You're dead. Now what?

[Quertus]

this... is a very, very, VERY specific set of requirements.

First of all the player being so unwilling to compromise. and he would only accept to play a weak character that would stand no chance with the rest of the party.

and then the game going on for so long without a glitch, and without this unwillingness to compromise being challenged earlier.

and then you die and can't resurrect. very rare, this one. nobody wants to play a campaign where they could lose the character they invested so much time and effort into. so normally a campaign either has resurrection available, or you can't really die, or it's intended to be far shorter.

personally, though, i'd look for some other way to get back. we discussed a similar proposition in my party (resurrection gets harder and harder, there would be no big deal bringing in a new character but it would be hard to insert into the party, and i'm very fond of my current character). we are more inclined to have the wizard make a sort of sentient golem with some of my most iconic belongings amnd powered by my life force . that way, i could still use basically the same character

I'm guessing you're not an oldschool grognard. Back in my day, that was the norm. So it's not really as totally oddball as you're envisioning it to be. Just… outdated.

[Kane0]

I'm guessing you're not an oldschool grognard. Back in my day, that was the norm. So it's not really as totally oddball as you're envisioning it to be. Just… outdated.

Wasn't it more across the board though? You woudn't often come across a situation where everybody leveled up into the teens before *one* character perished and rerolled at 1st, you'd have party members dropping off all along the way and having one survive all that was the more rare achievement.

[Tanarii]

Why can't you play a substantially weaker character? If the game is designed with this as even a remote possibility you should need much less xp to level than they do and should probably catch up to one or two levels behind relatively quickly. Start off as the apprentice/squire/caddie and grow into your own as you're thrown in the deep end.

Some systems, or some editions of some systems, don't support that very well. You end up with the classic problem of having Black Widow and Hawkeye on the one hand and Thor & Hulk on the other, all in a single party, and trying to figure out how to challenge them all without killing or otherwise marginalizing the first two or blatantly obvious deux ex machina / railroading.

Obviously I'm using combat potential for this comparison, but for a no-combat oriented game it might be like having Max Smart in the same party with Sherlock Holmes.

Or possibly d) run a 1st level character who wouldn't just die.

Or run one that dies over and over again and not care too much that you're so outclassed. Done that, it's definitely a valid option if you can handle it as a player.

The bigger problem with that IMX is other players complaining about having to carry the bag and do all the work, while you milk whatever the XP-equivalent is.

I'm guessing you're not an oldschool grognard. Back in my day, that was the norm. So it's not really as totally oddball as you're envisioning it to be. Just… outdated.

Wasn't it more across the board though? You woudn't often come across a situation where everybody leveled up into the teens before *one* character perished and rerolled at 1st, you'd have party members dropping off all along the way and having one survive all that was the more rare achievement.

As I understand it, at large gaming groups (especially universities) the standard was for people to put together groups of about the same level and go do level appropriate things together. So if you gained levels, you'd just play that character less frequently until other players In other words, pretty much like open-table official play is today.

Either that or mid to high levels would bring along a couple of low levels and just power level them up. Same behavior happens in MMOs for that matter. What's weird is if people do this in modern TTRPs, IMX people complain about it being "too videogamey", as if it's violating some kind of TTRPG tradition.

[MrStabby]

Time travel... kind of.

Start at the higher level.

Give your character a cool backstory involving their old party and their heroic adventures (vaguely defined).

Get buy-in from your group to run another campaign that kind of matches you backstory after this one.

Play a lower level version of your current character in that backstory.



You play all the lower power elements, it is earned. It just happens in a different order.

[Satinavian]

I would try to find a compromise :

So... resurrection is impossible, but what about a new undead career ?
Or maybe you start at 0 XP but get huge temporary blessings that gradually become weaker as you catch up to the party ?
Or maybe the system allows significantly more powerful monster races and picking one of those at 0 xp would be more in line with the power of the party ? (3.x has ECL other systems have other things)

if a compromise was not possible i would consider if my desire is important enough to leave the group and act accordingly.

[LordCdrMilitant]

Let's say you're a player that strongly believes that if you haven't gained levels (or character points, or whatever) through play, you haven't earned them. And you're playing a game where the main party is far enough ahead on the power curve that you'll get massacred if you bring a brand new character to the table. And you just invested a year of your life in the game.

And you just die. Heroically, totally in character, as a consequence of your own decisions. Resurrection isn't a possibility. The DM tells you to bring a character of the same level / point total next session ...

