RP: NWN mechanics vs Canon RP

[Fenix]

Feb 16, 2015 14:53:59 GMT -5 fisheyes said:

In my opinion, the single biggest reason why FRC continuously fails at immersion is the level range. Closely followed by, and linked to, the over-abundance of loot, wealth and magical items. Naturally, we get a lot of Gameplay and Story Segregation (NWN Mechanics vs Canon RP) when we on one hand have dozens and dozens of super heroes with more gold than Smaug, while on the other we still want to keep things... ‘realistic’.

Gameplay tells us that we can raise people from the dead and that we can easily gather millions of GP by walking through a forest, over and over again. And this works fine when we’re just out adventuring. But as soon as we begin to look for a deeper story than just dungeon crawling and adventuring, the immersion starts falling apart. What? I can’t raise them? People are poor and sick? Oh, let me throw some money at them and fix it, I can easily make another million. Yes... Lame Story.

While I think it’s awesome (and important for the plot) that the victims from the recent Alizarin Massacre by Padrin’s Murder Gorgons stay dead, I also think it’s immersion breaking when there are no attempts made to raise the dead students when there are characters involved who has the means to do so, and when resurrection magic is pretty common among adventurers (and these were no random commoners, it was students of the Alizarin Academy, perhaps even students from noble or merchant families? Or are they all orphans? And isn’t the Academy run by powerful adventurers who probably knew these students by name? But then again... Plot!). And it would get even worse if Padrin, the EVIL Druid of Doom, was raised from the dead while the students weren’t (not that I’d want to force a permanent death on anyone, but from an outside perspective, being killed by Mirrir would be a good ending... since she then also has to live with the consequences... but we could undo it all with a raise. Also, I don’t know why Padrin did what he did, but I think it was a brilliant way of turning a small stagnated plot into something bigger and better! InstantAwesomeJustAddMurderGorgons!)

Personally, I would love it if FRC’s level range and loot was reduced by, say, 50% and all the best items in stores were dumped into rare high level loot or replaced with lower level options. Or forever cast out into the Abyss. An FRC where levels 12-14+ or so were the new epic would be totally awesome. I do not consider epic levels to be all that 'fun' or necessary on a PW, quite the contrary. Epic levels work much better in single player or DMed campagins. It actually detracts more from my enjoyment and immersion when all the major plotlines have to summon Cthulhu, Godzilla and Sauron to be able to challenge the local demi-gods... OR some contrived RP has to take place where their powers are temporarily nerfed within the confines of the Plot, making levels and wealth pointless. Perhaps I’ve just been playing this game too long, or I’m just used to lower level campaigns that can be just as epic without facing Cthulhugodzillasauron Eater of Worlds in a boss battle (who is disguised like your average horde of orcs), and then easily paying reparations for all the burning cities and still have coin left for the caravan... but who pays for caravans these days when you can teleport? In any case, such a change seems very unlikely to happen, so enough about that. But I can dream and hope that the gap between gameplay/NWN mechanics and Story/Canon RP will be decreased. It's not hardcoded.

However, if we want to have the cookie and eat it too, if we want levels and wealth, while still also taking death seriously, then I think we need to change the way we look at death and resurrection magic. Make it an official DM rule/guideline/statement/in-game journal note/OOC message in the Fugue that tells something like:

"Deaths in dungeons from non-plot related adventuring are not to be taken as real deaths, but merely as "it's just a flesh wound", a serious wound that knocks the character unconscious and requires powerful healing magics. Raise Dead and Resurrection does not actually raise people from the dead (in most circumstances), merely from the 'brink of death' when normal healing magic are not strong enough. Real death only happens at the discretion of players and DMs, and can normally only result from plots or the character's own actions. Characters can be 'raised' from Plot Deaths by True Resurrection, only available with DM assistance."

