Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dravda 10-09-07, 11:58 PM	Ok, I've got a question, because I'm facing this from one of my players right now: Group is all level 10's, save for one level 8, because the character died, leveled down when she was raised, and then missed a play session. Anyway, they had a scrape with a demon attack squad, and while the party was fighting a hezrou and his mooks, a succubus tackled the ranger (who was away from the group) to the ground and planted her kiss on him. He failed his save against the suggestion. So she did it again. And again. At this point, the rogue finally took pity on the ranger and saved his butt. When it came time to remove the negative levels, the ranger failed all three of his saves, thus reducing him to level 7. The level 8 had gained a level from the fight, so the ranger was now two levels below anyone else in the party. He says he wants a new character, rather than continue the weak one. What level should i set him at? Should I give him a more powerful character (level 8), a weaker one (level 6, pretty much not an option), or just tell him to suck it up and deal with it? I'm worried that if I do the first, none of the players will worry about something happening to their characters because they know they'll just get another one. If i do the second, he will just continue his character rather than take a further hit, but will look at me as unfair. And if I do the last, he'll probably resent it and feel useless until he catches up. Any thoughts? -Count Dravda
Salla 10-10-07, 12:01 AM	I'd go with 8; one level lower than the lowest party member. That's my standard rule for incoming 'replacement' characters. You might want to mention that, as a lower-leveled character, he'll be gaining more XP than the rest of the group and will catch up fairly quickly.
darokinblade 10-10-07, 12:06 AM	I disagree entirely. I have this problem at my table, and what people do once they realize they can change characters is anytime something happens they dont like... boom. New character. So I said simply a new character is exactly that. And new characters are level 1. Dont worry, if you survive the first few fights you will catch up quickly. Incidentally, you would be surprised how more frequently people cough up the 5K to be rezzed. In cases when rez isn't possible (AKA mid levels disintegrations) than usually i allow them to come in 1 level lower than they used to be (As if they were rezed) but take away 5K from their starting gold for that level. This makes them play the game with a more careful way, instead of thinking every character is disposable. Just my 2P
Sevarian 10-10-07, 12:22 AM	I've done solo adventures for character notably weaker than the rest of the group. I did this because the group once kicked the character out of the dungeon because he was "slowing them down". If you do a solo adventure for every player over the course of a campaign (which I do), then picking a time that the player is lagging behind in xp is a good time to do it. If you don't run solo adventures, then disregard this. Otherwise, I'd tell him to suck it up. I'd word it as "don't worry, you'll catch up really quickly to the rest of the group, you get more xp as a lower level. Just be careful for a little while." I also don't go exactly by the numbers for xp. If a most of the players are close (read: within a level) to the highest xp character during downtime, I put them all up to the same xp total and tell them, "It's to make my bookkeeping easier and to help balance encounters better." That way the highest xp player doesn't get to upset that the others caught up.
Adric_the_Commoner 10-10-07, 12:46 AM	This is why I dislike permanent damage to PCs. Like negative levels. Why not have a short (half a session) quest to get a McGuffin cure. Some herbal tea brewed by a powerful shaman that will re-energize his soul blah blah blah. Then bump him up right to level 10. Obviously he'll have to expend some money and other resources to complete this adventure, but it's better to loose gold than levels. On the other hand, he may just see this as a good opportunity to bring in a new character. Ask him if this is the case. If so bring the character in one level below the lowest character.
pres_man 10-10-07, 12:50 AM	He got drained and now wants to switch his lower level character for a higher level one? Sorry, that doesn't fly. If he just wanted to switch out the character for a different one, of the same (reduced) level, no problem, but no you can't trade "up".
