Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - Overuse of Clone and Raise Dead?
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    Overuse of Clone and Raise Dead?
    Author Message
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:24 am  
    Overuse of Clone and Raise Dead?

    Curious as to the opinions about the use of resurrection and clones.
    On the board: Song of Fire & Ice Series. I was surprised by the anger of posters about the resurrection of characters as it rendered the events of the world pointless.

    It got me thinking, GH has a rich history but does the (liberal) use of raise dead and clones in the recent material harm the "grittiness" of the game world. The finality of death does add atmosphere to the travails of the players and excessive use diminishes the sense of danger.

    How do you balance the use of these spells....

    Just wondering....
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 03, 2011 11:36 am  

    Personally, I prefer not to lose a character of my own permanently, but that is because I have such little time to play D&D that I can't replace a character often. If I had more time to play, I'd have more fun knowing that a character could be permanently lost.

    I let my players decide when I DM. If they think it epicly awesome that their character or characters went down swinging and are happy to roll up new ones, I let it happen that way. If, however, they are very much invested in their character and want to make every effort to have that character returned to play, I provide a way for it to happen in game.

    SirXaris
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 29, 2006
    Posts: 494
    From: Dantredun, MN

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:30 pm  
    Re: Overuse of Clone and Raise Dead?

    Crag wrote:
    does the (liberal) use of raise dead and clones in the recent material harm the "grittiness" of the game world.


    Which sources/characters/events are you referring to? Off the top of my head, I can think of the CoE, Vayne, and Raknain coming back to life.
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:36 pm  

    Friends of Oerth,

    Just b/c it is possible to Raise Dead or Resurrect a person doesn't mean it automatically happens. Firstly, the priesthood in question needs to have major access to the Necromantic sphere. Secondly, you need to find a priest of the appropriate power level to pull of such a miracle. Furthermore, most faiths would only bestow such a high-powered gift upon some mortal truly worthy of it (typically a person held in high esteem in that church) UNLESS bringing that person back somehow furthered the aims of the faith in question. Even then, some type of service or offering should be made.

    I have made it possible to bring characters back, but only if it made sense to me (and my players) and wasn't contrived. Furthermore, there was always some type of counterbalance (tithe, service required, etc) for returning from the land of the dead.

    I have always been very thoughtful and judicious, not liberal, with the uses of those spells to keep everything in some type of balance.

    -Lanthorn
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 10, 2003
    Posts: 1234
    From: New Jersey

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 03, 2011 9:33 pm  

    Well the clone spell I put a simply stipulation on. One cannot cast or know of a clone being cast for them. It makes the person aware of their clone and they seek to destroy it much like the spell entails when both are active.

    Resurrection or Raise magic can only be summoned by a Priest who follow a God of the Dead. They are the only ones able to barter with the lord of the dead. Hence making such dealings minimal and payment in gold is only a portion of what needs to be paid for the return of a soul to the land of the living.

    A Soul for A Soul but the priest will tell you what soul is needed for the pact.

    Later

    Argon
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 01, 2004
    Posts: 252
    From: Nyrond

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 04, 2011 3:07 am  

    Lanthorn wrote:
    Friends of Oerth,

    Just b/c it is possible to Raise Dead or Resurrect a person doesn't mean it automatically happens. Firstly, the priesthood in question needs to have major access to the Necromantic sphere. Secondly, you need to find a priest of the appropriate power level to pull of such a miracle. Furthermore, most faiths would only bestow such a high-powered gift upon some mortal truly worthy of it (typically a person held in high esteem in that church) UNLESS bringing that person back somehow furthered the aims of the faith in question. Even then, some type of service or offering should be made.

    I have made it possible to bring characters back, but only if it made sense to me (and my players) and wasn't contrived. Furthermore, there was always some type of counterbalance (tithe, service required, etc) for returning from the land of the dead.

    I have always been very thoughtful and judicious, not liberal, with the uses of those spells to keep everything in some type of balance.

    -Lanthorn


    Yes, I must second this! In my campaigns, raise dead is very difficult to come by and even if a spell caster of a certain church could be found, what close ties did the post-mortem player have with said church? I always read in the WoG fluff great and noble king blah, blah, blah, but if they were so great and so noble, why weren't they brought back to life? This is usually my chance to reinforce the fact that the gods are very active in the WoG and they are making conscious decisions on such topics as who gets what spells for which purposes.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 04, 2011 12:36 pm  
    Resurrection and cloning

    And so ... here we are. This is a topic that I have discussed a few times before, and have my own personal theories about it ... I'll see if I can explain them here.

