Raise Dead now costs 5000 GP!

[Anubis the Doomseer]

Cheap Resurrection has always struck me as a bad and often setting-breaking work-around for the problem of player character script immunity. In the future I would prefer to see this sacred cow made into hamburger and replaced by a far more rational system of Drama/Hero Points. This would preserve the setting-affecting nature of fast/easy resurrection and cover the lethality of the combat system (which itself might be considered another sacred cow but that's another topic for another day).

- Ma'at

 

[Plane Sailing]

Interestingly, games like d20 Wheel of Time and d20 Star Wars manage OK without raise dead at all

On the level-loss for being raised idea, I might float an idea past my players and see what they think of it - specifically replacing the level loss with a CON loss (a bit like in the old days). Raise Dead will cost 2 CON, Resurrection will cost 1 CON and True Resurrection will cost 0 CON. Thus the body becomes wearied by it's continual return to life, and gradually fails.

Plus side: no level loss, characters retain their skills, their punch etc.

Minus side: hps could start dropping through the floor after too many resurrections. This can be partially countered by buffing magic and items.

Cheers

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Well, reading this thread has certainly been an eye-opener! It's interesting to see how different people play this game.

Myself, as a player and as a DM--but mostly as a player--I'm against anything that makes Raise Dead tougher than it already is. I invest hours into my characters. I write short stories with them. I search for just the right picture for them over the Internet. My enjoyment of the game stems from seeing them grow and develop. To a lesser degree, this is the same if I'm a DM shepherding a group of PCs through my world.

Raise Dead already hurts due to the level loss. Now it hurts even more. And the only people who are really hurt--people like me who would rather keep their PCs than roll up a new one.

Someone earlier in this thread said this change would "stimulate role-playing." I can't disagree more. Because if I know that in a game as deadly as D&D I won't be able to play my character for more than a few levels, I'm not going to put the time and emotion investiture in that I would have before. I'm going to create a combat-twink.

Or continue to play 3.0.

Edit: there, their, they're

 

[hong]

I invest hours into my characters. I write short stories with them. I search for just the right picture for them over the Internet.

For chrissakes man, get a life!

I mean, you have all that free time, and still such a PISSY postcount?

 

[Anubis the Doomseer]

Originally posted by Plane Sailing
Interestingly, games like d20 Wheel of Time and d20 Star Wars manage OK without raise dead at all

Needed to be repeated, in bold. Here are two very epic, very cinematic games with larger than life heroes that don't rely on the crutch of resurrection to keep things intereesting. They are also two games that use the same core system - one of which has far deadlier combats (Star Wars - blasters, grenades and lightsabers) with even deadlier combat rules.

No complaints yet.

- Ma'at

 

[hong]

Originally posted by Plane Sailing
Interestingly, games like d20 Wheel of Time and d20 Star Wars manage OK without raise dead at all

Needed to be repeated, in bold. Here are two very epic, very cinematic games with larger than life heroes that don't rely on the crutch of resurrection to keep things intereesting. They are also two games that use the same core system - one of which has far deadlier combats (Star Wars - blasters, grenades and lightsabers) with even deadlier combat rules.

No complaints yet.

- Ma'at

I can think of a number of reasons why people haven't complained about WoT or SW:

- Lack of numbers. There are probably six people in the world playing WoT. There's probably more playing SW, but neither of them have anywhere near the userbase of D&D. Hence even if there's a lot of dissatisfaction, you're unlikely to hear it to the same extent.

- Related to that, fewer high-level campaigns. At lower levels, D&D functions fairly well without resurrection. It's only later on, when you have fighters dishing out 100 points of damage per round and wizards chucking disintegrates, that things get really dangerous.

- Fewer instakill effects. In D&D, there's plenty of things that can kill you with a failed save at high level. There aren't any such in WoT, IIRC. Star Wars has the broken VP/WP thing which potentially allows a 1st level stormtrooper to cut down even the most uber jedi, but there, the genre has a strong emphasis on heroes wading through hordes of wimpy mooks. So the problem doesn't show up as much as it might otherwise.

