Post/Author/DateTime	Post
darksyngr 03-04-07, 12:18 AM	Okay, I want to run a campaign where death is involved and resurrection isn't so easy. For the sake of game consistancy what reason would you give players why most people are not resurrected? Such as kings, heroes, or other NPC's? I don't get how FR canon makes it so easy yet deaths so final outside the "star players".
draco1119 03-04-07, 04:48 AM	Okay, I want to run a campaign where death is involved and resurrection isn't so easy. For the sake of game consistancy what reason would you give players why most people are not resurrected? Such as kings, heroes, or other NPC's? I don't get how FR canon makes it so easy yet deaths so final outside the "star players". You mean like Azoun? :P It's easy, really. Bump the costs of Res/True Res spells. Only let them come back a number equal to their Con mod. Or, my personal favorite, tell them that Kelemvor has come under attack by Cyric/Bane/Xvim/whoever, and needs to keep as many souls as possible in order to be strong enough to keep "Death and The Dead" in his portfolio.
Mulan Rogue 03-04-07, 09:46 AM	Keep in mind -most souls get to the afterlife and don't want to be raised. The afterlife for most of the non-evil-god worshipping souls is complete bliss, why would they want to return to mundane life? Only those souls with a very (think of the character Eric Draven in The Crow film) super important task or unfinished business would even think of coming back to life. (Players ;))
Renvale999 03-04-07, 12:11 PM	The big thing is how you die, I think. Like Azoun, if you die on the battlefield, saving your country...do you really want to come back and die of old age? And sometimes you diety may not allow it, I really don't see Silvanus ever allowing any of his followers coming back, but that's just me.
Purple Dragon Knight 03-04-07, 12:58 PM	Mulan Rogue hit it right on the nose: a soul can elect not to come back, and when they're in paradise, let's face it, I'd dare say that a good 90% would elect to stay there! Which leads to an interesting conundrum: what about the cowards that end up in the lower planes unwillingly? let's face it: only the most insanely evil would wish to end up in such a gladiatorial pit and start to 'climb' the ladder, especially IF they have reached, say, a respectable level of power when they were mortal. An easy answer is that cowards and evil persons don't have that many friends, let alone friends who would be ready to pay for the resurrection spell! However, let us assume that raise dead / resurrection is cast an equal number of times per year on good and evil deceased ones. Let us also assume that the good ones mostly decide to stay in heaven. What, then, would happen to Faerun over the centuries? are we looking at more evil 'come backs' as they don't want to stay in Hell or the Abyss? Some food for thought! :cool:
miscellany 03-04-07, 01:14 PM	Raise Dead, etc... are available for play because it wouldln't be much fun to play a character that dies....and is dead forever. Obviously these spells aren't easy for PC's to obtain and all have drawbacks, so it follows that for most NPCs this is true as well. Note that in Cormyr for example it's against Crown Law (PDK, Charles Phipps, etc...help me if I'm off here) to raise a noble from the dead. This protects lines of succession and keeps things orderly. I imagine similar laws or prohibitions exists in other Realms as well. Lastly, once we step outside of the needs of the game environment and consider the setting as a living, breathing thing, it should become clear that magic capable of raising the dead back to life is a terribly powerful thing. When you look at all the machinations and scheming power plays (even amongst goodly churches and the like) it follows that most priest are simply not going to grant such raisings for a simple fee of coins. On the contrary I'd expect hefty favors, grants of power and land to the church in exchange for such. Just our thoughts. :)
Tergiver 03-04-07, 03:15 PM	You could also require the OK of two gods to bring people back from the dead - the god of the cleric casting the spell and the patron god of the dead character. The god granting the spell only agrees if they think it's beneficial to their interests, and the patron god of the dead character only agrees if the character has been robbed of their destiny (hasn't completed an important quest, a paladin who died after accidentally losing his powers, etc.). People are supposed to die - gods shouldn't want to interfere with people who died deaths as meaningful as their lives. If you wanted, you could also say that the FR gods (or Ao) made a pact (or edict) that gods couldn't raise their own followers, which leads you to the two-god solution. Approaching it from the other side, you could say that NPC are getting raised or resurrected, they just keep it quiet to avoid creeping people out and raising "is it really him?" questions. In my campaign, one of the high-level NPCs died doing some exploring (and to show the PCs how strong a bigbad was), and his clone picked up where he left off. He lost some items (including one he'd borrowed from the PCs) but most people never realized he'd died. Also, I have an NPC party of druids and rangers that included a couple of reincarnates.
darksyngr 03-05-07, 01:02 AM	These were all great answers. Thanks :) I just noticed that the subject is never really addressed in the books and was wondering.
Derren S. 03-10-07, 04:08 AM	Mulan Rogue hit it right on the nose: a soul can elect not to come back, and when they're in paradise, let's face it, I'd dare say that a good 90% would elect to stay there! The problem is that in the messed up faerun afterlife human souls don't land in the paradise immediatly. No you first spend some time on a depressing fugue plane together with hundereds of other souls without any memory of your former life, praying to someone you don't know while in the background there is a giant mortar and pestle is grinding souls into material for a wall which protects a city in which souls are tortured and devils walking among you trying to convince everyone to come with them to baator to start a career as Lemure. And don't forget the demon raids. So why would anyone refuse to be raised from a place like this? The real reason raise dead etc. isn't used is because the authors of the novels can't cope with it. When they kill someone in a novel he must stay dead even though it is illogical as hell so that the story continues. Thats why they never use the raise spells even on prominent characters.