So ScrewTheSourceRulesIHavePlot! That would help with immersion, even if we're keeping the Cthulhu levels, as we would then, as paradoxical as it may seem, actually be closer to the level of realism in the Forgotten Realms when it comes to frequency of returning from the dead! D&D source rules and high levels just doesn't work on a PW if we want to take death seriously.
Then, once we're taking death seriously, have important established NPCs permanently killed by rampaging gorgons to set an example (not redshirt NPC students that no one really cares about. Kill Bentin! Okey, maybe no on cares about Bentin either, but... someone people know and care about!). Increasing the XP penalty or adding a diamond material component to raise dead and resurrection probably won't have much effect if the XP penalty can be avoided with a raise and there is an unlimited amount of loose coins out in the forest. And that over-abundance of wealth has its own mechanics and RP problems...

I would like to express as a note, Epics are not the standard for FRC. While there are many epic level characters, it is about that time when most people stop playing those characters, with some exceptions. Being at the epic levels is not very exciting, and is a good reason why most players never reach it. THe best roleplay you have is your buildup to then, and what you make for it from there.

Epics are not the standard, were the exception. Not many actually reach it. There are PCs that have existed for 7+ years that STILL havent hit epic.

[DOT]

Feb 16, 2015 9:03:26 GMT -5 Andros said:

I have a personal rule when it comes to PC power and that is to divide a PC's level by 2 to get the "actual" level if that pc where to be exported to a pnp setting

You and me both

[Razgriz]

Feb 16, 2015 15:34:52 GMT -5 Fenix said:

Feb 16, 2015 14:53:59 GMT -5 fisheyes said:

In my opinion, the single biggest reason why FRC continuously fails at immersion is the level range. Closely followed by, and linked to, the over-abundance of loot, wealth and magical items. Naturally, we get a lot of Gameplay and Story Segregation (NWN Mechanics vs Canon RP) when we on one hand have dozens and dozens of super heroes with more gold than Smaug, while on the other we still want to keep things... ‘realistic’.

Gameplay tells us that we can raise people from the dead and that we can easily gather millions of GP by walking through a forest, over and over again. And this works fine when we’re just out adventuring. But as soon as we begin to look for a deeper story than just dungeon crawling and adventuring, the immersion starts falling apart. What? I can’t raise them? People are poor and sick? Oh, let me throw some money at them and fix it, I can easily make another million. Yes... Lame Story.

While I think it’s awesome (and important for the plot) that the victims from the recent Alizarin Massacre by Padrin’s Murder Gorgons stay dead, I also think it’s immersion breaking when there are no attempts made to raise the dead students when there are characters involved who has the means to do so, and when resurrection magic is pretty common among adventurers (and these were no random commoners, it was students of the Alizarin Academy, perhaps even students from noble or merchant families? Or are they all orphans? And isn’t the Academy run by powerful adventurers who probably knew these students by name? But then again... Plot!). And it would get even worse if Padrin, the EVIL Druid of Doom, was raised from the dead while the students weren’t (not that I’d want to force a permanent death on anyone, but from an outside perspective, being killed by Mirrir would be a good ending... since she then also has to live with the consequences... but we could undo it all with a raise. Also, I don’t know why Padrin did what he did, but I think it was a brilliant way of turning a small stagnated plot into something bigger and better! InstantAwesomeJustAddMurderGorgons!)

Personally, I would love it if FRC’s level range and loot was reduced by, say, 50% and all the best items in stores were dumped into rare high level loot or replaced with lower level options. Or forever cast out into the Abyss. An FRC where levels 12-14+ or so were the new epic would be totally awesome. I do not consider epic levels to be all that 'fun' or necessary on a PW, quite the contrary. Epic levels work much better in single player or DMed campagins. It actually detracts more from my enjoyment and immersion when all the major plotlines have to summon Cthulhu, Godzilla and Sauron to be able to challenge the local demi-gods... OR some contrived RP has to take place where their powers are temporarily nerfed within the confines of the Plot, making levels and wealth pointless. Perhaps I’ve just been playing this game too long, or I’m just used to lower level campaigns that can be just as epic without facing Cthulhugodzillasauron Eater of Worlds in a boss battle (who is disguised like your average horde of orcs), and then easily paying reparations for all the burning cities and still have coin left for the caravan... but who pays for caravans these days when you can teleport? In any case, such a change seems very unlikely to happen, so enough about that. But I can dream and hope that the gap between gameplay/NWN mechanics and Story/Canon RP will be decreased. It's not hardcoded.

