PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] How Should Resurrection be?



Zovc
2009-11-23, 04:08 PM
Question is the title... in two forms.

How rare do you think resurrection should be?

Does resurrection work on a subject whose time has come 'naturally?' (How does reincarnate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/reincarnate.htm) work on a subject whose 'time has come?')

Sure, the spells might say they work a certain way, but DMs have the final say, I say.

Fortuna
2009-11-23, 04:30 PM
In my opinion, ressurection should be a hell of a lot rarer than it is, and true ressurection should be in the hands of the gods. The problem is how it makes death "Bugger, we'll need to pay the resident priest" instead of "NOOOOO! DR'YZA THE MAGE! I SHALL AVENGE THEE!", which in my opinion detracts from rather than adds to the fantastic feeling. Likewise for the latter, but less so, and I see no reason why reincarnate shouldn't work then at all.

dsmiles
2009-11-23, 04:34 PM
If your time has come, I become the resurrection nazi (much like the soup nazi).

"No! No resurrection for you!"

This also applies to reincarnate. The ressurrection spell...no, let me rephrase that. The prayer that makes up the resurrection spell only works when the gods prefer that character to be alive in order to advance their plots. If the gods don't need you alive...

"No! No resurrection for you!"

Nero24200
2009-11-23, 04:39 PM
In my opinion, ressurection should be a hell of a lot rarer than it is, and true ressurection should be in the hands of the gods. The problem is how it makes death "Bugger, we'll need to pay the resident priest" instead of "NOOOOO! DR'YZA THE MAGE! I SHALL AVENGE THEE!", which in my opinion detracts from rather than adds to the fantastic feeling. Likewise for the latter, but less so, and I see no reason why reincarnate shouldn't work then at all.

Seconded. I absolutely hate it in movies/books/games etc where a character dies, then is brought back to life. It makes me feel like life is something cheap.

What's more, it brings up alot of weird questions - If you're able to bring someone back to life without any problems, why should they feear death? If the party are friends with a cleric who happens to know True Ressurection, what's to stop them just saying "We're going to fight big evil bad guy, if we're not back in 5 days assume we're dead and start raising", then go back after dying until they eventually defeat him/her/it/alloftheabove.

It also makes me wonder why NPC XY and Z can't also be brought back? (Same applies in some movies too. For instance, in Transformers)Prime dies in the second live action movie and they go to such lenghs to bring him back. But when Jazz dies in the first they don't seem to care. In the second they seem so insistant that, yes, there is definately a way to bring him back, but the thought seemed completely irrelvent earlier?
And well...9 times out of 10 the reason is mostly "Just because" with no real explanation for it. One thing I liked when I opened up my D'n'D books for the first time was that it brought up alot of questions about internal consistancy (for instance, mentioning that castles might not have walls in a setting where fly and teleport are common, since they'd be pointless) and well...when you apply that to ressurection magic, I can't picture anything other than a surrel world were the wealthy do increadibly stupid things constantly since they know they're just a short fee away (for them at least) from being back on their feet, and that doesn't sound like any fantasy setting I've read about.

If it was up to me, ressurection magic would be replaced with revivify, and that would be the only way to bring dead caharacters back to life (barring making them undead).

Starbuck_II
2009-11-23, 04:45 PM
Seconded. I absolutely hate it in movies/books/games etc where a character dies, then is brought back to life. It makes me feel like life is something cheap.


But if Conan died in the first movie permanently: there wouldn't be a book series!

The only risk was friendly Wizards are rare who would want to revive you.

Ormagoden
2009-11-23, 04:52 PM
I make resurrection a quest. It has some steps...see this post (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7159356#post7159356).

Nero24200
2009-11-23, 04:53 PM
But if Conan died in the first movie permanently: there wouldn't be a book series!

The only risk was friendly Wizards are rare who would want to revive you.

Well...that actually brings up my other point
I can't remember her name for the life of me, but the girl who was with him...what was to stop him trying to bring her back? Granted, I've only seen the movie and not read the book, but I couldn't think of any reason why he wouldn't try to bring her back, since, even with the dangers it seemed to bring, theres always the chance that it'll work and they'll both be alive

Weimann
2009-11-23, 04:55 PM
I am of the opinion that death should be final, and that's it. Instead, present your characters with means to survive.

Starbuck_II
2009-11-23, 04:56 PM
Well...that actually brings up my other point
I can't remember her name for the life of me, but the girl who was with him...what was to stop him trying to bring her back? Granted, I've only seen the movie and not read the book, but I couldn't think of any reason why he wouldn't try to bring her back, since, even with the dangers it seemed to bring, theres always the chance that it'll work and they'll both be alive

My thoughts are the Wizard didn't care about her. He liked Conan enough at least.

Unless, it was the Princess Bride situation: Conan was almost dead and she was fully dead.

Curmudgeon
2009-11-23, 04:57 PM
I'm happy with True Resurrection as a nifty way to waste PC resources. I also take glee in strictly following the letter of the spell's description:
Upon completion of the spell, the creature is immediately restored to full hit points, vigor, and health, with no loss of level (or Constitution points) or prepared spells. Every single time someone comes back, they're at the floor of XP for that level. You used to have 185,000 XP? Sorry, now you're at 171,000, with no loss of level. :smallwink:

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-23, 04:58 PM
Nero; I choose to intpret thus;
Conan, crucified to the tree, does not so much die as mostly die. He's at deaths door. Pretty close to dead, to all intents and purposes, but close enough still to life that his soul can be...preserved, almost as much as raised. They do the necessary magic, fight off the spirits of the dead that want to take him away (as his time had, perhaps, come). But there will be a price, of course. (A life for a life, it seems.)

