What level do you let someone make a new character after dying?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

1 to 50 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Well, my question is when a PC dies and decides not to raise dead / reincarnate, but create a new character. At what level do you let the new PC join as?

Their previous level?
Their previous level -1 ?
The lowest level of the party?
Level 1?

Liberty's Edge

Guthwulf wrote:

Well, my question is when a PC dies and decides not to raise dead / reincarnate, but create a new character. At what level do you let the new PC join as?

Their previous level?
Their previous level -1 ?
The lowest level of the party?
Level 1?

Unless I am mistaken, 1st.

EDIT: Unless you are talking Pathfinder society, ignore the above.

Liberty's Edge

It depends on what part of the level the part is at. If everyone is ~ half way or more through their current level, I let the new character be that level but reset their xp to the beginning of the level.
Basically, I only want them losing about one half of a level. This half-a-level loss is cumulative through repeated failures. And it is upped to a full-level if the person was fully aware that they'd likely die and didn't have a good role-play reason to jump in anyway.

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

I usually let the new character come in at their previous level -1, with enough XP to get them halfway to the next level. Thus, if a 10th level character died, his replacement would be level 9.5. This really sucks if your character was on the verge of leveling up, too, (since it wouldn't matter if you were 10.1 or 10.9) but them's the breaks.

Liberty's Edge

I just noticed which area this thread in is. If this is a Pathfinder Society question, then my previous answer stands, and this thread should be moved. If not then what they said.

Graywulfe


it is a good time to discuss with everyone if they are wanting to try some new characters...

Otherwise
I say reward the PC if he died well, or penalize same level or -1.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Since I have done away with experience, and level the party at story points instead, probably APL -1 for the first session or two.


As I've gotten older, I kind of like keeping everyone at the same level, no matter what, because it keeps the GM's life simple as well. The Core Rulebook actually discuses this, although there isn't a "standard" right answer. It does mention that if the original character dies and isn't raised, you should either not give the new character any extra gold (i.e. you don't use the wealth per level guide), or the dead character's gear is all off limits.

Personally, I'd just let the person come back at the same level. So long as they aren't clearly just playing the same character over again, at least.


There are no real clear guidelines.

I typically figure the average level of the PCs and subtract 1-2 from that to be the replacement character level. This means the party definitely takes a hit in terms of combat strength but the new PC isn't toast the second they fight a CR appropriate foe.

The way the XP charts work the lower level PC should make up a good amount of the difference pretty rapidly and will likely be no more than 1 level behind the rest of the party.

If there is a cohort that would make sense as a new PC, I'll definitely encourage the PC to take over that cohort.

Starting over at 1st basically cripples a party especially if the new character is replacing a needed component like a cleric or a wizard.

Alternatively I would also allow someone to be the same level as the rest of the party as long as 1 or more of the levels are in a NPC class like aristocrat or expert.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
graywulfe wrote:


Unless I am mistaken, 1st.

If the campaign is being run at high level, you might as well tell the player to pack up and go home with that mindset.


I generally do not punish a player if their character dies. Character death is a rare event in campaigns I run so this is largely a non-issue.


In 3.X? I DEFINITELY keep the replacement character at the same level. In fact, I give the dead PC experience points for that last, deadly encounter, and start the replacement PC with the same number of XP. The way I see it, creating a character is a lot of work in 3.X, so that should be penalty enough. And if the GM made the encounter too tough and deadly, why should the player be penalized for that? (And I don't do the "Raise Dead" thing...)

And besides, what if you're running one of those tough PC-killing modules that push a party to its limits? If it kills a PC and the replacement is a level lower, then that new PC will certainly be killed. And the next PC, two levels lower will certainly be. And so on...

Liberty's Edge

In my home campaigns I usually go with same level. In fact for the most part I just have one player track exp and when they go up all go up. Makes planning adventures alot easier. I used to go with Avg Party level minus 1 or 2.

Graywulfe

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Guthwulf wrote:

Well, my question is when a PC dies and decides not to raise dead / reincarnate, but create a new character. At what level do you let the new PC join as?

Their previous level?
Their previous level -1 ?
The lowest level of the party?
Level 1?