However, if we want to have the cookie and eat it too, if we want levels and wealth, while still also taking death seriously, then I think we need to change the way we look at death and resurrection magic. Make it an official DM rule/guideline/statement/in-game journal note/OOC message in the Fugue that tells something like:

"Deaths in dungeons from non-plot related adventuring are not to be taken as real deaths, but merely as "it's just a flesh wound", a serious wound that knocks the character unconscious and requires powerful healing magics. Raise Dead and Resurrection does not actually raise people from the dead (in most circumstances), merely from the 'brink of death' when normal healing magic are not strong enough. Real death only happens at the discretion of players and DMs, and can normally only result from plots or the character's own actions. Characters can be 'raised' from Plot Deaths by True Resurrection, only available with DM assistance."

So ScrewTheSourceRulesIHavePlot! That would help with immersion, even if we're keeping the Cthulhu levels, as we would then, as paradoxical as it may seem, actually be closer to the level of realism in the Forgotten Realms when it comes to frequency of returning from the dead! D&D source rules and high levels just doesn't work on a PW if we want to take death seriously.
Then, once we're taking death seriously, have important established NPCs permanently killed by rampaging gorgons to set an example (not redshirt NPC students that no one really cares about. Kill Bentin! Okey, maybe no on cares about Bentin either, but... someone people know and care about!). Increasing the XP penalty or adding a diamond material component to raise dead and resurrection probably won't have much effect if the XP penalty can be avoided with a raise and there is an unlimited amount of loose coins out in the forest. And that over-abundance of wealth has its own mechanics and RP problems...

I would like to express as a note, Epics are not the standard for FRC. While there are many epic level characters, it is about that time when most people stop playing those characters, with some exceptions. Being at the epic levels is not very exciting, and is a good reason why most players never reach it. THe best roleplay you have is your buildup to then, and what you make for it from there.

Epics are not the standard, were the exception. Not many actually reach it. There are PCs that have existed for 7+ years that STILL havent hit epic.

I dunno, I have more fun at low epics 21-24 than I had at lower levels.

I never reached anything beyond 25, but I heard it is somewhat boring.

[Syd's Blue Sky]

Feb 16, 2015 16:25:54 GMT -5 DOT said:

Feb 16, 2015 9:03:26 GMT -5 Andros said:

I have a personal rule when it comes to PC power and that is to divide a PC's level by 2 to get the "actual" level if that pc where to be exported to a pnp setting

You and me both

I've been using this formula for years.



*Stuff Fisheyes said, followed by stuff Fenix said, followed by stuff Merc said.*

At Fisheyes - STAGNATING?! Bah. Just because we were in a swamp doesn't mean we were in a quagmire!

At Fenix - Being lower level was always more mechnically exciting to me, but being epic generally has that long term RP conflict that really brings things to life and keeps me involved.

At Merc - that 21-24 range is kinda when Pony Boy is golden here, but a few dungeons are taking that up a bit. And hey, if you're not oen of those Bard/PM/RDD/WMs with 2 rogue levels for Evasion..... or a pure cleric... you might even get a few more interesting levels out of it before things get too easy!

[StabbingNirvana]

Feb 16, 2015 14:35:50 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

It only sparked more RP because the DM took it on, not because it was realistic.

Every action our characters take should be done with the expectation that a dm is watching and that a story could come from it. And if an action that requires DM intervention is taken, like raising a dead NPC, the DM channel should be pinged.

Realism on FRC includes powerful restorative and destructive magic. Resurrections will happen. Implodes will happen. Empowered Greater Missile Storms will happen. If someone wants to limit their RP to not using either or, that's fine. That's their own decision. But calling foul on someone that is using abilities that they're afforded and have available cause it isn't "realistic", well ... That's just lame.

[Syd's Blue Sky]

I don't think anyone is calling foul on anyone. This is a discussion, not a criminal trial.

[...]

No mud flinging.

