I was just wondering how other fellow DMs out there handle this situation. The guidelines in the DMG call for a player that either loses a character from death or decides to retire his existing one should start one level lower than his prior character and if he wants to take any amount of his old gear that’s subtracted off his starting wealth for his new PC. I was just wondering if others pretty much run things this way or are more lenient on these rules. I’m trying to decide how I want to handle this aspect of the game for my current and future campaigns.
I was just wondering how other fellow DMs out there handle this situation. The guidelines in the DMG call for a player that either loses a character from death or decides to retire his existing one should start one level lower than his prior character and if he wants to take any amount of his old gear that’s subtracted off his starting wealth for his new PC. I was just wondering if others pretty much run things this way or are more lenient on these rules. I’m trying to decide how I want to handle this aspect of the game for my current and future campaigns.
I pretty much handle it this way. Death is not as bad a result as one might think much of the time. When you bring a character back by making a character from scratch that is higher then 1st level they usually significantly improve. The most obvous example in my campaign is the Whirlwind Attack chain of feats. Now for a first level character to head down this path means having sub par feats for something like six levels while your slowly working your way to the big payoff at the end. Generally speaking none of my players even serously considered the idea. Pay off is much to distant and in the meantime one has a fighter thats really not as good as he could be at 3rd level or whatever.
However once my players started coming back from the dead at a high enough level Whirlwind Attack started to become a popular choice. Its very powerful between levels 6-12th or so since it allows for so many attacks. My bet is if I kill one of these whirlwind attackers at 13th level the returning character won't have that chain any more. By the time one is getting to 13th level you attack a bunch of times anyway and its getting critical that you just keep bashing away at the BBEG until it falls down. spreading ones damage over lots of targets is simply no longer so useful.
The bottom line is even if they loose a level you'll tend to find that they often come back more powerful then when they left. Add to that the fact that lower level characters gain more experience and hence the gap will close some what and you might find that the players that don't die are the ones who are most frustrated. Definitly I'd keep the level loss penalty. Without that as a detriment dying is to powerful.
Jeremy is right -- creating a higher-level character from scratch invariably leads to a better-optimized character. I prefer to levy some penalty for death, or changing characters (which has been a problem for a couple of our players).
IMC new characters start with fewer experience points than the rest of the party. Next campaign I'm going to start them on a 32-point buy for stats; replacement characters will only get 28 points. I have no idea how successful that'll be.
Jack
I am fairly lenient in this regard. I allow them to start midway through the level below where they died when they make a new character. Partially I do this to minimize their time "in the corner", but also to make figuring out XP easier on myself. The character who died will catch up in a session or two. I know I can always plug it into the d20srd encounter calculator, but my computer, alas, is not in the game room, so I have to run back and forth. New players start one level below average party level so they have time to acclimate before taking centre stage.
I agree that characters created later in the campaign are not only optimized, but they have the benefit of the experience of the current campaign. While I told my PC's that my current campaign (Merchants of Astephel) would reward skill based and well rounded characters, they didn't believe me until they died and made campaign-optimized PC's.
|
Next campaign I'm going to start them on a 32-point buy for stats; replacement characters will only get 28 points. I have no idea how successful that'll be.
Jack
I like this and will probably use this but drop from 32 to 30 and then any further characters will be made at 2 pts less then the last one.
Great concept for point buy users.FH
Next campaign I'm going to start them on a 32-point buy for stats; replacement characters will only get 28 points...
I like this and will probably use this but drop from 32 to 30 and then any further characters will be made at 2 pts less then the last one.
Great concept for point buy users.
Thanks :)
For what it's worth, this'll be the first time we've used a 32 point buy. Normally we go with 28, and I was going to have replacement characters at 25 (supposedly the D&D default). Some other discussions here have me convinced to try the higher number. Our next campaign is going to be Savage Tide, and Age of Worms has me thinking they can use the extra points. We'll see what happens.
well, for what it is worth; I do the level penalty; but often it makes a big difference on how the player died; if they have an honest death then just one level is appropriate; but if a guy does dumb stuff to get killed i add a level penalty each time after the third; same as when they just want to change characters; once or twice is ok, but after that it is a real pain in the butt for the whole group so I give this penalty. This is of course for a campaign; for just getting together a few times to go through a dungeon I dont apply any additional penalty other than the one level as these characters come back as stated above significantly different.
I'm pretty lenient about it. If you're divvying treasure correctly and giving them enough access to higher-level stuff when they have the scratch, one level can be a huge penalty. If you're being a DM-Dick about it, the one-level neg seems like a GP bonus.
