Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Streamweaver 04-07-05, 07:38 PM	With Raise Dead said to be so uncommon in Eberron I'm wondering how DMs are dealing with death of player in their campaigns? The way I see it, having a character die is kind of expected in the DnD experience. Particularly as you get higher in level there are a number of save or die situations and dying, while present in the game, was more of a nussance or setback. With that removed in Eberron does anyone else think there should still be some mechanism for insulating players from full on character loss, which is what all this raise dead stuff is in a metagame sense, or are you just letting the chips fall where they may? I don't have a solid answer to all this myself, but I would like some way to save a player character without flat out removing death as a possibility. Right now there are two possibilities floating around in my brain for house ruling this. 1. I could allow players to spend an action point to stay on the brink of death for a round longer when they would normally transition to a dead state. This could allow them to give other party members a round or two to reach them and stablize them if need be. 2. I could create another spell on the Cleric list. Say a 3rd level divine spell called "Revive the Fallen" or something that allows them to keep a soul from departing permanent if they cast it within 1 round per cleric level of death. They would need to cast this spell then immediatly follow it up with some kind of healing that would bring them back below what would considered to be dead. Maybe there are other options. I'm just wondering what people think about this, or if I'm the only one.
BMStroh 04-07-05, 08:51 PM	Let 'em die? :) I know it sounds flip, but we've gone with negative Con, not negative 10, and I'm pretty liberal with what action points can do in my game. Most of my players have got several character ideas kicking around anyway, so a chance to swap isn't a bad thing. We also don't penalize a player for a character death - new characters come in at the same level as the old ones. Takes most of the sting out of it. I thought I'd killed one of my characters last weekend with a 54hp critical from a great axe, but we realized I'd given the monster an AoO it wasn't entitled to. The extra 17hp the character recovered, plus most of the party healing potions, wand charges, and spells, were enough to keep the group alive. Although characters have their individual interests, I don't hang the main plot on one character. That avoids the problem of the game falling apart when one character gets whacked.
Edymnion 04-07-05, 09:12 PM	Its true, its rare to find anyone that can cast a Raise Dead spell in Eberron. And on the flip side, its just as rare, if not more so, to find someone that can cast an instant death spell as well. It balances out. If the players fight stupid and get killed, maybe it'll teach them to fight smart and do some planning next time instead of blundering into combat that they should have known they couldn't win in the first place. Dying in Eberron sucks. Like it's supposed to. It is something to be feared, and avoided at all costs. It puts the sting back into death when you know you can't just pop over to any small town temple and get raised. Somebody dies, its a big deal. Roleplay, then get a new character.
DarkWarriorKarg 04-07-05, 09:19 PM	Ensure one of the PCs is a cleric that can survive until level 9. :D
Streamweaver 04-07-05, 09:45 PM	Well those are interesting replies. I'm not really of the mindset of "too bad, get a new character" entirely. Also I think it's a bit synical to think that characters have to have done something stupid to die. A single hit from a greataxe at 1st level can max a crit somewhere around the 50s fairly easy. You don't need just save or die spells, there are plenty of criticals and such that do exactly the same thing. All without the fault of a player. I play my campaign at 60% exp and over the course of a year or more I plan to run this particular campaign, someone is just gonig to have a bad roll. The "Too bad" school of thought is reasonable, but there is nothing wrong with trying to hedge your bets a little to keep good characters around either.
3nigma 04-07-05, 09:56 PM	If the PCs die because of idiocracy, I take the "too bad" attitude. If it's a chance mistake like a crit, I almost ALWAYS (without exception) fudge the rolls. I make most of my rolls behind the DM screen. This allows me to completely orchestrate every event to the best of the enjoyment of the players. I can make a situation super intense and gut-wrenching, or make the players just walk all over some encounter =). Just my $0.02 (US), $9.24 (CA). -3nigma =)
Streamweaver 04-07-05, 10:01 PM	If the PCs die because of idiocracy, I take the "too bad" attitude. If it's a chance mistake like a crit, I almost ALWAYS (without exception) fudge the rolls. I make most of my rolls behind the DM screen. This allows me to completely orchestrate every event to the best of the enjoyment of the players. I can make a situation super intense and gut-wrenching, or make the players just walk all over some encounter =). Just my $0.02 (US), $9.24 (CA). -3nigma =) Well this can work in some situations but isn't really much of a fix. There are all kinds of ways this may not work. I'm actually trying to think about something that wouldn't take death out of the equation but wouldn't require me to obviously stretch things either. Right now I'm leaning toward the action point thing. There are already many examples of rules like this (actually more powerful ones with hero points) in other games already. It would allow someone to make up for a bad roll IF they had action points, only help them for a round or two, and still require action on the part of another PC. It would by no means be a ticket out of death. Still though, like to hear some other opinions.
DarkWarriorKarg 04-07-05, 10:59 PM	Despite Edymion's views, there are quite a few ways: Altars of Ressurection (House Jorasco) The occasional Adept (Jorasco again) Reincarnate (the occasional druid) Bribing clergy (2 in Sharn, the Keeper of the Flame, and there's GOT to be a few more 9th level clerics around) Artificers of level 7+ (of which there are more than a few...) Heck, the Whitehearth short story has a character given a raise dead scroll as a wedding present. The ways exist and the spells are not banned in the world.
Raster 04-07-05, 11:24 PM	Also, there is a spell much like the one you describe called "Revivify" in the miniatures handbook. However, it's a 5th level cleric spell, so you still need a 9th level cleric to cast it.