    The first point that I will go with has to do with age. Generally speaking, in the Player's Handbook of your choice, human ages are listed - giving us the ability to compare them. While it has always clearly been stated that Greyhawk is a fantasy setting similar to a Medieval Europe, human ages have always closely paralleled those of our modern, contemporary world. My personal theory is that it is because in the grand scheme of things, magic and priestly intervention is little different in its effect than is modern medicine.

    To that end, it is most often those who can afford to pay for health care that most benefit from the treatment that is available. If someone is wealthy, influential and powerful, they are more likely to be able to find treatment that the bumpkin living in the country. There are not the resources all over the world that we have here in the US, especially not in large metropolitan areas. Even today, when someone has to be treated for something very serious, they are often flown or travel otherwise to a major medical center in another area. Similar to how a 3rd level priest out in a hamlet may not have access to higher levels spells, and one would have to go to a large temple in a nearby city to get that type of treatment.

    We all have heard stories of someone who "died on the operating table", or was cured of blindness, or miraculously survived cancer. Compare these to fantasy parallels ... Mummy Rot is avoided, severe trauma caused by a marauding dragon is healed, or ... well, blindness is cured. Though we have heard these stories, how often do we actually personally know an individual to which it happens? ... Now before all of you guys start posting your "I have a friend it happened to" stories, just go with the analogy here. I too, have had medical miracles in my life, but, as a percentage of the population, it's very small.

    And so ... Resurrection. How many people die each year that don't have a medical miracle to save them? Probably about the same number in a fantasy setting that would die. We seem to have roughly equal lifespans, so my assumption is that treatment for illness is about the same. So, yes, while resurrection does happen, it is something that few benefit from. The wealthy, influential and powerful of our world still die, but, there's the occasional stories that perpetuate our faith in medical science ... the same is true of those who receive miraculous (and directly divine) healing from an agent of a god.

    So, my personal opinion? Resurrection is vastly overplayed these days. In my gaming career, I have had numerous characters die. ... and very few raised, or resurrected. It is something that is rare. Just because medical science (or priestly magic) could, in theory, save lives every day doesn't mean that it always happens. More often than not, it doesn't. And still, people still die of "natural causes" at the end of their lifespan, and there's *no* coming back when that happens. Even ... if it's from a god.

    Inigo Montoya wrote:
    Let me explain ... no, is too much. Let me sum up.

    I should've summed up. Wink
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Oct 10, 2001
    Posts: 225
    From: NC

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 04, 2011 4:25 pm  

    The past four years of my game have involved the PCs attempting to return a night hag to life, by means of three books known as the Tomes of Apotheosis. It has not been an easy task, as the hag was neither living nor was she dead, she was a spirit hag trapped in the Region of Dreams.

    More on apotheosis, HERE

    The party is very, very close to accomplishing their goal; restoring life to the hag Xaetra, so that her unliving deathlock, an integral part of the amalgamated being known as Diadema the blackwater hag, would be disrupted. They lack only one final element, Aqua Mortis; the Waters of Death.

    Granted, the apotheosis of Xaetra and subsequent liberation of the deathlock/transformation of the blackwater hag will unleash untoward dangers to be certain.

    In short, no. Bringing someone back from the dead should never be easy. It should always be memorable.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 01, 2004
    Posts: 252
    From: Nyrond

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 04, 2011 4:49 pm  
    Re: Resurrection and cloning

    Icarus wrote:
    And so ... here we are. This is a topic that I have discussed a few times before, and have my own personal theories about it ... I'll see if I can explain them here.

    The first point that I will go with has to do with age. Generally speaking, in the Player's Handbook of your choice, human ages are listed - giving us the ability to compare them. While it has always clearly been stated that Greyhawk is a fantasy setting similar to a Medieval Europe, human ages have always closely paralleled those of our modern, contemporary world. My personal theory is that it is because in the grand scheme of things, magic and priestly intervention is little different in its effect than is modern medicine.