Usually I let the new PC be the same level as the lowest level party member. Which often ends up having the new character be the same level as most of the party. I've never been a fan of "punishing" players who've had characters who die and had to replace them by forcing them to come back lower level than everyone else, because that's a great way to set up a self-fullfilling prophecy that means that player's character will die more often than normal since he/she will be less powerful and less able to deal with what everyone else is coping with!

And yeah... I let the new character get all the XP for the session, even if he came into being halfway through the game.


Guthwulf wrote:
Well, my question is when a PC dies and decides not to raise dead / reincarnate, but create a new character. At what level do you let the new PC join as?

Typically the lowest level in the party. If everyone's the same level, -1.

The party typically gains all the magic items from the fallen character, plus the new character is joining with a bunch of shiny new stuff. We had one campaign where there ended up being really high attrition (some people are on their 4th character), so there was a need to limit the inflow of magic items to the party (new characters started at the level of the lowest with 1/2 starting gold).


graywulfe wrote:
In fact for the most part I just have one player track exp and when they go up all go up. Makes planning adventures alot easier.

Sure, I keep track of XP with meticulous precision. Trust me. (Grins, with toothpick sticking out of mouth.)

Sovereign Court

BAH! You kids and your namby-pamby ways. Back in my day, if a character died during the course of the campaign, his player had to continue to play that character until the campaign ended. If you want derring-do and excitement, buddy, don't die. If you enjoy role-playing mouldering and the eternal silence of the tomb, have I got a Tomb of Horrors for you.

Of course, the older guys I gamed with were really hardcore. If your character died, they killed you and dumped your body in a drainage ditch.


What is up with all these people keeping up with XP, make a system that two games to 2nd level, three more to third, four more games to 4th level....

Make it work five games between 4th and 5th level, it actually works out really close to the XP points award also everyone levels at the same time (between games).

Hard core guys, when the minotor dies it is hamburgers for everyone else!

The Exchange

I let them come in the same level as they were playing before.

I also do not track XP's and do not penalize people for missing sessions, but then players in my campaigns never miss a session unless they absolutely can not avoid it so its rarely an issue.

Characters gain a level every 4th session, from 1st level through Nth level. Players are expected to have their character fully leveled between every 3rd and 4th session.


Another reason the good ole days weren't.


For me it depends on how and why the PC dies. If it was just bad luck then character level -1 just like if they got raised.

If they went out in an amazing or particularly heroic way they may even come in higher level then they went out at or with something cool to represent that their paladin jumped down the red dragon's throat so he could bypass it's natural armor and protective spells.

If they were being idiots ("I attack the king!" "Why?" "Because I can! RAAAAARRRGGH!") Then they'll come back in lower level then level-1, possibly even at level 1 if the rest of the PCs aren't too much higher then that.


We don't use individual experience points (because we have players who can't make 100% of sessions due to work schedule interference and it's just simpler that way), so new characters come in at the exact same experience total as the rest of the party.


Same for me, except that it is usually more than 3 or 4 sessions between levels. We play 3 hours or slightly less, a week, and they tend to role play and discuss a lot so sometimes they don't get much done in a session.

-- david
Papa.DRB

d20pfsrd.com wrote:

I let them come in the same level as they were playing before.

I also do not track XP's and do not penalize people for missing sessions, but then players in my campaigns never miss a session unless they absolutely can not avoid it so its rarely an issue.

Characters gain a level every 4th session, from 1st level through Nth level. Players are expected to have their character fully leveled between every 3rd and 4th session.


I much prefer to actually track XP, because without it, you can feel like you have no idea when you are going to level again. Even if its going to take forever, just seeing a total lets you know how many you got and how close you are to advancing.

Since you don't know what the scenario calls for, if the GM picks a point in the campaign to level up the characters, you can really flounder around until you do the magic "thing" that gets you to the encounter that lets you advance.

But, like I said above, I am now a much bigger fan of the whole group having the same XP total. It makes it much less of a problem to figure out how challenging encounters should be and the like, especially if you have more players than a standard group. Seven characters at three different character levels can make it a nightmare to figure out what the group can and can't handle.


For us, it turns out that starting at first level is best.

It helps integrate the new character into the party if the party has to spend a couple of levels just helping that new character stay alive. It also helps with character development.

Of course, lower level characters gain levels much faster than higher level characters so the new character catches up in about two levels with the rest of the party.