She, on the other hand, is handily pegged by a snake-arrow, probably taking both significant internal injuries and poison. She's dead in no time, no real chance to do anything about it.

Maryring
2009-11-23, 05:07 PM
For me, if someone dies, there's always a quest to raise them. The player gets to assume control of some temporary helper for the duration of the quest so they aren't left out. It is possible but it requires effort to get done.

Yzzyx
2009-11-23, 05:08 PM
I'm happy with True Resurrection as a nifty way to waste PC resources. I also take glee in strictly following the letter of the spell's description: Every single time someone comes back, they're at the floor of XP for that level. You used to have 185,000 XP? Sorry, now you're at 171,000, with no loss of level. :smallwink:

Well... feel free to do it that way, but it's not really "strictly following the letter of the spell's description," any more than saying True Resurrection brings you back to life than repeatedly hits you with bolts of lightning, with no loss of level, does so.

Gnomo
2009-11-23, 05:09 PM
I just play spells as they should by played and it works just fine... diamonds are very rare in my campaign, and players already know that if they get a diamond of 3k gp of worth they better save it, cause every raise dead / resurrection / true resurrection come out of their own expenses... they even know that if two players die in the same party they will have it hard to resurrect them.

The key is to enforce the correct use of Material Components, you cannot bypass material components with just money, if you don't have the diamonds in your bags (and written down in your inventory) there's no resurrection, and I do the same with every other spell. This is specially useful to keep at bay many problematic spells, for example:

Atral Projection: A jacinth worth at least 1,000 gp, plus a silver bar worth 5 gp for each person to be affected.

Shapechange: Focus: A jade circlet worth no less than 1,500 gp, which you must place on your head when casting the spell. (The focus melds into your new form when you change shape.)

Temporal Stasis: A powder composed of diamond, emerald, ruby, and sapphire dust with a total value of at least 5,000 gp.

Forcecage: Ruby dust worth 1,500 gp, which is tossed into the air and disappears when you cast the spell.

Contingency: Focus: A statuette of you carved from elephant ivory and decorated with gems (worth at least 1,500 gp). You must carry the focus for the contingency to work.

True Seeing: An ointment for the eyes that costs 250 gp and is made from mushroom powder, saffron, and fat.

Like those there are plenty, and I think is the correct way to work with spells, for example if you sunder the wizards bags and he drops his contingency focus the contingency doesn't work anymore, or if the player is using an item on his head he cannot cast Shapechange cause he needs touse another circlet (he needs to take the item off and that's a move action), or if you determine what the Divine Focus of the Cleric is and destroy it / take it from him. Just enforce and manage the scarcity of Material Components and everything should work fine.

On the other hand, in my campaigns is really hard to comeby diamonds, they are usually sold at a higher price than they correct worth, cause nobles and rich people usually stack those in case they die.

jmbrown
2009-11-23, 05:11 PM
AD&D wasn't very kind with death. Raise dead was a 5th level spell with no expensive component, however, there were a bunch of restrictions (2E's raise dead)

*You lose all of your memorized spells simply because AD&D made you lose spells if you hit 0 hp.
*You're raised with 1 hp. Period. You're so weak from being returned that you have to rest for 1 day per number of days you were dead regardless if you're healed to full hit points or not.
*Any poison or disease you had may remain in your body
*You have to roll to actually survive the ordeal. Fail and you're dead permanently.
*You lose 1 point of constitution regardless. Your base constitution is also the maximum number of times you can ever be raised in your entire life.

2E's resurrection? You were fully healed with no drawbacks (but you still couldn't be raised more than your base constitution). What happened to the cleric to the resurrected you?

-Immediately crippled (can't cast spells or fight) until he's rested a number of days equal to the experience level or hit dice of the creature he resurrected.
-Caster immediately ages 3 years.

Ouch. Frankly, I like how AD&D handled death more than 3.5. Death was a problem but didn't totally ruin a character. Most DMs I've played with give raised characters in 3.5 extra experience or count the experience they earned in the fight that killed them in order to off set the level loss. In AD&D, you died and you felt the physical pain from it.

Tyndmyr
2009-11-23, 05:13 PM
I'm happy with True Resurrection as a nifty way to waste PC resources. I also take glee in strictly following the letter of the spell's description: Every single time someone comes back, they're at the floor of XP for that level. You used to have 185,000 XP? Sorry, now you're at 171,000, with no loss of level. :smallwink:

That's not the letter of the spell's description, since it does not in any way describe loss of xp.

If you choose to do so, that's fine, but it's a house rule, not the literal reading.

Nero24200
2009-11-23, 05:15 PM
Spoiler Stuff

See, that I wouldn't mind. I don't have a problem with someone being near death and comming back (in fact, that's how I prefer to RP revivify). But theres a big difference between that and actually being in the afterlife then comming back.

Curmudgeon
2009-11-23, 05:32 PM
That's not the letter of the spell's description, since it does not in any way describe loss of xp.
The spell doesn't state that it restores full XP, just the last full level. Restoring exactly the XP count before death is a house rule, too.

Grumman
2009-11-23, 05:37 PM
The spell doesn't state that it restores full XP, just the last full level. Restoring exactly the XP count before death is a house rule, too.
No, it's not. Dying doesn't make you lose XP, Raise dead/Resurrection makes you lose XP. {Scrubbed}

Gnomo
2009-11-23, 05:37 PM
A houserule that I like to use is that you don't lose a level when resurrected, be it by means of Reincarnate, Raise Dead, Resurrection or whatever spell you are using, but you lose 1000 experience points per level you have.