MarkusTay63 03-10-07, 09:40 AM	however, it states 'somewhere' in canon that some souls 'just dissappear', and never wind up on the Fugue plane. I just read that last week, and I can't for the life of me remember where, but we can assume certain 'exalted' types have lived up to their gods expectations so well (Azoun) that they get to use the 'express lane' to heaven. The way I figure it, once you are actually IN your afterlife, there's NO coming back. Most characters and NPCs go to the Fugue plain for an indetermenant amount of time, perhaps years (time passes funny), before they 'move on'. During this time they are up for grabs. Once a fiend or a God has got its greedy little fingers in the person's soul, you have to go through Hell and highwater to get them back (literally). I would play it like Tergiver Has said at that point, and add in that you would ALSO need permission from the god of the dead (which in most cases the player's deity will do for him). I suppose certain artifacts and crafty types can circumvent this, but in so doing you risk accruing the wrath of powerful beings. Player characters are, for the most part, a dime a dozen, and don't warrant any special attention from the powers that be. But someone like a King, or Elminster, is most likely going to go straight to his reward and no amount of prayer is going to bring him back. That being said, my campaign takes place 20 years in the future, after Azoun's grandson has 'gone rogue'. I'm toying with the idea of having Azoun return (a'la the legend of King Arthur) when his country most desperately needs him, to fight his own grandson if need be.
Red_Wizard 03-10-07, 10:25 AM	These were all great answers. Thanks :) I just noticed that the subject is never really addressed in the books and was wondering. Actually a prime example of Ressurection amongst good aligned beings is in the new novel "Sacrifice of the Widow". When a priestes of Eilistraee dies, they will try to Ressurect her in all circumstances, so long as a body is presant. They hate having to draw the souls back from the lady, but their numbers are so few in their cause, it is a nessessity. That perfectly illustrates a respect for the soul going to it's god, and how they, nor the deceased, view it as a bad thing. The concept of Ressurection is more for those who wish to remain alive, or those who have buisness more pressing than death to finish.
Derren S. 03-10-07, 10:27 AM	When the patron gods permission is needed to raise a character than how are the devils able to bargain with souls? I don't think that many gods, even evil ones, agree with their souls leaving them to become devils. Yet it seems that in this case the souls wish to become a devil overrules what the patron god wants, so why should it be different with raise?
MarkusTay63 03-10-07, 12:28 PM	My take - you have to be faithless to end up going with a Demon, unless it somehow manages to 'trick' the soul ito going with him. So the way I see it, going by how FR cosmology is setup, most of the Demons, Devils, and Daemons ARE NOT from Faerûn! Most of the planes on the new Tree are unique to FR, but the various 'hells' are not (no matter which cosmology you use). So, weather those planes are part of the Wheel, or a small piece of the Real Plane broke off and interloped over (:yuck: ), the creatures already there were/are from a MYRIAD of different worlds. Thats why fiends have endless numbers, they are the False and Faithless from an infinite number of realities. People from Faerûn are too god-savy to fall for some demon's line of cr@p, but people from other worlds (like ours) would eat it right up. On other prime material worlds, people would be banging down the door to 'sign in blood' on the dotted line, guaranteeing them some earthly pleasures.
Purple Dragon Knight 03-10-07, 11:45 PM	The problem is that in the messed up faerun afterlife human souls don't land in the paradise immediatly. No you first spend some time on a depressing fugue plane together with hundereds of other souls without any memory of your former life, praying to someone you don't know while in the background there is a giant mortar and pestle is grinding souls into material for a wall which protects a city in which souls are tortured and devils walking among you trying to convince everyone to come with them to baator to start a career as Lemure. And don't forget the demon raids. So why would anyone refuse to be raised from a place like this? The real reason raise dead etc. isn't used is because the authors of the novels can't cope with it. When they kill someone in a novel he must stay dead even though it is illogical as hell so that the story continues. Thats why they never use the raise spells even on prominent characters.I don't think the Fugue Plane is that depressing to everyone... and I don't think souls lose their memories until after a servant of their Patron comes to collect them. I remember reading that you appear with a bunch of like-minded individuals all praying to your Patron deity... I also remember reading that souls who have a Patron deity, while waiting for a representative of their Patron, CANNOT be deceived in any way shape or form. Devils who walk around with big yellow binders full of Faustian contracts appear exactly as devils, and they are quite clear in their offer, as they are unable/unallowed to deceive, as per the standing contract they have with Kelemvor.
MarkusTay63 03-11-07, 01:14 AM	I've heard four different versions of this. In ALL cases you only lose those memories that connect you to your earthly eistance, like those of friends and family. You do not lose the collection of life experience that make up the sum total of who you are. You may still remember facts, like which world you are from or information about that world, but you will have no idea how or why you know these things. Kind of like an amnesia patient; they can still talk and drive a car and know how to count money, but they have NO CLUE who they are. #1 Semi-officiallly (Hallowed ground was a Planescape source, not FR) a petitioner (soul) loses its 'wordly memories' on the way to the fugue plain. They are left behind in a little crystal bubble floating in the Astral. If the person is rezzed they swing by and pick up their memories on the way back. Very contrived and mechanical if you ask me. #2 You slowly lose your memories over time, VERY slowly on the fugue plain but faster once you've gone to an actual after life. #3 You drink from the River Styx and you lose your memory. I think this may only happen if you are a petitioner of the Olympian Pantheon, however. #4 I believe this was proposed by Ripvanwormer on another thread, and I like it very much. Only the sum of your experiences become part of who you truly are (your soul). Your wordly memories stay behind with your mortal form (your body). They are just useless pieces of personal information that you won't need in the afterlife and are therefore only stored in your physical brain. When someone uses the Speak with dead spell, they are really just communicating with the person's 'data base'. The person's personality has long since fled with the soul. When you are rezzed you become reunited with those memories. If you are not rezzed and your body is destroyed (rotted away, burned, etc), your memories may 'linger' in a certain location that it finds familiar - it's home, it's final resting place, or the site at which it died (this usually happens only when death was unexpected and the 'memory' is confused). This is how we end up with apparition class 'ghosts'. They have little or no real power, and usually just keep repeating certain scenes from their life like a tape recorder. In time, even these fade and then there is nothing left.