My houserule is this: if the character dies legitimately, due to bad rolls and tough encounters, the new character gets the same XP as the old one, including any that character would have gained from the session. If, however, he does something stupid or obviously lethally dangerous, even for a heroic reason, his new character is the same level as the old, but the minimum amount of XP for that level. We tend to have a lot of people in our groups want to change characters in the middle of the campaign, which is why I implemented this. It isn't unusual for our memories of a campaign to include eight characters when there are only five players, and the GM is being extremely lenient. ("Oh, that would kill you? Then he did it to Bob's character instead.")

Now, if the heroic death impresses everyone else, he'll get minimum XP for that level, but the other players might reward him with high XP. (See this thread on how I award XP and why players can give it. However, it does contain a few spoilers to Rise of the Runelords.)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Lowest party member with 1/2 gold for that level. They get any of the "standard" gear for free. So they could have a mount for free if they currently need a mount for example.


SirUrza wrote:
Lowest party member with 1/2 gold for that level. They get any of the "standard" gear for free. So they could have a mount for free if they currently need a mount for example.

Same level as the others, and they get to buy items with gold of that level.

Our parties generally don't look our dead comrades, but give them hero's burials, leaving the body with all it's adventuring goods.


That depends on who and how he dies...

Deaths to change badly rolled characet are penalized.
Deaths out of stupidity are penalized (I cast my magic missile on the King).

For well played death (paladin sacrificing himself to save the parts from a rampaging giant, ...) I don't give any penalties.


Yep, situational.

Maybe -1, but usually no loss.

That said, I run it the new character only starts with starting wealth, whereas their last character may have amassed significantly more resources... so it's still a penalty of sorts.

That said, we dont run PFS stuff so...


In the current game I'm in new players start 2 lvls behind the highest in the group. Though they recieve a 10% exp bonus. Our group has just breached the 11th lvl so once the new character reaches 10th level the exp is removed


We used to start the recently deceased at the lowest level of a party member, but recently, we've started mixing things up a bit.

If you die, you start with a new character at first level. That said, we're not playing with the rule that experience gains can only advance you one level per session/award. That said, he hasn't jumped more than one level in a session...

(Unsure if that rule still exists in PF - we haven't converted the game whole hog. The player of the recently deceased 3.5 wizard decided to create a PF druid, so he's running with that book, and the rest is running with 3.5 books. It's a testament to compatibility that, so far, it's presented little to no issue.)

We've played four sessions with his new character so far, so he's jumped from L1 to L3 pretty quickly, and it hasn't really been an issue.

I presented the concept and the desire to run with it to my players, and they were more than happy to give it a shot. The party encountered the fledgeling druid during the later part of the session/encounter in which the wizard died, he assisted them and proved his worth, and they invited him along. They entrusted the deceased wizard's Ring of Protection to the druid's care, and helped to outfit him with a few pieces of suitable gear that they had acquired, and things are going well.


I let them come in at party level.

My PCs get into their characters, their backstories and life goals.
Character death is cathartic for everyone at the table. There really isn't any need to make it a punishment — it is already something players wish to avoid.

Grand Lodge

Many years ago I implemented the rule that when you die, you die. Next PC is a new character and comes in at 1st level. I had to wait quite a while until the group's resident cleric raised my lifeless body (the scars are still evident) so we won't be doing that again :)

Since our group uses a group leveling concept, the replacement PC comes in at the same level as the party. Replays of the previous PC, i.e. adding a roman numeral II behind the name, is not permitted. And the starting cash is somewhat equivalent to the table in the core rulebook, however, every non-standard item is scrutinized by the GM to prevent excessive magic item customization. If the average party wealth is significantly higher or lower than the table, we adjust. I also insist that characters follow reasonable expectations for building. For example, it is widely known that Sleep is perhaps the most powerful spell at first level, but by 4th, it is largely useless. Launching a wizard above first level without Sleep in his spellbook will require some explanation.


always the same lv. Had a group that fizzeled due to lv loss and two members staying behind the rest of the party. One PC in that game (it was their first PC ever and they were in love with it but had no idea how to play so death after death he was lv 3 when the party was average 10) that refused to allow a PC to go and due to this the rest of the party suffered. Since then If you die in my game you are one LV behind till the Party lvs again and then you gain Two one that you lost and one that everyone else gains. Have only had one PC death in PF so far and it was at first so she just built a new PC and problem solved.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I start them at the exact same level and XP they had when they died (maybe with some curable negative levels) in Pathfinder. Why? Because XP gain is static in Pathfinder, not relative. If you knock them down an extra level it will be absolutely impossible for them to ever catch up to their peers (or former peers I should say) short of doing solo adventures.