You keep your level but you lose a ton of exp points, this makes it harder to get to the next level but doesn't hamper you right now.

Belobog
2009-11-23, 05:43 PM
I really have no problem with Resurrection as it's stated, or any 'back from the dead' spell. They have penalties built in, and if you get high enough up the food chain, you bypass those. Makes sense, in a 'you-get-you-pay-for' kind of way. I do understand making it a little more dramatic, though; journeying into Perdition to rescue a fallen friend makes for a better story than 'I crushed some diamonds and stuffed them in his mouth. He got better.'

AslanCross
2009-11-23, 05:45 PM
I don't think it should be readily available via NPCs. (By the guidelines in the PHB anyway, it shouldn't be.)

deuxhero
2009-11-23, 05:48 PM
Death to provided motive has always seemed... cheep and overdone to me, so resing breaking such a plot doesn't really bug me.

oxybe
2009-11-23, 05:50 PM
honestly?

whatever gets the game moving faster.

in low levels, we just don't bother. it's too expensive, has pretty heavy drawbacks and making a character isn't much of a hassle.

mid-levels, it varies. sometimes it's time to try a new character, other times you want to keep playing this one because he's just fun. the option should be there should you want it.

high-levels, revive. making a high level character, especially a caster, is a pain. marking off 25000gp worth of diamonds is just less painful then sitting out the session making a new character.

that's just my personal opinion. in-game, the rarity of the spell and those who can/are willing to cast it will vary depending on the setting. note that even if resurrection is possible, failing can be worse then death. fail to stop the assassination and even if you can bring the rogue back, that won't stop the coup d'etat from happening...

Jack_Simth
2009-11-23, 05:53 PM
It's a matter of taste. The people you want to ask are your players, not a random bunch of strangers on the internet.

Players like the characters they've built, so they want to be able to continue playing them - hence the possibility of resurrection at all.

If you ban it, players just roll up another character and keep going - but they don't get to play the character they've grown attached to anymore.

If it's too expensive, or has overly horrendous consequences, it's effectively not an option, and you're effectively banning it even though you're not technically banning it. Meanwhile, it's available to opposing NPC's, for whom resources don't actually affect gameplay - which isn't fair.

If it's cheap, it cheapens character death.

If it requires a side-quest, it disrupts the plot and leaves the player sitting on the sidelines twiddling his thumbs for extended periods of time. Meanwhile, it's available to opposing NPC's, for whom resources don't actually affect gameplay - which isn't fair.

Yet those are basically the only four ways it can go. None of them are particularly grand, as they all have things about them that will upset somebody. You can get together with the players and negotiate how hard it'll be... but there's no one-size-fits-all answer.

Inhuman Bot
2009-11-23, 06:10 PM
I agree with Jack_Smith entirely here.

Personally, though I like the Iron Kingdoms take on ressurection

You CAN ressurect people, but the gods like to have the souls of their followers serving them in the afterlife, so ressurection carries the risk of "Does your god think this person can serve them better alive then dead?", where horrible things can occur to the caster of the revive spell.

Also, yay, ogre itp.

Maryring
2009-11-23, 06:13 PM
If you're going through the side-quest route, it's important to have a backup for the player "sitting it out". Considering all the people you've helped out, at least one of them should be willing to help find the snow rose of this millenium, or whatever other mac-guffin you need for resurrection, and you can let the player play that character. It offers them something new to try out and it'll make the return to their character that much sweeter when done well.

It also helps maintain internal consistency when resurrection is difficult.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-23, 08:13 PM
I just really don't see what's wrong with easy resurrection. So you died and were resurrected. That's great. You just wasted 25000 or more gold, a 9th-level spell slot, and a lot of time that could have been spent stopping the BBEGs. Every resource you spend on resurrection is one not spent on saving lives. People are dieing because of your resurrection (indirectly). It's like deuxhero said - IMO death on such a small scale isn't great motivation.


What's more, it brings up alot of weird questions - If you're able to bring someone back to life without any problems, why should they feear death? If the party are friends with a cleric who happens to know True Ressurection, what's to stop them just saying "We're going to fight big evil bad guy, if we're not back in 5 days assume we're dead and start raising", then go back after dying until they eventually defeat him/her/it/alloftheabove.
Because death is failure. Do you know how many people are dieing during those 5 days? You think they can all afford resurrection? I get to save my life easy, sure - but as a hero, I care about much more than my own life. The time spent resurrecting is time for the BBEGs to do whatever the hell they want, and that's very, very bad.


when you apply that to ressurection magic, I can't picture anything other than a surreal world were the wealthy do increadibly stupid things constantly since they know they're just a short fee away (for them at least) from being back on their feet, and that doesn't sound like any fantasy setting I've read about.
You really can't picture anything else? Between the possibility of noble enemies with soulbinding assassins, the extremely painful experience of dieing, and innate human fear, I'd assume resurrection is a last resort. Does it still break medievalism? Yes, but a lot less than Remove Disease, Create Water, Prestidigitation, or Teleportation do.

And if the DM is playing with easy resurrection, but never explains why NPC XYZ remains dead, that's a fault of the DM more than the easy resurrection. I've played with (and ran) semi-consistent settings where resurrection is easy. I say semi-consistent because after a while on these boards, anything but a "soft sci-fi" setting due to magic prevalence seems unrealistic to me. Srsly, y'all think teleportation or sanitation are less important problems than Raise Dead?

Saintheart
2009-11-23, 08:54 PM
Nero; I choose to intpret thus;
Conan, crucified to the tree, does not so much die as mostly die. He's at deaths door. Pretty close to dead, to all intents and purposes, but close enough still to life that his soul can be...preserved, almost as much as raised. They do the necessary magic, fight off the spirits of the dead that want to take him away (as his time had, perhaps, come). But there will be a price, of course. (A life for a life, it seems.)