Faraer 03-11-07, 04:22 AM	I just noticed that the subject is never really addressed in the books and was wondering.It is addressed, but piecemeal rather than all in one go. The combination of most folks not wanting to return, upperpriests not sharing such holy magic willy-nilly, cultural dislike of resurrection, specific traditions such as Cormyr's, difficulties in the magic which the spell writeup glosses over for simplicity's sake, and other factors combine to make raising the dead rare. On the other hand, there are many instances in Realmslore of characters being resurrected. All significant magic has such magical, cultural and historical complexities, details which the bare non-setting-specific spell writeups can't go into.
Derren S. 03-11-07, 04:23 AM	The fugu plane is described as a grey, featureless plane with a huge city in it. Combine that with the memory loss, the free roaming devils and the city wall which is made out of souls then I can't see how someone does not want to be ressurected. I also dislike how magic is handled in teh realms, especially with spells like raise dead it looks to me as if magic had to adapt so that the "target culture" of a country remains instead that the culture adapts to magic. Most restrictions on raise dead look awfully constructed and illogical to me.
Purple Dragon Knight 03-11-07, 07:13 PM	Derren, the FRCS states that the souls only remain in the Fugue Plane for 1d10 or 2d10 days (don't remember exactly) before they see a rep of their god or are judged by Kelemvor (i.e. this time period is coincidentally the only time a False or Faithless soul has to get raised/resurrected, as they are still 'free' in the Fugue Plane awaiting their awful judgement). After that time has passed, 1) the souls with a Patron are in their Patron's plane, and can be raised/resurrected normally; 2) the Faithless are in the wall and can only be brought back with wish or miracle; 3) I'm no longer sure about the False, but I'd say they share a fate similar to the Faithless in terms of raise/resurrection. So, only the False and the Faithless would have a truly bleak outlook on afterlife; mortals who KNOW or SUSPECT they do not hold a Patron deity above any other, or someone, for some reason, who HATES gods and their clergies; or someone, for some weird reasons, who would not believe* in any god/goddess would do well to become rich and powerful, and arrange for immediate raise/resurrection upon death with a local clergy... *Remember this is the Realms, where most mortals have SEEN the gods walk Faerun... (and the horrible effects this brought unto their lands) so it's not a matter of believe 90% of the time, as there is enough PROOF that gods exist...
Gray Richardson 03-11-07, 08:38 PM	In Cormyr and many other kingdoms it is illegal to resurrect royalty and nobility due to it complicates line of succession and title to property and such. If a character is noble and he dies, then it may be against custom, family tradition, or even against the law to resurrect him.
Gray Richardson 03-11-07, 08:42 PM	Maruts are a whole line of inevitables that exist to hunt down and put right those who would cheat the grave. You could have a powerful branch of Kelemvor's church that has declared resurrection to be blasphemous or sacrilegious and have them use every method at their employ, including summoning a squad of Maruts, to hunt down and extinguish those who violate "Kelemvor's Law" by returning from the dead.
GothicDan 03-11-07, 08:56 PM	That would definitely be giving Kelemvor a harsher, more LN/LE edge. Reminds me of the Dustmen's relationship with the Prolongers!
miscellany 03-11-07, 10:56 PM	You could have a powerful branch of Kelemvor's church that has declared resurrection to be blasphemous or sacrilegious and have them use every method at their employ, including summoning a squad of Maruts, to hunt down and extinguish those who violate "Kelemvor's Law" by returning from the dead. I've got more than one player who's joked about his or her character eventually being hunted down by a Marut or similar for multiple cheating's of death (and not just by ressurrection, but through sheer luck and prowess in battle). Thans to Gray's idea, I'm simply going to wait for them to offend just the right high priest of Kelemvor... :schemes:
Stigger 03-12-07, 01:38 AM	Heh, I always just figured the lack of resurrection magic was a way to annoy the hell out of us when we read novels... never liked the idea of making it uber rare when it's only a 5th level spell. True Resurrection, sure... but Raise Dead being nigh impossible to get just always struck me as a cheap literary device. Only time it's ever worked for me was the Azoun affair. At least that was properly explained and logical.
Derren S. 03-12-07, 02:30 AM	In Cormyr and many other kingdoms it is illegal to resurrect royalty and nobility due to it complicates line of succession and title to property and such. And that is completely illogical. Especially those people who live a good live and have enough power to get a resurrection (and to influence laws) would make sure that it is possible for them to be raised. That people can be raised would be acknowledged in the law and not ignored like this. Imo this line is there to prevent the society to look to different than the one Cormyr is based off. There would be laws about resurrection, but those laws would regulate what happens if someone is resurrected and not forbid it. Derren, the FRCS states that the souls only remain in the Fugue Plane for 1d10 or 2d10 days (don't remember exactly) before they see a rep of their god or are judged by Kelemvor (i.e. this time period is coincidentally the only time a False or Faithless soul has to get raised/resurrected, as they are still 'free' in the Fugue Plane awaiting their awful judgement). Most raises, especially those of influential people are done while they are still on the fuge plane (shortly after death) so lets ignore the willingness of people coming back when they have already been picked up (very low). What the people of Toril have seen is completely irrelevant because of the memory loss. They have no idea what afterlife awaits them (or that they are even dead). What they do know is that the place they currently are is not a nice place so when they somehow get the offer the return to their previous life most people would be willing to take that chance.
MarkusTay63 03-12-07, 08:51 AM	You also have the added problem of old age. If you bring back a loved one who died of natural causes, he/she will most likely immediately die again. Rezzing someone 'might' heal the damage that killed them, but it doesn't make them any younger. This is probably another reason that it is against the law in many places, it would almost be cruel to bring back someone like a beloved grandfather or uncle, only to have them suffer and die again.
Derren S. 03-12-07, 08:52 AM	You can't raise someone who died of old age.
Aldareth 03-12-07, 10:03 AM	And that is completely illogical. Especially those people who live a good live and have enough power to get a resurrection (and to influence laws) would make sure that it is possible for them to be raised. That people can be raised would be acknowledged in the law and not ignored like this. Imo this line is there to prevent the society to look to different than the one Cormyr is based off. There would be laws about resurrection, but those laws would regulate what happens if someone is resurrected and not forbid it. No its total logical, this laws prevent a civil war of second born nobels who dont see a chance to ever get a chance. maybe this law is established just because they learnd it the hard way?