    To that end, it is most often those who can afford to pay for health care that most benefit from the treatment that is available. If someone is wealthy, influential and powerful, they are more likely to be able to find treatment that the bumpkin living in the country. There are not the resources all over the world that we have here in the US, especially not in large metropolitan areas. Even today, when someone has to be treated for something very serious, they are often flown or travel otherwise to a major medical center in another area. Similar to how a 3rd level priest out in a hamlet may not have access to higher levels spells, and one would have to go to a large temple in a nearby city to get that type of treatment.

    We all have heard stories of someone who "died on the operating table", or was cured of blindness, or miraculously survived cancer. Compare these to fantasy parallels ... Mummy Rot is avoided, severe trauma caused by a marauding dragon is healed, or ... well, blindness is cured. Though we have heard these stories, how often do we actually personally know an individual to which it happens? ... Now before all of you guys start posting your "I have a friend it happened to" stories, just go with the analogy here. I too, have had medical miracles in my life, but, as a percentage of the population, it's very small.

    And so ... Resurrection. How many people die each year that don't have a medical miracle to save them? Probably about the same number in a fantasy setting that would die. We seem to have roughly equal lifespans, so my assumption is that treatment for illness is about the same. So, yes, while resurrection does happen, it is something that few benefit from. The wealthy, influential and powerful of our world still die, but, there's the occasional stories that perpetuate our faith in medical science ... the same is true of those who receive miraculous (and directly divine) healing from an agent of a god.

    So, my personal opinion? Resurrection is vastly overplayed these days. In my gaming career, I have had numerous characters die. ... and very few raised, or resurrected. It is something that is rare. Just because medical science (or priestly magic) could, in theory, save lives every day doesn't mean that it always happens. More often than not, it doesn't. And still, people still die of "natural causes" at the end of their lifespan, and there's *no* coming back when that happens. Even ... if it's from a god.

    Inigo Montoya wrote:
    Let me explain ... no, is too much. Let me sum up.

    I should've summed up. Wink


    Icarus, that was a most excellent explanation. I may have to ponder the idea of a man crush...
    Forum Moderator

    Joined: Feb 26, 2004
    Posts: 2590
    From: Ullinois

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:18 pm  

    I prefer cloning over ressurection.

    Think about it. How many instance of cloning has occured in Greyhawk canon? Quite a few. Instances of characters cheating death via lichdom, ascension, etc? Plenty. Characters being straight up raised from the dead? Erm...
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 07, 2004
    Posts: 1846
    From: Mt. Smolderac

    Send private message
    Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:49 pm  

    mortellan wrote:
    I prefer cloning over ressurection.

    Think about it. How many instance of cloning has occured in Greyhawk canon? Quite a few. Instances of characters cheating death via lichdom, ascension, etc? Plenty. Characters being straight up raised from the dead? Erm...


    Probably because it's not worth mentioning. Ho-hum. Dead again. Raise me! Smile

    Personally, I don't like either one, and I never allowed raise dead, resurrection or anything like that in previous campaigns. When you were dead you were dead. I have given in for my current campaign and two of the characters (at great cost to the party's finances) were raised from the dead. It still doesn't sit well with me. But someone on CF! (can't remember who) made the suggestion that raise dead is more of a "heals mortal wounds." The wounds the "dead" character receive are obviously life threatening and incapacitating (Spear through the lungs, etc...), and they will die if they don't receive some sort of extreme healing in a set time limit, in the form of the raise dead (or whatever you choose to call it) spell.This to me is a great idea because if the party wants to try and have the "dead" character "raised" they need to figure out how to get them back to someone who can perform the spell, ASAP. And if the player wants the character to die, there is the opportunity for some awesome roleplaying during the death scene -

    Artok: "Hal, I'm cold. I... can't feel my legs."

    Hal: "Hang on Artok! We'll get you to a healer! HANG ON!!!"

    Artok: "Hal, I have to tell you something."

    Hal: "Yes."

    Artok: "Hal, I've always loved you. I just... never knew how to tell you."

    Hal: "Uh, but you're a dwarf... and we're both dudes... and it says in the Libram Sanctus Vox that '... only the love between a man and a woman is sacred to Pholtus. If a man should...' "

    Artok: "Hal, shut up and hold me.... GAAAHHHHHH!!!"

    Hal: "NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!"
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Sat Nov 05, 2011 3:58 pm  

    Being one that dwells in the shadows (hehehe) I am not in opposition to Resurrection, with the stipulation that it is not the norm, it is a monumental undertaking (ie quest or epic worthy). I say this from a gaming perspective, as a DM, there are constraints to who can perform, age of character (ie no cheating life spans for that wonderful noble duke), etc.