The irony is that DMs who cut off their players from accumulating stuff at the correct rate are usually the ones who have a good time killing their players, so death becomes the primary method of advancement.
Hm. I allow liberal use of the rebuilding rules from PHB2, so optimization isn't so much of a concern. The main time I've seen a replacement character get out of hand was an Eberron game where one of the players swapped out his character for an Artificer at 8th level and took his starting gear in expendible items. For a few months after that, he had Wand of Lightning Bolt charges to burn, and the metamagic (wand) feats to go with them, More than one should-have-been dramatic fight was ended prematurely by a maximized, shaped blast lightning bolt.
I have house rules for death that go something like this:
1) Death is a big deal.
a) The raise dead spell series is not a sure thing. It takes one truly favored by the gods to even attempt to call back a departed spirit into its shattered body, and the magic is so advanced that even such an experienced practicioner cannot assure that nothing will go wrong. Demons and opposed dieties may attempt to intervene and infiltrate a spirit favorable to them into the body in place of the one being called. Necromantically tainted areas brim over with spirits already fighting their way back to the material plane, and many will try to slip in in place of the called spirit.
b) Different dieties demand other things in place of the stand (5,000 gp in diamonds) material component for Raise Dead. I was particularly happy with the hints in Heroes of Horror in this regard.
2) On the upside, it's harder to die. Normally the more you go up in level, the easier it is to go from "In the fight" to "sub-negative-10 hp", because the amount of damage flying around keeps going up and -10 as the death marker stays constant. I replace -10 as the death marker with -(Con+(Level*2)). This way, high level characters can linger a heroic amount of time, and are more likely to stabilize, which they need in an otherwise gritty and brutal campaign.
All that said, once a character is dead, dead, dead, I favor letting the player come back with a new character at starting XP for the party's average level, so I'm a softie in that regard, too.
2) On the upside, it's harder to die. Normally the more you go up in level, the easier it is to go from "In the fight" to "sub-negative-10 hp", because the amount of damage flying around keeps going up and -10 as the death marker stays constant. I replace -10 as the death marker with -(Con+(Level*2)). This way, high level characters can linger a heroic amount of time, and are more likely to stabilize, which they need in an otherwise gritty and brutal campaign.
I really like this rule!
I really like this rule!
2) On the upside, it's harder to die. Normally the more you go up in level, the easier it is to go from "In the fight" to "sub-negative-10 hp", because the amount of damage flying around keeps going up and -10 as the death marker stays constant. I replace -10 as the death marker with -(Con+(Level*2)). This way, high level characters can linger a heroic amount of time, and are more likely to stabilize, which they need in an otherwise gritty and brutal campaign.
Me too. My first reaction was that it provided high level characters with too much of a buffer (10th level fighter can potentially get to -40 without dying!) but then I realised my own house rules are not much better. We use the rule that from -1 to -(10+ConMod) you can stabilize and lower than that you can't stabilize and you die at -(10+ConMod)*2. But that still leaves one at nearly -30hp for a good Con modifier.
But I like the dependence on level. I've been thinking of going back to -10 and you're dead, but how about something like -(10+ConMod+(HD-1)) and you're dead. That way a 10th level character is still looking at being in the low -20s before dying. (I'm thinking HD-1 because that means the base of 10+ConMod is for 1st level and 1HD monsters and lower.) This makes -10 as being death for the 1st level, average Con character.
We also have the rule that stabilization is based on a Fort save with a DC of 15+(neghp). So someone at -10hp needs to make a DC 25 Fort save. Also, one can remain conscious while dying with a Will save at the same DC.
Greg
In the campaign I'm currently DM'ing I play:
- negative Con score or -10 (whichever is lower) is your death's door. Anything below that equals death.
- this same number becomes your percentile chance to stabilize. We didn't think it would be a big deal but we've had one person roll an eleven and another a fourteen to stabilize.
As far as dying goes, the marker I use is -10 + character level, it gives some leniency but keeps things simple.
As for starting new characters I think the number one thing to take into consideration is wether you're dealing with new players or not. In the campaign I'm currently running, this is my players' first experience with D & D, so I'm pretty lenient about them starting new characters. This lets them get a feel for the different classes and races and what they like to play. If you're dealing with a more experienced group, you may not want to be so lenient.
I start their new characters at the same level as the old ones, but with only 50% of the suggested wealth by their level to buy gear (and I don't allow looting of dead or retired PC's).
I also let them have the same XP as the old character.
I find this makes for a pretty even trade between raising a character and starting a new one
If your character dies IMC your new character starts at level 1. Even if the others are level 10. Though the difference is was never that huge.
