| Helix_the_Wolfshead |
brassbaboon wrote:Cheapy wrote:Digitalelf wrote:brassbaboon wrote:your GM introduces a new character at the level your old character died at, what would you do?
Less confusing now?
I suppose. But I still fail to see how a character one lousy level lower is somehow now broken and unplayable...
But then see my grognard comment in my last post...
It's not just the one level. Now he's more likely to die again, since he's lower level than the rest of the party.
And the options seem to be "Old character, at a lesser level" or "new character, maybe same character concept but with modified feats / skills / spells."
Essentially, it's the ability to completely redo your character and make any changes to things you chose in the past that really aren't working out for you.
Well, as the GM I'd probably discourage this and just restore the PC's level if he is raised from the dead. If the player wants to play a whole new character and is excited about that, then fine, but if the player wants to continue playing the old character and the party is willing to raise him from the dead, I generally just restored his level with a "restoration" spell or something like it.
I really, really don't like unbalanced parties, and I really, really want the players to feel like they are contributing to the experience. Level imbalance is one of the best ways to have a player disengage from the story.
This one makes me wonder. They could contribute at, say 10th level. But not at 9th level with the same gear they had before? The whole module with identical level thing started because the modules tended to competition between players. It rarely was that even (thanks to PC death and variable class experience to go up levels) in ordinary play.
Contributions can be made even if you lose a feat, a couple of hit points and skill points. I don't play APs though, so it's hard for me to judge how it works there... are they balanced that close to the edge?
I believe I've, thus far, got "bragging rights" to playing/GMing the longest (30yrs).
I've always found it more interesting if a player who can role-play the shock & return of dying; that new 10th-level character, if chosen, better be more interesting than the last one who's survived the odd 3 years of game-time with the party. I'd feel nothing for a 'newcomer to the party' that was hacked to bits in the next encounter over an established PC that was embelleshed & improved with the rest of the party. Wouldn't the party cheer to have their restored mate who was run through by the Kurgan & dashed upon jagged rocks, or would they turn on Fabio who somehow upstaged their fallen companion?In the end, nothing is more annoying than a player who would rather play the stats & not the character.