Raise Dead and its Social Implications

[Silveras]

I think that even those who nominally have 5000gp to use and still not be bankrupt, in many situations they would choose not to be raised.

Imagine an NPC Smith. He owns his own smithy and does a decent trade. He's been working for 20 years so he's decently old (let's say about 35) but still has a few years of life in him. If he were to die, by selling his smithy and collecting all his money, he could afford to be raised and still have a house to live under.

But he remembers his long years of apprenticeship and having to wander from teacher to teacher. He scraped together all of his money together so eventually he could buy a smithy so he could pass it down to his son, who has some talent in smithing. If he sold his smithy, his son would be left with nothing and would have to seek work elsewhere. Indeed, he would as well, since he wouldn't have his own shop.

In addition, he's scraped together about 1000gp to offer as a dowry for his daughter. He had a hard life, and he's hoping that by having his daughter marry someone of minor importance (which the dowry will help) she may have a better life, and more importantly, his grandkids may never have to experience going to bed hungry like his kids did when he was younger. He could use that money for himself, but that means that his daughter would most likely have to live the life of a pauper.

If this NPC died, do you think he put in his will "please liquidate everything and bring me back to life?" Or do you think he would be content that he raised a son and a daughter, both of which will hopefully have an easier life than he had?

I'm not saying that there are no people who would choose to be raised; however, I still maintain that the vast majority of the population would not be affected by raise dead regardless of how common it is.

It is not just about who can directly pay for the action, or how easily. It is about the fact that such spells are available for those who choose to use them that causes the social changes. People today cannot afford their medical bills... but their families insist on going into debt to pay for them, neighborhoods hold fund-raisers, charities donate the necessary funds, and so on. The availability of such magic would encourage the same kinds of behaviors in the game world.

Consider... if raise dead/resurrection/true resurrection are available...

• The custom of weregild takes on a whole new meaning. In the real world, people paid a cash penalty for accidental maiming or death of another. In a world where raise dead, etc., are available, the weregild could be extended to raising the cash for the necessary spell. Whole families and clans would be expected to contribute, and could be bankrupted to pay for an accidental death.
• In the case of a murder, the laws might well require the convicted person to liquidate all assets toward bringing the victim back to life.
• The inheritance traditions of the poor usually reflect those of the wealthy. The wealthy might generate a tradition like a 10% resurrection rule (liquidate 10% of the assets; if it is enough for a raise dead/resurrection/true resurrection, then one is performed).
• The inclusion of a stipulation "I do/do not want to be raised if I am killed" might become a standard part of the wills of the wealthy. In the case where such a clause is missing, it might become tradition to assume the dead want to be raised, or it could just as likely become tradition to assume they do not want to be raised (influenced by the general alignment of the population).
• Burial rites could take on ancient-Egyptian-like aspects, with more liberal use of Gentle Repose spells. A whole side industry in permanent gentle repose shrouds or the like would not be far-fetched. Certainly, the wealthier nobles would be likely to fund the research.

The blacksmith in your example raises another interesting point. People have to agree to be raised in order to come back; very few would be willing to risk 5,000 gp in diamonds on the chance that the recipient would say "No". So, there would also be customs for indicating your preference before you die, and about assuming a Yes or No answer if there is no specific indication. Perhaps all accidental deaths/murders are supposed to at least try a raise dead, while all old age/natural causes deaths are supposed not to.

In short, the implications of having the spells around go far beyond simply who can pay for them.

 

[Evilhalfling]

Gilbert de Clare built Caerphilly in under three years. Edward I got Conway finished in five years and Flint in three (and while he was builting nine other castles). And by no means were all castles monsters like Caerphilly and Conway.

Bother your right, Im sitting here with the welsh office official handbook for Caerphilly Castle- it is far more concerened with politics than build schedual..but the plan shows the entire inner ward (4 towers, 2 barbicans) and 2 external barbicans built between 1268-1271. in the midst of poltical manuvering and attacks by the price of wales.

Anyway now that finished watching LOR again (dollar show)
back to community spending limits.... I agree money is somewhat of a limiting factor, but with 40,000 avalible for a single item in a large city there will be a substantial number of people who can afford the price of raise or res.

This thread illustrates a how a much thought many Gm's have put into either limiting avaliblity or changing culture to accomidate the bringing back of the dead. This is not something that can be ignored.

 

[Janx]

So 60 clerics in a city of 25,000?

I would propose revising that table for cities larger than that (so you can scale things upward for really big exceptional cities).

But let's go with the basic math:
25,000 / 60 = 416 people per cleric

That's a lot of people to serve, and bear in mind, there are lower level clerics beneath the 60 to cover the lesser healings needed.