She, on the other hand, is handily pegged by a snake-arrow, probably taking both significant internal injuries and poison. She's dead in no time, no real chance to do anything about it.

And don't forget how she comes back from the dead to save Conan's ass at one point in the fight. She blinds one of the fighters, and then when Conan looks at her, she's got what damn well looks like a significant upgrade to mithril full plate with ghost touch and blur enhancements. No wonder she says "Do you want to live forever?" Hell, no! The gods have got better loot!

nightwyrm
2009-11-23, 11:35 PM
If I was a player looking to game the system, I'd totally choose to make a new char instead of rezing.

a) Your party doesn't lose money from rezing.
b) Your party gets to loot your dead PC body.
c) You get to bring in a new char with new gear (or a clone of your dead PC, hello Bob the Fighter IV). If you're playing 3e or 4e, your new char's level is probably no more than 1 lower than the rest anyways and you can catch up pretty easily in 3e.

dsmiles
2009-11-24, 05:15 AM
But if Conan died in the first movie permanently: there wouldn't be a book series!

The only risk was friendly Wizards are rare who would want to revive you.

Ummmm...guys?

The Robert E. Howard Conan stories were nothing like the movie. Conan, in the books, was never brought back from the "mostly dead" (the closest call was when he was crucified, and found by a bandit lord beffore he was dead, but he was in a bad way), and the situation with the woman in question (who was actually based on a pirate queen in the books) never happened. She died. Conan was fignting for his life against some monster winged ape. She appeared. Monster winged ape dies.

Sorry, just throwin' it out there.

Harperfan7
2009-11-24, 05:44 AM
I think the counterbalances to resurrection built into 3.5 are just fine.

-Spell slots
-casting time
-exp loss
-money (and finding diamonds)
-your gear isn't resurrected (if that's a problem)

Also
-soul bind
-damaging corpses to make them harder to revive
-inevitables probably don't like it
-it not being up to you if you are revived (do your allies like you?)

I liked the old system shock rules. I wish they we added into 3.5.

Optimystik
2009-11-24, 09:41 AM
Heroes of Horror has nice ideas on how to deepen the mood of resurrection. The ideas it presents are:

1) Lengthen the casting time - Having Resurrection take hours or even days instead of minutes to cast can make it feel more "epic." Over such a long time, the DM can send some hazards after the players (anything from undead to cultists to maruts) and the remaining party members would have to band together and defend their entranced cleric during that time. They would be less likely to treat resurrection cheaply in such circumstances.

2) Location - make it so raising or resurrection can't just be done anywhere - the remains must be taken to a specific location, such as a holy sanctum, nexus of ley energies, or some other significant place. Getting there may prove a challenge, and will at least delay a character's return to the campaign to prevent the "revolving door afterlife."

3) Balance the Scales - For one to live, another must die. The PCs must send another soul to the underworld in exchange for the one they want back. This can be restricted any number of ways: only a willing volunteer, must be the same alignment/worship same deity as the deceased, must be same race etc. It also has the potential for a lot of drama - raise a paladin by sacrificing an LG creature - how would the paladin react when he/she returns?

4) Coming Back Wrong (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CameBackWrong) - the book lists a number of ways this can go, from purely cosmetic effects, to changes in alignment, skills and abilities, to accumulation of Taint. Your imagination is truly the limit here.

5) Quest for the Dead - a nice little sidequest. Get exotic components; negotiate with the Lord of the Underworld; or even do any of the above.

I think any of those could be a great addition to a campaign.

The_Scourge
2009-11-24, 10:03 AM
I completely remove all spells for raising the dead in one of my campaign worlds, once you die you go off to your reward or your punishment as the case may be. In low to mid levels this can be harsh but I offset this by increasing the amount of damage you take before you die from -10 to -[half your max hp]. I find it works well, and makes Diehard worth a damn.

In another setting resurection was commonplace, described exactly as the phb lays it out. In that world most adventurers were bored rich people looking for a thrill with no consequences similar to what Nero24200 described. Rich people took unneeded risks because the house cleric could raise them before lunch. I'm actually planning on making it a major plot point later on when suddenly raising the dead stops working. Panic among the upper class ensues people send out armies to find their sons and daughters who are out adventuring and bring them back before something happens to them. With mortality finally sinking in, the entire economic and political structure of the world changes. This is all caused by Death, who is fed up with people laughing at him and decides to put the squeeze on people coming back through the veil. I'm really excited to see how the players react to it.

dsmiles
2009-11-24, 10:03 AM
4)Coming Back Wrong (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CameBackWrong) - the book lists a number of ways this can go, from purely cosmetic effects, to changes in alignment, skills and abilities, to accumulation of Taint. Your imagination is truly the limit here.

You said taint...:smallbiggrin:

Zen Master
2009-11-24, 10:22 AM
I hate ressurections. When my character dies, he stays dead. Basically, a heroic death just isn't worth spoiling by being brought back to life. I'd much, much rather create a new hero, than reuse one whose goal has been admirably fulfilled.

At any rate ... a planned death might call for a planned ressurection. I've never gone that way myself, but as a player I can see it work for me. Overwhelmed by the enemy horde, I die - only to be brought back to life weeks later by a lowly cleric with a scroll, who has come in a desperate hope of turning the tide of the events that followed my death. Something like that.

Otherwise, I'd go another way: Everyone dies, and the only way back to life is to literally fight your way out of Hades.

