more appealing.

I also heavily endorse spells like Revivify from spell compendium (by mentioning it, and by enforcing a party pool of money to buy scrolls of it, and other healing items), which must be cast immediately after "dying" (before the soul has completely left, according to the fluff), but instantly raise the person at no level loss and to fighting-capable hp. To me, using spells like that makes it seem like the person never died. You're not undoing the most powerful force of nature with a cheap magic trick. You're rescuing him/her from the brink of it.

You do bring up a good point, Stream-- I know not all gaming groups are huge on this, but I am a fan of continuity as well. It's conducive to role-playing. And it does have the potential to ruin a campaign if 3/4 of the party dies halfway through a big adventure, now it's up to the survivors maybe to find new "recruits"... But it is more of a campaign-stopper when there's a TPK in there. In a Red Hand of Doom campaign I was in the party was doing fairly well until the blue dragon guarding the entrance to the temple at the end wiped us all out. We had gone pretty far by that point and felt that it wouldn't make sense to have another party "magically appear" where the dead ones were.

So I guess that's why I'm worried about this in the campaign that I am DM'ing, I am all for continuity and players "growing" with their characters, and establishing a "known" company like the Knights of Myth Drannor for example-- but we all know that PC's die. A "1" on a save, being critted by a Frost Giant, a monster they might be totally unprepared for, etc. etc. Having the possibility of permenant death will keep the PC's on their toes and help to avoid the "dumb PC" situations ("There's a glowing black evil rune on the door? Sure, I'll touch it! If I die I'll just come back!").

Several of you have some interesting ideas-- Jhaelen, I do think the Raelms try to be consistent, but don't succeed 100% of the time. I agree with the notion that King Azoun IV was "comfortable" with his death and didn't want his soul to return, he didn't really have unfinished business and knew that his kingdom was in pretty good hands with Alusair and Vangerdahast and the Purple Dragons... that makes sense.

Irdeggman, I do agree with the god's purposes statement. I think in my campaign I will limit these spells to clerics of deities with the appropriate portfolios, and only then under extenuating circumstances, like if the PC's ARE in the middle of a tough adventure against a baddie that threatens the entire land. So going to the temple of Selune or Waukeen wouldn't do it, but maybe for Tymora or Lathander, if the PC is a worshipper or of the same alignment. And of course if it is a nature god like possibly Silvanus then no raise or resurrection, but maybe a reincarnate as long as the PC embraced that philosophy.

Stream, I totally forgot about Revivify! That "saved from the brink of death" spell is a great idea, especially for situations where a PC death is "unfair" (like rolling that "1" on a save-or-die trap). It's costly enough that it's not always going to be a safety net, but affordable enough that it can keep the campaign and continuity on track.

How about some thoughts from players? As a player, what do you expect concerning these spells? As a cleric player, what do you think? Do you think your deity should give it to you because "it's in the Player's Handbook" or do you agree that only certain deities might allow it? As a player, would you think it's "unfair" that a DM might put a restriction on the power over life and death??

 

[Dragonnety]

Well, I am not proud of it but I have player's dying all the time. I try to be good. You fall from the 80 ft pit, ok you don't die, you are just badly wounded. While being pulled up, you fall again 40 ft more, ok near death. but keep moving in the dungeon whith no potions or a cleric while you HP are less than ten then you had it coming.

And Mumford, yes sometimes rolling "1" is enough to die. I have seen it happening, it was not nice and we (DM and party) decided to pretend it never happened. It is better to "avoid" dying than to ressurect someone who fell from the stairs and broke his neck or someone that stabbed his own eye (true stories, both avoided)