invisble1 10-10-07, 12:59 AM	i had a rogue who was level 5 or something in a key part of the first act of my campaign whom would not stop trying to get a ring from a fallen NPC while in battle. This was looked upon as opertunistic for the monster, i forget what it was, but said and done she lost her main hand. she said "omg, i retire my character. and she starts rolling another one, with no prompting or input from me. she also decides this character is a tinker gnome who has access to steampunk style tech... mean while im like, no, im not going to allow that. so she spends the rest of the session rolling up this character because she didnt want to play a character with a defect ((which i might add, I would LOVE to have played/ have played in my group, awesome RPing and so many oppertunities)) so the end of the night im like, yo J, what do you want to do, you can't use this character that you rolled. i told her she could roll a new one at the cost of 2.5 levels *at this point because i was ******* so she said she's using this gnome, just 2 levels under on the next session. that was the day that our gaming party went form 7 to 6 players via unanimous vote. tell your player to suck it up or deal with the way you run your game. if you have him roll have him roll with a -3 to each roll and give him the same level or soemthing. also what i like to do, ((got it from one of my frist DMS)) i have 15 envelopes with pre-rolled characters (read: stats, class, race, etc) all at level 1-3. if your char dies you get to pick from the envelopes and play him, or miss a session ((because it takes a session to flush out and roll up a new character)) we as DMs work hard to provide a story and excitement for our players, this gets difficult and repetative when the players do not appreciate what we do and feel that they are going to do what they want reguardless of the rules layed out ((house rules not withstanding))
Suzaku455 10-10-07, 01:06 AM	Ah yes I want to play the chort character of everyone in the group. Face it once you get to be 2 levels below everyone you're now a cohort. You should really keep characters with in one level of everyone to keep everyone from being over shadow. It reduces your saves and HP causing you to be the one to be more likely to die pushing you further below
fliprushman 10-10-07, 01:16 AM	In my current campaign, the players have been able to adjust their characters and trade in new ones pretty frequently. It hasn't caused any problems yet because the way I dm is free flowing. The only thing that I tell the players is that they will start off one level lower than the parties average and will get a gold value equvielent to that characters wealth. I have only run into the a character losing levels once and he two lost 3 levels. I did let him change out his character and his next character was actually more helpful than his last. It didn't interrupt the story and the players did fill his new character in with the current plot. Well a few more sessions into the story, Bhaal communicates with one of the characters and the other decides to eat brains like a mind flayer. So it was easy to say that the party was becoming evil, well this character was ready not so willing to join in the parties alignment so that character left and a new one was introduced. This still did not disrupt any story that the players had completed so far nor any future plots that were to happen. So I would have to say that they should be allowed to change their character, but like everyone else has said, she will level up relatively quickly. But remember the character should be at one level lower than the average of the party. Character wealth should be at that characters level unless you play like a dragonlance campaign or other low magic campaigns where the wealth would be a lot less.
Someone 10-10-07, 01:20 AM	I'm a bit surprised they didn't/don't have access to a restoration spell. If cast within a number of days according to caster level, it can completely recover a drained level. So cast it thrice and they're good as new.
navar100 10-10-07, 02:24 AM	Why doesn't the cleric cast Restoration on the ranger? It will take three castings, but the "problem" is solved.
Novacat 10-10-07, 02:33 AM	Even "permanent" level drains are not permanent. As has been stated, a Restoration spell, if cast within the time limit, will remove them. I would also rule that most "permanent" effects on a character are removed when they die. If the party can find a cleric powerful enough to cast True Resurrection, they can pay the extra fee to prevent losing a level from dying as well. That'll do until the party's cleric is high enough to do it himself.
High Octane 10-10-07, 03:49 AM	What? No one in this level 10 group has access to a restoration spell? Its a 4th level spell thus castable at 7th level. Costs 100gp. If its been too long, go for greater restoration. Thats at least 13 weeks time.
Ayra 10-10-07, 03:58 AM	Like others said: He'll easily catch up to the other players. Like others haven't said yet: His party members may suffer the same ordeal in the (near) future. **** happens. You die, you lose your gear, you lose levels or your character may become completely disintegrated. If D&D wasn't meant to be like this, there'd be no permanent level drain. Anyway it's completely up to you, but I'd let him roll a new character at 1 level lower than the lowest member of his party, including himself. Which means he'll be one level lower than he is now with his new character. If players figure out that death and further ingame 'penalties' can be avoided they will make use of that and they will be far less careful.
warthur 10-10-07, 06:43 AM	It sounds like your player has a more extreme case of my "kill me or spare me, but don't cripple me" attitude that I talk about here (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6806) - except in this case the character isn't crippled, he's just a bit less good than everybody else. True, as people have pointed out he'll catch up thanks to the Challenge Rating rules, but until then he's a) vulnerable and b) going to be constantly overshadowed by his level 9 and 10 comrades. Almost nobody plays D&D to be an irrelevant supporting character, so I can see why he'd be distressed. If I were in your situation, I'd tell him "look, I know it's bad for now but your character isn't going to have to suffer this for long: it'll be one or two sessions, tops, before you're back with the big hitters, and a 7th level ranger isn't vastly less powerful than the others - you'll still be making a valuable contribution to the party". I'll then strongly urge the party as a whole to look into Restoration spells, because sheesh. On another topic, I don't like forcing people to play weaker characters if their PCs die. I regard XP as being a reward for the player as much as it is for the character: if you've managed to take a PC from 1st level to 10th in one of my campaigns, you've earned the right to play a 10th level character in that campaign, full stop. I've honestly never had a problem with players swapping characters and not respecting their PCs; the advantages and rewards of playing a character with a history we've developed in-game as opposed to yet another Johnny Nobody see to that.