Like Jason said, they will likely just continue to die--especially if they have to do solo missions in their weakened state just to catch up.

I never liked starting them at lower level in v3.5 either. Due to the relativity of the XP system in that game I would often have the "punished player" sling shot ahead of everyone else in terms of levels and XP. They would end up being more powerful in the end because they had died (especially if they got some of the old character's gear).


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I have new/replacement PCs come in at the same level as the rest of the group. Usually, the old character's gear goes to their family or church. The new character gains according to the wealth chart (which often hurts the new PC due to group enchanting practices).


Ravingdork wrote:
XP gain is static in Pathfinder, not relative. If you knock them down an extra level it will be absolutely impossible for them to ever catch up to their peers (or former peers I should say) short of doing solo adventures.

While this is true if you account for absolute XP, it would only be true for levels too if all levels had the same XP value.

However, higher levels are "bigger" so while the new character is behind in absolute XP he is not in absolute level when the level of the game is high enough because the "gap" that separates the characters is progressively smaller compared to the whole level. Also the slower the progression the less hurts to be behind in XP, counter intuitive as it may seem.

A difference of 1000XP at low levels is huge; a level behind during many encounters. When you reach the mid levels this difference is covered by a single encounter.


Party level. In general the campaigns our group runs don't have raise dead magic commonly available (wish/miracle is required). Having said that - we're pretty bad at running away, by the time we realise we're in trouble a TPK is pretty much guaranteed.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
nidho wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
XP gain is static in Pathfinder, not relative. If you knock them down an extra level it will be absolutely impossible for them to ever catch up to their peers (or former peers I should say) short of doing solo adventures.

While this is true if you account for absolute XP, it would only be true for levels too if all levels had the same XP value.

However, higher levels are "bigger" so while the new character is behind in absolute XP he is not in absolute level when the level of the game is high enough because the "gap" that separates the characters is progressively smaller compared to the whole level. Also the slower the progression the less hurts to be behind in XP, counter intuitive as it may seem.

A difference of 1000XP at low levels is huge; a level behind during many encounters. When you reach the mid levels this difference is covered by a single encounter.

There will still be a level discrepancy when the other PCs have enough XP to level up and you don't. You likely die since you are lower level which creates a land slide effect if you are penalized yet again.


Ravingdork wrote:
nidho wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
XP gain is static in Pathfinder, not relative. If you knock them down an extra level it will be absolutely impossible for them to ever catch up to their peers (or former peers I should say) short of doing solo adventures.

While this is true if you account for absolute XP, it would only be true for levels too if all levels had the same XP value.

However, higher levels are "bigger" so while the new character is behind in absolute XP he is not in absolute level when the level of the game is high enough because the "gap" that separates the characters is progressively smaller compared to the whole level. Also the slower the progression the less hurts to be behind in XP, counter intuitive as it may seem.

A difference of 1000XP at low levels is huge; a level behind during many encounters. When you reach the mid levels this difference is covered by a single encounter.

There will still be a level discrepancy when the other PCs have enough XP to level up and you don't. You likely die since you are lower level which creates a land slide effect if you are penalized yet again.

True, you will be behind in XP at some points so you'll be weaker, and thus the possibility of character death is increased and this could lead to the landslide effect you mention, although in my experience after a character death players tend to play more cautiously to compensate.

My point is that the higher level you are from the level you died/rerolled the PC the window of opportunity for this happening narrows more and more. Eventually becoming negligible.

On a side note I agree that an equally leveled party is much easier to challenge adequately but I do not see the XP difference so unmanageable.
Even if there are level discrepancies; not all encounters are suposed to be equally challenging for all players/classes.
And there's always ad-hoc XP, or as you said, solo/personalized encounters if I feel that the gap needs to be filled.