- Less of an emphasis on combat. For many (probably most) people, D&D is basically all about killing monsters and taking their stuff. If you're higher level, that just means you fight bigger monsters. The more fighting you do, the more PC deaths are going to result, and the greater the demand to be able to do something about it.

Before you say it, "so don't fight so much" is not a viable solution for D&D.

 

[Anubis the Doomseer]

Originally posted by hong
- Lack of numbers.

Granted for WoT, but I know what the sales figures were for Star Wars Revised. This is a dangerous argument however, because it can be turned around - how many people were complaining for/against the changes in Resurrecvtion now? So far on this thread I have quickly counted maybe 4 people out of 20 who posted complaining about the change. And the rest seem to approve fo the change. So arguing that it was a bad decision is already a minority (those who don't like it) of a minority (those who post here) of a minority (those who play without house rules or who play D&D).

- Related to that, fewer high-level campaigns.

This complaint (and to an extent many of your others) seem to skirt the main issue which is a flawed combat system and reinforce my argument that cheap resurrection = band-aid solution to a broken sacred cow.

At lower levels, D&D functions fairly well without resurrection.

At lower levels D&D is, if anything, even more deadly. Any critical will kill most PCs - optimized or not. Saving throws suck, low ACs, bad Spot levels, lack of compensating magic, lack of Feats, etc. If the game works at this level of lethality and not at the other perhaps the problem is more a matter of perception and expectation instead of actual mechanics?

- Fewer instakill effects.

3.5 has nerfed most of the remaining instant-kills. And again, there are more at lower level in all 3 games (D&D, WoT d20, SW d20) since most effects that do reasonable damage ARE instant-kills to low hit point characters.

- Less of an emphasis on combat. For many (probably most) people, D&D is basically all about killing monsters and taking their stuff.

So is Diablo II - but you notice that along with this style of play comes a distain for cheap "re-loading" of saved games.

Before you say it, "so don't fight so much" is not a viable solution for D&D.

Really, and all this time I've had just about everyone trying to tell me that D&D isn't all about killing things and taking their stuff, that I could have role-playing and other elements in it.

Anyway - much of your argument is nonsensical - you complain that at high levels this is unfair, but at high-levels aren't you making about 5000gp per encounter, or have easy access to that sort of cash in the form of magic item creation or performing services? At the level you are complaining about (high-level) the cost of the spell is of little real consequence. Even less if you find a scroll or a staff/rod which casts the spell for you.

At low levels (what everyone else is complaining about) you just said there isn't that much of a problem. Further if the problem was really at low/mid-levels then wouldn't we be hearing more complaints from WoT/SW/d20 Modern gamers, since you posit that the bulk of their games take place in this low to mid level range?

- Ma'at

 

[hong]

Originally posted by hong
- Lack of numbers.

Granted for WoT, but I know what the sales figures were for Star Wars Revised.

If those sales figures are anywhere near D&D's, I'd be surprised.

This is a dangerous argument however, because it can be turned around - how many people were complaining for/against the changes in Resurrecvtion now? So far on this thread I have quickly counted maybe 4 people out of 20 who posted complaining about the change. And the rest seem to approve fo the change. So arguing that it was a bad decision is already a minority (those who don't like it) of a minority (those who post here) of a minority (those who play without house rules or who play D&D).

The bulk of people posting on boards tend to be DMs, who are disproportionately concerned with things like world design and verisimilitude. Most players don't really care too much about whether raise dead is so cheap that everyone could be raised, as long as they can do it.

- Related to that, fewer high-level campaigns.

This complaint (and to an extent many of your others) seem to skirt the main issue which is a flawed combat system and reinforce my argument that cheap resurrection = band-aid solution to a broken sacred cow.

Hello. It's called "3.5E", not "4E". If you're looking for a fundamental rejigging of the combat system, come back in 2006 or thereabouts.

At lower levels, D&D functions fairly well without resurrection.