    Also, being one from the ranks of the "undieing", Undead is not resurrection, there is always a penance to be paid to exist in such a form.

    As for cloning, I have always been in opposition to the defined version of the spell. Technically, a clone is a genetic copy ( ie just like the sheep) BUT (IMC) it is not a copy of the life experiences. I allow a clone but in this context, If the PC is attempting a "carbon copy" ( since we are carbon based life forms? hehe) then they would also have to dive into and embrace some darker magics such as Magic Jar and utilize it in unison with Revivification to place the "soul and life experiences" from the slain to the "duplicate". Needless to say this would all have to be timed out pretty well since it would require a life threatening event, a necromancer and a priest. Not impossable, but close. Laughing And as others have pointed out ... those priests and necros will certainly want payment and wonder what the "newly departed" has done for them and their cause along the way.
    Lastly, I would say, if there is no "fear of death" then there is little reason to expect the characters to have the sense to flee and fight another day. Not all encounters are winable.
    Just my two coppers
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Sat Nov 05, 2011 7:58 pm  

    Good points, all, friends.

    Just wondering how priests manage to 'collect in' on any deals brokered with the character they've just brought back. I would imagine most characters will make good on their deals with a priesthood capable of bringing back mortals from the grave. But what if you, say, 'skip out' and squelch on the deal?

    Charm spells have limited durations. Quest spells are only possible, if memory serves me, if the clergy has major access to Charm sphere. Heironeans have certains spells (a la "Bastion of Faith") that would definitely make a transgressor suffer for breaking an agreement (Lesser and Greater Brands, for instance). But what about others? I imagine if they cannot directly punish the character (and/or party) outright, then it would amount to something akin to a 'blacklisting' or perhaps even sending out some martyrs or inquisitors/crusaders of the faithful to hunt down and bring the offenders to justice...

    -Lanthorn (recently Raised from a long torpid state of posting inactivity)
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 06, 2011
    Posts: 201
    From: South Africa, Cape Town

    Send private message
    Sat Nov 05, 2011 11:06 pm  

    In my up coming campaign I have made a lot of changes that makes Greyhawk grittier.

    Raise Dead, Ressurection are only possible with the aid of a priest of death. A deal is made, but these deals are not for the average person.

    The individual must have sacrificed a lot, a person of virtue and substance in order for any priest or church to want to make a deal with a priest of death.

    Once the deal has been struct the soul is returned to his body BUT carries the mark of the reaper. Only once the contract has been fulfilled then does the mark leave the person marked.

    The mark would have effects ont he person depending on the terms of the contract. if the deal was time based for someting to be completed then, the character could find himself starting to get sick, in game terms -2 to everything and so on as more time progresses.

    You might even find that individuals raised are only alive in order to complete there quest and which point they are then "collected" to return to there resting place.

    I am thinking that a person should only be allowed to be resurrected once ever, maybe some sort of risidual effect that is left behind from the greater powers that stays in that person to keep the spell in effect

    The only way that I see that they gets factored out is that the person who died goes to purgatory until the rites of death has been performed. Only at that time then does the soul get to move on. This then makes more sense why resurrection is possible and why characters would want to as they are still tied to the prime plane through a connection to there physical dead body. Even if the the body is totally destroyed a priest or person of faith must perform the rite to give that person the ability to move on.

    It is still a thought in progress .... Thoughts?
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sun Nov 06, 2011 12:10 am  

    Raise dead and resurrection were very rare in our campaigns until the characters were very high level(10th and above for us), and the characters themselves had access to those spells. Even then, the characters were usually in the service of some great cause or other where a power would give the okay for a raise dead/resurrection to even happen. Even still, there was always a price to be paid. Of all the character deaths in the campaign, less than 10% of theme were ever raised/resurrected, and they were usually very complex and drawn out events, with only a few notable exceptions.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 20, 2008
    Posts: 594


    Send private message
    Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:17 am  

    I handle these spells rather well, I think.

    Raise Dead and Resurrection bring a character back from the dead. When a character dies, they meet with their deity. The character's deity then makes them a job offer in Their service in Their Realm. This is much like the concept of einherjar in Norse mythology. In my games it is customary to cast Speak With Dead prior to a raise attempt to find out if the character will return to life or not. The way I put it, is that nothing on the Material Plane can compare to what is experienced in a High Realm. A character, while young, may choose to come back in order to experience more of the Material Plane, not yet ready for an existence elsewhere. A veteran character would be less prone to being raised, as the next great adventure for them lies beyond the physical.

