PDA

View Full Version : About backup characters [3.5]



true_shinken
2010-12-25, 01:53 PM
Now and again I see people talking about backup characters in case their current one dies. I just can't wrap my head around this concept, though. We have ressurrection magic in D&D and considering tha standard fire forged friends (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FireForgedFriends) trend in fantasy at large, just abandoning your recently deceased mate for a new, conviniently leveled nobody looks really really weird.
What are your thoughts on this?

Amphetryon
2010-12-25, 02:02 PM
Thoughts on possible explanations:


Not all games play at levels where Raise Dead and its stronger cousins are able to be cast, let alone afforded, by the characters.

In cases where this isn't true, there are some situations where the pacing of the game couples with the timing of the demise to make raising a character a tactically difficult decision.

Some DMs house-rule additional limitations on raising characters in the interest of creating and preserving a grittier atmosphere than the default standard.

Finally, because coming up with characters is often considered a mini-game in itself (see the IC challenges for proof :smallbiggrin:), some players would rather go with their spiffy new idea if given the opportunity.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-12-25, 02:21 PM
The only game my players have ever made backup characters for was the most recent campaign, a level 3-7 "old school" dungeon crawl wherein raising would have required a trip back to the base camp (highly impractical). Each of the four players had a primary character and two backups each, and even then only 2 out the 12 characters left the dungeon at the end of the campaign.

In all of my other games, the only reason for my players to make "backup" characters is if they're anticipating making a heroic sacrifice of some sort from which coming back wouldn't be economically feasible for a few levels, or if they've gotten bored of the character and want to go out with a bang and try a dramatically different character instead of going with a behind-the-scenes rebuild.

Techsmart
2010-12-25, 02:39 PM
Thoughts on possible explanations:


Not all games play at levels where Raise Dead and its stronger cousins are able to be cast, let alone afforded, by the characters.

In cases where this isn't true, there are some situations where the pacing of the game couples with the timing of the demise to make raising a character a tactically difficult decision.

Some DMs house-rule additional limitations on raising characters in the interest of creating and preserving a grittier atmosphere than the default standard.

Finally, because coming up with characters is often considered a mini-game in itself (see the IC challenges for proof :smallbiggrin:), some players would rather go with their spiffy new idea if given the opportunity.


This.
I, for example, play in games where the party rarely exceeds the single digits, and the dm often carries tolls with resurrection very heavily. Also, some characters don't WANT to come back, which is very possible especially in good aligned afterlives. It also allows the player the ability to experiment if their current character can be switched. Sometimes, players will experiment with certain builds to see if they can make it work. Also, some players, myself included, play with groups who cannot or will not take any raise dead spells, for one reason or another. Dm's could also run a campaign where if a hero was raised from the dead, it raised one villain of equal HD as well (bad motivator on the raise and I have seen this done) There are lots of reasons why a back-up character can be justified.
I also keep backup characters just in case a campaign gets canceled that week, and we decide to do a backup campaign. No prep time.

Greyfell
2010-12-25, 02:52 PM
I have a feeling my recent post might have kicked this one off. For my group, it's the cost of it (overall). Ressurect takes a lot of resources away from gearing up further in party. In the specific campaign I'm playing now, we also have time/finding the high enough level person constraints as well.

true_shinken
2010-12-25, 02:56 PM
I have a feeling my recent post might have kicked this one off. For my group, it's the cost of it (overall). Ressurect takes a lot of resources away from gearing up further in party. In the specific campaign I'm playing now, we also have time/finding the high enough level person constraints as well.

This is a very very cynical view of the world, isn't it? Returning one of your closest friends to life is always worth it in my book. But I actually expect parties to engage in fire forged friendship. Maybe most don't?




Also, some characters don't WANT to come back, which is very possible especially in good aligned afterlives.
If you're talking about mercenaries, sure. If you're talking about adventurers on some kind of quest... not.

It also allows the player the ability to experiment if their current character can be switched. Sometimes, players will experiment with certain builds to see if they can make it work.
Yeah, I wanted to go that. I enjoy fiddling with the rules, creating builds and such. But I also think the story is far more important than this. After two instances of 'he died, you just managed to find another 9th-level guy at the inn, oh btw you trust him completely' it grows more and more silly, IMHO.

There are lots of reasons why a back-up character can be justified.
Of course there are. That's what the thread is about.

I also keep backup characters just in case a campaign gets canceled that week, and we decide to do a backup campaign. No prep time.
That sounds like a very good idea, but it's hard to be prepared, if only because of starting level.

Dr.Epic
2010-12-25, 02:57 PM
Sometimes you can't resurrect right away because you're not high enough level, don't have the gold for materials, or simply can't do it right now because you're in the middle of nowhere. Also, the body could have been completely destroyed. Besides, sometimes people get tired of their characters.

jpreem
2010-12-25, 03:49 PM
[QUOTE=true_shinken;10038585]This is a very very cynical view of the world, isn't it? Returning one of your closest friends to life is always worth it in my book. But I actually expect parties to engage in fire forged friendship. Maybe most don't?