Ayra 10-10-07, 08:44 AM	It sounds like your player has a more extreme case of my "kill me or spare me, but don't cripple me" attitude that I talk about here (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6806) - except in this case the character isn't crippled, he's just a bit less good than everybody else. True, as people have pointed out he'll catch up thanks to the Challenge Rating rules, but until then he's a) vulnerable and b) going to be constantly overshadowed by his level 9 and 10 comrades. Almost nobody plays D&D to be an irrelevant supporting character, so I can see why he'd be distressed. If I were in your situation, I'd tell him "look, I know it's bad for now but your character isn't going to have to suffer this for long: it'll be one or two sessions, tops, before you're back with the big hitters, and a 7th level ranger isn't vastly less powerful than the others - you'll still be making a valuable contribution to the party". I'll then strongly urge the party as a whole to look into Restoration spells, because sheesh. On another topic, I don't like forcing people to play weaker characters if their PCs die. I regard XP as being a reward for the player as much as it is for the character: if you've managed to take a PC from 1st level to 10th in one of my campaigns, you've earned the right to play a 10th level character in that campaign, full stop. I've honestly never had a problem with players swapping characters and not respecting their PCs; the advantages and rewards of playing a character with a history we've developed in-game as opposed to yet another Johnny Nobody see to that. I agree with your standpoint, weren't it for one thing. In some D&D groups, players tend to switch characters a lot. I used to do that, simply because I just couldn't find a class/build I wanted to play with. Now I have found what I like and I'm not switching characters anymore, but it's very annoying for other players. Now you can tell your players to stick with one character for good, there are some who will beg and whine (and now I'm not referring to myself ;P) to get their character going nonetheless. This can be very annoying and having the steady "1 level below the lowest character in the party" makes sure people stick with the characters they have chosen to begin with unless they are REALLY not interested in playing their characters anymore. Now that isn't the issue in this thread, though. In this thread it just seems that the player is trying to evade whatever bad things he has gotten by rolling a new character. That's like playing D&D with an altered type of save games. You could let him reroll a character at the same level, instead of one lower, but I wouldn't give him any extra levels because he just so decided to change his character. You could also tell him that if he changes his character when he has regained his lost levels (be it by quest or some alternate form of restoration) his new character will have a higher starting level.
Myzery78 10-10-07, 09:36 AM	I disagree entirely. I have this problem at my table, and what people do once they realize they can change characters is anytime something happens they dont like... boom. New character. So I said simply a new character is exactly that. And new characters are level 1. Dont worry, if you survive the first few fights you will catch up quickly. Incidentally, you would be surprised how more frequently people cough up the 5K to be rezzed. In cases when rez isn't possible (AKA mid levels disintegrations) than usually i allow them to come in 1 level lower than they used to be (As if they were rezed) but take away 5K from their starting gold for that level. This makes them play the game with a more careful way, instead of thinking every character is disposable. While as a DM I like that idea, how could you justify it in game? I just cant see a team of battle hardened veterans(the example lvl 10 party) recruiting somebody with little to no combat experience(a lvl 1 character).
Arscura 10-10-07, 09:50 AM	What? No one in this level 10 group has access to a restoration spell? Its a 4th level spell thus castable at 7th level. Costs 100gp. If its been too long, go for greater restoration. Thats at least 13 weeks time. I stand by this point, though I would advice to he must go for Restoration, greater as Restoration unfortunately will only restore one level of the three drained. For the rest of the discussion; I only allow new characters after true death or the player can't get into his role and begins to dislike his own character. I let them start with equal XP as the current lowest in the group (only less if they died with less)
Phrennzy 10-10-07, 10:54 AM	This is why I houserule death/energy drain as leveling a negative level until a new level of experience is gained. It's definately a lesser penalty. But definately, his party should be looking into Restoration.
HermitIX 10-10-07, 01:28 PM	The standard rule of thumb is 1 level lower than the lowest member of the party when you make a new character to replace an old one. But I always made it two or three levels because I want this option to be less desirable than getting raised. I also roll randomly for their starting treasure, because hand picked treasure is more powerful than the random treasure my other players had to pick through to get their gear. If he is already two levels below that party I would let him make a new character if he wants but it needs to be level eight.