Edymnion 04-07-05, 11:34 PM	Despite Edymion's views, there are quite a few waysI didn't say you couldn't do it, just that it wasn't something the characters should be able to expect. And just to clear something up, I don't kill characters by chance. If its a one in a million thing, I'll openly just reroll it. No fudging dice, I roll out in the open and will reroll anything that kills a character outright for no good reason other than that one in a million maxxed out crit. Of course, if the dice roll it again, I take it as a sign and they're toast. A PC death should always have meaning. Rolling a 1 on a Balance check on a swinging bridge between towers in Sharn and falling to your death because of a light breeze is just plain stupid. Now, if the player was trying to BACKFLIP across the bridge and rolls that 1, then they deserve to die. I protect my players from stupid, meaningless deaths, because that just sucks, both as a player and as a DM. But this is Eberron, people die, and not every joe schmoe adventurer can get raised from the dead. KINGS can't even get raised from the dead around here. There is just nothing cinematic about a potentially lethal situation when they know they can just go to a cleric and get revived. Its one of the selling points of the setting for many DMs. Death is significant, and the threat of a character dying is a SERIOUS one. A character coming back from the dead should be a MIRACLE, not something they expect to happen.
zambuka 04-08-05, 12:31 AM	I sometimes give my players an option, a final action or a stabilised at -9. Whether I give this option depends on the situation. The final action is a rules bender to allow the character to go out in one final memorable blaze of glory, like grappling that ogre and dragging him off the cliff, or the paladin throwing his bloodied body over the evil alter with one final prayer and blessing thus cleansing the evil and washing it away with the blood of purity. Go for good story and cinematics over rules. The -9 option leaves the character to recover purely by natural healing, this often means a character is out of action for a week or more while recovering. To a degree I agree with Edymnion's view of protecting the PCs from meaningless death. Dying from the rusty dagger of a low level minion is ok by me, but dying because of a save or die situation is not (unless it is part of a major encounter). If they died because of some stupid choice, like standing up to one of the Dragon queens in the Dark Sun setting and calling her a "pox ridden (lady of the night)*", then they deserved to die. *changed because of censorship filters not allowing the actual words used in that situation and I hate the ***** type thing.
Streamweaver 04-08-05, 09:09 AM	Despite Edymion's views, there are quite a few ways: How did this become about Edymion? What he said is basically true, that high level content has less of an emphasis in Eberron and by implication resurrection and other elements. I don't agree it's every said that death is suppose to be more common and the point I'm trying to get at here is the designers of DnD understood from the beginning that death happens in DnD even without stupididty so they built in a way to deal with that. I don't think people realize the significance of an out of hand dismissal of this element of the game, but they have every right to do that. Some people enjoy very harsh games and gaming, people here have every right to enjoy that style so I kind of take offense at bashing anyone by name over it, particularly Edymion who I find to be insightful and intelligent.
polt 04-08-05, 09:31 AM	I try my best to DM, and be fair. So if the PCs die, it's usally bad dice rolls or their own fault. So i let them die. It keeps them on their toes. If they know they can just get back to life, death won't be feared. They also loose half a level when they die. So it hurts to die :)
Streamweaver 04-08-05, 09:32 AM	A PC death should always have meaning. Rolling a 1 on a Balance check on a swinging bridge between towers in Sharn and falling to your death because of a light breeze is just plain stupid. Now, if the player was trying to BACKFLIP across the bridge and rolls that 1, then they deserve to die. I protect my players from stupid, meaningless deaths, .... This is really kind of the irony of this whole thread so far. Several replies come into this thread in fairly quick succession with variations on the "screw them, let them die" theme. Of course later they pipe up with how they actually do save players themselves. Somehow people take this as an opportunity to offer unasked for advice about GMing. Honestly I don't really need that, I've been running games for over 20 years and I'm quiet good at it if I say so myself. Even if I didn't the scores of people I've run for over the years would. So while that has been the advice so far, this isn't about how to run a game. This is a simple thread about pondering a crunchy bit that could possibly add to the gaming experience. Let me sum up some of the reasoning again to get us back on topic if I can. Changing the way death is handled in DnD on a whim is about as sensible as changing the way Power Attack or some other core game feature works on a whim. Running a low level campaign and keeping to a low level feel in Eberron leads to that. It is actually a myth that the 'save or die' situations only exist in DnD at higher levels. They exist right from the start, only there it is worse because they usually come in the form of a critical. High end crits even from a 1st level fighter or barbarian can wipe out a 5th level mage or rouge in a single shot. I say worse because these aren't even save or die (which you could spend Action points on to overcome) there are just "no save, just die" rolls. For my particular campaign I run it at a lower experience rate, right now about 60% of normal exp. That means players are facing danger after danger in a very vulnerable level range. Usually in DnD player just bite the bullet and get through those levels until they can reasonably afford a resurrection or raise dead. The threshold for this in DnD is actually pretty low, a few thousand gold which is usually available at fairly low level, if the party pools their money that threshold is even lower. Now, I'm fine with the whole raise dead thing being more rare in Eberron. I'm not trying to come up with a ripcord rule to banish the fear of death and change it's place in Eberron. Both my suggestions above have been very low end buffers to player death. At best they give a round or two for other actions to take place that could pull them back from the brink if they even have action points left, and if someone is able to get to them and help them in time. I'm just seeking something between the "screw them let them die (no but not really because I cheat to save them anyway)" and the sprinkling of raise dead items around the continent. Are these really the only options people have come up with?
darkthought 04-08-05, 11:45 AM	The Blood of Vol is more willing than most religions to cast Raise Dead. I need to talk to my characters about it, but they'll have to decide how they want to handle death. They can attempt to convince one of the Host or the Silver Flame to cast it, or go to the Blood and owe them a really big fat favor. I'd also allow them to find a cleric of the Shadow or the Keeper, but of the three, I think that the Blood would extract less of a favor.
polt 04-08-05, 11:48 AM	Well, first they have to find somebody that's able to cast raise dead, which is pretty hard. And then convince him to do it.