<3

[Razgriz]

Feb 16, 2015 19:46:58 GMT -5 StabbingNirvana said:

Feb 16, 2015 14:35:50 GMT -5 Lady Frost said:

It only sparked more RP because the DM took it on, not because it was realistic.

Every action our characters take should be done with the expectation that a dm is watching and that a story could come from it. And if an action that requires DM intervention is taken, like raising a dead NPC, the DM channel should be pinged.

Realism on FRC includes powerful restorative and destructive magic. Resurrections will happen. Implodes will happen. Empowered Greater Missile Storms will happen. If someone wants to limit their RP to not using either or, that's fine. That's their own decision. But calling foul on someone that is using abilities that they're afforded and have available cause it isn't "realistic", well ... That's just lame.

Nah bud.

Frost explained it was her opinion and gave reasons why. I agree that it does not seem very realistic, but at the same time if someone wishes to spend a fortune in $ or power, then let them do it. Folks just need to remember that even if they did such sacrifice, it does not mean a 100% chance of success.

Velisario and Holance helped the baby and did what they did because they are stuborn like that. At the time I doubt we could even afford one of those raise dead scrolls anyways (Well, Holance was broke :S). Will Holance try to resurrect someone again or bring their body to some NPC cleric? Absolutely, he did that some months ago and he earned 1 point towards good, though the fallen npcs stayed dead.

What matters is trying when you can and is up to each character, IMO.

[Ivarcles]

This issue of raising the dead being too easy is not just an issue with NWN or FRC. It's a fundamental issue with D&D. (At least up to version 3.5. I haven't looked at later editions.) The problem is that it used to be that clerics and druids only had spells up to seventh level. Not only that, in the early days of D&D, a ninth level character was considered fairly high level, almost like epics are seen as now. So minimally what should have happened when they added eighth and ninth level divine spells was that the spell levels for raise dead and resurrection probably should have been changed to seventh and ninth. Of course, the problem with that would have been that everyone was used to them being what they are and that ship has probably sailed already. In the end, this change wouldn't have made a huge difference for FRC, but this issue is one that's inherent in the base game of D&D. In a universe where spells have nine plus levels (including epic), raise dead is only level five.

[marredwolf]

death in dnd has no teeth, at most dentures. and that alone is more than enough to change your whole outlook in life. death, the great motivator, is no longer an issue. what do you do then when you no longer fear death? thats a place where few have ventured.

[Dobian]

There are a lot of good points above. I've never felt that PWs and DnD really fit together. To me DnD is about building a character and going on a campaign, then build another character and go on another campaign. Not build a character and then live their life. Because DnD is built around leveling characters, in a PW that means repetition, and lots of it. And part of that repetition includes going to the same places to kill the same things over and over, and it includes dying and being raised over and over. And that's where the immersion starts to break.

Sometimes I wonder what would happen if you went from slow leveling to the opposite extreme of allowing players to build a level 40 epic in just a few months. My guess is that players actually would switch characters much more frequently, making things much more dynamic and believable than having the same character rinse and repeat over and over for years on end. Or in the opposite direction, give all characters an expiration date. They live and grow for one year and then either die or have an exit story. Or you could have no expiration date, but have specific permadeath scenarios. Permadeath makes death real. Imagine role playing a funeral for a player character. Whichever method, the idea is for players to be less attached to or invested in a specific character because the massive time commitment would be mitigated, and focused more on role playing a variety of characters which makes things more immersive and believable. New characters experience things in the game world for the first time instead of old characters experiencing them for the umpteenth time. New characters react to and impact the game world in new ways as opposed to old characters reacting and impacting in the same predictable ways. Keeps things fresh.

[Deleted]

Feb 16, 2015 13:38:35 GMT -5 marredwolf said:

" I mean what's a high level good character who has the money and means supposed to do when an innocent person lies dead in front of him or her? Standing around and doing nothing usually doesn't make a lot of RP sense" [quote

it doesnt make any rp sense, like you said. but we need to accept this as an ooc tool to move the plot forward.

i dont get how the King of Cormyr wasnt raised. I did play dnd back in the day and from what i understand, raising someone from the dead is very easy, its just not done because you need that to have a good story. you can say "well in this novel this guy wasnt raised, and in that one the high priest was also not raised, and so therefore it is a hard thing to do" but the real reason they werent raised was to further the plot. could they have been raised? as far as i can remember the answer is yes, and quite easily done. this is even more so in nwn.

you are asking me to ignore how easy it is to raise someone, and also to ignore what a good PC would do in that situation had he the means, the RP that should be happening. its necessary, i get that, but please dont tell me that its somehow more realistic when its clearly the case that its the opposite.