But we're talking revivicapable clerics and the people-load they would serve.

It is conceivable that, except for cost, each revivicapable cleric could keep up with normal attrition rates (murders and accidents, not wars and massacres). At least in large enough cities.

So GM's have 2 basic choices:
A. revise their world to reflect the impact of revivication availability per the rules

B. revise the rules to limit revivication in order to maintain the desired "rarity" of revivication.

Personally, I'm inclined to go with option B in my campaign. But a GM can have a lot of fun with option A as well.

Janx

 

[Silveras]

So 60 clerics in a city of 25,000?

But let's go with the basic math:
25,000 / 60 = 416 people per cleric

That's a lot of people to serve, and bear in mind, there are lower level clerics beneath the 60 to cover the lesser healings needed.

But we're talking revivicapable clerics and the people-load they would serve.

Just to be clear, those 60 included all the lesser clerics as well. Only 4-12 would be capable of revivification.

It is conceivable that, except for cost, each revivicapable cleric could keep up with normal attrition rates (murders and accidents, not wars and massacres). At least in large enough cities.

So GM's have 2 basic choices:
A. revise their world to reflect the impact of revivication availability per the rules

B. revise the rules to limit revivication in order to maintain the desired "rarity" of revivication.

Personally, I'm inclined to go with option B in my campaign. But a GM can have a lot of fun with option A as well.

Janx

Well, that's the issue.

For people who run dungeon-based campaigns and don't do a lot of political adventures, it is pretty easy to ignore the issue.

However, if you are a world-builder (like I am) or you like internally-consistent politics and societies (like I do), you pretty much have to do one or the other. If you are both a world-builder and a political-adventure sort, the existing arrangement gets under your skin and gnaws at you.

Option A does offer a lot of potential plot hooks, though.

• Party enters town and is asked to donate to a collection to raise money for the resurrection of a popular citizen
• Party Cleric is asked to cast Gentle Repose on a body and convey it to the temple where it can be raised
• Party is tasked with recovering a stolen body, slated for raising, before it can be burned
• Party is tasked with guarding the body of a hated political figure who could afford a raise dead. A mob wants to burn the body.

 

[I'm A Banana]

1) Assassination is now obsolete, or nearly so.
Only elite assassins can now TRULY kill someone. The assassin must now: a) use a magical weapon/poison that kills the soul; b) use a magical weapon/poison that prevents resurrection; c) use a magical device that allows him to spirit away the body. (Destroying the body outright is not a viable option since True Resurrection can counter this.)

Not as bad as you might think. Think of some Wizard spells that get rid of the corpse too (like Disintegration). True Resurrection can counter it, but True Res is quite expensive. You may not be able to TRULY assassinate the king (unless, like aforementioned, you spirit away the body -- possible with a mere Teleport), but you can TRULY assassinate, say, the clerics friendly to him.......and THEN truly assassinate the king.

2) Those who cannot afford resurrection rebel against priests and the rich.
Peasants and the like who cannot afford resurrection often suffer the death of loved ones and would be irrate about not having access to this "answer to death."

Well, yeah. Aside from the raising not quite being as common as all that, they probably would be irate. But it's one of those luxuries the upper class affords in exchange for them killing the dragons. They get to live again, you get to live longer.

3) Humanity no longer TRULY fears death.
Humanity acts with more bravado and recklessness because friends can simply resurrect each other. How does this affect the world? Are there more heroes? Are there more wars?

Naaaaaah, they still fear death. Even if a True Res can be assured, it ain't cheap......

Take a look at some of the town design rules, see how many clerics can actually cast True Res. Look about the NPC wealth/level rules, see how many NPC's can truly afford that price. True, assassination works by attrition now, but death is still a big impact.....not as big as it is in the real world of course.

 

[jwdh71]

Interesting thread everyone. Lots of ideas to mine for use.
In my own campaign, (3rd Ed.) the largest city is over a million people, so there are enough clerics to cast these spells many times over. The White Priesthood (Naqsabani pantheon) will cast raise dead or true resurrection on people they feel are deserving, while the Red Priesthood (Condari pantheon) will only use these spells when it serves their own political interests. As the Red Priesthood is the more political, and more prosperous, (as it takes its believers from the upper classes and aristocracy) and the White Priesthood more serving of the poor and middle class, the way these spells are used varies dramatically between the two. The Reds are far more likely to raise or resurrect you if you have something they want, the Whites are more likely to raise or resurrect you if you have helped people. Since lower level PC's are unlikely to be important enough (or rich enough)to have the attention or favor of the Reds, keeping favor with the White Priesthood is very important, so the party is much more likely to do good deeds, as this will give the Whites a favorable impression.