Derren S. 03-12-07, 10:39 AM	It is illogical. When ressurection magic is availiable the whole society would look different than medival fantasy and the line of succession would be handeled differently. You are restricting magic to preserve a form of society which wouldn't exist if magic was availiable.
Aldareth 03-12-07, 11:16 AM	no it didnt , because there are at anytime enough ambitious second born who want their chance of power , no matter who the society changes. lets see what happens in your scenario: Firstborn dies, get raised, dies , get raised, dies ,get raised...this happens a few times ( Secondborn thinks: Stupid firstborn wont stay dead, but i am a so much better leader! So he goes out get some money ( adventuring, or what ever u imagine ) and then raise a army to take what he thinks belong to him...after firstborn was raised a dozen times... maybe this just the reason why the " No resurrection for Nobels" Law is brought up, think about it , and dont make the mistake to think too good of Humans, if there is a chance to power 4/10 will try it
Derren S. 03-12-07, 11:25 AM	And how does the anti raise law prevent this? It doesn't. With all the divination magic around sending an assasin to kill the firstborn is not possible without being recognized. So we are back to the civil war. If a secondborn wants power it doesn't matter if the firstborn gets killed and raised constantly or not. There will be war. If you want to prevent this you need a law to kill every child after the first. Nobles, which lead a very good life and would gain most from being raised would never agree with a law which prevents them from being raised. If you insist in keeping a medival society which itself is illogical than the laws would regulate of how raising affects the line of succession but not forbid it.
GothicDan 03-12-07, 11:30 AM	In real life, there's a myriad of 'conflicts' and 'illogical laws' made for purely moral/religious/ethical reasons, rather than 'efficiency' or due to brute force. That's how a realistically crafted fantasy world works, too.
Derren S. 03-12-07, 11:32 AM	Please tell me one of the myriade illogical laws where the ones with power get disadvantaged.
Aldareth 03-12-07, 11:37 AM	so what you say is, that after every death there gonna make an autopsy and a divination? so what results will the autopsy show if there is a " hunting accident" and the victim break his neck just because he falls from the horse? and dont forget if the god guys use divination , the "evil" can also use magic to counter divination
Derren S. 03-12-07, 12:55 PM	We are talking about secondborn who want to get the power. I doubt that they hope for a hunting accident. And when speak with death is so readily availiable why not use it when a important person (=noble) dies? Also please tell me which spell can be used to counter divinations.
ShadezofDis 03-12-07, 01:51 PM	Please tell me one of the myriade illogical laws where the ones with power get disadvantaged. MA state blue laws ftw! It is illogical. When ressurection magic is availiable the whole society would look different than medival fantasy and the line of succession would be handeled differently. You are restricting magic to preserve a form of society which wouldn't exist if magic was availiable. Raise dead is a fifth level spell, thus a cleric has to be at least 10th to use the spell. That limits the amount of beings capable of raising a dead person by a massive amount, in other words, there aren't enough people who can raise the dead to have a huge impact upon the society. Perhaps the higher end nobility and the royalty could afford resurections but then you must consider; Are the faiths that these particular nobility and royalty have access to able to cast that high a level spell. WOULD these faiths cast the spell for them. Anyhow, in either case it's not going to have a significant impact upon your average persons outlook because it's so removed from anything to do with their lives. Thus it is easy to see how a society would frown upon resurecting anyone.
Derren S. 03-12-07, 02:23 PM	There are many high level casters in the realms. Enough so that every rich/influental person can contact a high enough cleric or at least can get a scroll. And as gods are very active in the realms it is very unlikely that someone doesn't worship a god. And why would a priest not ressurect a rich and influental worshiper of his god? The churches do have worldly needs too. And there is always wauken whos priests are very likely to sell spells. After all trade is part of their dogma. When adventurers can get raise deads then nobles certainly can get them too. Yes, raise would not have much influence on the live of commoners except the knowledge that such spell exists. But it has a big impact on the live of nobles who can afford too get such a spell. And who in the realms creates the laws? The common man or the nobles?
Purple Dragon Knight 03-12-07, 11:34 PM	Also please tell me which spell can be used to counter divinations.Glibness.
bitter thorn 03-13-07, 12:00 AM	I have to agree with Darrens reasoning here. There might logically be an exception to raising the King when he dies (or undead rulers for that matter) to preclude succesion issues in a hereditary monarchy. However I just can't see (for instance) Cormyran nobles supporting a law saying that none of them could ever be raised. I believe Ed has adressed this at some point in CK, but I can't access it from work. Perhaps some more astute sage could have a peek?;)
Stigger 03-13-07, 12:28 AM	I would think a clerics willingness to resurrect someone who could afford it would correllate to just how much they left the church in their will... the higher the endowment, the lower the chances of a raise. /end cynicism ;)
Old Sage 03-13-07, 12:50 AM	Re: Ed's thoughts on raising dead nobles - "On December 20, 2005 THO said: I’m sure Ed explained this somewhere already: in most places (Waterdeep and Cormyr definitely among them), laws prevent nobles (sometimes royalty are exempt) from being raised. This stops all sorts of power struggles, conflicting claims for lands and money from “back from the dead” claimants or pretenders purporting to be someone dead centuries ago (whom nobody alive today would be able to swear is an impostor), pretenders “rewriting history” by writing diaries, accounts, false wills, documents purporting to be old agreements, and so on. Over time, the laws are backed up by social custom: if you break it by raising someone, you threaten the social order, and are apt to be shunned, exiled, or no longer treated as noble by anyone. So folk grow up thinking it’s simply not a possibility. love, THO"
Stigger 03-13-07, 12:56 AM	Really wish that had made it into the FRCS in some form...
