Raise Dead: A nice big bone to the simulationists

[Delta]

This seems a lot more Narrativist than Simulationist.

 

[zoroaster100]

I like this explanation. It solves the problems in so many plots. For example, I just read a big debate on Paizo's board about their current adventure path, where there is a death of a major NPC in the realm. Some raised questions about how such a major NPC could stay dead and not simply be raised by one of the churches in the realm. This solves the problem. Otherwise there are no deaths of major NPCs except from old age, which makes it very hard to relate to such a world or create dramatic adventures.

 

[drjones]

Sounds good to me. I'd like it if the only way to tell that someones destiny has run out is to try to rez them, keeping an opportunity cost high and limiting the number of resurrections in the world even further.

I would take it a little more theatrically though, someone who does not qualify for a raise dead by standard means might still come back.. if truly despicable actions or transcendently pure sacrifices have taken place.

Its a good rule but don't let that get in the way of a tasty story. Literature (and b movies) are full of folks trying to bring back loved ones and paying terrible prices.

 

[Kesh]

Actually, as a pro-simulationist, I consider this yet another outrage. What does "destiny" mean? Why should the gods allow Harry the adventurer to be raised, only to see him fall into the next pit trap and die and be be left to rot, while the favored high priest has no 'destiny' and cannot be raised?

It could mean that they're including the Destiny mechanic from Star Wars: Saga Edition.

 

[DandD]

I will sum up: the journey to the underworld should exist as a powerful mythic journey, a dark echo of every dungeon delve into the unknown, with ultimate risk and ultimate reward, but it should also be a journey into a real place, with actual, constant rules. I want a system where you can represent Hades, god of the dead as utterly implacable at ninth level, able to be influenced with extreme skill and luck at nineteenth, and able to be beaten up and his stuff taken at twenty-ninth. I want my mythic components built out of set-in-stone, understandable rules, and I want there to be either upper limits on how much the myth can work, or alternately, I want recognizable reality and expectations to be thrown out the window when they encounter the trump mythic reality. It's great to have dragons that represent the destructive elements of human greed and who can be overcome through their lust for treasure, but it's also important to remember that no matter how much of the human condition they model, they are creatures who you can beat with an axe until dead (and then steal their eggs and raise their young in slavery).

So, basically, you're agreeing with me all along?

 

[Kwalish Kid]

I've always assumed that "simulationist" means that you establish consistent rules within the game, and then let the world "emerge" in a complex way. You don't dictate outcomes; you apply rules and simulate systems.

CPA: The Auditing

 

[Wormwood]

All it does is change he base assumption from "anybody can get raised unless there's a good reason not to" to "no-one can get raised unless there's a good reason they can".

Bears repeating.

A third time, in fact.

 

[Wolfspider]

Bears repeating.

 

[Nom]

I don't think the rules are saying that it's DM fiat whether a PC gets raised. Rather, they are enshrining it as player fiat.

Destiny = protagonist.

3E would at times pretend that PCs are not "blessed" by the metagame. Sometimes it succeeded. More often than not it just looked silly. 4E throws any such pretense out the window. "You're a PC. You're a protagonist. You're special. What the heck, let's call it 'Destiny'".

4E allows the DM to extend this conceit to NPCs, if appropriate. But it still should be remarkable. If your PCs are regularly using some technique to "make sure that they all stay dead", then you're doing something badly wrong (unless this is a plot mechanic). NPCs should only get raised because "they still have unfinished business", and hearing of it should tip the PC's off that "something big is going down".

That said, death seems unusual enough in 4E that it might be possible to ignore resurrection effects without messing up the system.

 

[Irda Ranger]

I like this explanation. It solves the problems in so many plots. For example, I just read a big debate on Paizo's board about their current adventure path, where there is a death of a major NPC in the realm. Some raised questions about how such a major NPC could stay dead and not simply be raised by one of the churches in the realm.
Actually, this isn't a problem with the rules per se. This is a problem with the author of the adventure trying to use story hooks that don't make any sense (in D&D world). He was lazy and borrowed story plot hooks from the real world, even though they don't translate at all.

It would have been just as faulty to write an adventure that turned on not knowing who in the town is a disguised outsider, when a simple Protection of Evil, 10' radius would answer the question.

Otherwise there are no deaths of major NPCs except from old age, which makes it very hard to relate to such a world or create dramatic adventures.

Robert Heinlein and Isaac Asimov disagree with you.

Every story has to make sense (even Alice in Wonderland obeyed certain rules). I could (and have!) DMed dramatic adventures where the story depended on Raise Dead working exactly the way it does.

Plot Hook: You are the King's Sworn Champions. Someone has killed the King! And they blew up his head! The High Priest of the Temple tells you that you have thirteen days to acquire the means to put it back together or the King's soul is beyond the reach of mortal men!* **

*Maybe not the best plot, but I just whipped it up of 15 seconds, so cut me some slack.
**I have not scoured the SRD to make sure there aren't any spells under 6th level that can do this.