Breath of Life is a 5th level cleric spell that can bring a character back to life if they died within one round of casting. One question I've been struggling with is how does a character know in game when another character just died?
Do GMs allow meta-gaming, and let players announce when they die and by how many hit points, or does a cleric need to cast Status on the party in order to make Breath of Life useful?
It seems that you almost have to meta-game the PC death event in order to make Breath of Life work. Otherwise the poor cleric has to devote several 2nd level spells to Status over the course of a day, or cast Breath of Life whenever a party member drops for any reason. If they spend a round to do a Heal check, or take some other action to assess the condition, the spell can't be cast in time.
Best I can come up with is to allow some kind of passive Perception check in conjunction with a Heal check as a free action to observe a fatal blow being struck during combat.
How do people address this issue in their games?
Breath of Life is a 5th level cleric spell that can bring a character back to life if they died within one round of casting. One question I've been struggling with is how does a character know in game when another character just died?
Do GMs allow meta-gaming, and let players announce when they die and by how many hit points, or does a cleric need to cast Status on the party in order to make Breath of Life useful?
It seems that you almost have to meta-game the PC death event in order to make Breath of Life work. Otherwise the poor cleric has to devote several 2nd level spells to Status over the course of a day, or cast Breath of Life whenever a party member drops for any reason. If they spend a round to do a Heal check, or take some other action to assess the condition, the spell can't be cast in time.
Best I can come up with is to allow some kind of passive Perception check in conjunction with a Heal check as a free action to observe a fatal blow being struck during combat.
How do people address this issue in their games?
My cleric routinely runs deathwatch in any major battle. So I can keep tabs on health of the party members. The DM house ruled out the evil descriptor so my NG cleric could use it. Thankfully Paizo also removed the evil descriptor from the spell so any cleric can use it.
|
Breath of Life is a 5th level cleric spell that can bring a character back to life if they died within one round of casting. One question I've been struggling with is how does a character know in game when another character just died?
Do GMs allow meta-gaming, and let players announce when they die and by how many hit points, or does a cleric need to cast Status on the party in order to make Breath of Life useful?
It seems that you almost have to meta-game the PC death event in order to make Breath of Life work. Otherwise the poor cleric has to devote several 2nd level spells to Status over the course of a day, or cast Breath of Life whenever a party member drops for any reason. If they spend a round to do a Heal check, or take some other action to assess the condition, the spell can't be cast in time.
Best I can come up with is to allow some kind of passive Perception check in conjunction with a Heal check as a free action to observe a fatal blow being struck during combat.
How do people address this issue in their games?
Simple. Why does the cleric have to know the party member died? In game, they see their ally take an immense hit and fall. A passive perception check might tell them whether they see him/her breathing. Even if they don't, it's still a perfectly viable excuse to run over there ready to apply a Cure spell. When they get there (after a move action) and realize they look dead, then they can cast Breath of Life instead.
Otherwise the poor cleric has to devote several 2nd level spells to Status over the course of a day.
By 9th level, you can touch 3 players, which covers a classic 4-man party, and the spell lasts 9 hours.
Status avoids many cleric problems, and it's probably worth it to spend at least one full slot on it pretty much all the time.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Well, there's 2 common situations that make it pretty obvious when to use breath of life.
1) If you see someone take a crit from a great axe using barbarian (or dragon bite, etc.) after already being really wounded, and they just flat out die, no time spent bleeding to death, etc. That's pretty obvious that they're dead, so if the cleric runs over there the next round and casts breath of life, they're good.
2) If you see your ally go down from a regular hit, and go over to them the next round, you should be able to see if they're dead or bleeding out pretty easily, and then determine if you need to use breath of life or a regular healing spell.
Sounds like a common approach is to allow an accurate assessment of condition as a free action when a cleric is next to the body. Although, I'm pretty sure that if a person was just fatally stabbed 6 seconds ago, it wouldn't be obvious if they were living or dead with a cursory glance. I'd think the blood would continue to stream out for awhile and perhaps even some involuntary muscle activity after death, although I'm definitely not a medical professional.