bitter thorn 03-13-07, 01:10 AM	Really wish that had made it into the FRCS in some form... I concur! I'm playing a Cormyran noble cleric that has run afoul of this prohibition. I thought royalty couldn't be raised, but nobles (not in the line of succesion) could be if it was done promptly. Whoops!:embarrass BTW, Old Sage, YOU ROCK!:pint: :mage:
GothicDan 03-14-07, 07:22 AM	Please tell me one of the myriade illogical laws where the ones with power get disadvantaged. That question is impossible to answer completely for two reasons: logic varies between people and not everyone in power has the same situations that would lead to them being equally disadvantaged or advantaged on a universal basis. For instance, there's numerous laws placed on scientific research which morally/religiously offends many of the socially elite (which is why they were often put there in the first place). If proper funding and liberty was given with such research, many of those same people may well have been able to save a number of the lives of their loved ones (or their own life!). Not to mention the fact that when technology and science is increasing in a way that puts you ahead of your competitors (other countries), you automatically have more power: supply and demand. And using science as an analogy for magic is perhaps the most applicable example to a real world concern. And spellcasters would be like scientists: except in a few specific cases, they rarely hold direct temporal/political power (not because they couldn't, but because it doesn't interest them, usually), they hold the keys to advanced civilization in the form of medical techniques (healing, surgery, resurrections) and warfare (fireball spells, to put it bluntly). On a less advanced level, in ancient times, whoever managed to get the loyalty of the majority of a nation's military behind them were effectively able to usurp power from the people who were supposed to be 'in power.' In Faerun, the political rulers and nobles and the like are almost never spellcasters (who only make up a fractional minority in the first place), let alone of a level that could utilize the resurrection spell. So they'd have to try to find a Cleric willing to do it for them - which means he better not go and irk off the local churches in any way (who's the REAL power behind the throne?). And Clerics just don't resurrect anyone... Remember that RELIGION they have, as well as their class abilities? You know, the completely 'illogical' dogmas they hold, regardless of how it affects those 'in power'? That faith is what gives them their ability to resurrect, and by not following it, that ability can be stripped from them, along with every other one (and if it's done as a rebuke, it is something that very often literally damages the person's psyche forever). So, a noble would have to find a high enough level spellcaster within reasonable distance who he or she is not only very likely on good terms with, but whose dogma does not in any way clash with the idea of resurrecting said noble upon his or her death... Taking into account just how one died and the reason for wanting to be resurrected, of course. Just because you want to be alive again, and throw a few thousand goldpieces at a Cleric, doesn't mean that Cleric is going to do it. Your resurrection has to somehow be worthwhile to the Cleric - and his deity.
bitter thorn 03-14-07, 07:35 AM	I'm still having trouble seeing how some minor nobles third son getting raised right after a battle would cause a problem, though. Re: Ed's thoughts on raising dead nobles - "On December 20, 2005 THO said: I’m sure Ed explained this somewhere already: in most places (Waterdeep and Cormyr definitely among them), laws prevent nobles (sometimes royalty are exempt) from being raised. This stops all sorts of power struggles, conflicting claims for lands and money from “back from the dead” claimants or pretenders purporting to be someone dead centuries ago (whom nobody alive today would be able to swear is an impostor), pretenders “rewriting history” by writing diaries, accounts, false wills, documents purporting to be old agreements, and so on. Over time, the laws are backed up by social custom: if you break it by raising someone, you threaten the social order, and are apt to be shunned, exiled, or no longer treated as noble by anyone. So folk grow up thinking it’s simply not a possibility. love, THO"
Derren S. 03-14-07, 08:35 AM	Just because you want to be alive again, and throw a few thousand goldpieces at a Cleric, doesn't mean that Cleric is going to do it. Except it is a cleric of Waukeen. Or a cleric of the same faith and the noble supports the church. Or the dogma of the church matches with the actions of the noble and with all the gods in the realms there is always a deity who has a similiar dogma. And spellcasters are not like scientiests. In some cases they may be but most of the time they only cast spells which are already known and which work 100%. There is no guessing if the "research" will be usefull or not. Its more like a influental group of people preventing themself from using a already existing and tested machine by law even though this machine would be a big boon for them. You also forget the non divine ways of ressurection. Scroll + Use Magic Device, Rods, Dragons,...
Old Sage 03-14-07, 10:16 AM	I'm still having trouble seeing how some minor nobles third son getting raised right after a battle would cause a problem, though.It will cause a problem if this raised third son suddenly wonders why he's not heir (long after his brothers have passed on) to the fortune and power of the noble house he belongs to -- fortune and power denied to him due to his death. If he's raised from the dead... he may begin to think he's entitled to it all, regardless of how the current, and very much alive, heir of the noble house feels. Nobility is often a fickle occupation. And even the slightest disruption to a noble house's power, say from a long dead heir returning from the afterlife and claiming that all the house's power and influence belong to him, can have unfortunate side-effects for both the noble family and any industries/guilds they may support. Not to mention the possible resurrection of old inner-family rivalries and/or hatreds that may have been put to rest after the death of the previous heirs.
Derren S. 03-14-07, 10:22 AM	Because of the way the FR afterlife works someone long dead coming back is extremly rare. 99% of all ressurections would happen while the persons soul is still on the fugue plane so normally within a tenday especially as the raise spell itself have time limits. And how will this disrupt the power structure? All this laws allows is that power struggles are resolved with the help of assasines. If there would be any law then something more like "if you are not ressurected within a tenday you forfeit your title". But not "Nobles can't be ressurected". Thats just an arbitrary law make mediveal governments work.