Sorry I was late to the party here, but, I will explain to you -exactly- why the King of Cormyr wasn't raised! Are you ready? Ok here we go!

He can't be raised. It's forbidden by the Ancient Treaty which founded Cormyr. If the King is raised from the dead, resurrected, or otherwise brought back to life, he cannot sit on the Dragon Throne or bad things will happen. It's stipulated that if they -are- brought back, they aren't Nobles anymore, or heirs, or whatever titles they held, they no longer have them and can't rule anything. I suppose for that reason, traditionally, they aren't ever brought back.

Don't take my word though, here we have Ed Greenwoods word from Cormyr: A Novel



This means that none of you will ever sit on the Dragon Throne. Sorry.

It also means that this is correct, it was done for plot, but also, it couldn't have been done. It's got to be assumed that when taking the Dragon Throne, arrangements are made. It appears that you choose then if you will be brought back without titles and noble identity, or you die. Looks like every King to ever sit the Dragon Throne died though, I looked. In the causes of death for them all there is never a mention of any of them being raised.

[Deleted]

Mar 13, 2015 12:46:23 GMT -5 Dobian said:

There are a lot of good points above. I've never felt that PWs and DnD really fit together. To me DnD is about building a character and going on a campaign, then build another character and go on another campaign. Not build a character and then live their life. Because DnD is built around leveling characters, in a PW that means repetition, and lots of it. And part of that repetition includes going to the same places to kill the same things over and over, and it includes dying and being raised over and over. And that's where the immersion starts to break.

Sometimes I wonder what would happen if you went from slow leveling to the opposite extreme of allowing players to build a level 40 epic in just a few months. My guess is that players actually would switch characters much more frequently, making things much more dynamic and believable than having the same character rinse and repeat over and over for years on end. Or in the opposite direction, give all characters an expiration date. They live and grow for one year and then either die or have an exit story. Or you could have no expiration date, but have specific permadeath scenarios. Permadeath makes death real. Imagine role playing a funeral for a player character. Whichever method, the idea is for players to be less attached to or invested in a specific character because the massive time commitment would be mitigated, and focused more on role playing a variety of characters which makes things more immersive and believable. New characters experience things in the game world for the first time instead of old characters experiencing them for the umpteenth time. New characters react to and impact the game world in new ways as opposed to old characters reacting and impacting in the same predictable ways. Keeps things fresh.

This is really a question of the playstyle you prefer.

I have played one character for the last 8-9 years. He isn't even close to level 40, or level 30, and he hasn't hit level 20 yet either. Still quite some time until he does I would imagine. If you combine living your characters 'life' with occasional adventuring, getting involved in player driven plots, dm driven plots, doing quests, and aren't running the roads grinding to gain those levels so quickly, the process can be -much- slower and greatly -extend- the life of a character. It allows you to do things like, be someone with a highly prestigious reputation. To found an organization, or multiple organizations, carve out a corner of FRC that has your name on it forever. It is doable. That being said, it isn't for everyone. It isn't for most people for that matter.

It's my personal playstyle and it has been the most rewarding thing ever. Each time I gain a level it's a really big deal. It only happens now really every 2 years or so. Correspondingly deaths become a big deal as well. I lose experience that takes months to replace if I die. This means that I undertake 'safer' roleplay dealing with intrigue, politics, cloak and dagger tactics, and actual leadership roles that don't usually put me directly in harms way.

To some people this is extremely boring, and for them, I say it's ok to run a guy up to epic in a few months and have fun with him, then retire and start fresh. He probably doesn't intend to found any great and lasting organization or change the world in some meaningful way, he probably just wants to be known as a really awesome adventurer, and I am totally fine with that! Maybe he instead will have a great impact on just a few close friends with his unique warriors philosophy that they discuss. Maybe this character is a great guy but his gifts are not those of a career scholar or politician.