Free-for-all ressurection is absolute crap, in my opinion. However, this point of view is unique to me in my group. Meh :)

Optimystik
2009-11-24, 10:55 AM
I think the goal here is not to remove resurrection entirely, but to make it less of a "crutch" for the players. They should be able to earn it, but it shouldn't be easy. The variants in my previous post can assist with that.


You said taint...:smallbiggrin:

Settle down, Beavis :smalltongue:

Cespenar
2009-11-24, 11:15 AM
Heh, I love that "life for a life" fix, which is also used in some other fantasy works, in different contexts. It's like the underworld is actually ruled by the Ministry of Finance, and has some kind of exchange rate.

"Uh, you said that he was a level 12 elven fighter, right? Okay... round the thief, carry the drow... here. You need to sacrifice one level 6 human aristocrat, three level 2 kobold monks, and for the tax, 14 commoners of any race. Each day that you tarry, however, we add one more commoner to the fee."

Roderick_BR
2009-11-24, 12:50 PM
(...)
It also makes me wonder why NPC XY and Z can't also be brought back? (Same applies in some movies too. For instance, in Transformers)Prime dies in the second live action movie and they go to such lenghs to bring him back. But when Jazz dies in the first they don't seem to care. In the second they seem so insistant that, yes, there is definately a way to bring him back, but the thought seemed completely irrelvent earlier?

In defense of the movie, I think they only find out about the ressurrection thingy, only after Prime dies, since they get it from a not reliable source (a decepticon). It was a well hidden secret (by the decepticons) or a lost knowledge (for the autobots). When they find out about it, they go to great lengths to get it, and it's pretty much a one-use rare item. If they had some left, they'd try to restore all fallen in combat with the decepticons.
Still, it's a good example on how death could be avoided/reversed, but not cheap.

To the OP: Yeah, the revolving door at afterlife is annoying. That's why they made it easier to survive in 4e (more HP, better defenses, spells don't have "Save: No" anymore, you need a crapload of damage after you fall, most powers don't deal that much damage any more), and ressurrection harder (by what I heard, the cleric risks dying if he fail an over complex ritual).

Another point: If ressurrection is so easy, why don't the characters just revive everyone that died in the village? At high enough levels, diamonds would be easy to find (brb, going to the elemental plane of earth), or just craft some epic costless ressurrection.

Some suggestions: rise dead, ressurrection, true ressurrection, and reincarnate can no longer be memorized as normal spells. Instead, they become special rituals that require a whole day of preparation at special consecrated places. The standard 5000 po worth of diamonds still apply, plus 1000 po worth of various other things, like scrolls with holy words, oils, incenses(sp?), whatever, plus any extra cost if ressurrection is used in place of rise dead. The ritual lasts a number of days equal to the number of days (for rise dead) or years (ressurrection) the target remained death, and half this number in clergy men to assist the caster.
To bring a diceased back, the spirit must be willing, and the group needs to undertake a quest (CL equal to the target's CR) to bring him back.
The target character is brought back to life. Any debilitating wound, like damaged internal organs or broken limbs are restored. His HP is restored
up to 1 (rise dead) or full (ressurrection). Any spells, power points, maneuvers, or daily uses are fully spent (rise dead) or remains as it was when the character died (ressurrection).
As an extra penalty, if rise dead is used the character loses 1 class level, or 1 racial dice if he is only level 1. If he is only level 1 and have no racial dice, he can't be rised. He also takes a -2 penalty to Con, for a number of days equal to number of days he remained dead, when the penalty is then removed. A Greater Restoration or Heal removes this penalty earlier.
Ressurrection allows the character to be brought back without level loss. He still takes the -2 penalty to Con, treatable as normal.

True Ressurrection restores a character fully, with all abilities restored as if the character had just taken a full rest (including weekly abilities), without any penalty to level, hit dice, or con. Only deities or other powerful beings can use this power, and even them, they are limited on how often they can do it.

Reincarnate... Dunno, make it a nature ritual like the others spells, or deity-only.

So, on-the-fly complex rituals to make ressurrection harder, but possible, and also gets rid of ressurrection on the battle field (no more phoenix down for you).
To make battles a tad less lethal, you may want to increase the "unconcious threshold" (ie, dying at -10) to something more, maybe increase it by 2 points for every character level, so you die only at -50 at 20th level or something. Or not, let your players get screwed by their errors.

Nero24200
2009-11-24, 01:41 PM
I just really don't see what's wrong with easy resurrection. So you died and were resurrected. That's great. You just wasted 25000 or more gold, a 9th-level spell slot Raise Dead is only 5th level, 5,000 gold worth of items isn't a stretch for a wealthy person.



and a lot of time that could have been spent stopping the BBEGs. I don't see how wasting time to be brought back from the dead does less to stop the BBEG than...you know...actually staying dead.


Every resource you spend on resurrection is one not spent on saving lives. What's more likely to save a town from bandits, a high level PC, or 5,000 gold worth of fortitifications. I'd choose the high level PC any day.


Because death is failure. Do you know how many people are dieing during those 5 days? You think they can all afford resurrection? I get to save my life easy, sure - but as a hero, I care about much more than my own life. The time spent resurrecting is time for the BBEGs to do whatever the hell they want, and that's very, very bad. This hypotetical assumes, of course, that in trying to stop the BBEG you're not fighting to save others? If anything, this method means less death overall, since the characters will be less likely to hesitate.

Rushing into a burning building to save someone trapped inside is heroic, mostly because it's also dangerous. How would having a cleric revive you on death make you less likely to save someone in this fashion?