Streamweaver 04-08-05, 12:31 PM	The conversations on clerics casting raise dead are interesting, but I'm not sure the intent was to have them be the primary sources for it in Eberron. I got the impression that healing, including raise dead and such, as a service was more in the hands of House Jorasco (the healing one if I got the names mixed up) than the churches. I recall it being mentioned that churches may provide these services to the faithful but it was more likely you'd go to a Jorasco house of healing. That's how I've been playing it anyway. House Jorasco obviously offers raise dead service because there is an item listed right in the Eberron Book using their dragonmark that does just this. Honestly I don't see why raise dead would be any more uncommon in Eberron than any other DnD setting. The big barrier would be the money to pay for it if you follow the "Eberron is a lower level setting" idea. As a GM, once the players are able to afford this I don't really have a big problem with it. The way I have it set up in my campaign Jorasco does offer Raise Dead services but it's kind of like getting acess to a modern MRI or something where there is a backlog of people waiting. Not only a backlog but first preference would be given to nobles, House Jorasco members, and members in good standing of other Dragonmarkes houses or churches. So basically players would have to do the standard DnD thing of "preform a quest, and you have a deal" in addition to paying for the service. Once they get to that level I don't see it as a problem. I have a particular probalem because of the lower experience rate of my campaign. So my players linger at a lower level and stay in that vulnerable area longer than is intended in the DnD genre. Thus my thought that I may want a dead buffer since I artificially keep my players lingering in that vulnerable area.
fizzbang 04-08-05, 12:35 PM	A PC death should always have meaning. ... There is just nothing cinematic about a potentially lethal situation when they know they can just go to a cleric and get revived. Its one of the selling points of the setting for many DMs. Death is significant, and the threat of a character dying is a SERIOUS one. A character coming back from the dead should be a MIRACLE, not something they expect to happen. I was halfway writing something along this line and then I noticed that Edymnion had already put it quite well. Death in a story should have meaning; unless you're interested in a strict simulation rather than a storytelling experience, don't let random things kill characters. And on the flip side of that, death should also be final in all but a miraculous few cases; anything else cheapens the power and threat of death. That said, my local players and I have so many interesting character concepts that we're almost excited at the prospect of our characters dying in a game: DM: "The dire shark succeeds in its automatic grapple against you. Spitting and snarling, you disappear down his toothy maw." Me: "Oh boy! Time to bring in a Changeling Wu Jen from the Shadow Marches!!" DM: "You're not dead, yet! Even in the burning confines of his stomach, you can lash out with your daggers against his tender flesh." Me: "Welllllll, okay. I guess I'll cut my way out and survive this time..." Friend: "Don't kill him too much! I got a couple nifty concepts from the latest Dragonshard I wanna try out!"
shilsen 04-08-05, 12:37 PM	The players in my group really don't like rolling up new characters so I've instituted an extra use for action points. Using 3 action pts at once can turn any killing effect (blow, spell, etc.) into one that renders the PC unconscious and comatose for the duration of the encounter. I roll in the open, don't fudge at all, and don't pull my punches, so it's a good thing I instituted that rule. Without it, there'd have been anywhere from 4-8 deaths in a dozen sessions.
Altaris 04-08-05, 01:42 PM	I guess it really depends on the playing and DMing style involved. My group tends to run campaigns on a bi-weekly basis for 12 to 18 months at a time. Our DMs (including myself) all roll behind the screen, and we all fudge rolls at times. In some games PC death is never a concern, between PC clerics or DM intervention. In my Eberron game though, death is a very real concern. I'm known for no holds barred encounters, and my PCs have died more than once. My first Eberron game ended in a TPK due to player ineptitude (they all seem to have taken 'stupid' pills that night.) Since then, the group has been much more cautious about their tactics. They run when needed, allow NPCs to flee if the PCs are too wounded to pursue, pause to quaff healing potions and use other buffs at opportune times. They have better teamwork than we do in other games and actively work to cover eachother's backs. That, IMO of Eberron, is what Eberron is all about. Truely cooperative heroes facing the adversity of over-the-top villians. Now, I know this is not really in answer of the thread, but it sets up my suggestions. I have no probably fudging rolls in the right situations. I fudged the roll on one PC death, because it was not appropriate nor was it very cinematic. And yet, the same PC died three sessions later, again. I didn't fudge the rolls then because it WAS cinematic for her to die, and die she did. It provided some great RP during and after the situation. I don't feel there is a need to have all kinds of crunch for every little niche. Sometimes the DM just has to make a judgement call, afterall, that is what being a DM is all about.
JoshuaWilhoyte 04-08-05, 02:23 PM	Poor Phillip, Cleric of the Silver Flame was critted by a Skeleton wielding a Scythe near the end of the first module. Cap'n Katt, Dragonslayer (it was a little dragon) was poisoned and bitten to death by a giant snake near the site of an ancient battle. Dalen and Si were alone when they caught up to the 10 stirges. That's 4 deathes in the campaign so far (as the highest level, I should hit 6th level two games). Only Si is still alive, he was rasied by some horrible evil artifact we can't get off his risk. Dalen and Phillip were both Scott's characters. He'll be rolling up his third for the next game. We're hoping to eventually be high enough level to afford a Raise Dead. We especially don't want to lose Abe and Gimble, since they've been in the party since day 1. All in all, we dislike death, and we try to avoid it. We try to use each instance of death as a learning experience on what not to do. So far, don't willing provoke AoO so you can turn/explode all the skeletons. Take the two turns, the Skellie might actually crit with a Scythe. Don't attack snakes that bite for Con damage when you're already injured. Fall back and shoot them, letting the Warforged ignore the poison. Lastly, never even fight a dozen Strige. And if you have do, pull out the Fireball scroll sooner rather than later.