MarkusTay63 03-14-07, 10:28 AM	There was an entire article in a really old Dragon magazine covering this very subject. It also covered clones - what happens when a clone is activated and then the original person is ressurected? Who does his 'stuff' belong to? What if a woman remarries and her husband is brought back a year later? There are soooo many legal issues with ressurection, and the article was an excellent read, too bad I don't remember the issue. :( One MAJOR case if FR - when Bruenor Battlehammer's great great (etc) Grandpappy was brought back, Bruenor had to abdicate the throne. That kind of sucked for him, since the first guy LOST the kingdom, and Bruenor fought to win it back. It was like "thanks for doing all the work for me, I was way too incompitant, you can leave now". If I was Bruenor I'd have made sure dear old 'granddad' had a fatal accident. Come to think of it.... he did die soon after.... :devil:
GothicDan 03-14-07, 05:09 PM	Except it is a cleric of Waukeen. Then you better be prepared to pay out your nose for the rest of your life. Life is not a thing to be handed out blithely. Or a cleric of the same faith and the noble supports the church. A cleric of the same faith that the noble supports, with the power to do so. With every condition added on, it makes resurrection less and less frequent. And what you're saying is basically similar to the idea that all clergy and laymen see completely eye to eye, dogmatically and morally. That's simply not the case. Or the dogma of the church matches with the actions of the noble and with all the gods in the realms there is always a deity who has a similiar dogma. So, similar dogma automatically means they're best friends? People's minds don't work like that. Look at real world religions for a cue, again. The most ranking priests that held some role in politics were very often at odds with the ruling patriarchy and aristocracy, even when they were of the same religions. And spellcasters are not like scientiests. In some cases they may be but most of the time they only cast spells which are already known and which work 100%. If they're content to do that, then they're the ones who are going to get nowhere far in life, fall in battle, and make no mark on the world or their faith or Art. It's the ambitious researchers of new magics that really are in high demand - those that create new harder to counter spells, who push the boundries of magic itself further (Karsus), and the like. Both Azuth and Mystra have perhaps the greatest desire of all, the continued use, spread, and research and invention of new magic, to keep it growing and change. You're basically saying that all spellcasters are completely okay with the status quo, and that those who are not creative and possessed of secrets and powers no one else knows of does not hold a sort of power. There's even rules in the PHB for Wizards creating new spells; it's built right into the mechanics of the core rules. There is no guessing if the "research" will be usefull or not. Its more like a influental group of people preventing themself from using a already existing and tested machine by law even though this machine would be a big boon for them. The people in power are those most likely to break the laws and get away with it. That doesn't mean that the laws themselves change. You also forget the non divine ways of ressurection. Scroll + Use Magic Device, Rods, Dragons,... Who creates those magic items?
GothicDan 03-14-07, 05:11 PM	But not "Nobles can't be ressurected". Thats just an arbitrary law make mediveal governments work. How's it arbitrary if you yourself admit it makes the government work? Obviously it's doing SOMETHING right. If I was a Noble, I'd agree to the law, simply because it would prevent possible future disharmony. After all, if I do die, I go to my god's demesne and into bliss. Why the heck would I want to come back?
Derren S. 03-14-07, 05:40 PM	How's it arbitrary if you yourself admit it makes the government work? Because if ressurection magic exists, the form of government would be different. They have kings and nobles in the traditional form because that is a typical fantasy stereotype and now they seek to explain how that works despite ressurection magic. But logically the methods of how titles are passed down would be very different from the steretype nobles. As for your other points. 1. And? A noble can afford that 2. A noble will search out a cleric which matches this description while he still lives (if he wants to be ressurected). So that is not a limiting factor 3. It removes the "faith decides who can be raised" block you came up with. The noble and the cleric does not have to be friends. As long as it is (very) beneficial for the church that the noble lives they will ressurect him no matter what the cleric thinks of it (at least a lawful church would) 4. Not every wizard is a Karsus. Some do not have the ability or the interest to discover a new level of spellcraft. There are certainly wizards who are content to use existing spells to perform their duty and live a good live. That would be the wizards who craft items, cast spells for money, work for nobles or kings, etc. 5. When the people in power make them it does. They only break them if those rules are already in place and there is no reason why nobles would agree to such a law as the disadvantages you make up will not happen in most cases (no noble starts plotting when his brother is ressurected after 10 days) or would also happen without ressurection. 6. Clerics, but they can't keep track of all this stuff and can't controll it after those items left their hands. You seem to ignore completly that adventurers have access to all those things rather easily and when they can get a scroll of raise dead or even the spell itself than a noble certainly can too (even if that means contracting adventurers to get them). You make the same mistake like with the law issue. You think that a live on faerun has exactly the same value as in the real world which would mean that clerics would be very hesitant to raise the dead. But rather when raise dead magic is availiable, the value of someones life would be less in certain groups because he can always be raised. But we probably will never agree on that as our point of view in such issues are very different. Lets simply say that if you want to keep the realms as they are, which is a sword&sorcery LotR inspired campaign world which basically means medival + magic then this law makes sense. If you want to rebuild the realms without copying (to much) from the real world medival period and want to create the society in the realms in a way that it reflects the possibilities magic offer then this law does not make any sense at all.
ShadezofDis 03-15-07, 12:50 PM	But we probably will never agree on that as our point of view in such issues are very different. Yes. That goes for myself as well. Lets simply say that if you want to keep the realms as they are, which is a sword&sorcery LotR inspired campaign world which basically means medival + magic then this law makes sense. If you want to rebuild the realms without copying (to much) from the real world medival period and want to create the society in the realms in a way that it reflects the possibilities magic offer then this law does not make any sense at all. If you recreate the society of the realms (which one? all of them? just the ones you don't agree with?) then the end result will not be the realms, it will be a homebrew based off the realms. I'll leave you with a few more reasons for such a law. So that younger sons who want to take over the noblehouse don't destroy the souls of the people they kill. So that Kelemvor's church doesn't get ******. The law was pushed through by the more evilly inclined nobels of Cormyr. While they have no intention of following the law they want to be able to take out "good" types without having to worry about them coming back later. So that the nobility and the royalty isn't beholdent to any particular group of priests.