    I handle Clone by having the Cloned character be unable to be the subject of Divine Healing. Furthermore, the character who was Cloned can never pass into a High Realm in the service of their deity. Basically, once the soul is Cloned, it loses principle qualities that make it capable of Transmigration. Its like voiding the warranty on your soul.

    When True Resurrection is cast, and its subject is willing, a duplicate Thread is produced by their Deity. It is possible, with True Resurrection, to forcefully raise a character from death. This must be the conscious intent of the caster, however. This unravels reality when done, but merely by a single Thread. When this happens bizarre things happen around the character. Magic may not work for them, or on them, correctly. Because the character was pulled from another context in time, sometimes spells will instead affect their past, "pointing" to their proper timeline. For instance, such a character throws a fireball into the enemy. Instead of being injured, signs of the area having been burned in the past will appear. Elsewhere, three pilgrims who camped there in the past, suddenly die from massive burns.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:06 pm  

    Glad, many took it so seriously...
    I have run into a few games where the consitution score really did mean the number of times a character had been raised or near enough. FtA developments such as "all his clones" and the creation of the animus was concerning.

    Second hand about what occured in the LGG; heard there were quite a few assassinations. Worried that the direction of 4th ed and the historical context, would become more video game. I like GH; medieval not mmorpg.
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:56 am  

    DarkHerald wrote:

    Raise Dead, Ressurection are only possible with the aid of a priest of death. A deal is made, but these deals are not for the average person.

    I agree,only a priest should perform this, (IMC) It would depend on several factors:
    1> The patron relationship with their deity
    2>The relationship with the priest requesting and the deity ( two fold here, priest devotions and whether the deity has dominion over the death within their plane, some are some aren't)
    One thing that intrigues me though, are you saying it would be a "specialty class" of priest? or someone within the structured clergy that would simply preform the right?
    DarkHerald wrote:

    You might even find that individuals raised are only alive in order to complete there quest and which point they are then "collected" to return to there resting place.

    This part we do in our campaign, but like your idea of the "mark" in addition to the act, makes for some thought provoking ideas.
    And may be a good way to address

    Lanthorn wrote:

    Just wondering how priests manage to 'collect in' on any deals brokered with the character they've just brought back. I would imagine most characters will make good on their deals with a priesthood capable of bringing back mortals from the grave. But what if you, say, 'skip out' and squelch on the deal?

    Maybe the mark would work similar to Drawmij’s Instant Summons only allow the priest to summon back those who squelch or suffer increasing pain, weakness, or return to the priest and/or task assigned.
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:41 am  

    One of the main problems that led me to the norm of allowing the resurrection/reincarnation of dead PCs comes down to this: how do you handle replacement PCs?

    If I allow the player to make up a new PC of the same level, I either get a virtual twin of the dead PC or a brand new character in the party that the player has no experience with. If the party all happens to be first level, that's not such a problem. But, if the rest of the party is 4th level and this is the player's first character, s/he may have no idea how to play a different character class. Learning to play a spellcasting character takes time, which the player has if s/he has experienced the effectiveness of different strategies over the course of several levels of play, adding new spells only ocassionally, once the old spells have been mastered. Switching from a dead 4th level fighter to a new 4th level wizard will result in a very ineffective PC.

    Alternatively, I can require a replacement PC to begin at 1st level. Of course, the myriad problems should be obvious when the rest of the party is of a higher level than 1st.

    So, instead, I provide a means for the PC to be brought back. It always requires of the PC, and the party as a whole, a huge sacrifice. This solves several potential problems for me as a DM:

    1) A player who is very attached to a character is not too upset - and the main goal of the game is to "Have Fun!" Wink

    2) Players don't get into arguments about how it was unfair that I allowed the other guy's character to be raised when they thought their own character had just as legitimate a reason to be resurrected.