Makabriel 04-08-05, 03:55 PM	I've thrown in a house rule with action points. They can use them to negatively effect an opponents roll. Natural 20? Burn an AP and it goes down by D6. Hit cuases you to go below 0? Burn an AP and the damage is reduced by D6 I think of it as "Lucky misses" or "by the skin of your teeth"
Gurv 04-08-05, 04:41 PM	Bringing back the dead is rare in Eberron, yes. But it can be done, and is not so impossible that people would believe otherwise. I think the people of Eberron are under the impression that magic can accomplish virtually anything. The PCs are the ones that rare things happen to. If someone comes back from the dead, there should be a good chance that that person is a PC, or someone of great importance. Raise Dead is rare. So are PCs themselves. They go hand in hand. It isn't right to remove a viable part of the game arbitrarily...but it is okay to make them earn the ability to do it, whether they do so by learning to cast it themselves or whether they want someone else to do it for them. In my own game, if a PC dies and the player doesn't want to make a new character, I will present them with a quest that makes it happen. The player will have to sit out, or play a temporary character, for the duration of the adventure. It might be a favor for a religion (most likely the BoV, as I like the idea of making them work with the dark side to get something like this done), or for House Jorasco. It might be a quest to find the lost Fountain of Life deep in the jungles of Xen'drik. Actually, since my players work for the dragonmarked houses anyway, I think they will be sent to find an Altar of Ressurection lost during the Mourning. Once they've done that favor for Jorasco, I'll let them make use of it in the future, as long as they stay on good terms. But I'll make them travel to it each time, and bring the material component with them.
Edymnion 04-08-05, 04:49 PM	This is really kind of the irony of this whole thread so far. Several replies come into this thread in fairly quick succession with variations on the "screw them, let them die" theme. Of course later they pipe up with how they actually do save players themselves. Somehow people take this as an opportunity to offer unasked for advice about GMing. Honestly I don't really need that, I've been running games for over 20 years and I'm quiet good at it if I say so myself. Even if I didn't the scores of people I've run for over the years would. I think you missed the point. OP asked about bringing back the dead in Eberron. I replied with "Generally, you don't." People then jumped in with how easy it is to die thanks to a lucky crit and started getting a bit testy, and seemed to aim it towards me. I pointed out that I don't let things like random rolls of the dice kill characters. When they die, its typically for a good reason. And once they are dead, they are dead, and they are not coming back. Oh, and you messed up one thing. "...unasked for advice about GMing". The entire point of the thread is asking for advice about how to GM death in this setting.With Raise Dead said to be so uncommon in Eberron I'm wondering how DMs are dealing with death of player in their campaigns?I think that makes it pretty clear that he *IS* asking about GMing advice. He wanted to know, I told him. I don't let characters die for random accidents, but when they do die, they stay dead.
Pinky's brain 04-08-05, 04:53 PM	Call me a roll player all you want ... but I still think most players hate loosing a level as much or more as loosing a character. Also it might not be the ideal way to be brought back to life, but scrolls of reincarnate should be relatively easy to find. 5th level artificers arent that rare ... they occur in all small cities and 1/3d of the large towns,
Streamweaver 04-09-05, 12:28 AM	I think you missed the point. OP asked about bringing back the dead in Eberron. I replied with "Generally, you don't." People then jumped in with how easy it is to die thanks to a lucky crit and started getting a bit testy, and seemed to aim it towards me. I pointed out that I don't let things like random rolls of the dice kill characters. When they die, its typically for a good reason. And once they are dead, they are dead, and they are not coming back. Oh, and you messed up one thing. "...unasked for advice about GMing". The entire point of the thread is asking for advice about how to GM death in this setting.I think that makes it pretty clear that he *IS* asking about GMing advice. He wanted to know, I told him. I don't let characters die for random accidents, but when they do die, they stay dead. Being the original poster and the person quoted here I'll reply. - Sorry but your wrong on me asking for GMing advice. I asked you how you were dealing with it, now how I should deal with it which was the gist of most of the answers. I never asked "what should I do" I only asked for a discusson on what people were doing. The irony then began when people began their "I let them die" conversations followed by their "well I just cheat when I want to instead of letting them die" follow ups. You were one of these people, but by no means the only one. - People did jump in and attack you on it. I jumped in and defended you on it and it's a pitty you can recall one but not the other.