There are two valid games. The 'long game' that I play, and the 'short game' you propose. I think you'll find that about 50% of people are somewhere in the middle.

I encourage players to play how they have the most fun. For me personally it's the 'long game'. I enjoy wielding intangible power far more than slaying dragons. My character has the influence and reputation of a character of immensely greater level than normal as a bi-product of the long game. Players of the short game will find that they are super awesome powerful and no one really knows who they are. This isn't poking fun or saying it's wrong, it's just true. My character is as old as the hills of FRC nearly, and I run into people daily who are probably closer to level 30 than 20, and they are just another face in the crowd to me. Their name holds no weight unless you just happen to be there when they kill something.

Edit: Best thing about my long game style of play? The best thing is that it actually combines with the short game. You can play the short game for the power you need to back up the long game. Many people have done this, I just chose to rely purely on charisma and high skills over level when I came into power as the Headmaster of Alizarin at level 8. Just short game to the level you feel you want to be at and then transition into a more roleplay oriented 'living the characters life after adventuring'. Or if you want to do it my way, you select yourself two marketable skills (in my case perform and lore, these work great for a bard because we get an bonus equal to our level as a bard to lore checks and perform is exclusive). Take those two skills and put yourself on a progression track that will have these as 'superskills' by level 8-10. You make your living off these skills, performing songs, acting as a sage, crafting items, making wands and potions, teaching your skill to others if it's not quite as 'useful' for a roleplayed profession. Pump these skills with everything you have got. They are your means of reputation, -not- your sword.

[Dobian]

I'll just say "yes" to the above. The only thing I'll add is that playing the long game can be a challenge as people come and go, even you may come and go, which makes it hard to maintain continuity. But you can still put together some great story arcs. And being known for something you role play is always greater than being known for your great AB.

[Deleted]

Mar 13, 2015 15:37:18 GMT -5 Dobian said:

I'll just say "yes" to the above. The only thing I'll add is that playing the long game can be a challenge as people come and go, even you may come and go, which makes it hard to maintain continuity. But you can still put together some great story arcs.

This is true enough. I -have- had a hard time adjusting to new 'generations' of characters coming and going, combined with my own periods of absence. I have just always accepted the challenge and tried to 'stay relevant'. Fame once truly achieved is hard to erase. In fact, as a bard, it's my job to make sure that it doesn't. My character spends a great deal of time 'musing about the good old days when so and so was around' keeping those characters stories alive. I look at Darkharp, as sort of an FRC Historian. I don't write it all down anywhere, I just make people come ask me about it!

[probablyamage]

The main reason that King Azoun IV wasn't raised is likely that he's probably having a blast in whatever heaven was waiting for him. For evils, they'd probably love a raise....but I'm sorry, they're stretched out on the rack right now and the devil torturing them is taking the call, can you try back in six thousand years? FRC is an incredibly high magic setting. I have read novels set in Netheril which is similarly high magic, and some of them actually did address the fact that death is cheap. One focused on a Judge sentencing someone to death without resurrection.....for thirty years. After that point, they're free to be raised back to life on go on about their business. That's the kind of thing you get in a high magic setting. When you want to put someone down for good, you don't just kill them, you take further measures. Destruction of the soul, or some clever trick to keep them out of business for a while. Hire your assassin to shove the body in a bag of holding, and toss it into a deep, deep pit. Or hide it. It'd bad form to just pop a raise dead on someone, but that's what you have to unfortunately anticipate. On a related note, I tend not to consider the spell Raise Dead as actually -raising the dead- on here. It always struck me as more reasonable to think of it along the lines of 'revive from coma'. I'm fairly sure that's even how they treat things when respawning on FRC. "Well, we found you unconscious and beaten and dragged you back here to recover". The gold and XP loss is just trauma and whatever the people that beat the hells out of you nabbed off your still breathing body.