Maybe I just don't feel that character death should be irrelevant. If you can sacrifice a character without consequences then the value of life drops quickly and the game resents from it IMO.
I have DM'd for some very reckless players and the prospect of death and therefore power loss is the only thing that kept them from the "I magic missile the king" situation mentioned before. Sad but true.


nidho wrote:
Maybe I just don't feel that character death should be irrelevant. If you can sacrifice a character without consequences then the value of life drops quickly and the game resents from it IMO.

Character death is only irrelevant without penalties if your players don't care about their characters. If your players are actually invested in their own characters, they aren't going to like having their character die. There's no need to artificially punish something that they already don't want to have happen.

Sovereign Court Contributor

Undoubtedly the thread has wandered far and deep since it's inception, but responding to the initial question: half-way through the level below the level of the lowest party member.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Yet again, I admit to being odd about this.

If a PC is full-and-truly dead, I let the rest of the party decide as a group what kind of character they're looking for as a replacement team-mate: what class, maybe some other attributes or qualities. Of course, the player is still in the room, so people tend not to suggest new character features the player would hate, if they want to keep him in the group.

That new character comes in, by default, with enough experience to begin two levels lower than the dead character, but the rest of the party can decide to contribute experience points, on a one-will-give-him-five basis.

So, let's say the party's 7th level rogue sits on a poison needle and dies. The other four party members decide that what they really need is a bard with maybe some rogue savvy. So, the player is invited to roll up a bard / rogue, at level 5.

If this were Pathfinder's medium experience progression, the character would begin with 15,000 experience points. But if the rest of the players were each willing to contribute 400 experience points, the new character would have an additional (400*4 = 1600 * 5 = 8000) experience points, bringing him in at 6th level instead of 5th. And of course some players might decide to contribute more than others. (An average donation of 1000 each is what they'd need to bring in a new PC at 7th Level.)

  • This puts a burden on the party for letting someone die.
  • I make no judgement as to whether I personally think the death was heroic, just unlucky, or a bone-headed blunder, but the other players can sure make their feeling known about that.
  • This eliminates the problem of the bad player who can't design a character archetype that fits with the rest of the party. If everybody else is Chaotic Scheming, they don't go looking for a Paladin.


Wow, I would walk away from the table the instant the DM told me the group got to dictate to me what character to play.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Zurai wrote:
Wow, I would walk away from the table the instant the DM told me the group got to dictate to me what character to play.

(grin)

Zurai, we've established a number of times now that our gaming style isn't for you. And, as I say, the player of the once and future character gets a voice, but no vote in the process. I've never had someone play a character they really disliked, but we have had a "no more barbarians for you!" discussion.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

That is a rather unusual system. I'm sure it works great for groups composed of longtime friends. I know that is the only possible way I could accept it. Otherwise I'd do just as Zurai would.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
TriOmegaZero wrote:
That is a rather unusual system. I'm sure it works great for groups composed of longtime friends. I know that is the only possible way I could accept it. Otherwise I'd do just as Zurai would.

Same here. I "might" do it for a group of longtime friends and will walk away otherwise (and may do so anyways depending on how they approach me about it).


Chris Mortika wrote:
Zurai wrote:
Wow, I would walk away from the table the instant the DM told me the group got to dictate to me what character to play.

(grin)

Zurai, we've established a number of times now that our gaming style isn't for you. And, as I say, the player of the once and future character gets a voice, but no vote in the process. I've never had someone play a character they really disliked, but we have had a "no more barbarians for you!" discussion.

Yeah, that came off a bit more harshly than I intended. My apologies for that. It's not a system I would play under (although we do discuss what roles the party needs whenever there's a new character entering a campaign, it's always a suggestion or a "hey you know we don't have a trap finder"), but if it works for you, more power to you. It takes all kinds :)

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Well, I can tell you the reason for the rule. One of the players had come from a campaign that broke down because a couple of players just brought in characters that were ... not bad, but ... wrong. That didn't fit the campaign. Diplomats in a game without a lot of opportunities for them; that kind of stuff.

And that player said, "I can't imagine why our characters would have ever agreed to adventure with that kind of a person." And we talked about the suspension of disbelief, and how the DM could make your characters meet and join up, despite the characters' feelings, with spells or criminal sentences or such.

And so we came up with the rule. And it has worked for us.

But, as I say, it's odd. And I don't think it would work for casual games.

1 to 50 of 290 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / What level do you let someone make a new character after dying? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.