At lower levels D&D is, if anything, even more deadly. Any critical will kill most PCs - optimized or not. Saving throws suck, low ACs, bad Spot levels, lack of compensating magic, lack of Feats, etc. If the game works at this level of lethality and not at the other perhaps the problem is more a matter of perception and expectation instead of actual mechanics?

At _low_ low levels (1st-3rd), D&D is deadly. At high levels, (12th+), it's also deadly. In the middle, it's not so deadly. Have you played any high-level campaigns?

- Fewer instakill effects.

3.5 has nerfed most of the remaining instant-kills.

Actually, from what I hear, they've nerfed exactly two: disintegrate and harm. Finger of death, slay living, destruction, power word kill, flesh to stone, prismatic spray, and plane shift (teleport someone to the Abyss) are still remaining untouched.

And again, there are more at lower level in all 3 games (D&D, WoT d20, SW d20) since most effects that do reasonable damage ARE instant-kills to low hit point characters.

Huh?

- Less of an emphasis on combat. For many (probably most) people, D&D is basically all about killing monsters and taking their stuff.

So is Diablo II - but you notice that along with this style of play comes a distain for cheap "re-loading" of saved games.

Who disdains reloading? Noone I know of, except a minority who like playing iron man. What's disdained is _unavoidable_ reloading, where a fight is so hard you have to do it multiple times before you figure out the trick, or get lucky.

Before you say it, "so don't fight so much" is not a viable solution for D&D.

Really, and all this time I've had just about everyone trying to tell me that D&D isn't all about killing things and taking their stuff, that I could have role-playing and other elements in it.

Please be aware that trolling is MY schtick, and I get most displeased when people STEAL MY SCHTICK. So please do not steal my schtick. ThaADVANCEnks!

Anyway - much of your argument is nonsensical - you complain that at high levels this is unfair, but at high-levels aren't you making about 5000gp per encounter, or have easy access to that sort of cash in the form of magic item creation or performing services?

Let me tell you about our high-level campaign. Ever since reaching 15th level, we've been averaging about one death per session, and this is with powerful characters and a sympathetic DM. In the last few months, we've been slogging through the RttToH, and the death rate has gone up to about two per session. On a good day, it can go to 3. The only thing that helps maintain any semblance of continuity is plentiful raising, in particular true res. If prices go up to 25000 gp, you're going to have a lot more people thinking about retiring dead PCs and making up new ones.

At the level you are complaining about (high-level) the cost of the spell is of little real consequence. Even less if you find a scroll or a staff/rod which casts the spell for you.

When you're shelling out for a true res every session, it adds up, believe me.

At low levels (what everyone else is complaining about) you just said there isn't that much of a problem. Further if the problem was really at low/mid-levels then wouldn't we be hearing more complaints from WoT/SW/d20 Modern gamers, since you posit that the bulk of their games take place in this low to mid level range?

Duh. I just SAID that the problems arise at high levels.

 

[AuraSeer]

Originally posted by hong
At lower levels, D&D functions fairly well without resurrection.
At lower levels D&D is, if anything, even more deadly. Any critical will kill most PCs - optimized or not.[/B]

Saying "any critical" is clearly incorrect. A crit with a 1d8 weapon, x2 crit, would not kill any PC except a Wiz1 or Sor1. Even then, the mage survives if he has a Con of 16 or better.

The only monsters who are likely to kill with one shot are those with both high damage and high multipliers, which are not common at low levels. (The major exception is an orc with a greataxe, whose critical does 12-45 damage. For that reason, orcs are more lethal to low-level characters than their low CR would indicate.)

 

[Plane Sailing]

One of the distinct differences I've noticed in 3e compared to earlier editions is that higher level characters are now threatened with death far more option.

In previous editions, once characters reached about 10th level they could survive in a fight for quite a long time, even against bad odds before they were in danger of dying (and largely laughed at save or die STs too!).

This has tripped up both my players and I in my current campaign, as a 5 round combat can easily finish off 9th level characters - everything just does more damage (apart from the fireballs, natch!).

Just an observation
Cheers