Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Banshee16" data-source="post: 3223243" data-attributes="member: 7883">I'm not sure I agree with that.  I think it would be more a matter of personal choice.  Some who have the ability might choose to live forever.  But it would be like artificially extending life on Earth.  Not everyone wants to take that step.  In a fantasy world, where the rewards of living a faithful life are real and tangible (ie. clerics can talk to their gods), the subject of choosing to leave after one's natural time on in life would be something far easier to make a choice on.This is not to imply that the God respected by real world religions isn't real.  He's just more subtle than clerics in a game who can throw flamestrikes and such.With respect to druids, someone else mentioned that druids would naturally want to reincarnate, so that they could continue to interact with nature etc.  I don't quite agree.  Druids might choose to pass on, because death is a natural part of life.  Endlessly reincarnating themselves might be seen as a way of circumventing the natural order of things.Personally I like the idea of the reincarnation spell better than Raise Dead and Resurrection.  It has more immediate and concrete consequences than the others do.  An excellent sample is the Wheel of Time novels, where so many of the Forsaken have been reincarnated into new bodies.  They are still around, but in many cases (ie. Balthamel, Lanfear), are very different from who they once were.So I'm not sure all high level characters would elect immortality.  Some might view death as a welcome release from the troubles of their lives, and the opportunity to get their true reward.  And since that Lvl 20 paladin knows he's going to be happy on Mount Celestia, possibly becoming a powerful archon, why would he try to hold it off?  Sure, the low level characters and commoners might not know....but they wouldn't have the choice to live forever anyways.  And by the time a character is lvl 20, they know enough about the planes etc. to know what their afterlife would likely be like.Finally, I too dislike the fact that they've excised all the ways to cheat time.  There are plenty of NPCs in the books and games, and more importantly, in standard fantasy literature, who can do so....I don't know why 3.5 has to be against it.  Lifespan *is* a "fluffy" issue.  How many characters are there running around who get into their middle years?  Given that everyone in a group is usually the same level, if one guy wants to play a 40 year old, all he's doing is giving himself a mechanical disadvantage against the other players who are playing 18-year olds.  The DM won't let him start at a higher level, afterall.  But between characters like Elminster, Manshoon, the Seven Sisters, the Nameless One, Mordenkainen, Fistandantilus/Raistlin, etc. in D&D, and others like Pub/Milamber, Merlin, etc. in non-D&D literature, I'm not sure why they removed longevity from the game.  And 3.5 makes a big point against using "fluff" disadvantages to offset mechanical advantages.  Yet lifespan (fluff) is being used to balance against mechanical advantages...Banshee</blockquote>

Verification