Returning your closest friend to life might not always be worth it even if you love him dearly. In lots of campaign worlds ESPECIALLY if you love him dearly - you know that he is much bettter off in his well deserved afterlife and dragging him out of there just to finish a mission ( and well you know you got this helpful new guy anyway) or just to please YOU is the selfish thing to do.
Main thing for me is that it is quite usually awkwardly played - (anybody seen "The Gamers" - "Hi I'm Magellan the travelling wizard, I have noticed that your groups seems lacking a mage"

true_shinken
2010-12-25, 03:59 PM
Returning your closest friend to life might not always be worth it even if you love him dearly. In lots of campaign worlds ESPECIALLY if you love him dearly - you know that he is much bettter off in his well deserved afterlife and dragging him out of there just to finish a mission ( and well you know you got this helpful new guy anyway) or just to please YOU is the selfish thing to do.
How do you even know he is a pleasant afterlife? Except for Paladins, it's kinda hard to know a dude's alignment the whole time.

Main thing for me is that it is quite usually awkwardly played - (anybody seen "The Gamers" - "Hi I'm Magellan the travelling wizard, I have noticed that your groups seems lacking a mage"
Yeah, I agree. That's why I tend to dislike it.

Piedmon_Sama
2010-12-25, 04:37 PM
My only problem with backup characters is eventually I'll want to play it so bad I won't mind getting my current one killed.

Working new player characters into an established group is almost always awkward, unless you devote a large part of the story to it (which you can rarely do without stopping the campaign in its tracks). This is just one of those things, like when your prize BBEG gets sniped, stunned and torn to pieces in one round, that a DM just has to live with. An RPG storyline isn't like a novel or anime and IME you don't get far trying to make it conform to that standard.

Callista
2010-12-25, 04:51 PM
I like having backup characters.

1. It make Resurrection more special and lets you put restrictions on it, so that death is actually a major event.
2. It lets you use risky or even suicidal strategies if your character would do so, without cheapening the resulting death by immediately coming back, or being "punished" for it by having to sit out the rest of the session making a new character. This comes up more often than you would think: Stupid or foolhardy characters; characters working at cross-purposes to the party; double agents for the BBEG; Good-aligned types with the tendency to pull heroic sacrifices; Evil-aligned types that the party will kill if they're found out. Having a backup frees you to let the character die when it is appropriate for him to do so.
3. It lets you play low-level characters that can't access resurrection magic without your DM having to deus ex machina a resurrection for you.
4. It lets you retire your current character and bring in a new one if it is appropriate for him to leave the party, instead of awkwardly staying when there's no in-character reason to stick around.

I honestly am not very fond of repeated resurrection magic. Death of a PC should be heroic (or antiheroic) and cinematic, not just a temporary inconvenience. I suppose at higher levels, "destruction of the soul" or "permanent death" takes the place of reversible death; but at lower levels--below the mid-teens--it should be a major event.

Tips for working a new PC into the party:
--Have the party rescue him as a prisoner in their next dungeon.
--Have the party hire him for a share of the treasure.
--Religious characters can be given visions or omens that point them toward the party; magical characters can do the same through divination.
--If traveling in a hostile environment, have them meet someone else who is going their way and make it logical to join together for mutual protection.
--If the new PC has a grudge against their enemy, it makes a lot of sense for them to team up.

Adamantrue
2010-12-25, 05:46 PM
I think there has to be a balance between "cheapening" the bond between members of a party, and trivializing character death into what is more or less an inconvenience. If there is no real risk, there is no real reward.

true_shinken
2010-12-25, 07:02 PM
I think there has to be a balance between "cheapening" the bond between members of a party, and trivializing character death into what is more or less an inconvenience. If there is no real risk, there is no real reward.
Actually, as OOTS aptly shows, death is not 'just an inconvenience' in D&D. You still need to:
a) get the body
b) find a spellcaster to cast the spell
c) pay for the spellcasting and the material component
That's good sidequest material, even.

But I agree - finding the middle ground, as usual, is the best answer.

Amphetryon
2010-12-25, 07:05 PM
Actually, as OOTS aptly shows, death is not 'just an inconvenience' in D&D. You still need to:
a) get the body
b) find a spellcaster to cast the spell
c) pay for the spellcasting and the material component
That's good sidequest material, even.

But I agree - finding the middle ground, as usual, is the best answer.

Without a backup character, that sidequest means one player sits on his hands and does nothing for at least one session, doesn't it?

true_shinken
2010-12-25, 07:13 PM
Without a backup character, that sidequest means one player sits on his hands and does nothing for at least one session, doesn't it?
Hm, maybe he could... go to the movies or... uh... hang out with his other friends?
Yeah, I admit it, you got me. :smallbiggrin:
Temporary backup characters looks like a good idea, specially if it's an NPC taking the spotlight for a session or something. The problem is introduction - if the guy just comes out of nowhere, it sounds pretty silly.

AslanCross
2010-12-25, 08:01 PM
I only allow it inasmuch as it makes sense in the current state of the campaign. In my last campaign, I let them replace their characters if they died until about 3/4 of the way through it. Once we hit the latter part of chapter 4, I could no longer allow it, let alone the last chapter.

In the last chapter I simply told them: You better play smart, because stupid deaths at this point will no longer be tolerated. You're in the middle of the Fiery Death Mountains in the Middle of the Middle of Nowhere in Nowhereland. Another 10th-level character will simply not appear.