But, in a game world, allowing players to make that assessment might be easiest. I guess as long as the cleric always rushes to the aid of a fallen PC, having meta-game knowledge of their condition isn't a problem. What I'll try to discourage as a GM is a cleric taking one action when a PC is at -1, and a different action at -10, without any in-game knowledge.
It also sounds like having Status running is something to be encouraged, to keep in-game and out of game information in sync.
As a side note, as a player, I toyed with a bard with high UMD skill, and wanted to buy a scroll of Breath of Life. Unfortunately, I talked myself into needing a wand of Status to make that work, which would suck up charges in a hurry (CL3 wand would be useful for 1 person, and last 3 hours). I decided it was cheaper and more reliable to go with a scroll of Raise Dead and Restoration instead. That then led me to this question, and how people treated moment of death situations in game.
When I DM, at least, a character that falls to a lethal blow gets a nice detailed description that usually rules out anything else. If the Cleric doesn't have restoration memorized, he might even be running around the rest of the day without one of his arms or something. It's so easy to bring characters back at higher levels that I like to throw in some negative factor to make it suck to die. I don't like dropping a character's level as it's just plain discouraging and half the time I don't even track XP anyway.
So, I guess my suggestion would be to ask the DM for a detailed description of the possibly fatal strike. Chances are, he'll give you enough so that you don't have to feel like your meta-gaming.
If someone drops you at least know they are in need of healing, which Breath of Life also provides.
Others mentioned that when a lot of high level characters die, it's really obvious because they get crushed.
If it's not so obvious, I'd say a DC 20 Heal check would be needed to gauge, which any high level cleric should be able to make.
Hmmm.. this brings up an interesting house rule for games where "is he dead or just really hurt" isn't metagamed: any cure spell applied w/in 1 round of death extends the length of time that Breath of Life can be effective by 1 round.
So:
Player 1: I charge that spear-wielding Orc!
Orc (DM): Yay, I set against a charge.. oo, Crit! - x4 damage... 56 points.
Player 1: Ughh, I'm d.. er, I drop.
Player 2: I rush over and cast Cure Moderate Wounds... 13 total!
DM: While his wounds close a bit, his eyes don't open, and his body doesn't react to the healing like it normally does.
Orc: Stab cleric! - critical fumble! Aghh! I'm de... I drop.
Player 1: ....
Player 2: I see how close to death he is and cast Breath of Life!
Totally agree with a Heal check by the way.
I distinctly remember seeing this in print, but I can't find it in the SRD... must have been a splatbook (or 3.0?), but anyway: there was a rule for using Heal checks to determine a creature's general status. It listed several categories; something along the lines of unharmed, minor wounds, major wounds, near death, stable, dying, dead.
No idea what the DCs or action were (though I do recall it taking an action). House-ruling off the top of my head, for fallen characters I think I'd use:
Swift action. Failure always indicates that the character is dead.
DC = 10 + character's current negative hit points.
+5 DC per 5 feet distance outside of your natural reach.
-5 DC if character is not stable.
-10 DC if performed as a standard action, within reach. This provokes AoO.
GM makes the check. Beating the DC tells you exactly how far negative the character is, and beating it by 5 or more tells you how many more points before they actually die.
Creative Director
|
Since there's very little more frustrating than having to sit at the table and have nothing to do since your character died, I think that it's absolutely important to allow metagaming in this case. If a PC dies, that's something that the entire table should know about (unless, of course, the PC died when no other PC was around to notice at all). Forcing a player to essentially stop playing the game because no one could roll a certain number on a die is bad gaming and should not be encouraged. :)
Forcing a player to essentially stop playing the game because no one could roll a certain number on a die is bad gaming and should not be encouraged.
At times there is an essential conflict between "good gaming" (in the casual sense) and "good roleplay" (in the literary sense).
Yes, the vast majority prefer the former, and it was the shift to more player-centric rules which allowed the RPG genre to become as popular as it has today; but the way most tables play today is far removed from anything Gary Gygax would likely approve of, or even enjoy.
And no, I don't see anything inherently wrong with that. But sometimes some of us like to go in the other direction, and it's nice to have a path mapped out!
