Raise Dead: A nice big bone to the simulationists

[Wormwood]

 

[BryonD]

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

You really have no clue what simulationist means.

 

[Kzach]

Allow me to educate you.

I tried to learn from you but I failed to care enough.

 

[Dragongrief]

Here's my take on 4e Raising and 'Destiny', which I'll be using whenever I run a 4e game (assuming the final rules don't invalidate it).

This is based on the statement that:
1) Herioc tier raising is near impossible
2) Paragon tier is still difficult
3) Epic tier is a "speed bump"

Destiny is a sentient force which is trying to keep the mortal world on a certain path (or lead it to a particular end). It is unaffiliated with any gods or other powers and seeks only to lead the world toward it's purpose. To this end, it assists those whose actions are in line with it's goals, gathering around them as they grow in power.

The greatest interference with Destiny's cause is Free Will, but this is also a weapon it uses to get back on track. When some great disturbance occurs (constantly happening/ongoing in a PoL campaign), Destiny seeks out those who have proven that they may be able to correct the situation and gently guides them towards a purpose (READ: they come across the appropriate adventure opportunities). While doing so, it grants them certain advantages that most beings don't have (ressurrection).

Both Herioc and Villianous beings can have purpose. GENERALLY, herioc beings are there to set things right and villians are there to test them and make sure they are truely capable of being the heroes. There are also some beings who are outside the bounds of Destiny (i.e. Godlike beings); these beings may be raised should they die, but the method would be much different than raising a mortal.

What the tiers mean:

Herioc - Most characters in this tier have not been noticed/recognized by Destiny, thus being raised is nearly impossible. Should a character die in some truly epic manner (delaying an oncoming horde alone long enough that the town could escape safely would likely count), Destiny may take enough notice that raising is possible but still extremely difficult.

Paragon - Characters have been noticed by Destiny, however they have not yet shown that they are the 'Stuff of Legends'. Raising is possible but is still difficult, and should a character be repeatedly killed in 'non-meaningful' encounters, Destiny may lose interest (effectively putting them on-par with Herioc tiers for raise dead).

Epic - You are Legend. Your power makes you someone to be respected and feared. Your actions can change worlds. Destiny pools around you to try and guide you to making the 'correct' decisions.


So those are my thoughts on the in-game logic on why Raise Dead works the way it does. Obviously the characters won't know about Destiny and it's goals (the players may not either), but the adventures should put them on the right track (my group is just happy to play, so I don't get any "railroad" complaints by offering few options at once).

 

[Guild Goodknife]

As someone pointed out earlier this change sounds a lot more Narrativist than Simulationist... and i love it!!! The story as a whole is much more important to me an my players than the accurate simulation of a fantasy world where the strictly defined rules work the same way for everybody, so this small change fills me with joy, as it sounds way more atmospheric and interessting to me than the old approach. I like it because it evokes a stronger sense of wonder and returns a bit of mystery to death and dieing!

 

[Roman]

I have been using something similar (along with other modifications to resurrection/raising/...) as a houserule for a long time. In my campaign, only characters that have a destiny desirable to the deity doing the resurrecting can be raised.

 

[Dire Lemming]

Wow. It's always bugged me about how in D&D computer games only PCs could be raised. Now we're going to have that kind of random idiotic limitation in 4E as well? :\

 

[hong]

Wow. It's always bugged me about how in D&D computer games only PCs could be raised. Now we're going to have that kind of random idiotic limitation in 4E as well? :\

Well, you can always ban raise dead. I did just that in my last game, in fact!

 

[Dausuul]

Well, if we're going to have resurrection, this is a good way to go about it. Nice, simple, and totally sufficient to explain why PCs can be resurrected but most people can't--much better than 3E's "uh, most people don't want to be released from eternal torment in the Nine Hells" excuse.

Still, I hope the game can tolerate an outright ban on resurrection magic if the DM and players are so inclined. 3E didn't handle that very well at higher levels.

 

[Celebrim]

Raise Dead: Its one of those things that is always an issue for world builders. How does a society deal with a world in raising the dead is so easy? Kings that can just come back, high priests that cannot really be killed.

Ok, since you ask.

You know how in stories when the villain(ess) captures the prince(ess) and instead of killing them immediately, they always say something like, "We can't kill them now. We have to do this in the right way."

Well, in my campaign, when they say that, ressurection is one of the things that they are planning against. Kings often can just come back. But anyone powerful likely to plan an assassination of a king or prince will realize that there are far more permenent ways of getting rid of a king than simply killing them, and which at least partially take the matter out of the gods hands. Like for example, turning them into a frog and leaving them in random ponds. Wicked queens anxious to dispose of younger rivals take pains to insure that the body of thier victim is never found, up to and including cannibalism. Evil priests insure that the soul is devoured by ancient evils, never to return. Evil wizards imprison the souls of thier enemies in gems, which are lost to dragon hordes, buried in ancient tombs, or dropped into deep wells.

Death might not be permenent, but there are things worse than death.

Everyone has their own reason, but those reasons are often hand waves on the "realism" of the world.

My stories work under faerie tale logic. Realism is just part of the pastiche.

So I greatly applaud 4e's way to handle raise dead:

"You can only be raised if you have an unfulfilled destiny."

Hasn't this always been part of the assumption? I can't find a 1st edition quote, but I would assume no one has to come back that doesn't want to. My take was always, "Does the character have anything they think worth coming back for?" True love? A good mutton, lettuse, and tomato sandwich? If so, ressurection is possible, if not terribly common. Your average merchant prince watching his family falling to squabbling over his inheritance and secretly hoping he stays dead generally decides that he's better taking his chances on the next life. You average high priest decides now is the time to take his reward. Kings decide to leave thier lands in the hands of thier son. Some of course come back, but its not a 100% thing. Actually, there was a defined chance of failure in 1st edition.