DM_Shonuff 10-10-07, 01:41 PM	The standard rule of thumb is 1 level lower than the lowest member of the party when you make a new character to replace an old one. But I always made it two or three levels because I want this option to be less desirable than getting raised. I also roll randomly for their starting treasure, because hand picked treasure is more powerful than the random treasure my other players had to pick through to get their gear. If he is already two levels below that party I would let him make a new character if he wants but it needs to be level eight. This is my house rule as well. I agree that the player has some sort of "save me or kill me, but don't cripple me" attitude. I had a similar player in my game and it took quite a few sessions, sitting him next to the veteran Roleplayer to see he can have a cool charater with , say, a missing hand. (or in Mikal's case, movement 1/2ed withered leg on a wizard, using his staff as a crutch.) What kind of makes me stop and pause...was this comment: Group is all level 10's, save for one level 8, because the character died, leveled down when she was raised, and then missed a play session. So in one sessions' time, your part leveled from 9th to 10th? dayum, what were you guys fighting? and was there any roleplay, or just combat for hours? Was it the BBEG? was it dragons? This sort of makes me take pause trying to defend the DM, if you're giving xp out like that.
HamHam 10-10-07, 02:10 PM	So in one sessions' time, your part leveled from 9th to 10th? dayum, what were you guys fighting? and was there any roleplay, or just combat for hours? Was it the BBEG? was it dragons? This sort of makes me take pause trying to defend the DM, if you're giving xp out like that. In my game, all but the last session, the PCs leveled twice druing the session. And that wasn't even with all that much RP XP. Then again they were 6 hours long or so...
DM_Shonuff 10-10-07, 02:37 PM	In my game, all but the last session, the PCs leveled twice druing the session. And that wasn't even with all that much RP XP. Then again they were 6 hours long or so... Was it level 8 to 10? or level 2 to 4? kind of makes a difference numbers wise. But I stand corrected...I must be miserly with the xp... I'm old skool, I make my players earn every last point.
HamHam 10-10-07, 03:02 PM	Was it level 8 to 10? or level 2 to 4? kind of makes a difference numbers wise. But I stand corrected...I must be miserly with the xp... I'm old skool, I make my players earn every last point. 1 to 4. Then 4 to 6. Then 6 to 8. Then 8 to 9. (IIRC)
Man in the Funny Hat 10-10-07, 09:50 PM	I'd say have pity on the poor shmoe. Let him have a new character if it's going to be a problem being 2-3 levels lower than everyone. Yes, he could catch up in xp but that takes TIME, during which he's going to be rather unhappy with his situation. My read of the situation - which may admittedly be inaccurate because I wasn't actually there - is that the guy simply had a really bad night and should melt his dice. Why continue to keep him as unhappy as he must already be? It's not as if it's an ETHICS violation to let someone dump a character they no longer like - for whatever reason. I'd say that eliminates telling him to just suck it up unless there's compelling reasons I'm not seeing that he should suffer for months because his dice and level draining mechanics SUCK. Letting him start a new PC only if he's starting at 6th level or lower, well that's hardly an option worth even mentioning. Live with a character suffering penalties - or play a new one with WORSE penalties? If your other players take your allowing him to start a new character at a sensible level as a sign that they now have a right to do-overs and get-out-of-bad-luck-free-cards then that is a problem with THOSE PLAYERS - not the one who wants the new character. If you take the simple step of explaining this to them you've done all you should need to do. If that's not enough then cross that bridge when you come to it and apply the punishments and restrictions where and when they are due. Don't make an unfortunate player pay the penalty for what OTHER players MIGHT do.
ToastedAmphibian 10-11-07, 12:19 AM	Wow, you guys get off easy. My dm apears to use a diffrent rule for awarding xp. He gives everyone the same amount of xp, based on the AVERAGE level of the party. This basically means that a lower level character never catches up to the other players unless he kills of their characters, or sabotages their cars. On a side note, he uses LA buy-off. I wonder if he realizes that his system really just steals their xp and dosnt really give them anything in return? But back to the issue, will he have fun playing his now lvl 7 character? Will everyone else? Will he have fun playing a new, lvl 6 character? Will anyooone else have fun because of this? The important issue is for everyone to enjoy what they are doing, thats the point. If all your players start getting their characters killed so that they can make new ones, and that ruins your fun, tell them as much and ask them to stop. Or simply dont let them. One of the characters in teh game i played in had some REALLY bad luck, and kept trying to kill himself. He tried to brain himself, but only suceeded in knocking himself out (A homless person stole his magic gloves while he was out).