RamblingScribe 04-09-05, 12:59 PM	Caveat: I'm not saying anyone else should do this. This is what I do. If you like it, steal it. If you don't, I already know why, and I already don't agree. You can try and convert me, but it probaly won't work. In two weeks my brothers and I are having a celebratory game of 'In Search of the Unknown' to celebrate our 25th anniverary of D&D playing. I'm not totally set in my ways, but I know what I'm doing and why. I hope that doesn't come off as snooty, but I neither want to give the impression that I'm telling you how to run your game, nor to solicit more opinions that I should fudge die rolls when I've already heard these arguments many times. I understand why people do this and support their choice to run their game that way, It's just not for me. I like my players to feel challenged. I feel that if I fudge a die roll to save them, I cheat them of that. I've become pretty good at pushing the envelope. Almost every important encounter, my party at some point feel that they are screwed. Then when they survive, they feel like they beat the odds. They enjoy this. If I just let them win, or let them live when they should have died, they have not achieved anything. I don't make all of my rolls publicly, because my players are quick enough to use the results and the base roll to extrapolate their opponent's stats, and then make better choices on whether to use action points or not, etc. Also, my players already know how I run things. They know I won't save them. They also know that I will always do my best to create encounters that they can survive, if they play smart. I really like the rarity of raise dead and associated magics in Eberron. It makes the challenge that much more real. At this point, it hasn't been that big a deal, because my party hasn't lost anyone yet. Also, they are still only 4th level, so don't have their own access to such spells. My current plan is that if they ever wish to raise someone, part of the magic involves them spiritually travelling to Dollurh (sp?) to recover the soul. I'm going to make that a component of the spell. In fact, once I have time, I'm going to design a standard scalable adventure for this purpose. My game logic for the scalability is that the attraction between Dollurh and the soul are like gravity; the stronger the soul (ie the higher level the dead character's level) the stronger the pull to Dollurh. Of course this will be represented by tougher challenges rather than a simple force that needs to be overcome. Actually, in spite of what I said earlier, I'm happy to take suggestions on how to run this particular adventure, since I haven't written it yet, or worked out the details. Just bear in mind that I'm not likely to be swayed from doing this. One final word. Action points (as they are) go a long way towards giving players more control over their characters' survival, even in a tougher setting. I really think this eliminates most of the need for raise dead, assuming that your challenges are no more than somewhat unbalanced. Craig Shackleton, The Rambling Scribe
Brastan 04-11-05, 12:22 AM	As both Eberron campaigns I was running have stalled to death and I have reverted to a Player in another setting I can't give an current examples of how *I* handle player death in Eberron. In the past it has never been an issue because most of the player parties I run tend to act more like a well drilled hit squad than a band of adventures. They've never really let death take a good long look at them, they grab control of an encounter away from my NPCs within two to three rounds. There were one or two occasions were I thought a death was immanent but they used AP to stabilize and were back on their feet due to ready healing(magical or otherwise) from still stand party members. Now as to how I *would* deal with death if it some how occurred would be the standard response to death in all D&D games, you need to find a provider and then pay for it. The nature of the provider(and spell used) and the payment dependent on what the Players decide to do. The Alters of the Healers guild were always an option in cities that could support them(GP limits and stuff). The quest of revive a friend would become a mini-adventure. My players would have likely intimidated the Halfling healers into performing the service as soon as possible. If they didn't have the cash they would have likely taken out a loan (see Sharn:CoT for money lending) and then sacked a cult stronghold or other similarly wealthy evil local to pay it off. Low level death is normally not revisable due to lack of money, higher level death is off set by money, contacts, and favors gained during their career. I would think that character death and revival is truly a case by case thing since circumstances and resources vary from situation to situation. but scrolls of reincarnate should be relatively easy to find. 5th level artificers arent that rare ... they occur in all small cities and 1/3d of the large towns, Thanks for the reminder that Artificers and Magewrites do actually play a really role in Eberrons magic economy. A Rogue with high UMD could even be a source of resurrection. So for me ya gotta find it and ya gotta pay for it.
Just another user 04-11-05, 02:56 AM	A houserule suggested by Hellcow to limit the "all you need is a 5th level Artificer and death is not a problem anymore" problem is to use the table for when dolurh is coterminus at page 95 of the ECS for any situation where a Raise Dead & c is used without clerical assistance (i.e. UMD skill, artificers and, maybe, Jorasco's Altars).
Bone Machine 04-12-05, 10:53 AM	And how exactly can a 5th level artificer bring back the dead? I'd really like to know :P
Just another user 04-12-05, 11:05 AM	And how exactly can a 5th level artificer bring back the dead? I'd really like to know :P You are right, make it 7th, a little more rare but still common enough to be a problem because at that point he can start to create scrolls of raise dead as needed or almost so.
heretic44 04-12-05, 11:28 AM	I generally go with Keiths suggestion that once a soul has passed to Dollurh, it requires an actual rescue attempt to get them back. But I give my players until the sun next crosses the horizon (whether that be evening or morning) to use some form of life restoring magic. After that, the soul is in Dolurhh and the players must physically travel there as well as find and capture the spirit of their companion. Then they must escape (no easy task, Dolurrh is hard to get away from), then use their life restoring magic. Mechanically speaking, once a soul is in Dolurrh, I treat it as being automatically unwilling to return (which it is) thus causing all forms of life restoring magic to fail. As for death in general, Eberron is designed to be cinematic and action oriented, if a player dies, there are only two possible ways it could happen: a) Player stupidity (in which case they deserve to die) b) DM miscalculation/mistake/stupidity. (In which case you should re-evaluate the approach you take to your game. Or expect recurring player death. In this circumstance, any fudging is really just covering for your own screw up, and, well, should be minimized lest you lose the respect of your players (once that happens, your campaign is dead))
Bone Machine 04-12-05, 11:58 AM	I think the save vs. death sucks personally. It's not the DMs fault, and it's not the players faults. A single bad die roll shouldn't result in death. It's not fun. Our campaign is currently playing the Grasp of the Emerald Claw adventure - I am not the DM but I'm assuming that everyone has met the Bodak in Stormreach? I'm all for tough challenging encounters. If I die fighting, so be it. Running up to a hooded figure, rolling a 2 on a DC 15 fortitude save (not knowing it's a bodak or anything that could cause death with a glance), and having the DM tell you the character you've invested the last 6 months playing has died stinks.