You really can't picture anything else? Between the possibility of noble enemies with soulbinding assassins I wasn't aware that all assassins were at least 15th level wizards with Trap the Soul prepered. Quite frankly, if you have level 15 characters after you, you're dead anyway, ressurection magic or no.


Srsly, y'all think teleportation or sanitation are less important problems than Raise Dead? Well...yeah, since the game isn't designed under the assumption that teleport and remove disease will be common at high levels.

PinkysBrain
2009-11-24, 01:43 PM
I hate ressurections. When my character dies, he stays dead. Basically, a heroic death just isn't worth spoiling by being brought back to life.
Without plot armor and dice fudging D&D has more very unheroic deaths than heroic ones.

PinkysBrain
2009-11-24, 01:48 PM
I wasn't aware that all assassins were at least 15th level wizards with Trap the Soul prepered.
Complete warrior has that weapon special material which does effectively the same thing.

Tyndmyr
2009-11-24, 01:53 PM
Raise Dead is only 5th level, 5,000 gold worth of items isn't a stretch for a wealthy person.


But a lost level is. Yes, characters may not understand levels, but they understand the effects of them. Weaker, not as skilled. Yeah, that's something to avoid.

True Rez is expensive enough that it will be avoided. So is Raise Dead, just in a different way.

Temet Nosce
2009-11-24, 01:59 PM
Question is the title... in two forms.

How rare do you think resurrection should be?

Does resurrection work on a subject whose time has come 'naturally?' (How does reincarnate (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/reincarnate.htm) work on a subject whose 'time has come?')

Sure, the spells might say they work a certain way, but DMs have the final say, I say.

Nonexistent if you mean the spell based revolving door present in D&D. I only allow one resurrection spell as a DM, and I don't really consider it resurrection per se (It's the spell that brings back someone dead for less than a turn - I always forget its name).

Other than that if the PCs want to resurrect someone, well I'm fine with that. Of course it means they're going to need to drag themselves down into whatever underworld I've dreamt up for this setting and steal back their companion from death (if I'm feeling generous), but hey I'm perfectly fine with them trying.

As far as who resurrection works on when I DM - anyone. Of course if their body failed them and they get resurrected into the same one they're probably just going to die again anyways, but being the generous soul that I am I'd let the PCs quest to create a new one.

Also - I skip penalties for resurrection (well, the typical ones), and may depending on the situation even provide benefits. Given how many hoops I make people jump through I don't see the point.

deuxhero
2009-11-24, 08:38 PM
Wasn't there a spell that costs next to nothing (1000 GP or so) and could res without level loss... within a single round of the creatures death? Far less likely to break the plot or the wallet.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-24, 08:45 PM
(It's the spell that brings back someone dead for less than a turn - I always forget its name).
The closest thing I know of is Revenance. If your target has a mostly intact corpse and has died within a few rounds, you can bring them back for 1 minute/CL for revenge.


Wasn't there a spell that costs next to nothing (1000 GP or so) and could res without level loss... within a single round of the creatures death? Far less likely to break the plot or the wallet.

Revivify, which works only if the body is intact as per Raise Dead - no guarantee (so less likely to break plot). There's also Last Breath, but that is much easier to abuse.

Both from Spell Compendium.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-11-24, 08:54 PM
The closest thing I know of is Revenance. If your target has a mostly intact corpse and has died within a few rounds, you can bring them back for 1 minute/CL for revenge.



Revivify, which works only if the body is intact as per Raise Dead - no guarantee (so less likely to break plot). There's also Last Breath, but that is much easier to abuse.

Both from Spell Compendium.Fun fact, Revenance and Revivify can be combined to get past the "1 round" problem with Revivify.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-24, 08:54 PM
Raise Dead is only 5th level, 5,000 gold worth of items isn't a stretch for a wealthy person.
If you have an intact body, you've basically won conclusively. You deserve the opportunity to recover.


I don't see how wasting time to be brought back from the dead does less to stop the BBEG than...you know...actually staying dead.
The point is that you died. Sure, you can mitigate the drawback by being resurrected, but you died. You tried to stop the BBEG and failed, and lost all your loot, and a level, making your next confrontation even more unlikely to succeed. Death is still a massive setback, revolving-door or not, and


What's more likely to save a town from bandits, a high level PC, or 5,000 gold worth of fortitifications. I'd choose the high level PC any day.
A high level PC and 5000 gp of fortifications is easily the superior choice. If you died, then resurrection is the best option. Sort of like how if you're a cleric 3/wizard 3, mystic theurge is the best option. But it's still a bad option. Far better to never die in the first place, easy resurrection or not.


This hypotetical assumes, of course, that in trying to stop the BBEG you're not fighting to save others? If anything, this method means less death overall, since the characters will be less likely to hesitate.

Rushing into a burning building to save someone trapped inside is heroic, mostly because it's also dangerous. How would having a cleric revive you on death make you less likely to save someone in this fashion?
I have no idea what you're talking about, which makes me deathly afraid that I'm communicating similarly unclearly. Let me try to state myself more clearly.

Question: If you have a cleric friend, why fear death? Why not just attack the evil guys over and over again with a contingent resurrection?
Answer: You should fear death because it's a setback, and the people you're fighting to save will be unprotected while you're waiting to come back to life. You shouldn't attack the evil guys over and over because that's an inefficient use of resources, and if you don't efficiently use resources the bad guys might win the war.


Quite frankly, if you have level 15 characters after you, you're dead anyway, ressurection magic or no.
And there are level 15 characters running around and making enemies. If they can perma-kill people so easily, then your verisimilitude issues are solved.