Do you:
A) bite the bullet and accept.
B) negotiate for a lower level / point total that makes your character able to contribute, but eases the guilt somewhat.
C) tell them no thanks, and quit the game.
D) same as C, but yearn for the days when henchmen would be leveling along with your main character. Just in case.
E) other. (egs - Flip the table, Nerd Rage, Vent on Forums, steal the players for your own campaign, meditate on a solution, eat a Banana.)

I mean, you did earn the XP to match the level of your previous character, as your previous character.

[Quertus]

The bigger problem with that IMX is other players complaining about having to carry the bag and do all the work, while you milk whatever the XP-equivalent is.

If their biggest problem is that they're getting too much spotlight, then they shouldn't complain. Now, I don't like characters whose contribution is negative, who are actively sabotaging the campaign. But even that is acceptable at some tables, and this isn't even that.

[Tanarii]

I mean, you did earn the XP to match the level of your previous character, as your previous character.

Right But XP is character specific.

Personal belief here. But even trickle down character XP in character trees bothers me, since those 'reserve' characters aren't present in the adventure. Henchmen are a different matter, they're present and get a share of the XP. And let's not even get started on giving XP to absent players/characters.

If their biggest problem is that they're getting too much spotlight, then they shouldn't complain. Now, I don't like characters whose contribution is negative, who are actively sabotaging the campaign. But even that is acceptable at some tables, and this isn't even that.

its not about spotlight. It's mechanical.
Keeping a lower level characters alive uses resources that could otherwise be used offensively, they can easily cause the group to perform worse than it would without then, ie they are a mechanical negative . And they get a full share of XP, while contributing very little, which is also a mechanical negative. That bothers some people.

It's exactly why many people used to eschew henchmen. Because when it's not another player, altruism and feeling like sacrificing for another person goes out the window.

[GrayDeath]

Time travel... kind of.

Start at the higher level.

Give your character a cool backstory involving their old party and their heroic adventures (vaguely defined).

Get buy-in from your group to run another campaign that kind of matches you backstory after this one.

Play a lower level version of your current character in that backstory.



You play all the lower power elements, it is earned. It just happens in a different order.

This is the correct answer for the very few people who are in said very specific situation and have "unchangeable" preferences as listed.

All others, just build another char youw ant to play, and enjoy. ^^

[Asmotherion]

Probably bring an NPC from my backstory as a PC. Probably a Mentor or Relative who has gained levels since old PC saw them.

[Vaern]

If your character is to begin at the same level as the rest of the party and you're determined to maintain the idea that levels must be earned by the character, then just say that your character has earned those levels "off screen" while the PC party has been off on their own adventure.
Ask your DM what's going on in other nearby areas in your campaign setting. Your new character may have been solving some major crisis in a nearby city with his old party before the "real" PC party made it into town. Note these exploits in your character's backstory. Perhaps you can even arrange for the DM to have an NPC or two mention the exploits of this adventurer while they are searching for your old character's replacement. Depending on your level, your reputation should precede you.
The spell Legend Lore defines any character of 11th level or higher, as well as the equipment they use, creatures they encounter, or places where significant events involving them occur, as being legendary or of legendary importance. At that level or higher, your backstory should almost certainly contain at least one exploit significant enough for that the party might learn of it through a decent knowledge or bardic lore check.

[zinycor]

Look, what you do is this:

bring that idea to your gaming table, maybe they will agree with you and rule something to your liking.

If not. you either agree to play by the rules at the table or find another table.

[Delta]

If your character is to begin at the same level as the rest of the party and you're determined to maintain the idea that levels must be earned by the character, then just say that your character has earned those levels "off screen" while the PC party has been off on their own adventure.
Ask your DM what's going on in other nearby areas in your campaign setting. Your new character may have been solving some major crisis in a nearby city with his old party before the "real" PC party made it into town. Note these exploits in your character's backstory. Perhaps you can even arrange for the DM to have an NPC or two mention the exploits of this adventurer while they are searching for your old character's replacement. Depending on your level, your reputation should precede you.
The spell Legend Lore defines any character of 11th level or higher, as well as the equipment they use, creatures they encounter, or places where significant events involving them occur, as being legendary or of legendary importance. At that level or higher, your backstory should almost certainly contain at least one exploit significant enough for that the party might learn of it through a decent knowledge or bardic lore check.

While I love giving characters, especially those who join later on, a background linked to the campaign so it's interesting to the group, I'm not sure how that would solve the OPs problem. He still wouldn't have "earned" those levels in any way in that sense.

