Raise Dead: A nice big bone to the simulationists

[Sir Sebastian Hardin]

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?

I am a sim guy. ANd I love this. Well some mayor NPCs might have important destinies too. You are the DM: YOU ARE DESTINY!

 

[Wormwood]

I like it. Simple, but straight-forward and nothing bars the DM from applying to "special" NPCs.

Agreed. Fantastic.

 

[Wormwood]

It is pure, rules-enshrined, DM fiat.

And for that, I am overflowing with gratitude.

 

[Irda Ranger]

How would a simulationist approach Raise Dead then? I am anxious to see how Raise Dead works in the real world.

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.

Really there's no wrong way to do Raise Dead then. You just accept that works "thusly", and apply that rule to the game.

But the catch, the real catch, is that rules must only be self-referential. They must apply to rules within the context of the game. There can be a rule that says "Left-handed PCs get a +2 to Sleight of Hand checks." but there can't be a rule that says "Left-handed players get a +2 to Sleight of Hand checks." The second rule refers to something that doesn't exist within the game.

That's the simulationists' problem with this new Raise Dead rule. It basically says that "Raise Dead works for world-people relevant to the current story arc, but not for anyone else." That "doesn't work" because to a simulationist everyone has their own story arc. From within the game there shouldn't be any way to tell the difference between an NPC and a PC. Now there is.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I like it, it will actually work well with my homebrew setting.

Where certain individuals are considered "Reality-Deviants" where basically every step they take, slightly alters reality and every major event in their lives has a kind of butterfly effect.

Raise Dead can work into this, as that those who are Reality-Deviants can circumnavigate death (which is still bound to Reality) and return to life.

While the general populace can't, and since obviously major PCs and BBEGs would be amongst Reality-Deviants then works quite well

___________________________________________________________________________________

As for general campaigns, it can work into simulation I think, since while they do talk about it being more PC-centered, that is simply because PCs generally have some kind of destiny or something greater ahead of them.

This doesn't mean only PCs and BBEG can be raised. You can have in your setting a benevolent ruler, who has been king of his empire for centuries; having been raised and kept alive by a clergy of priests, etc.

Since perhaps he must lead his Kingdom to some future fate and thus must be kept alive, or what he is doing now with ruling his Kingdom will lead to the Destinies of others coming into being. Just imagine knowing your Destiny and the reason you were brought back was to create and bring about the Destiny of another, now to me that is really fun concept.

There are many ways this can work.

 

[Wormwood]

How would a simulationist approach Raise Dead then?

I suppose stuff like: it costs X amount of cash, the body must be in Y condition, Z ethical considerations must be adhered to, etc.

 

[Kraydak]

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.

Really there's no wrong way to do Raise Dead then. You just accept that works "thusly", and apply that rule to the game.

But the catch, the real catch, is that rules must only be self-referential. They must apply to rules within the context of the game. There can be a rule that says "Left-handed PCs get a +2 to Sleight of Hand checks." but there can't be a rule that says "Left-handed players get a +2 to Sleight of Hand checks." The second rule refers to something that doesn't exist within the game.

That's the simulationists' problem with this new Raise Dead rule. It basically says that "Raise Dead works for world-people relevant to the current story arc, but not for anyone else." That "doesn't work" because to a simulationist everyone has their own story arc. From within the game there shouldn't be any way to tell the difference between an NPC and a PC. Now there is.

Irda Ranger succeeded at a english writing check I would have failed.

 

[A'koss]

If you're going to keep Raise Dead, et. al. in the game, this is a very good way to handle it.

Me happy.

We have heard though that you have to be at least Paragon-level in order to be raised (it sounds like Heroic tier characters who die, are done for good), and even though it is available, it's not supposed to be easy (which is good). However, we've also heard that at Epic Levels, some PCs have the ability to self-resurrect... which on the surface I'm not so keen on. Implementation matters though, so I look forward to seeing how this is resolved.

 

[Sir Sebastian Hardin]

From a simulationist context I never had a problem with Raise Dead. It was rare enough (How many clerics are there that can even cast it in all of Eberron?) and expensive enough that it was only really available to PCs, other adventurers of note, and royalty.

Even if there only 10 guys that know Raise Dead (9+ level clerics), The Great Kindom of Galifar could have found at least one of them.

And if the beloved king is killed...
"you raise the taxes, you sell stuff or even sell yourself but you get those 5000 gp within a week or you can say goodbye to your head! Got it?"
so says the lovely, mourning Queen.

 

[HeinorNY]

I'm a sim DM and I like it. It's perfect.

I also think that only souls that were powerful in life could ever be ressurected, so I hope the rules also support that.

What does "destiny" mean?

It depends on each one's personal philosophy, so I think the relevant question here is: Who decides each person's destiny?
In game it's the Master of Fate AKA DM.