Akal Saris
2009-11-24, 09:12 PM
If I was a player looking to game the system, I'd totally choose to make a new char instead of rezing.

a) Your party doesn't lose money from rezing.
b) Your party gets to loot your dead PC body.
c) You get to bring in a new char with new gear (or a clone of your dead PC, hello Bob the Fighter IV). If you're playing 3e or 4e, your new char's level is probably no more than 1 lower than the rest anyways and you can catch up pretty easily in 3e.

This is why as a DM I try to make resurrection and related spells relatively easy to accomplish with PCs. I've had too many PCs who have died and elected to make their new character a near-copy of their old one's character sheet, only with a different name and personality (OK, and sometimes sex, race, and alignment). I'd rather just not disrupt the plot and have relatively painless resurrections.

Does it destroy the believability of the game world? Depends on the campaign setting. In my most lethal game, it's Dragonlance right during the War of the Lance, and the PCs are on the bad guys' side - so the gods are much more willing than "usual" to break the rules and bring their servants back from the dead without level lost or gold - but at the same time, the PCs are increasingly indebted to their evil deities. For that game I also use the Heroes of Horror rules on taint (heh, heh, heh - taint), so there is also a minor consequence in that, though it's also a bit of a benefit as well.

Really, in most of my games, I want TPKs to be a consequence, but not individual PC death - especially in a high level, high-powered game where a lot of fights are "rocket tag." There should be a penalty, even if it's just the other PCs mocking you. I don't think losing con or experience is the right kind of penalty though, since that makes me feel doubly used, and I'd rather have the aforementioned Bob the Fighter IV with his full 18 con instead. I'd prefer it if the caster had to rest for a few days (2E!), or if the raised person had to perform a single service for the caster in return, or something.

Lord of Syntax
2009-11-24, 09:32 PM
In my games, it is just Plane Shift! Locate Creature! Greater Teleport! Plane Shift! to get someone back.

Temet Nosce
2009-11-25, 04:16 AM
Wasn't there a spell that costs next to nothing (1000 GP or so) and could res without level loss... within a single round of the creatures death? Far less likely to break the plot or the wallet.


Revivify, which works only if the body is intact as per Raise Dead - no guarantee (so less likely to break plot). There's also Last Breath, but that is much easier to abuse.

Yeah, sorry was referring to Revivify. No idea why I phrased it that way.

Doc Roc
2009-11-25, 04:38 AM
I think it should be readily available, and not incur level loss. It costs enough that it's sufficiently punishing as is.

Milskidasith
2009-11-25, 04:50 AM
The problem with all these resurrection things is that, even if it makes sense fluff wise to not have a revolving door afterlife, it certainly isn't fun to be the dead guy when all the epic raise dead rituals are flying about. Or the cleric's, for that matter, if he's involved in this.

DM: OK, it's Joe's turn, what do you do.
Joe: I slash the cultist. Woo, another one dead.
DM: Fine, only a few dozen left trying to bash down the doors of the monastery. Steve, what do you do.
Steve: I'm casting the raise dead ritual, what do you think I'm going to do?
DM: Fine, steve waves his hands around and continues chanting. How does anybody memorize a week long ritual, anyway?
Bill: So... how long until my guy is back up, again?
DM: A session or so.
Bill: Can I just go get some food and watch TV?

dsmiles
2009-11-25, 05:04 AM
I think it should be readily available, and not incur level loss. It costs enough that it's sufficiently punishing as is.

No. A measly couple thousand gold for a life? What are you smokin'? Let's see...you die...I lose some gold...you come back with no level loss? Where's the incentive to not die? Adventurers can always get more gold.

I personally have left resurrection in the hands of the gods. Sure, a powerful enough cleric can prepare the True Resurrection prayer, but it doesn't mean that the gods will grant it.
Clerics draw their power from the gods. At any time, the gods could just say, "No, you can't do that," and it's perfectly acceptable. You're only getting rezzed if the gods aren't done with you yet, or the remainder of the party completes some mega-quest to prove that they need you. Better to just roll a new character, and get on with it.

Zen Master
2009-11-25, 08:44 AM
Without plot armor and dice fudging D&D has more very unheroic deaths than heroic ones.

Never happens. As a player, I never do anything that would not lead to a heroic death should I fail at it - and as a GM I would never kill a character in a non-heroic fashion. I'd much rather fudge some rolls so I can kill him properly later.

Optimystik
2009-11-25, 09:11 AM
Never happens. As a player, I never do anything that would not lead to a heroic death should I fail at it - and as a GM I would never kill a character in a non-heroic fashion. I'd much rather fudge some rolls so I can kill him properly later.

You just proved his point, you know.

dsmiles
2009-11-25, 09:15 AM
You just proved his point, you know.

Aren't some people funny like that?

Optimystik
2009-11-25, 09:46 AM
Aren't some people funny like that?

If by "funny" you mean "tragic" then yes.


DM: OK, it's Joe's turn, what do you do.
Joe: I slash the cultist. Woo, another one dead.
DM: Fine, only a few dozen left trying to bash down the doors of the monastery. Steve, what do you do.
Steve: I'm casting the raise dead ritual, what do you think I'm going to do?
DM: Fine, steve waves his hands around and continues chanting. How does anybody memorize a week long ritual, anyway?
Bill: So... how long until my guy is back up, again?
DM: A session or so.
Bill: Can I just go get some food and watch TV?

You raise an interesting (and amusing) point. The solution, naturally, is to give the dead character some tactical decision-making. Here's what I would do if I took the "long ritual" approach.

Initiating the resurrection ritual weakens the barrier between the realm of the dead and the realm of the living. The dead character's spirit is able to manifest in very limited form on the Material Plane for as long as the ritual remains uninterrupted.