Vaeliorin 10-11-07, 01:59 AM	Interesting situation. Admittedly, in the game I play in when I'm not DM'ing, I pretty much switch characters every adventure. That, however, is because it's a campaign that the group I play with has been playing since several years before I met any of them, and while they're all important to the plot, I am a lowly red-shirt from their ship. Granted, it lets me make all kinds of weird and stupid characters, and try out a bunch of the new classes to see how broken they are. I'd rather play something more permanent, but I don't really like starting a character at level 10 without playing him from 1, so...meh. Anyway, were I in your situation, I would first point out the existence of the restoration spell to said player. 3 restorations = negative levels gone. If the player had been happy with his character, and was just mad that bad stuff had happened to him (which, I've been in that boat, it's not fun, but his character is still at least alive) I wouldn't let him switch out characters. Not only should he catch up quickly (particularly at the rate your players seem to be leveling...if I was DM'ing they might be level 3 in that amount of playtime...maybe) but being a level 7 character isn't really that bad, even compared to 10th level characters. Yeah, his saves, attack bonus, and hit points are a little worse, and he might have to be a little cautious, but these aren't really insurmountable. He'll just have to go after they small fry (aka mooks) for a little while, instead of charging the BBEG. Or maybe use a bow. All in all, I'd say that the level 6 option is obviously out, and letting him replace the character (particularly if he liked him prior to getting level-drained) isn't really a good option. Honestly, I can't imagine him wanting to trade the character out if it was one he cared about anyway, so my guess would be that he didn't really like the character in the first place (and hence I wouldn't be inherently opposed to changing...though if he wanted to make another ranger, I would certainly eye that suspiciously.)
High Octane 10-11-07, 03:14 AM	I stand by this point, though I would advice to he must go for Restoration, greater as Restoration unfortunately will only restore one level of the three drained. For the rest of the discussion; I only allow new characters after true death or the player can't get into his role and begins to dislike his own character. I let them start with equal XP as the current lowest in the group (only less if they died with less) Actually it would remove them all. It would restore only one LEVEL LOST, but it would remove all NEGATIVE LEVELS. There's a difference. Negative levels are like a 50 pound weight thats attached to you. Lost levels is like having muscle removed from your body.
danielinthewolvesden 10-11-07, 03:20 AM	I never have PC's lose a level. Sometimes they get a minor flaw (UA) instead. New PC's come in same level, but with gold at one level lower from DMG pg 135.
Dragoncat 10-11-07, 05:07 PM	This sounds like a job for a side quest! :D Seriously. Your player had bad luck on three die rolls. Punishing him for it the rest of the campaign would be ridiculous. Slip them a plot hook about a powerful cleric, one capable of granting a Greater Restoration. This'll give you a nice trek, plus perhaps a deed that the player must accomplish to earn the spell. That'll get rid of the negative levels, keep the continuity of the character, and remind everyone that they can get disastrous stuff fixed, but they'll have to work for it.
FatJerk 10-11-07, 06:34 PM	So in one sessions' time, your part leveled from 9th to 10th? dayum, what were you guys fighting? and was there any roleplay, or just combat for hours?He said nothing about how much xp they got in that one session. They could have been 1 xp away from 10th level when she got died. She still ends up at 8th level when she comes back. Then she missed the session where the others got 1+ xp, and she's level 8 while everybody else is level 10.
Cifer 10-11-07, 07:00 PM	i had a rogue who was level 5 or something in a key part of the first act of my campaign whom would not stop trying to get a ring from a fallen NPC while in battle. This was looked upon as opertunistic for the monster, i forget what it was, but said and done she lost her main hand. she said "omg, i retire my character. and she starts rolling another one, with no prompting or input from me. she also decides this character is a tinker gnome who has access to steampunk style tech... mean while im like, no, im not going to allow that. so she spends the rest of the session rolling up this character because she didnt want to play a character with a defect ((which i might add, I would LOVE to have played/ have played in my group, awesome RPing and so many oppertunities)) so the end of the night im like, yo J, what do you want to do, you can't use this character that you rolled. i told her she could roll a new one at the cost of 2.5 levels *at this point because i was ******* so she said she's using this gnome, just 2 levels under on the next session. that was the day that our gaming party went form 7 to 6 players via unanimous vote. Except for the point with the steam thingy, I'd completely agree with your player. Regeneration would have been about 8 levels away and a rogue character without his strong hand is pretty much dead weight on the team. You might have loved playing that character - but neither she nor I would. Back to topic: I wouldn't really see a problem with switching characters. In my campaigns, at least, the penalty is losing a character you've put love in building and playing. That's about enough. And yes, being three levels behind outright sucks. I don't know how fast the character would catch up (haven't got the tables with me), but it will quite probably take a lot of time. I don't blame your player for not wanting to do that, although you might want to mention the possibility of Restoration.