[Munroe]

Mar 13, 2015 15:44:09 GMT -5 @dmhighherald said:

Mar 13, 2015 15:37:18 GMT -5 Dobian said:

I'll just say "yes" to the above. The only thing I'll add is that playing the long game can be a challenge as people come and go, even you may come and go, which makes it hard to maintain continuity. But you can still put together some great story arcs.

This is true enough. I -have- had a hard time adjusting to new 'generations' of characters coming and going, combined with my own periods of absence. I have just always accepted the challenge and tried to 'stay relevant'. Fame once truly achieved is hard to erase. In fact, as a bard, it's my job to make sure that it doesn't. My character spends a great deal of time 'musing about the good old days when so and so was around' keeping those characters stories alive. I look at Darkharp, as sort of an FRC Historian. I don't write it all down anywhere, I just make people come ask me about it!

My characters are still around for you, High Herald. Some have even been around longer than Darkharp. Does that comfort you?

[Munroe]

Mar 13, 2015 19:50:11 GMT -5 probablyamage said:

On a related note, I tend not to consider the spell Raise Dead as actually -raising the dead- on here. It always struck me as more reasonable to think of it along the lines of 'revive from coma'. I'm fairly sure that's even how they treat things when respawning on FRC. "Well, we found you unconscious and beaten and dragged you back here to recover". The gold and XP loss is just trauma and whatever the people that beat the hells out of you nabbed off your still breathing body.

Raise Dead and Resurrection should be treated as such when used. The character was dead, the character was restored to life. OOC Raises don't negate the fact that the character died either, they only negate the fact that it was your Evil McEvilson who Raised the PC from death, IC leaving them to be eaten by carron birds. The OOC Raise just means you the player are giving that corpse you made an out to say someone else Raised them later.

If you want someone not to die, instead going unconscious, you've got to hit that sweet spot between -1 hp and -9 hp, and hope they stabilize. That or use some magic that specifically renders them unconscious, such as a sleep effect (not all of them are level-capped, though the spell is) or flesh to stone. (Can't be conscious when you're made of rock, but neither are you dead.)

The "You just respawned" healer dialogs has generally been left intentionally vague mostly because it's hard to explain why strangers found your body somewhere in the wilderness, brought it back to civilization, and took it upon themselves to see it restored to life. "Eeeehhh. Welcome back! Don't look too deep into what just happened."

[Deleted]

Mar 13, 2015 20:01:55 GMT -5 Munroe said:

Mar 13, 2015 15:44:09 GMT -5 @dmhighherald said:

This is true enough. I -have- had a hard time adjusting to new 'generations' of characters coming and going, combined with my own periods of absence. I have just always accepted the challenge and tried to 'stay relevant'. Fame once truly achieved is hard to erase. In fact, as a bard, it's my job to make sure that it doesn't. My character spends a great deal of time 'musing about the good old days when so and so was around' keeping those characters stories alive. I look at Darkharp, as sort of an FRC Historian. I don't write it all down anywhere, I just make people come ask me about it!

My characters are still around for you, High Herald. Some have even been around longer than Darkharp. Does that comfort you?

It actually does comfort me, Munroe. I feel, less alone.

[marredwolf]

thanks for the history lesson, no really. no sarcasm. i used the king as just an example. its a good story and reason, i do like it, but my point was more on the broad scheme. the important people and the unimportant ones. the point was to show that being dead isnt such a bad thing, because someone could easily revive you. now i can understand that there may, and likely is, some traumatic stuff happen to you, like ptsd, if you die (and this is what we must rp after dying). but think on this. if you knew for realzs that there was an afterlife and not only that but that you could quite easily escape death numerous times you would be a bold person indeed. like extremely risking your life, to the scale that you might be called some kind of mental condition. very differently from your current state of mind, which is to flee or fight, to survive at all costs, a very common thing.