But I have hit points heal at 1/level/hour of rest. Real damage is expressed as con loss. Its what you loose when you run out of hp. This makes the party tougher, and it makes it easy for people to catch up.
Obviously this will not work in an adventure path, but it does in an open campaign setting.
If your character dies IMC your new character starts at level 1. Even if the others are level 10. Though the difference is was never that huge.
But I have hit points heal at 1/level/hour of rest. Real damage is expressed as con loss. Its what you loose when you run out of hp. This makes the party tougher, and it makes it easy for people to catch up.
Obviously this will not work in an adventure path, but it does in an open campaign setting.
I was using this system but it collapsed, for me any way, when the average party level was around 6 as the difference just became to great.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Replacement character rules are one of the few must have house rules at any game. The topic is poorly covered in the PHB/DMG and comes up in every single campaign I've ever run. My rule is that all gear (other than special quest items) on the dead character is lost and the new character comes in one level lower. New gear is purchased by the character out of the DMG (no custom items or items from other books) and no item may constitute more than half the character's total wealth at the time of creation.
I was using this system but it collapsed, for me any way, when the average party level was around 6 as the difference just became to great.If your character dies IMC your new character starts at level 1. Even if the others are level 10. Though the difference is was never that huge.
But I have hit points heal at 1/level/hour of rest. Real damage is expressed as con loss. Its what you loose when you run out of hp. This makes the party tougher, and it makes it easy for people to catch up.
Obviously this will not work in an adventure path, but it does in an open campaign setting.
I know what you mean. The way I dealt with was to reaverage the party and just drop the remainder. So if the party was 6th level and one person died assuming a 4 person party you would get 19/4 = 4. So I would try to shepard them into encounters that were good for a 4th level party. Dangerous for a 1st level character, but not too deadly as CRs go, and routine work for the 6th level guys. The xp gain of the rest of the party slows down while it speeds up for the 1st level guy. An 11 + 1 + 6 + 6 party might be a problem though. But if you are brutal enough, this should never happen. A good rule of thumb would be that you start at the level of the highest level character -8. That way the CRs don't get too out of control.
Oh and I forgot, also change the advancement rate. Keep the lower levels fast but slow the advancement way down as you level. Levels 10 - 15 are the levels where the abilities of the player characters start to break down the game, so make it harder to get there. This way you will have a nice mix of characters level 1-10. After all, Gandalf was a 5th level Magic User.
My rule is that all gear (other than special quest items) on the dead character is lost and the new character comes in one level lower.
This seems important to me, as my players always loot the body of their comrade. I was tempted to make a glass jaw wandmaker (spend one level worth of XP to stretch the starting money twice as far), and follow it up with a rogue or bard maxxed out in the use magic device skill. I am not a metagamer, so I didn't, but the thought crossed my mind.
I like the potential possesion on raise dead mentioned above (am stealing that :).
Replacement characters can not be of the same race or class (Abe another tumbling rogue?) and I do not let prestige classes to start (play at least one level of the standard classes). Monster classes are popular replacements, but I only allow starting gold for the actual class levels not the ECLs.
No one has died since I thought of a new rule, so not sure how it would work: roll 1d4, 1=two levels below party average, 2=1 level below party average, 3=party average, 4=one level above party average. I figure a party gaining some notieriety might just attract an already famous lead singer. (without having to go through American Idols wannabes :).
I also submitted an article to dungeon that was not accepted. It was a half-dozen or so ideas to introduce a replacement character when the tavern is not around. I just hate finding a table full of gear next to a tied-up captive. If anyone wants to see it, let me know.
Replacement character rules are one of the few must have house rules at any game. The topic is poorly covered in the PHB/DMG and comes up in every single campaign I've ever run. My rule is that all gear (other than special quest items) on the dead character is lost and the new character comes in one level lower. New gear is purchased by the character out of the DMG (no custom items or items from other books) and no item may constitute more than half the character's total wealth at the time of creation.
I use the opposite. All the gears is left behind but newly entered characters start off broke. Actually I was happy to use your system as well and simply told my players to choose which system they wanted. They wanted the gear. Probably because I'm strict as all hell about how much one can spend on newly acquired magic items but have a habit of making the treasure into a single good item moderatly often. So no one wants to loose the Ring of Wizardry II when all they'll be allowed to buy with their new character is a bunch of stuff none of which may be worth more then 9000 gp.
baudot's 1a and 1b suggestions are golden. Heroes of Horror may join my list of rule books...
baudot, did all of this come from HoH? Or just the idea for the second part?