danielinthewolvesden 10-11-07, 07:54 PM	This was looked upon as opertunistic for the monster, i forget what it was, but said and done she lost her main hand. she said "omg, i retire my character. and she starts rolling another one, with no prompting or input from me. she also decides this character is a tinker gnome who has access to steampunk style tech... mean while im like, no, im not going to allow that. so she spends the rest of the session rolling up this character because she didnt want to play a character with a defect ((which i might add, I would LOVE to have played/ have played in my group, awesome RPing and so many oppertunities)) I can not think of any way in 3.5 anyone can lose a hand. So, I would be a bit upset too.Some people do not like the DM messing with their concept of THEIR character, and that is reasonable.
Bob Loblaw 10-11-07, 09:02 PM	What would you do if the character died in a heroic fashion and was unable to be raised for whatever reason? Would you still deny him the chance to come in with another character? What if he just isn't having any fun with his character anymore, even if he was the same level as the party? Would you still tell him he can't bring in a new character? The point of the game is to have fun. Your friend is not having any fun. It doesn't sound like this player is the type that brings in a new character every week. It just sounds like he is unhappy with how his character has turned out. I say let him come in with a new character. Don't kill this one off, just have it retire. Let him come in with less gear as was suggested earlier just so there is some consequence for breaking continuity.
Dravda 10-12-07, 01:08 AM	He said nothing about how much xp they got in that one session. They could have been 1 xp away from 10th level when she got died. She still ends up at 8th level when she comes back. Then she missed the session where the others got 1+ xp, and she's level 8 while everybody else is level 10. Thank you for a bit of common sense. Yes, the players were about a hundred xp from 10th level when the rogue died against a major villain. After defeating the villain, the rest of the group leveled to 10 while she went halfway between 8 and 9. Much later, in the same fight that the ranger was deleveled to 7, the rogue recovered to level 9. And to respond to an earlier comment, yes, we were doing hours upon hours of straight-up combat. Dragons, vampires, etc. Ok, now that I've cleared that up, I want to thank you all for your good suggestions. I don't know why we didn't think of restoration, although the fact that we don't have a cleric (only a druid) might have something to do with it. The players are religiously affiliated, though, so they'll be able to get a restoration as soon as i call for an appropriate knowledge check and have a character "remember" the solution. Thanks again, everyone! -Count Dravda
Archon-John 10-12-07, 03:21 AM	I disagree entirely. I have this problem at my table, and what people do once they realize they can change characters is anytime something happens they dont like... boom. New character. So I said simply a new character is exactly that. And new characters are level 1. Dont worry, if you survive the first few fights you will catch up quickly. Incidentally, you would be surprised how more frequently people cough up the 5K to be rezzed. In cases when rez isn't possible (AKA mid levels disintegrations) than usually i allow them to come in 1 level lower than they used to be (As if they were rezed) but take away 5K from their starting gold for that level. This makes them play the game with a more careful way, instead of thinking every character is disposable. Just my 2P Is interesting and good plan. When I find another group of non-RPers to game with, I will immediately use this. Kudos.
pres_man 10-12-07, 06:03 AM	Thank you for a bit of common sense. Yes, the players were about a hundred xp from 10th level when the rogue died against a major villain. After defeating the villain, the rest of the group leveled to 10 while she went halfway between 8 and 9. Much later, in the same fight that the ranger was deleveled to 7, the rogue recovered to level 9. Just to be clear, the rogue did get the xp from the encounter in which they were killed, after they were set midway between 8 and 9, right?
Dravda 10-12-07, 10:11 PM	Just to be clear, the rogue did get the xp from the encounter in which they were killed, after they were set midway between 8 and 9, right? Yep. It was pretty funny. The group probably had enough money to pay for a true resurrection (if they added up their assets), but they were too cheap, so they bought her a raise dead instead.:P -Count Dravda