[EDM Neo]

In regards to the general Raise Dead issue, my thoughts are very much along the same line as Lady Frost and fisheyes and probably others expressed. I feel that the magic being so commonplace cheapens death and cheapens resurrection from death both, and so I usually try to avoid having my characters explicitly mentioning "oh, I died," or "oh, you were dead." Instead I try to stick to, "oh, you were really badly hurt, we needed to use a powerful healing scroll to get you up again." It just keeps things more immersive for me when I think of it as an abstraction, and it's vague enough that even if someone is a stickler for the letter of rules-as-written so far as death goes it still shouldn't raise many eyebrows. (A view which I can certainly respect - even if I like to pretend otherwise, well, this is as it is here, and sometimes you can't get around it.)

On a server I used to DM, which had a sufficiently lower level range than FRC that level 13 clerics were very rare, we houseruled our raise dead/resurrection spells as:

Raise Dead does not actually restore the dead to life. It can bring people back from the brink of death. PCs who are reduced to -11 HP in combat against ordinary spawns are, at the player's option, typically considered in a coma-like state, so close to death that ordinary means of healing them are no longer effective. Roleplaying actual death outside of a DM supervised event is always optional. ...

Resurrection can restore the dead to life only as Raise Dead in PnP does. The target must have been dead for no longer then one day per caster level, and their body must be mostly intact. ...

It wasn't perfect, but it meant that when someone did die on screen, properly died, it was serious and impactful and outside of rare exceptions usually permanent. Still never forced on people who weren't ready to retire their character, but it ensured that when it did happen, to PCs or NPCs, it mattered and the incident would be treated with the respect it deserved. Death on FRC is in most cases absolutely trivial in comparison, to the point that it's become something of a running joke that no one ever stays dead. Still, it's a different environment here and a different set of expectations, and the system we have in place for the most part works fine. It only starts to seem off if you look at it too closely - but I do think it's worth giving consideration to the pros and cons of alternatives, even if just in your own RP when the circumstance allows for ambiguity and not on an official server-wide level.

[Orchid]

As someone who has played D&D for twenty eight years, whether it be table top, NWN, some MMO or something else I have learned regardless of where you are, there's a general golden set of principles.

1. Every setting has setting specific rules, expectations, and the like.
2. Setting circumstances trump any and all pre-existing notions in that setting unless specifically stated otherwise
3. Unless a DM says No or someone does something expressly prohibited in a setting it's valid RP and only a DM can overturn this validity.

TL;DR
unless a DM flat out says raising random people or any other RP is invalid here on FRC, it's valid. Everyone is allowed their opinions, however noone has a more or less valid opinion. I propose instead of finding fault with someone's IC RP that is not naysayed by our overbeings and making a grand OOC statement, find an IC way to deal with it. IC is IC OOC is OOC.

[thearchaeologist]

NWN is not PnP.

Case closed.

[Fenix]

I think it was closed two years ago when the discussion ended.

[stryker]

My paladin in one PnP campaign got possessed fkr 5 seconds and bkew up a *chickenwing* full of gun powder while it was docked. I paid in gold to bring back to life all the innocent bystanders. And then they still jailed me lol (and tried stealing the rest of my small fortune).

Its hard to do real story in gsme formst because real time combat is so grindable thst you csn not give real PnP rewards both in exp and tresaure. Thus the codt of raising people, restoring lvls, etc. Is greatly deflated becsuse people get less treasure per encounter(but still dir as often per enecounter). And becaise its deflated, it becomes so common place that its no longer considered a sacrifice. In PnP DND you might as well roll a new character if you lose all your equipment at high levels. Its hard to represent real economy in any PW game.

[abby]

I don’t know if anyone mentioned anywhere in here, but most people, especially children, will not return when you try to raise them. There has to be some significant goal they want to achieve to lure them back, and for most commoners, the afterlife looks a lot sweeter than toiling in the fields. So even if we don’t have material components, and even for those of us who play clerics of Gods who don’t mind raising and healing anyone, they won’t be raising commoners or NPCs because they simply aren’t going to come back.

With Abby I occasionally will RP trying to raise an NPC only to report they have refused the calling.

When it comes to dungeon raising, I treat the spell more like a specialized healing spell, like a defibrillator that shocks the person conscious before their souls has truly had time to escape (or at least get far) and so I don’t give it the gravity I would if I had a body brought to me for a raise. We just have to do these kinds of things to cut down on the cheese if you ask me.