    3) I can dispose of extra/unbalancing treasure the party has accumulated by my judicious application of resurrection costs. Evil Grin

    4) As a DM, I can be more ruthless with the monsters and NPCs the party encounters. Many times I've been surprised when an average encounter went wrong for the PCs through bad luck. Now, I don't have to worry too much about killing one or more of them off. The players really like the game more when I roll all the dice out in the open. When I used to roll them behind a screen, they always suspected me of fudging. I was. I either fudged to make the monsters tougher or fudged to avoid killing the PCs off. The players never appreciated either.

    I've found that most of my players, through the years, appreciate this solution. I'm sure in a tournament setting, this would not be appropriate, but it works for our years-long campaigning. Smile

    As to the original question regarding canon: it always bugged me that Tenser was able to arrange for his own cloning, but Otto (Otiluke?) wasn't. A member of the Circle of Eight shouldn't have been caught so unprepared. Confused

    SirXaris
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 06, 2011
    Posts: 201
    From: South Africa, Cape Town

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:56 am  

    @SirXaris

    I am glad you found a solution that works for you. The downside of that solution is that the game then starts to feel like an RPG on the PC.

    I hear you WRT having issues of introducing new characters into the group. That is why I have thought that I would allow my players to have 4 characters for the next campaign.

    These characters do not get to be played at the same time, but have to remain with a level of two of each other. This also gives the players more choices to play with as to what character use for different portions of the game. You may find that the current cleric is need of time off and player 2 also has a cleric that can be brought in to substitute for the other cleric having some down time.

    This breaks the tediousness of players playing the same character for long periods of time. It also allows players to rethink stratergies during different sections of the adventure.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 12, 2005
    Posts: 266


    Send private message
    Mon Nov 07, 2011 11:03 am  

    smillan_31 wrote:

    Personally, I don't like either one, and I never allowed raise dead, resurrection or anything like that in previous campaigns. When you were dead you were dead. I have given in for my current campaign and two of the characters (at great cost to the party's finances) were raised from the dead. It still doesn't sit well with me. But someone on CF! (can't remember who) made the suggestion that raise dead is more of a "heals mortal wounds." The wounds the "dead" character receive are obviously life threatening and incapacitating (Spear through the lungs, etc...), and they will die if they don't receive some sort of extreme healing in a set time limit, in the form of the raise dead (or whatever you choose to call it) spell.This to me is a great idea because if the party wants to try and have the "dead" character "raised" they need to figure out how to get them back to someone who can perform the spell, ASAP. And if the player wants the character to die, there is the opportunity for some awesome roleplaying during the death scene -



    As I've posted elsewhere (can't recall where) I would favour this method for a truly gritty feel and to explain the lack of mention in canon of raise dead/resurrection.

    Personally, I prefer a model where a by-the-rules dead character is deemed in fact to be mortally wounded and will die in a number of days equal to their level/Con bonus/Con score or something like that. Raise dead functions as per whatever rule set you are using with the same costs but is depicted in the story as the care of an expert priestly healer who brings the PC back from the brink.

    As I've also posted elsewhere, I am inclined to deal with a lot of rituals (as they are in 4E) in this way so that there is a largely mundane explanation that still requires specialist training (as Maesters in the GRR Martin books).

    This keeps Raise Dead as an element of game balance (which in 4E it certainly is) but does not allow the routine return from death which the spells/rituals allow which I have a lot of trouble believing.

    Clone has to have a magical element to it but as I have never had it used in a campaign I can't really speak to how you would give that a more gritty feel.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 24, 2008
    Posts: 126


    Send private message
    Wed Nov 09, 2011 7:45 pm  

    My opinion is that life-restoring magic goes along with the life-taking magic fairly well. This became especially trues once I shifted from all PCs having max hit points to mandatory average hit points. A missed saving throw here or there and a PC is dead when they are at the levels where they can raise dead. "Rule Book" D&D really can't be viewed as light or low fantasy like the Song of Fire & Ice novels. Its got those demi-humans and humanoids walking about town, wizardry is just some other occupation, dragons are flying about, etc.

    I recall an issue of Dragon Magazine examined the Song of Fire and Ice world with stats for some characters, a Night's Watch prestige class, etc. One of their suggestions on lowering the magic was to make all the PC classes a form of prestige class. Characters essentially had to take an NPC class (warrior, adept, aristocrat, expert, commoner) for four or five levels before they could take a PC class. This would certainly place some of the game changing spells and consequences beyond the hands of all but the highest level characters. It would also push the balance toward fighters and their ilk as caster levels would be lower for all spells. This could be coupled with doubling the cost of magic items. I do share your interest in perhaps having a "Joe Commoner" "Low-fantasy" gritt-fest campaign one of these days. (Routine tetanus infections after every battle!)