[Quertus]

its not about spotlight. It's mechanical.
Keeping a lower level characters alive uses resources that could otherwise be used offensively, they can easily cause the group to perform worse than it would without then, ie they are a mechanical negative . And they get a full share of XP, while contributing very little, which is also a mechanical negative. That bothers some people.

It's exactly why many people used to eschew henchmen. Because when it's not another player, altruism and feeling like sacrificing for another person goes out the window.

You mean, you play with people who actually expense resources keeping low-level characters alive, rather than letting them sink or swim "survival of the fittest" style?

Hmmm… I'm too senile to remember for sure, but I'm not remembering much of that. More "well, I was going to DMM Persist Mass Lesser Vigor the entire party anyway, so I may as well include you, too", and, "cool, an excuse to show off how much we've grown by ROFLstomping some low-level threats that used to give us problems. Let's go back and give those kobolds what for. Wait, why is Tucker smiling?".

But, as a ****, I'll just say that parties that are too dumb to invest in their future survival deserve to die, "survival of the fittest" style. So, if the players are annoyed that they have to put any effort into getting a powerful teammate, then they deserve a TPK.

[Tanarii]

While I love giving characters, especially those who join later on, a background linked to the campaign so it's interesting to the group, I'm not sure how that would solve the OPs problem. He still wouldn't have "earned" those levels in any way in that sense.

I think the key there is the post stated "earned by the character". That means it doesn't have to happen in game, it can have already happened historically. Or as part of a montage.

In other words, the opposite of "earned by the player", or at least "earned by the player at this table", in which you can move those XP/levels to any new character you bring to that table.

As opposed to "earned by the player for that specific character during play", which is what my OP meant. Possibly with an additional "at that specific table", or not depending on if it was official play or a cooperative new DM allowing a character port.

I just, like, assumed all that subtext was the default/normal and everyone else would automatically see it too, because of course I did. ;)

[zinycor]

So, have you tried talking to your GM about it?

[LordCdrMilitant]

I think the key there is the post stated "earned by the character". That means it doesn't have to happen in game, it can have already happened historically. Or as part of a montage.

In other words, the opposite of "earned by the player", or at least "earned by the player at this table", in which you can move those XP/levels to any new character you bring to that table.

As opposed to "earned by the player for that specific character during play", which is what my OP meant. Possibly with an additional "at that specific table", or not depending on if it was official play or a cooperative new DM allowing a character port.

I just, like, assumed all that subtext was the default/normal and everyone else would automatically see it too, because of course I did. ;)

I usually go with:
Players replacing characters get XP equal to the average of party XP. They get starting infamy/influence and starting corruption/insanity.
New players get XP equal to about 80% the average of the rest of the party's XP. They get infamy/influence equal to the lowest in the party, and corruption/insanity equal to the party average.
Absent players don't get XP from sessions they aren't part of.

For D&D/PF, and other systems that have levels, I usually just go with replacement characters and new characters are all at the same level of the rest of the party, and the party all levels together, absent or not.

[Darth Tom]

It's not unreasonable: it's an approach to roleplaying.

I totally get it. Bringing in a new character can feel cheap, unearned, and like you're playing an empty statblock devoid of personality, not the friendyou had before. But I think the problem is a psychological one as much as a gaming one.

That character was a year of your life, a year of high adventure with friends. Now they are just... gone. You can't get that back. It might sound odd, but it is a shock, and you probably feel there is something missing. Ultimately, you are feeling grief for the loss of your avatar in that world.

I don't think it's reasonable to just tell a grieving person to get over it: it takes time to process these things, all the potential being gone and the good times never coming back. This is where the whole table needs to get together and support each other: with such a history of adventure, this may be tough for some of them to handle, too.

Maybe don't take any big decisions right away. If possible, see if the party can retreat from danger, hold a funeral for their friend, remember all those adventures and times, and properly role-play this stuff in character. During this time, maybe try playing your character's ghost or something, so you can interact and say goodbye to your friends. Ask them (in-character) what they want to do next. Ideally, you want this to reach a point where your character can depart at peace for their well-earned afterlife, and where the surviving members are comfortable with what they have decided to do. As you should be as well.

I'm not going to say what the solution will be. That's down to you, your friends, and your DM (hopefully I'm repeating myself there). Walking away may be the right option for you: I hope it isn't because it's a shame to lose a good friend and split a good table. But I've been in situations where I felt the right choice was to walk away from the things which gave my life purpose. Sometimes you can carry on, if sad, other times you need to start anew.

Best of luck.