BMStroh 04-12-05, 12:21 PM	As for death in general, Eberron is designed to be cinematic and action oriented, if a player dies, there are only two possible ways it could happen: a) Player stupidity (in which case they deserve to die) b) DM miscalculation/mistake/stupidity. (In which case you should re-evaluate the approach you take to your game. Or expect recurring player death. In this circumstance, any fudging is really just covering for your own screw up, and, well, should be minimized lest you lose the respect of your players (once that happens, your campaign is dead)) I'm sure that works for a lot of people, but there are some (myself included) who don't buy into giving characters script immunity just because they're PCs. It doesn't take a stupid decision on the players part or a miscalculation/error on my part to kill a character; it takes removing more HP than he has, through whatever combination of circumstances. If a party of 5th level characters is facing a minotaur zombie and one character takes a 50+ point critical hit, I'm not going to handwave it away. Players enjoy a challenge and I enjoy trying to provide one. IMO, the relationship of GM to the characters is essentially that of 'the world to the players - the world is largely disinterested in the outcome of my life. Similarly, as GM, if the characters come up with an effective plan to neutralize my big, bad encounter, so be it. If my evil bad guy scores a crit and takes down a character, so be it. Between action points and the party's sense of self-preservation, odds are good that anyone taken below zero will either stabilize or be healed with time to spare. And if not, break out the dice. Without risk, there is no reward. :)
Streamweaver 04-12-05, 12:49 PM	As for death in general, Eberron is designed to be cinematic and action oriented, if a player dies, there are only two possible ways it could happen: a) Player stupidity (in which case they deserve to die) b) DM miscalculation/mistake/stupidity. This, of course, is a downright silly statement and shows an ignorance of not only Eberron but DnD in general.
Streamweaver 04-12-05, 01:28 PM	I think the save vs. death sucks personally. <snip> Running up to a hooded figure, rolling a 2 on a DC 15 fortitude save (not knowing it's a bodak or anything that could cause death with a glance), and having the DM tell you the character you've invested the last 6 months playing has died stinks. I would generally agree with this but Eberron already has a mechanic for dealing with it in the form of Action Points. Action Points and all the variations present in other D20 games (force points, fate points, hero points...) came about because game designers understand an inherent flaw in the D20 system is the wide variance on any given single roll. So being able to modify a given D20 roll is a way to buffer that weakness in the system and provide a bit more stability. I'm sure that works for a lot of people, but there are some (myself included) who don't buy into giving characters script immunity just because they're PCs. This is an interesting statement because I do generally buy into this theory. I usually roll in sight of my players, I enjoy it and in my own game it generally raises the tension of encounters. My players know and understand that I will let them die if it comes to it or, more horrid from the PC point of view, I will take their stuff away if they lose it as well. If a party of 5th level characters is facing a minotaur zombie and one character takes a 50+ point critical hit, I'm not going to handwave it away. Players enjoy a challenge and I enjoy trying to provide one. I'm not really one prone to waving it away either. As a GM I have fudged die rolls in the past but I generally do it as infrequently as I can. In fact I think the whole "sting of death" thing isn't done away with because a player knows they can get raised (which may take lots of money, a big quest, and have them losing a level) I think death looses it's power when players know a GM will just fudge a roll to save them if they feel like it. I think you lose your credibility as a GM when you start doing things like this. The whole issue of weather someone should be brought back from the dead, although the primary topic of conversation, wasn't what I was getting at when I started this thread. If you look back I was toying with the idea of putting some element in the rules that may extend the action of the campaign when it came to death and saving lives. Though the conversation since the start has been all about what a DM should do after a player is dead, all my initial suggestions were about things to do before that occurs. Something like this would not only increase the action in an encounter but support Eberron's take on Raise Dead as a rare occurrence. Basically both suggestions I tossed out insert a similar mechanism into the game. That a player can still be taken out by a massive critical (note I said nothing about spell effects, just damage) but it could create the possibility they could have a few rounds where another player could sweep in and try to save them in some heroic fashion. In my opinion this would provide a heck of a lot more action than just "wham - dead" and it does a very critical thing, it involves the party even more in the action. The whole idea of furious action and heroically pulling peoples fat out of the fire IS central to the noir genre. The reactions that some folks have had to the suggestion as if it would write death off as a concern is just absurd. (and understand I'm not addressing you directly here I'm kind of talking about the whole thread now) Basically what I think is happening here is people don't understand the place Raise Dead and the like has in DnD from a game design point of view. Like it or not when something is put into the game, especially at later levels, it is balanced in some cases by the understanding that Raising someone is a possibility. So it moderates things like the Bodak's insta-death gaze and other things. I'm not a big fan of Raise Dead and I like it's rarity in Eberron. I don't plan on making Raising a common thing at all, though I still intend it to have a small place in the world. I also do not like the wham-dead approach because it's sterile in terms of action and story. IMO, the relationship of GM to the characters is essentially that of 'the world to the players - the world is largely disinterested in the outcome of my life. I disagree with what you're saying here. The GM is never a disinterested third party. If they were then players would sit in a tavern and nothing would ever happen, because that is life. I think what you're getting at is the GM shouldn't play nanny to the players, which I absolutely agree with. I don't hold my players hand through things, and I am perfectly willing to let them succumb to the fate their actions have in store for them. I am not indifferent to the whole thing though. As a GM I am very interesting in providing action and excellent story along the way that is both engaging, exciting, and involving. My attempts with the initial suggestions were as a means to make the action surrounding player deaths more involving and exciting. The idea that any of my suggestions would remove risk from the game is just plain wrong, but the topic has drifted so much people may need to go back and read the original suggestions.