While the dead character's spirit is in the world, he is capable of either accelerating the ritual or bolstering his companions. While he can start either of these actions as a free action, channeling his spirit energy in this way taxes him, and he requires a full round to recover in between uses.

Ritual Acceleration: For every round the spirit concentrates along with the ritual caster, 10 minutes are shaved off of the casting time. Thus, concentrating for 6 rounds would shorten the ritual by an hour.

Alternatively, the length of the ritual may result in danger for the party - perhaps they have attracted the attention of a Marut, who wishes to enforce the laws of death; perhaps the ritual can only be performed on ground sacred to a cult or other religious order. Whichever the case, the rest of the party may end up in combat at some point. The spirit cannot participate in combat, but his presence can boost his companions.

Bolster Flesh - For every round he concentrates on the subject, the spirit's presence provides a +1 bonus to AC and fortitude saving throws for the character so bolstered.

Temper Spirit - For every round he concentrates on the subject, the spirit's presence provides a +4 bonus to Concentration and Spellcraft checks, as well as Will saving throws for the character whose spirit is so tempered.

Sharpen Mind - For every round he concentrates on the subject, the spirit's presence provides a +2 bonus to all skill checks and a +1 bonus to Reflex saving throws.

He thus has the choice between helping the defenders, and speeding up the ritual. Towards the end of the ritual, he has to decide if he can help more by returning to life sooner and leaping into the fray, or bolstering his companions while delaying his return. That should be enough to keep the player engaged during a long rez.

Oslecamo
2009-11-25, 10:00 AM
No. A measly couple thousand gold for a life? What are you smokin'? Let's see...you die...I lose some gold...you come back with no level loss? Where's the incentive to not die? Adventurers can always get more gold.


Except that at higher levels, monsters start having nasty anti-ressurection abilities. Soon you'll need to begin burning wishes, and after some time not even the gods will be able to help bring your friend back from the atomizing curse of absoulte anihilation.

dsmiles
2009-11-25, 10:08 AM
Except that at higher levels, monsters start having nasty anti-ressurection abilities. Soon you'll need to begin burning wishes, and after some time not even the gods will be able to help bring your friend back from the atomizing curse of absoulte anihilation.

And this is bad why, exactly? Don't forget I'm on the anti-rezz team here.

Foryn Gilnith
2009-11-25, 12:13 PM
It's not bad, but it's a point in favor (sort of) of the current system. Resurrection makes death cheap, supposedly, except for all of the anti-resurrection abilities that make death very painful. That's your incentive to not die. That and the fact that the BBEGs are having fun while you're coming back to life, because you were stupid enough to die even if resurrection was available.

oxybe
2009-11-25, 01:10 PM
I personally have left resurrection in the hands of the gods. Sure, a powerful enough cleric can prepare the True Resurrection prayer, but it doesn't mean that the gods will grant it.
Clerics draw their power from the gods. At any time, the gods could just say, "No, you can't do that," and it's perfectly acceptable. You're only getting rezzed if the gods aren't done with you yet, or the remainder of the party completes some mega-quest to prove that they need you. Better to just roll a new character, and get on with it.

let's be honest here, this isn't leaving it to the gods, this is DM fiat on an assumed resource at the party's disposal for whatever reason (i don't mean to be snarky i just don't know any other way to phrase this, sorry).

i don't mind it so much as long as it's clearly stated at the start of the campaign, but thrown in without warning is bad manners, IMO

as for the incentive not to die:
-no immediate access to a high level cleric, so you might not come alive soon. in some settings, like eberron, you just can't accidentally bump into a level 15 NPC without a heaping dose of DM interference... heck a 10th level one is pretty darned hard to come by.

-no time to stop and cast (either on a tight schedule "the dragonlord won't wait for us before using his deathlaser on the town of Helplesspeasantsville" or high chance of interruption "the dragonlord's minions won't wait for us and are beating down our door as we sp-OWWW THEY HAVE OGRES WITH SPIKEY CLUBS")

-possible that you may have to sell your current gear to pay for the revival, setting you back a bit. 25000gp for a true rez is still quite a bit of money that you might not have lying around. assured money later doesn't matter when you need that money now. if you need to have your buddies hawk your weapon or armor to pay for it....

-level loss & reduction of power: if you go for the cheaper rez, you're weaker then the group, and you face a greater chance of dying then you did when you died (less you died at a dead level and only gained skill points and HP. at which point you're looking forward to the dead level... again. whee!).

Tyndmyr
2009-11-25, 01:49 PM
No. A measly couple thousand gold for a life? What are you smokin'? Let's see...you die...I lose some gold...you come back with no level loss? Where's the incentive to not die? Adventurers can always get more gold.

I personally have left resurrection in the hands of the gods. Sure, a powerful enough cleric can prepare the True Resurrection prayer, but it doesn't mean that the gods will grant it.
Clerics draw their power from the gods. At any time, the gods could just say, "No, you can't do that," and it's perfectly acceptable. You're only getting rezzed if the gods aren't done with you yet, or the remainder of the party completes some mega-quest to prove that they need you. Better to just roll a new character, and get on with it.

DM fiat is bad. DM fiat that results in your character sheet being shredded is extra bad.

Ressurection is already costly. True rez, much more so. Yes, 4e does tend to trivialize death, but 3.5 really does mete out penalties. Even one death has a noticable effect on wealth until well into epic levels. 25k cash on hand isn't chump change.

Add in the penalties mentioned from others due to already existing means of denying ressurection(blowing thousands on a failed ressurection SUCKS!), and it's certainly not free. I've seen players opt to reroll at a level below the party rather than get revived. That's a good sign the penalty is significant.

There's no need for additional penalties.