Old Sparky 03-15-07, 03:34 PM	I posted a similar response to this awhile back on another thread and the whole concept didn't go over well and people argued about the unfairness to souls that earned their afterlife... but what the heck, I'm a bit of a masochist. In my campaign, bringing the dead back to life does not necessarily allow the departed soul a choice in the matter. A weaker spell like Raise Dead will allow the deceased to resist being pulled back to life; however, the higher level magics pack some serious mojo and automatically function (more or less). Additionally, I've brought back the old school Constitution penalty and limit of how many times you can be brought back to life... total number is 1+Con modifier. And yes, it is intended to be flexible over time, so someone that was brought back once when he had a Con score of 18 (which would allow for 4 more times to be brought back) could die with a Con score of only 12 and be unable to return to life. This can and does lead to some abuse, such as allowing evil folk to torture someone to death and bring them back to life for more. Yeah, awful, I know. Conversely, it allows good folk to bring back a villain who escapes justice by dying and going on to his final reward for serving his evil god well. The "abuse" works both ways, so I don't have a problem with the mechanics of it all. Here's where things get tricky (and more interesting). Just because the spell works doesn't mean it works out how the caster wished. With magic reach across the border of life and death, it is creating a sort of beacon... this beacon may attract unwanted attention, drawing a malevolent spirit or fiend or other hazard along with the person being brought back to life. Sometimes, the wrong soul may end up in the body being restored, however it gains some access to some of the formerly deceased body's memories and can pretend to be that person (bluff checks required). Creating this kind of hazard makes it undesirable for people to indulge in life-restoring magics willy-nilly. The magic can and does work, but there is a chance that it will go wrong. Raise Dead is the most likely of spells to cause this sort of problem because it merely sends out a magical summons to draw the soul back to the body. Resurrection is a more powerful spell and so the patron diety sends an escort with the soul to ensure it arrives safely... though there is always the chance that the escort isn't powerful enough to prevent something from going wrong, but it does reduce the chance for a negative effect significantly from just being raised. Also, the escort isn't charged with directly interfering with mortal affairs, so while it won't rescue a soul brought back to punished or tortured, it may try to contact a friend or ally of the individual and let them know what's going on. True Resurrection, on the other hand, is the only reliable magic for safely bringing the dead back to life. Those seeking to abuse this spell to do harm to a follower of another god are likely to get punished directly by whatever "escort" the diety sends. A cleric of Cyric fool-hardy enough to try true resurrection on the corpse of his paladin enemy is very likely to get a harsh lesson taught to him by a solar or a planetar. In such a situation, the escort may take the soul back to its home plane or offer to return to life. This makes reliable resurrection available, but keeps it difinitively out of reach of most people (players and NPCs alike). The unreliability of the lower level magics keeps people from over-using such spells and can make it more legitimate for laws to be passed against their use (such laws being enforable only within the borders of the kingdom or government that passed them). Things that can go wrong with attempts to revive the dead include: Poor transition back to life, subject gains a negative level that could end up being permanent. Psychological trauma leaving the subject "touched in the head" (using rules for Madness). Ghost, fiend, or other possessing spirit can enter the body before the correct soul can, forcing that soul to either wander as a ghost itself or --if travelling with an escort-- return to its home plane. Attack by non-possessing planar monster (something ethereal or maybe astral, a servant of Kelemvor, or maybe something else). Undead ignore (unless attacked) the individual. Undead recognizing the individual as having returned from the dead and attacking the individual as a primary target. Animals spooked and refuse to be near the individual (-4, -6, or -8 on Handle Animal skill checks). Prophetic visions (only half of which may be accurate). Treated as undead for purposes of Turn/Rebuke attempts and magic which specifically affects undead). Experiences occasional bad luck. DM discretion, once per session something bad occurs which can cause problems --such as making a benign random encounter into a monstrous one, the individual loses something important that isn't primary gear (such as weapon, spellbook, etc) but rather something of monetary value or informational significance (an expensive gem or maybe an important letter).
Zsych 03-17-07, 09:53 AM	How many sufficiently high level clerics are usually on hand, if your party doesn't have one? Its not like every temple you find is likely to house a cleric that can cast Resurrection(or True Resurrection), even if you have the money. Throw new and problematic quests in, while they're looking for decent clerics. .. You could have trouble with clerics too. Gods worried about something, and high level servants being pulled elsewhere as a precaution. --- Greater quests awaiting dead characters, would keep them from coming back to the minor quests of the mortal world(Generally though, I expect characters to be resurrectable without interference from gods, when a sufficiently high level cleric is doing the casting... but if he doesn't want to come back...) ... Some kind of a latter day twist in the basis of resurrection magic, causing some people to return as undead monsters...
Derren S. 03-17-07, 11:36 AM	Greater quests awaiting dead characters, would keep them from coming back to the minor quests of the mortal world Considering how the afterlife in D&D works this is extremly unlikely. No matter who someone was in life, in death hes just another petitioner.
miscellany 03-17-07, 09:38 PM	I doubt nobles -particularly those who are ‘next in line’ should someone senior to them in the family die- will simply step aside should that dead noble come back. I doubt priests with any desire to maintain the character of their church and its standing within a city or city state would want to be seen as a destabilizing force that is trying to undo the natural and lawful order of things. Now, I could see chaotic or neutral evil priesthoods with much to gain trying such tactics, just as I could see a very few of the most arrogant and powerful amongst all nobles in a given area try and even succeed at getting themselves raised up from the dead (probably with the help of the aforementioned priesthoods), but even then such nobles must not actively pronounce or show themselves to ‘be back’ lest they be marked for arrest, punishment and possibly a second death by the authorities and/or other noble houses, as well as the stigma and rumor mongering that comes with resurrection where none but a few know the circumstances of that noble’s restoration to life. I think I will have the next character of mine that dies in the Realms try really hard to make a bargain with Devils. That always sounded like a fun way to do one last bit of roleplaying before moving on. :D
GothicDan 03-17-07, 11:57 PM	Lets simply say that if you want to keep the realms as they are, which is a sword&sorcery LotR inspired campaign world which basically means medival + magic then this law makes sense. I'm not sure what Realms you're running, but mine have never been like that.
Stigger 03-18-07, 02:12 AM	Can't stand LotR personally... so I don't think I've ever interpreted the Realms that way.