Pinky's brain 04-12-05, 03:19 PM	Id say bump revivify (miniatures handbook) down to level 3, and have them get early access to a scroll of it during one of the first few quests.
Bone Machine 04-12-05, 03:37 PM	I agree with you on the use & implementation of AP, but if you're critted for 54 points and you have 36, you're outta luck. It's not those kinds of things I mind though. My beef is with save vs. death effects that really shouldn't kill, but can with a roll of a 1 or something.
Altaris 04-12-05, 03:59 PM	Basically both suggestions I tossed out insert a similar mechanism into the game. That a player can still be taken out by a massive critical (note I said nothing about spell effects, just damage) but it could create the possibility they could have a few rounds where another player could sweep in and try to save them in some heroic fashion. In my opinion this would provide a heck of a lot more action than just "wham - dead" and it does a very critical thing, it involves the party even more in the action. The whole idea of furious action and heroically pulling peoples fat out of the fire IS central to the noir genre. Try this optional rule: Once a character exceeds their total contsitution score in negative damage, they die. Just as if the character had died at -11, as normal. A character can remain at negative hit points (beyond -10) for a number of rounds equal to their current Constitution modifier (if positive.) They continue to lose hit points each round unless stablized, as normal, and all negative damage must be healed. I've just made that up, so let me know if you use it and how it works out.
Altaris 04-12-05, 04:28 PM	Basically both suggestions I tossed out insert a similar mechanism into the game. That a player can still be taken out by a massive critical (note I said nothing about spell effects, just damage) but it could create the possibility they could have a few rounds where another player could sweep in and try to save them in some heroic fashion. In my opinion this would provide a heck of a lot more action than just "wham - dead" and it does a very critical thing, it involves the party even more in the action. The whole idea of furious action and heroically pulling peoples fat out of the fire IS central to the noir genre. Try this optional rule: Once a character exceeds their total contsitution score in negative damage, they die. Just as if the character had died at -11, as normal. A character can remain at negative hit points (beyond -10) for a number of rounds equal to their current Constitution modifier (if positive.) They continue to lose hit points each round unless stablized, as normal, and all negative damage must be healed. I've just made that up, so let me know if you use it and how it works out.
Pinky's brain 04-12-05, 05:33 PM	And how exactly can a 5th level artificer bring back the dead? I'd really like to know :PScroll of reincarnate.
Streamweaver 04-12-05, 07:49 PM	Try this optional rule: Once a character exceeds their total contsitution score in negative damage, they die. Just as if the character had died at -11, as normal. A character can remain at negative hit points (beyond -10) for a number of rounds equal to their current Constitution modifier (if positive.) They continue to lose hit points each round unless stablized, as normal, and all negative damage must be healed. I've just made that up, so let me know if you use it and how it works out. I already use a houserule that incorporates some of these ideas, without the ability to linger. Basically in my game someone is considered incapacitated when they are between 0 and negative their Con modifier, and dead once their hps exceed their negative constition score. This doesn't really do much to save people from death, and it wasn't meant to, it gives players a bit more room in the incapacitated state if they have a high con. I've found it really can add to the action of an encounter. (BTW this is a common houserule that's floated around for awhile now, so I didn't invent it or anything) That idea of staying around once you would normally hit dead for a few rounds is interesting and seems similar to the AP thing, though it obviously favors fighters who are less vulnerable to the damage from crits in the first palce. There could be other variations on this theme as well, like a fort save each round. Thanks, definitly an interesting idea.
Streamweaver 04-12-05, 08:08 PM	I agree with you on the use & implementation of AP, but if you're critted for 54 points and you have 36, you're outta luck. It's not those kinds of things I mind though. My beef is with save vs. death effects that really shouldn't kill, but can with a roll of a 1 or something. I can understand what you're saying here and I have to say my gut reaction to it is along similar lines. I have to wonder though, what is the difference between the two? How come simple dumb luck when it comes to a spell save is any more worthy of sympathy than simple dumb luck when it comes to to hit and damage rolls? Sure the bad rolls on damage require several bad turns of luck in a row, but you make attack and damage rolls a few orders of magnitude more times on a player than they have to make death spell saves. Furthermore in Eberron there is a built in mechanism to deal with the bad spell saves everyone seems to dislike so much, those being action points. So if these two aren't really any different, why then is a mechanism for buffering the result of one contingency any better or worse than a mechanism for buffering the other? In fact the method I'm suggesting is even weaker when it comes to saving a character than the benefit you get against spell saves with action points. With a spell you are able to spend some APs to completely negate the effect of these death effects, but when it comes to overwhelming damage the best my rule does is give yourself hope of holding on a few rounds if someone else can take a heroic action to save you. I'm not disagreeing with you because, like I said, my reaction was that I agree with what you said. When I tried to think about it logically (with the reasoning above) I'm not so sure of the reasoning.
Streamweaver 04-15-05, 08:54 PM	After thinking about the issue I'm going to suggest the following rule on the matter for my game. To come some context, I use a house rule where you are considered Disabled when you're between 0 and neg your con modifier in HP (just zero if you already have a neg con modifier) and you're considered Dying when between Disabled and negative your con stat. Action Points and Deaths Door When a player would normally reach Dead status they may spend an action point to remain at Death's Door instead for a single round. Each round thereafter characters may continue to spend an additional action point to remain at Deaths Door for an additional round. Characters who no long have action points to spend die. Someone at Deaths Door can be stabilized with a DC 20 Heal check or by being healed 2 or more hit points by some extraordinary means. Hitpoints for a character stabilized in this manner are immediately brought to just below their dead threshold (see houserules for this value). If the character is traumatized in any way such as being moved roughly, left without care, or struck they immediately move to dead status (though they can again spend action points to being the Deaths Door process all over again). Characters who recover after being at Deaths Door always do so with some sort of dramatic scare, loss of a body part, or other malady consistant with the nature of their wound(s) at the DMs descretion.