I'm suddenly glad that my current cleric was given permission to swap the normal Repose domain power for persistent deathwatch. I'm now ahead of the curve!
|
Creative Director
|
And no, I don't see anything inherently wrong with that. But sometimes some of us like to go in the other direction, and it's nice to have a path mapped out!
As long as every player at the table's cool with that, I don't see that as a problem. Just make sure everyone knows what's up from the start, I guess! :)
If the battle involves allied NPCs or cohorts, it's often worthwhile to give the player of an incapacitated character the option to "take over" an NPC/cohort until their own character is back in the fight.
Gives them something to do, and takes some of the load off the DM.
Hell, if you trust 'em, nothing wrong with letting them run some henchmen!
Since there's very little more frustrating than having to sit at the table and have nothing to do since your character died, I think that it's absolutely important to allow metagaming in this case. If a PC dies, that's something that the entire table should know about (unless, of course, the PC died when no other PC was around to notice at all). Forcing a player to essentially stop playing the game because no one could roll a certain number on a die is bad gaming and should not be encouraged. :)
Can't say I'm in agreement with you on this.
If a player gets himself into a position where he may die then that player needs to learn that sitting out sucks sometimes. Not every death is avoidable but many, many, imo, are!
I allow a Heal check to notice if the subject is breathing/alive. This check can be relatively easy if the Party has experience of the type of creature they are fighting, or someone has rolled well when identifying the monster and its traits and abilities. In-game learning is important to achieve better play.
Not knowing what you are fighting and the dangers to watch out for is suicidal during mid-to-high level play. Allowing a player to live when their actions were frankly stupid isn't something that should be encouraged imo.
Maybe I'm just a harsh DM, but sometimes your character dies, but 9 times out of 10 it's usually due to stupid actions.
If you allow meta-gaming in this case, where do you draw the line? Would you allow a PC to cast Death Ward the first time the Party comes up against a Dread Wraith if no previous encounters involved any incorporeal creatures and no player has passed a Knowledge Religion check? Me, NO! If the player can't justify his actions in-game, he can't do them.
People seem to forget that being a "rookie" in the world of adventuring IS actually a very enjoyable thing even if you may die occasionally. Out-of-game knowledge is inevitable to a degree but I want it limited as much as possible. As long as players learn, they usually live to tell a tale or two.
Many people have posted their favourite adventure on another thread. Many of these seem to be their first adventure, before they had read the monster manual and had out-of-game knowledge, they were really scared!, and that's a good thing.
[Edit] Define RPG. To me it's about not being me, and not knowing what I know. Acting on what my character knows is a huge part of the fun [and challenge], even if it does result in scary encounters!
A neat trick for DMs and players who like to preserve continuity in some of the harder Adventure Paths (let's face it, beating Age of Worms without having anyone in the party die is ... unlikely):
There's a 4th level cleric spell in the Spell Compendium (not sure of the original source) called revenance. You cast it on a dead person and that person is resurrected for minutes/level. At the end of the duration, they go to -con and die.
So, when one of your friends gets splatted by a full power attack crit from a scythe-wielding flesh golem and are too far gone for even breath of life, but you don't want to deal with expensive material components or permanent level drain ... cast revenance on them after the battle (or even during the battle, although then you risk another scythe crit...), then breath of life when the duration runs out. Voila, your companion is back among the living without any diamonds or levels being lost.
Note, this is only for players and DMs who prefer there to be continuity among players in their games. Players and DMs who prefer death to be final should ban this little trick, because it does work perfectly within the rules as written.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Since there's very little more frustrating than having to sit at the table and have nothing to do since your character died, .... Forcing a player to essentially stop playing the game because no one could roll a certain number on a die is bad gaming and should not be encouraged. :)
I recommend, after the first session of a campaign, encouraging players to stat up back-up characters.
Am I the anomaly here?
It never crossed my mind that PCs wouldn't be aware of each other's HP... I guess I never looked at the Status spell, though. My players routinely announce their HP when someone asks, and it hasn't been a problem before. In fact, everyone seems cool with it. I had no idea how many people played without announcing their HP to each other, but I now I can see why; it makes sense. Huh. Maybe I'll pitch that to my group and see what they think... I bet they'll be surprised!
