What do they expect?

[Darmanicus]

Yer monk thought he was Bruce Lee, he obviously wasn't and he got nailed, boo-hoo. C'mon man, the ranger was cool enough to grapple the thief and what does Brucey boy do? Well as it transpires, nothing but piss said thief off enough for him to want to fight instead of resolve the issue more peacefully/less forcibly. What next? Slappin' the local kids about? Stealin' candy from babies? I think Brucey has issues and you should advise him that it's ok for a ranger/fighter/barbarian to have those issues at level 2 but not monks.

At level 2, raise dead is simply unavailable to all but the most lucky/rich/plot connected characters so tell him to deal with it and whilst he's at it, roll 4d6 x6, drop lowest!!!

 

[sniffles]

Sounds to me like the players know that "raise dead" exists, and therefore think it should exist for them specifically, no matter how unlikely that seems in-game. If I were their fellow player I'd be arguing that they have no chance of getting the monk raised and should say farewell to their friend and move on - and I'd be saying that even if I was playing the monk. Is the monk's player really encouraging them to do this?

 

[RuminDange]

Was I wrong to not give them a raise dead?
Was I wrong in killing the monk?
Why does a second level character think they deserve to get raised if they die?
How could I have played the 'your character doesn't know any of this' and 'roleplay your character' more effectively?

In Order:
No, see third answer as well.
No, nope crit happens. Bad choices bad rolls, bad luck, all adds up to a very bad day.
This depends on the customization of the FR world since FR is very magic rich in places. They (the characters) know such magic is possible unless you have toned down the magic therefore they just need to find someone and the money. Not likely for 2nd level. However, if I am remembering correctly from the FR books, I think the monk has a bigger problem since he didn't have a Patron deity. FR has some stuff written up in the Campaign Setting book about Faithless and being brought back from the dead and what happens to them upon death. Don't recall the page number and don't have access to my books at the moment (work interferes too much with play time). So unless you changed that it could even more problematic when and if they find a priest capable, as they may not be willing no matter the money offered.

Ask for skill rolls in Spellcraft or Know(Arcana), set the DC to what you think it would be for what they are trying to know. If they don't make the DC, tell them they don't know it. Otherwise not much else you can do but remind them to play what their characters know not what they know. Hard to do.
know not what they know. Hard to do.

RD

 

[werk]

Thanks for the responses so far, I feel better

My custom FR is much lower magic than published and double scale, so everything that is there is spread over more area. I also set it up that D&D player knowledge is not standard and most people do not travel farther than 10 miles from their point of origin due to the perils of the world, so while you the player know the energy type of every colored dragon, your character does not, and probably does not even know about dragon colors at all unless he has specific knowledge training.

These players have no experience with the FR, books or play. A couple are newbs, but the monk is one of the most experienced (after myself), so they tend to follow his lead (and I'm yet to get his roleplaying hat on at all). I agree that the monk, IMO, was not acting lawfully at all...but he's dead now, oh well.

The party was hiding out at a weapons academy, and there were a couple of other students living there that weren't developed NPCs...easy replacements. He just changed the name on the character sheet and picked up where he left off. No pain, no problem, but like I said, I just thought it weird that they even thought the raise dead was an option at their level.

Thanks!

 

[yennico]

I totally agree with arnwyn.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Given that monks are supposed to be lawful, by what law did the monk attack a defenseless (grappled) guard? Since the monk worships no deity, and he seems to have violated the tenets of lawfulness (or "the code of the monk" or whatever), what leg does he stand on as he argues that he should be raised? (Or am I blurring "lawful" and "good" here?)

The lawful alignment isn't about obeying laws per se - it's about believing that structures, rules, and self-consistent principles, when adhered to by (the majority of members of) society, produce the best society. Lawful characters believe that a code of law is a good thing if it provides stability and order to society; they are unlikely to respect a code of laws if it is unpredictable, inconsistent, and foments social chaos.

(That said, lawful characters are likely to attempt to reform the legal code in such a case, rather than seek to overthrow it entirely; better to work within the system than to cause even more chaos by tearing it down.)

That said, it's perfectly possible that monks would have a code of behaviour which required them to refrain from attacking helpless beings - though such a code would be motivated by altruism or honour, not by orderly and disciplined (i.e. lawful) inclinations per se.

 

[VirgilCaine]

My custom FR is much lower magic than published and double scale, so everything that is there is spread over more area. I also set it up that D&D player knowledge is not standard and most people do not travel farther than 10 miles from their point of origin due to the perils of the world, so while you the player know the energy type of every colored dragon, your character does not, and probably does not even know about dragon colors at all unless he has specific knowledge training.

Why was all of this not mentioned in the beginning?
Why do DM's think that these kinds of changes have no impact on anything?

 

[Templeton580]

*

 

[mcrow]

I say you played it right. If a PC tries something dumb an they fail @ it there should be consequences(sp?). I'm of the school that raise dead is a very powerfull spell that cannot be found just anywhere and people shouldn't be raised just because the player wants it to happen. There should always be a good reason for everything that happens to a PC. This one had a good reason and resolved as it should have.

 

[Technik4]

...I just thought it weird that they even thought the raise dead was an option at their level.

Level decides many things in D&D. However if someone in my game went through a lot of trouble to come up with a unique character concept, then rolled the dice and configured a character, and finally developed a rich background, then expected his friends to raise (save) him, I would allow it, low-magic FR or no. It may lead to a series of adventures different from what they would like to concentrate on, but there are always willing clerics to gain the employ of young adventurers (at least, in all the d&d campaigns I've played in).

Whether it leads to quests where the party become messengers, escorts, or look-outs where there is a will there is a way.

The reason for this post is the only thing that changes during a campaign is usually level, and hardly ever does an 'appropriate' amount of game time pass. So, its outrageous for the monk to expect to get raised at level 2, but 9 months and 3 harrowing adventures later its not only not-outrageous, but typical and expected if they cleric has access to raise dead? Just doesn't jive with me (and its a hypothetical example, but that seems to be the tone of level dictating raising imo).

Technik