Old Sparky 03-19-07, 12:37 AM	LotR and FR need to remain distinctly separate. They share enough in common as it is, no need to further impose Tolkien's vision on this D&D staple.
bitter thorn 03-19-07, 01:10 AM	Didn't they try to raise the nobles who were killed duing the Azoun assasination attempt in Cormyr the novel? It will cause a problem if this raised third son suddenly wonders why he's not heir (long after his brothers have passed on) to the fortune and power of the noble house he belongs to -- fortune and power denied to him due to his death. If he's raised from the dead... he may begin to think he's entitled to it all, regardless of how the current, and very much alive, heir of the noble house feels. Nobility is often a fickle occupation. And even the slightest disruption to a noble house's power, say from a long dead heir returning from the afterlife and claiming that all the house's power and influence belong to him, can have unfortunate side-effects for both the noble family and any industries/guilds they may support. Not to mention the possible resurrection of old inner-family rivalries and/or hatreds that may have been put to rest after the death of the previous heirs.
Stigger 03-19-07, 02:25 AM	Think they tried to heal them, but I don't recall them trying to raise them. Could be wrong about it though.
bitter thorn 03-21-07, 05:00 AM	"Tymora: crypts for some, embalming for some, resurrection for some, cremation for some, dicing and rotting for some: “Last Gamble” ritual involves dice (cast by loved ones if they want to be part of this, otherwise by the Lady’s clergy) that determine fate of the deceased; in above list, “crypts” means full magical preservation spells and sealing in luxurious but small crypt (like a canopied bed made of stone); embalming means body is preserved by physical means rather than magic, and placed reverently in a shared crypt; resurrection means clergy (for free) use all the magic they can muster to restore the corpse to whole and hale life, under no obligation whatsoever to the church of Tymora; cremation means burning on a shared pyre; and “dicing and rotting” means bodies are chopped up and scattered in a charnel (compost) heap to rot down, and eventually be spread on farm fields And there you have it. Individual temples vary, especially in the amount of time they keep bodies in “cold crypt” storage (deep in stone-lined or solid stone chambers, to slow decay and prevent rats or other scavengers getting at bodies) for possible resurrections (if requested by family, adventuring colleagues, or civil authorities investigating crimes. So saith Ed. " I wonder how this interacts with Cormyran noble tradition/law?
ShadezofDis 03-21-07, 07:56 AM	"Tymora: crypts for some, embalming for some, resurrection for some, cremation for some, dicing and rotting for some: “Last Gamble” ritual involves dice (cast by loved ones if they want to be part of this, otherwise by the Lady’s clergy) that determine fate of the deceased; in above list, “crypts” means full magical preservation spells and sealing in luxurious but small crypt (like a canopied bed made of stone); embalming means body is preserved by physical means rather than magic, and placed reverently in a shared crypt; resurrection means clergy (for free) use all the magic they can muster to restore the corpse to whole and hale life, under no obligation whatsoever to the church of Tymora; cremation means burning on a shared pyre; and “dicing and rotting” means bodies are chopped up and scattered in a charnel (compost) heap to rot down, and eventually be spread on farm fields And there you have it. Individual temples vary, especially in the amount of time they keep bodies in “cold crypt” storage (deep in stone-lined or solid stone chambers, to slow decay and prevent rats or other scavengers getting at bodies) for possible resurrections (if requested by family, adventuring colleagues, or civil authorities investigating crimes. So saith Ed. " I wonder how this interacts with Cormyran noble tradition/law? It means that if the dice come up "resurrection" and it's a noble you'd best not let anyone know. I mean how often does tradition trump an active, enforced law?(Warning: rhetorical question! The answers I assume is that an active, enforced law will beat a small portion of the societies cultural traditions, unless that cultural tradition is able to be hidden) (note: further, do we know that the law is actively enforced? sorta seems that way but it wouldn't really have to be so, it could just be a law to pull out when that first son dies, loses heir rights, comes back and tries to get those heir rights. Just a though, and probably a good way to "remove" this law from your game if you so choose)
bitter thorn 03-21-07, 08:06 AM	Well, we are going to have to find some work around for this law/tradition in our home game because it's been violated more than once in the history of the game both on stage and off. I think we might create a legal loophole of a tenday, so if you get brought back within a tenday you're kosher otherwise noble or royal rules of succession kick in. I think I've created a ten day waiting period.:confused:
ShadezofDis 03-21-07, 08:15 AM	Well, we are going to have to find some work around for this law/tradition in our home game because it's been violated more than once in the history of the game both on stage and off. I think we might create a legal loophole of a tenday, so if you get brought back within a tenday you're kosher otherwise noble or royal rules of succession kick in. I think I've created a ten day waiting period.:confused: Just rule that the law is there for the purpose of "defining" succession. The punishment of the law? A fine of 5 gold. The reason for the law? Say noble son A dies. Noble son B then becomes heir to the title. Noble son A is raised from the dead. The law now comes into play, Noble son B still retains "heirhood" because Noble son A "broke the law". Perhaps it started as a prohibition against raising the nobility (for all the reasons stated above in the thread) and eventually developed into a tool for solving the succession problem in the face of raising magic. Maybe introduce it to the PC's by having the person raised pay the fine, or they could see whatever church they're using pay the fine, or something like that. When the PC's ask why they're paying they could say "Well, didn't you know that bringing dead nobility back to life is illegal in Cormyr?" AND that's overall pretty brilliant, a law the developed over the centuries that's just part of everyday life, makes the world that much more a living, breathing place.
bitter thorn 03-25-07, 01:39 AM	That's not a bad idea, but several of our PCs are highish level nobles. My PC in particular is a minor noble, PDK, Battle Priest of Cormyr. The character would logically know the law, so learning it in play would be inconsistant with the establishede story line.
Stigger 03-25-07, 02:10 AM	Better off just ignoring the rule then, I'd say. Nothing says you have to keep it if it would create an incosistency in your campaign. Just keep it in mind for the next campaign and move on would be my suggestion.
ShadezofDis 03-25-07, 10:46 AM	Better off just ignoring the rule then, I'd say. Nothing says you have to keep it if it would create an incosistency in your campaign. Just keep it in mind for the next campaign and move on would be my suggestion. Beat me to it :p