Am I the anomaly here?
It never crossed my mind that PCs wouldn't be aware of each other's HP... I guess I never looked at the Status spell, though. My players routinely announce their HP when someone asks, and it hasn't been a problem before. In fact, everyone seems cool with it. I had no idea how many people played without announcing their HP to each other, but I now I can see why; it makes sense. Huh. Maybe I'll pitch that to my group and see what they think... I bet they'll be surprised!
We've all heard the following...
Cleric: Anyone hurt?
Fighter: Yes! I need 78 hit points.
Why not...
Cleric: Anyone hurt?
Fighter: Yes! A few Cure Critical Wounds would do the trick, no need to use a Heal spell on me.
Or
Fighter: It looks like we're in the clear, how about 7 lesser vigors
Look, there isn't anything wrong with the way you're doing it, in fact, far from it. As long as everyone is happy and having fun you're doing a great job. However, your players are actually meta-gaming!
|
In short there are two schools of thought.
1) No meta-gaming at all even in the interest of speeding things along.
OR
2) Allow meta-gaming only within the party, things one character knows could feasibly be spread out quickly and therefore knowledge checks and the conditions of characters are fair game to everyone, once ONE person has made the check or has the knowledge.
If you don't allow players to know each other is dead, then knowledge checks and HP can't be shared immediately either.
Why not...
Cleric: Anyone hurt?
Fighter: Yes! A few Cure Critical Wounds would do the trick, no need to use a Heal spell on me.
We've actually (insert "boo! hsss!") been using a pseudo 4E approach: instead of giving hp totals, we say "well, I'm bloodied, but I should be OK for now" or "Wren's pretty badly beat up" or "Just a few bruises and scratches, no worries". Basically, break it down to rough verbal percentages. "Bloodied" is the big one, for 50%, from 4E. It maintains the flow of RP without interfering with the very real need to deliver information about how badly you need a heal. The distinction between, say, 40% and 50% hp (24 vs 30 out of 60, for example) is rarely relevant, so the absolute numerical scale is really not needed in our experience.
The existence and inherent perceptibility of the "bloodied" condition was one of the few things that I genuinely liked about 4th Edition, yep.
We've actually (insert "boo! hsss!") been using a pseudo 4E approach: instead of giving hp totals, we say "well, I'm bloodied, but I should be OK for now" or "Wren's pretty badly beat up" or "Just a few bruises and scratches, no worries". Basically, break it down to rough verbal percentages. "Bloodied" is the big one, for 50%, from 4E. It maintains the flow of RP without interfering with the very real need to deliver information about how badly you need a heal. The distinction between, say, 40% and 50% hp (24 vs 30 out of 60, for example) is rarely relevant, so the absolute numerical scale is really not needed in our experience.Why not...
Cleric: Anyone hurt?
Fighter: Yes! A few Cure Critical Wounds would do the trick, no need to use a Heal spell on me.
Oh my bad, I thought in 4th you just rolled a series of skill checks to see whether you've just role-played... :-}
Oh my bad, I thought in 4th you just rolled a series of skill checks to see whether you've just role-played... :-}
I took ten on those, because they sure as hell didn't happen during combat.
But in combat... oh man, let me tell you: I knew when that skeleton was bloodied. And the ochre jelly, too.
And the ochre jelly, too.
Would that be the new medium one or the original large one? ;-)
As a DM i like to not tell the PC's the damage they took when i knock them unconcious but instead ask them to tell me there hitpoints and keep them bleeding myself, that way it eliminates the "I'll do it later your on -2 you have 8 rounds left" attitude and adds a whole level of suspense and tension to the table. Of course you allow free action heal checks or spot checks for breathing and wounds etc. to get a fair ida of injury. -1 - -5 Very wounded, -6 - -8 Dying, -9 On the brink of death.
I like that! Control!!
So do you update them every time they take damage?
You could take it further and do it for all damage, having different categories when describing their current health/condition?
Something like...
100-80% - Scratched
80-60% - Injured
60-40% - Bleeding
40-20% - Messed up
20-0% - Critical
0 or below - Frosty (Heal check to determine life/death)