Raise Dead now costs 5000 GP!

[Gizzard]

To the people saying 8th level characters won't be able to come back from the dead:

At what level do you think characters should first have access to raise dead -type magic? And what effect would it have on the rest of the world?

To me, it's silly that a first level character might be able to be raised for 500G. If 500G were the cost of performing a miracle, imagine all the mayors, wealthy merchants or even popular commoners who'd be able to afford being Raised. Think about it; no one able to collect 500G would ever die of sickness or accidents again. And they wouldn't be mewling about how unfair it is that they had to sell all their stuff (or even hock themselves into indentured servitude for 5 years!) in order to afford Raising - they'd do it and be happy about it.

But, back to the beginning, at what level do "heroes" become truly important enough that they deserve to be raised?

 

[jasamcarl]

If I had a 19 str, and come back to life with an 18, I am weaker.

If I had 5500 gold, and now I have 500, I am poorer.

If I had a 12 int, and now I have 11, I am dumber. (Yes, I get the irony of that word use).

These comparisions have nothing to do with the flavour of the world I am in.

Ah, so it is a mechanical argument. May i then ask what makes this illogical, assuming no narrative or simulationist conscerns?

 

[3d6]

I don't know why they make changes like this, changes that hurt role-players and don't even incontinence hack-n-slashers.

When a character your're attached to dies, you want to bring him back, and will play him, level-loss and all. This change makes it harder to stick with a character.

When a hack'n'slasher's character dies, they roll up a new one. No powergaming campaign I've ever played in has seen any rasing magic cast.

Raising magic in my campaign is free, and does not cause level-loss, because I want to encourage staying with one character rather than discourage it.

 

[Destil]

I don't know why they make changes like this, changes that hurt role-players and don't even incontinence hack-n-slashers.

When a character your're attached to dies, you want to bring him back, and will play him, level-loss and all. This change makes it harder to stick with a character.

When a hack'n'slasher's character dies, they roll up a new one. No powergaming campaign I've ever played in has seen any rasing magic cast.

Raising magic in my campaign is free, and does not cause level-loss, because I want to encourage staying with one character rather than discourage it.

Roleplayers should be using the Power Components variant for raising the dead, IMHO. Nice story hooks (and side quests), there...

 

[3d6]

The problem with that is you tend to have a session or two where one player may as well not show up as you quest for his ressurection.

Anything that's not fun is bad by default.

 

[AuraSeer]

To me, it's silly that a first level character might be able to be raised for 500G. If 500G were the cost of performing a miracle, imagine all the mayors, wealthy merchants or even popular commoners who'd be able to afford being Raised.

No one is saying that a first-level character should be able to afford it. (Even if he could, the spell would fail, because the level loss would bring him to 0 HD.) The issue is that with the increased cost, even a party powerful enough to cast the spell would likely be unable to afford the material component.

Mentioning commoners here is a red herring. Your average commoner earns 1 silver piece per day. Even if he had no living expenses, he'd have to work 7-day weeks for 136 years in order to earn enough for a single 3E raise. Once the price is raised to 5000 gp, he'd better be an elf with a strong work ethic.

[snip]And they wouldn't be mewling about how unfair it is that they had to sell all their stuff (or even hock themselves into indentured servitude for 5 years!) in order to afford Raising - they'd do it and be happy about it.

Yeah, if they were real people living in a real world, they'd be happy. If they were players, participating in a game that's supposed to be fun, it's clear that some of them would be rather annoyed.

As I read this thread, it seems that everyone happy about the change is a DM. Do any players like the idea of 5000-gp raise dead? Or is this another change that lets "hardass" DMs screw their players, and annoys everyone else?

 

[Kurtz Tote]

You just need more necromancers running in your groups. When somebody dies, they just get animated so you don't have to worry about trying to raise or resurrect them. If the necromancer is quick enough on the draw, the question won't even come up.

 

[Nail]

The problem with that is you tend to have a session or two where one player may as well not show up as you quest for his ressurection.

Anything that's not fun is bad by default.

It's true that death sucks.

No bones about that. The problems stem from the "believability" of your games. Part of the fun we're talking about here is from immersing yourself in a world that "makes sense". Cheap raise deads tend to make the world make less sense. As always, YMMV.

The idea of rich commoners (or aristocrats or merchants or what-have-you) being able to easily access resurrection.....stretches things a bit, don't you think?

Expensive resurrection magicks make sense, and are a good core rule. Don't like it? The house rule forum is just a click away.

 

[Nail]

No As I read this thread, it seems that everyone happy about the change is a DM. Do any players like the idea of 5000-gp raise dead? Or is this another change that lets "hardass" DMs screw their players, and annoys everyone else?

This is just Troll-Bait(tm).

FWIW, I'm a player, and I like the change.

 

[Mercule]

To the people saying 8th level characters won't be able to come back from the dead:

At what level do you think characters should first have access to raise dead -type magic? And what effect would it have on the rest of the world?

Honestly, I don't think that characters much below 10th should have an expectation of access to any sort of Raising effect.

IMHO, the high end of availability to Raise effects is that they just typically aren't for sale. The Cleric gets it at 9th level. Either don't die before then or make sure the right people owe you a favor.

The low end of availability is that Raise effects are typically not for sale. Strike Resurrection and True Res from the books and move Raise Dead to a 9th level spell with a 25,000 gp component. Same guidelines as above.

Somewhere between the two, in my mind, is an option that makes it available for a price from the right people.

I think it stains credulity that in a game of 4 PCs there would be more than one Raise of some sort between them in 20 levels of play. For six PCs, I could see two.

Ideally, I think that Raises should be viewed a lot like having an artifact in your game. Stories should be told about how you were once involved in a game that included a Raise -- and it wasn't done cheesy or anything.

Of course, given the realities of this being a game where dice or a DM's judgement can give out and cause a pretty pathetic death, the 3.5 revision is a reasonable compromise.