Raise Dead now costs 5000 GP!

jasamcarl said:


Actually, that is the same thing as flavor. The logic depends on certain assumption that you are inclined to make conscerning the nature of your setting/world. The price of ressurection/raise dead would come under this. 'Poorer' and 'Weaker', especially in the context you used the, have a QUALITATIVIE element. Whether or not a relationship is logical depends heavily on the 'nature' of those variables.

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.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

atra2 said:


With Raise Dead at 5000GP, Resurrection at 25000GP, and
many home game DMs being notoriously cheap on wealth,
why didn't they just delete the spells, and move them to the
DMG as a "monty haul" campaign option?


I agree - I've never been a fan of resurrection other than DM designed fiat. At some point there has to be an assumption of risk on the player's end. After listening to how some characters are resurrected 2 or 3 times it just makes me wonder how that can be any fun. There is almost no ultimate risk.

If the DM wants to bring a character back as part of some miracle or plot device, then that's fine - every once in a while. Other than that just move on and start rolling up your next one.
 

I don't understand all this "a new character is cheaper" mentality - what about what is invested in the character itself? What about the role in the group the PC plays and its role in the on-going story?

Is it not possible the other PCs will chip in to pay for it - or actually have to struggle to raise the money somehow?

These are the kinds of choices I make based on the character.

1) Does he want to come back from whatever after-life?

2) Will I have fun playing another character or still playing the same character?

3) Does it make sense in the context of the campaign for the character to return?

Etc. . .

Personally, I think anything that makes deaths more permanent and raising more difficult is okay in my book from the sense of it not being cheapened - but at the same time when it comes down to it is not coming back to life worth that extra effort?
 

AuraSeer said:

I knew a DM who used this rule once.

The party consisted of one 8th-level PC, one at 10th level, and a few others at 11+. After the guy at 8 got himself killed and came back a level higher, they decided it wasn't a very good rule.

If he was two levels lower than everyone else, he was probably the weakest character and it's little surprise that he died. Compounding that problem (by making him even lower level) isn't going to help.

But if that kind of thing is intolerable to the group, it's easy enough to add an addendum: a new character can't be higher level than the dead one.
 

I love it when my posts are broken down into bite-size chewable pieces. Really, I do. I feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

Nevertheless, TSYR, your point has been made. DMs can rule either way - ie., no resurrection as in your case or running a game where raise dead is "free!" and nobody ever REALLY dies. But that does not negate the fact that for those of us that actually plan on following the core rules, 3.5E will make dying and raising dead/resurrection more of a game-shocking moment. And role-playing will be enhanced, clerics will be respected more and hopefully the party will stick together instead of pretending to be in a race for XP/GP.

Wow. I feel like I'm repeating myself. Why yes - I am! Oh - I forgot one thing. Those people that disagree with the raise in price are whiny powergaming munchkin babies. :eek: INSULT!
 

Cheap and painless ressurrection ruins any suspension of disbelief I can muster. "Oh I'm the epic hero Throkk...I've been ressurrected 5 times..." Blah. What a great idea for 3.5...I'm stealing it for 3.0!
 

I don't much care about the price increase for Raise Dead. The level hit was nasty enough; the monetary loss is just an added pain.

I like the huge price for Ressurrection, though. I loath the idea of getting back from the dead with no penalties, even with 9th level magic.
 



Asked how the cost was determined:

That's an excellent question.

We pegged the new prices to be roughly 10% of a typical character's wealth at the level when a cleric could cast the spell.

For instance, raise dead at 5000 is 10% of the wealth of a typical 10th-level character. (It's about 14% of the wealth of a 9th-level character, the minimum level at which raise dead could be cast.)

Resurrection, at 10,000, is about 9% of the wealth of a 13th-level character, while true resurrection (25K) is about 7.5% of the wealth of a 17th-level character.

This encourages the party to use its own resources for raising, etc., rather than relying only on the "clerics in town." That means more clerics packing raise dead (or a raise dead scroll) for dungeon explorations, which means more in-adventure raises, which means fewer mandatory retreats from the dungeon.

This change was based on a couple conclusions:

1) Raising from the dead was too cheap. It wasn't "special" or even "unusual"--it was so commonplace as to place significant strains on the believability of the system.

2) By the time your party cleric could raise the dead, no character in the party would willingly agree to a raise dead, since true resurrection was dirt-cheap and didn't cost a level. That meant that characters never raised their own dead unless there was simply no other option. If a character died in the first encounter, the party went back to town to get him true-rezzed, even if the rest of the group was at full strength. That really puts a crimp in the flow of an adventure, and forces the players to weigh their odds of success against the fun of letting all the players play. That was an unfair decision to force on the players, in our opinions.

This second point was actually more problematic to us, as it meant that one of the cleric's roles (bringing his comrades back from the dead) was essentially being ignored. With the higher prices, the typical 9th-level PC can't afford true resurrection without going into severe hock, which means that he's happy to take the party cleric's raise dead (and thus keep the adventure moving ahead).

By tying the increased cost to the material component value (rather than adding an XP cost to the caster, for instance), characters can easily barter for the service. Don't have 5000 gp to get your buddy raised? OK, we'll raise him and then you can take on this low-level quest for the church to repay us. That gives the DM the power to increase character access to such effects, if he so chooses.


__________________
Andy Collins
Senior Designer
Wizards of the Coast RPG R&D

I like it. Coming back from the dead was way to easy. 25k -- ouch!
 

Remove ads

Top