Kennian 04-15-05, 09:37 PM	I love this... AHH DEAHT IS SO HORRRRIBLE IN EBBERON BECAUSE ITS LOW LEVEL every major city probibly has at least a dozen or so people who can use a alter of ressurection a artificer can create a raise dead scroll at seventh level, or reincarnate at fith.. death isnt all that horrible in Ebberon if you stop and think about it...it isnt as easy to fix as in FR or most custom settings, but it isnt as bad as most people think
ChronosCrow 04-15-05, 10:20 PM	When my player got bull rushed off a cliff (it was spectacular) he said "Damn" and then rolled up another character. I feel that part of the Eberron nature with pulp and noir in concern some of the good guys just HAVE to die and stay dead too. It keeps things more 'real' in that aspect. If you have a fear of 'dead dead' then things seem to kinda click for the players as adventurers. It's a dirty hard and dangerous lifestyle.
ChronosCrow 04-15-05, 10:26 PM	... don't buy into giving characters script immunity just because they're PCs...Without risk, there is no reward. :) Here here!
anthrorob 04-15-05, 10:28 PM	Personally, any DM worth his salt can fudge his rolls with no one ever knowing. I do this by keeping track of the PCs HPs. If I know you have 30 points and you are on your fourth character, I will tone down the damage. That is what the DM screen is for. To back pedal after the fact..."oh did that kill you, um, oops"...destroys a DMs credibility. The question shouldn't be about the mechanics of death in the game and resurrection in the game, the real question is this: Does the death of the character add to the game, or take away? Some pluses include adding threat and drama, emphasizing strategic playing. Negatives include character revolving doors, loss of continuity and creation of general apathy. Too many deaths in a group are bad news. And once you raise one character you have opened a Pandora's box, a virtual slippery slope. If only certain characters can get resurrected, other don't get to. This creates discriminatory practices that further degrade the game. "Why does he get rezzed and not me?" If you resurrect everyone, there is no fear of death. If you resurrect no one, and there is a lot of death, people will stop playing interesting characters and start Min-Maxing. Character should always be dramatic, even if caused by player stupidity. Simply saying "You are dead" takes all the drama out of the game. As I said, opening this box should be done with a lot of thought, and not out of guilt, impulsiveness or simply for the facilitation of the game. I get surprised by the often adversarial tone that DM's take on these boards (and even in some games.) Sure players make mistakes and are sometimes stupid, but we DMs can be too. Anthrorob
Streamweaver 04-15-05, 10:29 PM	When my player got bull rushed off a cliff (it was spectacular) he said "Damn" and then rolled up another character. I feel that part of the Eberron nature with pulp and noir in concern some of the good guys just HAVE to die and stay dead too. It keeps things more 'real' in that aspect. If you have a fear of 'dead dead' then things seem to kinda click for the players as adventurers. It's a dirty hard and dangerous lifestyle. Try reading the rest of the thread, this is the same kind of kneejerk reaction that guided the entire first half of it. This isn't about saving characters, this is about increasing the action in a scene.
Gurv 04-15-05, 10:45 PM	I'm sure that works for a lot of people, but there are some (myself included) who don't buy into giving characters script immunity just because they're PCs. It doesn't take a stupid decision on the players part or a miscalculation/error on my part to kill a character; it takes removing more HP than he has, through whatever combination of circumstances. If a party of 5th level characters is facing a minotaur zombie and one character takes a 50+ point critical hit, I'm not going to handwave it away. Players enjoy a challenge and I enjoy trying to provide one. IMO, the relationship of GM to the characters is essentially that of 'the world to the players - the world is largely disinterested in the outcome of my life. Similarly, as GM, if the characters come up with an effective plan to neutralize my big, bad encounter, so be it. If my evil bad guy scores a crit and takes down a character, so be it. Between action points and the party's sense of self-preservation, odds are good that anyone taken below zero will either stabilize or be healed with time to spare. And if not, break out the dice. Without risk, there is no reward. :) I agree with most of what is being said here, on some level. It is important not to hand everything to the players if they don't do anything to earn it with their characters. If a character has had a good chance to succeed, but has failed to take advantage of those chances, then he should not succeed. I agree with that. But not that the DM should be indifferent. He should want interesting things to happen to the PCs. He should want the PCs to become whatever it is that they are supposed to become. I don't say "good things" because that is not what I mean. I also think that players need to get used to the idea that when something bad happens to their character, that is part of the fun too. Most of the time, the PC wins. Sometimes, the PC does not win. In both cases, the game should be fun. If the event that befalls is not fun, the DM should not cause it, whether it is good for the PC or bad for the PC. I have played in games where both things have happened. I have seen the DM let a die roll kill a player in a situation that could have just as easily not have happened, when the character was doing nothing dramatic, heroics, or noteworthy. Just like real life, it just wasn't a good day. And you know what? The player didn't think that was fun. I have also played in games where good things happened that were no fun either. It is strange, but in a game where the DM constantly has great things happen to you, just because you are the PC, you won't have fun either. A good DM has to stay in the middle. He has to want the PCs to succeed in the same way he wants the characters in a movie to succeed. They have to save the day with a combination of skill and luck. If it is only the former, then the game is nothing but rolling dice; only the latter, and it becomes a rather one-sided story.
Pinky's brain 04-15-05, 10:58 PM	I like hard encounters, I dislike a new PC in the party every couple of sessions.