Too much incentive to stay dead

[delericho]

My players got to the point where they would only raise a character via a True Resurrection. If they couldn't afford it, or if the character wasn't already high level (13+), he stayed dead.

I recommend that new characters joining because a new player joins, or joining to replace a character who retires (isn't dead) join at the same level as the rest of the group and with full equipment, while characters joining to replace a dead PC join at one level below the lowest member of the group, and gear appropriate to his level. I also strongly recommend encouraging the group to not keep the deceased character's gear - it either goes to family, a patron, charity, or is just buried with the character. That said, I don't impose that... it's just that I follow the DMG wealth guidelines quite closely, so if they keep the dead PC's gear then they're just getting a temporary boost, and usually end up with less well-tailored items.

If, however, none of this really suits you... just get rid of the level loss for Raise Dead and Resurrection. It won't affect your game world that much - deaths by natural causes can't be undone, and not too many NPCs can really afford 6,000 gp anyway. It won't actually damage your game any.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

We had the rule that replacement PCs join the party at one level below the average party level - at minimum XP.

I allowed replacement PCs to select about half their magical gear by wealth level, I would give them some items, and then they could borrow from the rest of the party and the dead PCs gear.

The other DM in our group tended to bring replacement PCs in as prisoners we rescued, which sucked because they always had no gear at all. If their new PC didn't match well with the dead one, they had very little they could use: one player's halfling sorcerer died and was replaced by a half-orc barbarian with nothing but a loincloth. He was fairly ineffective until we got done with the adventure and were able to sell off the sorcerer's stuff to help equip the barbarian.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

Dying sucks. That's as it should be, IMO (I like the very real fear that level-draining undead elicit, too). I guess everybody plays differently, but in my games, it ain't Super Mario World out there.

 

[Edgewood]

IMC You have to be the same faith as the cleric who is raising you. This creates alot of dramatic tension especially if your character is dead and there are no clerics of your faith around to raise you. It also causes some party tension, especially if the party cleric is of the same faith of only half of the group, meaning the other half cannot be raised by him or her.

 

[Wolfwood2]

IMC You have to be the same faith as the cleric who is raising you. This creates alot of dramatic tension especially if your character is dead and there are no clerics of your faith around to raise you. It also causes some party tension, especially if the party cleric is of the same faith of only half of the group, meaning the other half cannot be raised by him or her.

In that case, I'd campaign for an out of game gentleman's agreement that no one would agree to be raised, whether of the relevant faith or not.

It would be an excellent way of saying "shove off" to a rules-based attempt to turn the party against each other.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Well, you are certainly rewarding player character death, that's for sure.

I would suggest one of two options. The easiest has been stated above. Change the rules about what level new PCs are introduced. The metagame justification is that a new PC is making it tougher on the DM to hold party and plot continuity together. Therefore, new PCs begin a half level (XP wise) behind where a raised PC would begin. And, according to the DMG wealth standard, they get to choose items equalling half their wealth and they get to roll randomly using the appropriate treasure tables for the rest of their wealth. {EDIT: The IC justification for this is that every character can buy things in D&D, but characters often randomly find stuff as they adventure. This reflects reality - and not pregen characters}

The second option involves a houserule, but is an easy fix. Nobody bats an eye when certain spells say "Spell only affects characters of X HD or lower." {For example, hold person} Why not reverse that? Have raise dead (and the various upgrades from that) only work on characters with HD equal to or greater than the minimum caster level of the spell.

There is an IC reason this could be true. The strain of coming back from the dead via the spell is so great that only characters of certain level can survive it. So, you can make the spell much cheaper without making it available to every commoner on the street. Commoners don't get to use the spell because the caster (most likely a priest) can tell whether or not the deceased would survive the casting anyway.

Or, you could combine both of these examples. Quit rewarding players for having their PCs die and make raising easier. I don't see either of these solutions as problematic in game.

 

[Ourph]

Personally, I would rather my PCs stay dead than try to get resurrected, but a friend of mine who feels the same way as the OP uses these guidelines to encourage players to go for the resurrection option. As far as I have seen, it works well and hasn't led to any imbalances in the game.

1 - Drop level loss due to resurrection.

2 - New PCs come in at the same level as the rest of the party but with equipment equal to the selling price value of his former PC's equipment (usually 1/2 value). Any single item costing more than 1/10th of this total must be purchased in-game, not before the game begins.

3 - The DM determines how much of the dead PC's equipment stays with the party and how much goes to "relatives and other acquaintances" so that you don't end up imbalancing the equipment situation for the rest of the party. Usually, one-use items like potions, scrolls and magic arrows stay with the remaining PCs, as do minor magic items (wands, bags of holding, etc. depending on the party's level), but major items like weapons, armor, staves, rods, rings and other "high end" items leave along with the PC. At best another character might be able to trade one of his items of nearly equivalent value for one of the dead PC's items if he really wants to keep one.

 

[freyar]

I only have limited experience with this (since it's only happened once), but in the relatively light-hearted game I'm running, I've just replaced the level loss from raise dead with a negative level for one week. I've thought maybe about making the penalty less for resurrection and none for true resurrection, also. Honestly, I think it just depends on how gritty you want your game to be.

 

[William drake]

In our games new PCs start at the same level as the rest of the group with gear according to the DMG wealth by level tables. Raise Dead costs about 6000gp and you lose the level. The result? A strong incentive to stay dead.

I don't like a high PC turnover rate, you lose the point of a campaign, it renders early development, goals and foreshadowing pointless if all the PCs have changed. But if raise dead is made cheaper it leads to the problem of it being too easy to obtain in the world at large. For instance if it only cost 100gp many people could afford it. No one would be dying, except of old age.

What solutions can you think of? Perhaps the PCs are 'special' so rezzing is easier for them. Perhaps they are bodiless spirits.

Perhaps the DM should use other tools instead of killing off the players so much: wounds that don't heal, scars, fatigue, and so on. Combat can be great, and the players can get hurt enough, lose llimbs or fingers or just get kicked around to the point that they are still going to feel it for the next few weeks, and not die. If the DM has that HIGH of death in his game, he might think about droping things a bit.

I favor less healing in my games, and rare if any at all, raise dead-type spells. (Healing magic isn't abundent, and combat is over most times with one serious wound. We use the rules that are in some of the modern games: Hp-Vitality, and Con-Guts (Vitality-how much energy you have, and how much fatigue, bashing, and subdul damage you can take. Guts-how much blood loss, broken bones, or vital organ damage you can suffer before death) We also have a bleed-out chart, and a list to show how long your wounds will stay even after you've been healed. Which means, the bone is set, or the stabwound is stitched, but your still going to not be %100 for some time. But that's jut me, when combat comes...its rough, but over quick, ya know, like real combat. Alot of hits bounce off, or just miss; lost of blocks and dodges, some nicks and bruises but only one true stab that drops the foe. (Take the scene from Troy where Hecktor faught Achilies. Hecktor was stabed twice: once in shoulder, then last through the chest, but how long did the fight last, and why: alot of blocks, parries and other movies to explot the foe's weakness whereby a single stroke can kill him and end the combat.


DND can be the same way, even more with magic and so on.

My thoughts.

Game On

 

[William drake]

I don't like raise dead. I'd rather have Fate Points. Once the FPs are up the character is dead, dead ,dead.

However, there should be a spell called biography that a cleric could cast to preserve and pass on the campaign knowledge of a dead character to a new character so the player can get on with the game already.

Biography......sorry, I just had to laugh. I hope you were kidding.

"Please insert two more coins to continue..........." you can't just upload one persons impact from the story into someone new just for convience, if you want that, play a videogame.