    In conclusion I have been pleased with my experience of the life-restoring magic used by my players. After all, I don't hesitate to start combats by having armored clerics run at them while holding the charge on slay living spells.

    (If using 3rd ed., note the particular rules for raise dead regarding when the deceased was killed by a death effect. My players had forgotten that little bit of detail - once.)
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Wed Nov 09, 2011 11:05 pm  
    Wasteros issue of Dragon and ressurection comment

    A-Baneful-Backfire wrote:
    I recall an issue of Dragon Magazine examined the Song of Fire and Ice world with stats for some characters, a Night's Watch prestige class, etc.

    The issue in question was Dragon magazine #307. I have always been particularly fond of that issue, and I have always wanted to run a campaign using the more "gritty" option that is suggested, which you mentinoed. But, I haven't ever been able to find a group of players interested in it. It would require players that have all read the Song of Ice and Fire series, or were willing to play a non-standard game. I have never met either.
    A-Baneful-Backfire wrote:
    (If using 3rd ed., note the particular rules for raise dead regarding when the deceased was killed by a death effect. My players had forgotten that little bit of detail - once.)

    I hadn't ever thought about that. Essentially, that would require that anyone being brought back from the dead would have to be resurrected instead of raised. ... which by 3rd Edition (or 3.5 or Pathfinder) rules would mean that they would have to have diamonds worth 10,000 gp. Most players I know tend to spend their loot long before they amass that much.
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>


    Last edited by Icarus on Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:41 am; edited 1 time in total
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:23 am  

    Raise dead also doesn't work when certain important bits a creature can't live without are unattached/missing.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 24, 2008
    Posts: 126


    Send private message
    Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:22 am  

    Cebrion wrote:
    Raise dead also doesn't work when certain important bits a creature can't live without are unattached/missing.


    And determining just what part of the deceased was eaten by the monster is up to the DM. Bwah hah hah!

    Just like some of the Pathfinder adventure paths have introduced the practice of detaching the jaws of deceased witnesses so Speak with Dead is useless, I also think they came up with the idea of quieting needles.

    These needles are placed in the body, piercing vital organs. They are difficult to find. If the deceased is raised without them being removed, the deceased, quickly becomes deceased yet again.

    These are the sort of controls that would arise in a world were such magic exists, and villains get sick and tired of killing the same heroes again and again.
    GreySage

    Joined: Jul 26, 2010
    Posts: 2695
    From: LG Dyvers

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm  

    A-Baneful-Backfire wrote:

    Just like some of the Pathfinder adventure paths have introduced the practice of detaching the jaws of deceased witnesses so Speak with Dead is useless, I also think they came up with the idea of quieting needles.

    These needles are placed in the body, piercing vital organs. They are difficult to find. If the deceased is raised without them being removed, the deceased, quickly becomes deceased yet again.

    These are the sort of controls that would arise in a world were such magic exists, and villains get sick and tired of killing the same heroes again and again.


    It seems like burning the body would be a simpler solution 99% of the time. Neutral

    SirXaris
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 06, 2011
    Posts: 201
    From: South Africa, Cape Town

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:59 pm  

    In my campaign if the persons/creatures tongue has been removed then the speak with dead spell then becomes useless.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Oct 10, 2001
    Posts: 225
    From: NC

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:08 pm  

    DarkHerald wrote:
    In my campaign if the persons/creatures tongue has been removed then the speak with dead spell then becomes useless.


    What if the corpse in question was deaf in life and thus spoke with sign language?
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 06, 2011
    Posts: 201
    From: South Africa, Cape Town

    Send private message
    Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:32 pm  

    That's a bit fishy ....
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 11, 2011 8:02 am  

    Aeolius wrote:
    What if the corpse in question was deaf in life and thus spoke with sign language?


    Shocked

    DarkHerald wrote:
    That's a bit fishy . . .


    So, this guy's god is unable to heal the deaf? The blind? The sick? Surprised

    Even after they've died and "gone to heaven?" Shocked

    Pretty weak god if you ask me. Why worship him/her? Razz

    Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Sep 09, 2009
    Posts: 2470
    From: SW WA state (Highvale)

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 11, 2011 8:36 am  

    In my game, when a Speak with Dead spell is used, it is the spirit of the deceased that is contacted. The description of the spell, at least in 2e mechanics, says that only a part of the being is needed. This can be a finger, a tooth, whatever. Removing a tongue would not preclude the possibility of speaking with the dead creature whatsoever. In fact, the tongue itself could be used as a material component (until it decays to the point of utter uselessness)!

    -Lanthorn
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Fri Nov 11, 2011 4:59 pm  

    Yep. The spirit is doing the talking, not the physical remains. It is of course cool to have such remains do something for visual effect- a skeleton talking, the dust of the ancient dead coalescing in the air to form a disembodied face which then speaks, or just the spirit itself partially manifesting.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 20, 2008
    Posts: 594


    Send private message
    Sat Nov 12, 2011 7:02 pm  

    All writing in Pathfinder er on the side of violence. It is only a matter of time until there is a Power Word: Rape spell in their books.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Feb 06, 2011
    Posts: 201
    From: South Africa, Cape Town

    Send private message
    Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:38 pm  

    The ritual of removing the tongue and placing brass coins on the victims eyes
    in my campaigns binds the corpse with a hex in the afterlife so that they can not speak or see.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 14, 2011 2:17 am  

    chaoticprime wrote:
    All writing in Pathfinder er on the side of violence. It is only a matter of time until there is a Power Word: Rape spell in their books.

    With regard to this particular topic, is there any actual point to this post?
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Apr 15, 2011
    Posts: 85
    From: Staug, FL, USA

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:34 am  

    To me, this has never been an issue. Raise dead and the like are the purview of higher level characters... which tend only to be PCs and important NPCs. As such, there's really no glut of dead coming back to life in my campaigns.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:20 pm  

    Consider the implications for monarchial succession, if nothing else. It would place tremendous power in the hands of the priests. Courtly, factions arise both resurrection and succession.

    The monarch dies and the priests negotiate with the heir, whether to raise the erstwhile ruler. Monarchial successors become little more then puppets but get the crown.

    Does frustrated long time successors take aggressive action to ensure the priests don't act. I've waited 30 years for the throne damn it and these men-at-arms will make sure he remains dead, got it.

    Either scenario creates problems and hardly encourages a peaceful transfer of power.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 13, 2001
    Posts: 64
    From: Stockholm, Sweden

    Send private message
    Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:52 pm  

    Crag wrote:
    Consider the implications for monarchial succession, if nothing else. It would place tremendous power in the hands of the priests. Courtly, factions arise both resurrection and succession.

    The monarch dies and the priests negotiate with the heir, whether to raise the erstwhile ruler. Monarchial successors become little more then puppets but get the crown.

    Does frustrated long time successors take aggressive action to ensure the priests don't act. I've waited 30 years for the throne damn it and these men-at-arms will make sure he remains dead, got it.

    Either scenario creates problems and hardly encourages a peaceful transfer of power.

    But shouldn't raise dead and resurrection fall into the purview of the Good religions? As such I'm sure they would be unable to barter with their god's magic in order to gain temporal power. IMO Good is Good and unable to withhold its "goodness" unless it gets a treat/bribe/tithe. If it is a good act to resurrect the King, which might not always be the case, then they must perform the deed on the dead.
    _________________
    Never say blip-blip to a kuo-tua
    Paladin

    Joined: Sep 07, 2011
    Posts: 833
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Tue Nov 15, 2011 1:29 am  

    Crag wrote:
    Consider the implications for monarchial succession, if nothing else. It would place tremendous power in the hands of the priests. Courtly, factions arise both resurrection and succession.

    The monarch dies and the priests negotiate with the heir, whether to raise the erstwhile ruler. Monarchial successors become little more then puppets but get the crown.

    Does frustrated long time successors take aggressive action to ensure the priests don't act. I've waited 30 years for the throne damn it and these men-at-arms will make sure he remains dead, got it.

    Either scenario creates problems and hardly encourages a peaceful transfer of power.

    Who says power transfers are peaceful? hehe
    Even in a Fantasy Feudal society there will be political strife on the "changing of the guard". And to do a historical compare, the church in similar times had alot of power and influence on the realms they tended.
    And as covered earlier, those resurrections would probably "good alignment dominated" anyway.
    Further, if good king so in so sat on the throne 30 years, its possible natural causes got him and those spells would not apply anyway.
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.40 Seconds