|
Two PCs died in the BBEG fight we just had. Now one wasn't really happy with his character and wants to try something new. I am ok with that.
The other is just making a new guy almost exactly the same (same race, class, and ability scores, just a better feat choice). I am not happy about saying "oh yeah this new guy comes along" but want to say "no, you have to use a Raise Dead, or try a different class out that you want" otherwise to me it seems like it is just a way to get around the cost of raise dead. "bob 2.0 comes along, the twin brother"
After all the PCs can certainly afford the Raise Dead plus 2 restorations quite easily. (they would be using prestige points for it, this is not PFS but I am playing with different factions competing in my campaign)
Does this seem fair or should I just drop it because does it even matter? All I would be doing is taking prestige points away from other players who'd have to help him pay. But on the other hand, it might be incentive for them to stop him from running in first and getting himself killed.
How do you guys handle player death and replacements?
I personally have one or two other character concepts for "back ups" when playing. I have very poor luck when it comes to rolls in clutch situations when gaming. Depending on what is happening in the campaign determines which one comes in. If the character was going over well and I'm enjoying it, sitting out until the party can get me back in is the norm. A Speak with Dead spell lets the party know if I want to come back.
If one of the other concepts would be a better fit, I end up waiting for the GM to write me in.
Obviously you want the players to enjoy themselves, but at the same point, as you said... Rewriting the same character is pretty poor etiquette. You are the GM, and the option to bring the character back exists without much hardship. Give them the option of being raised or coming in with another concept they would enjoy. Death shouldn't be viewed as a punishment, but it should have repercussions. This isn't an MMO where you pop up at your body or nearest convienant spot.
This is a sensitive subject to many people.
But I do feel it to be somewhat immersion breaking to bring in effectively the same character to get around the cost of a raise dead.
However, you could simply say he can play the "new" character, but joins the party with NPC wealth by level instead of PC wealth by level. This would discourage him from bringing in a virtually identical PC to avoid the death tax.
For the other player, I would almost suggest the same, but with the caveat that his character is instead "reincarnated" or resurrected with the touch of death having changed him. He remembers his old life, but has a completely new mindset (and class, and other abilities).
This way it is fair, everybody pays the death tax or starts with NPC wealth. Make sure to offer the effective rebuild option to the other player as well.
He already lost a character, don't kick him while he is down... er dead...
Let him make the new one using whatever rules you use.
In my games, unless someone obviously suicides their PC, they start at the same level as the rest of the party, with as much money as the poorest person (or WBL, it varies).
If someone starts changing characters without a death, I usually impose a level penalty to them.
As in, "dammit Frank, this is the third character in as many sessions, your new one starts at level 5, not 6."
He already lost a character, don't kick him while he is down... er dead...
Let him make the new one using whatever rules you use.
In my games, unless someone obviously suicides their PC, they start at the same level as the rest of the party, with as much money as the poorest person (or WBL, it varies).
If someone starts changing characters without a death, I usually impose a level penalty to them.
As in, "dammit Frank, this is the third character in as many sessions, your new one starts at level 5, not 6."
Death is part of the story of the character though, and a raise dead is available. Frank 2.0 is just a way to game the system, flat out. It isn't kicking the player while they are down. Sometimes $&#@ happens, and repercussions help drive the story forward and make it meaningful.
I can understand the thought process of doing it, as every popular game has save points or spawn points or whatever, that let you jump right back into the action. But that isn't what PnP RPGs are about. Or at least not in any group I've been a part of or any I've talked to others about. And it obviously isn't the tone the OP wants for their game.
Let me say that your prestige points might be some part of this problem. If bringing back Bob 1.0 has no major hassle, people usually do it. If it has a hassle that applies to the whole party, then people try to game the system to avoid the hassle.
Further, if there is NO downside to rolling up Bob 2.0, then there is no incentive to deal with the hassle of the raise dead.
By hassle, I mean prestige points but also the cost (gold) and wasted time (leaving dungeon, finding cleric, returning to dungeon).
Basically, you're giving the guy a choice: Option A, pay prestige points, lose treasure, waste time, or Option B, none of the above, no problems at all. Of course option B looks better.
Solutions: The biggest downside to being dead is that you cannot play. The player just sits there while the surviving party members play the game. This is not ideal, so I suggest fixing that quickly. Don't create a hassle with getting to town and getting that raise dead. Make it simple so the bored players are back in the game quickly without any non-play time while they just have to be spectators to the game their friends are playing. Remove the hassle, including prestige points, and you remove the negative incentive to avoid the Raise Dead.
Then put a negative incentive on making a new character. Say, the new guy starts with only 75% of the total wealth of the dead guy, or starts one level below the dead guy. Sure, he'll catch up, but at least for a few game sessions you're playing a weaker character. Do it for both guys; this isn't just a punishment for the one guy rolling Bob 2.0, but rather, a system to make Raising Dead more desirable - in the end it helps the game by maintaining consistency among the characters (I weave them into the story, give non-treasure rewards like titles and land and followers and important friends - none of that is transferable to Bob 2.0 so I personally find it really breaks story continuity when players randomly re-roll for no good reason).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Death is part of the story of the character though, and a raise dead is available. Frank 2.0 is just a way to game the system, flat out. It isn't kicking the player while they are down. Sometimes $&#@ happens, and repercussions help drive the story forward and make it meaningful.He already lost a character, don't kick him while he is down... er dead...
Let him make the new one using whatever rules you use.
In my games, unless someone obviously suicides their PC, they start at the same level as the rest of the party, with as much money as the poorest person (or WBL, it varies).
If someone starts changing characters without a death, I usually impose a level penalty to them.
As in, "dammit Frank, this is the third character in as many sessions, your new one starts at level 5, not 6."
Killing him wasn't enough, now you want to force him to play a character he doesn't want?
I answered the question... you didn't like my answer. That's fine, but forcing someone to play a character they don't want, AFTER killing them... that's just mean.
Death is part of the story of the character though, and a raise dead is available. Frank 2.0 is just a way to game the system, flat out. It isn't kicking the player while they are down. Sometimes $&#@ happens, and repercussions help drive the story forward and make it meaningful.He already lost a character, don't kick him while he is down... er dead...
Let him make the new one using whatever rules you use.
In my games, unless someone obviously suicides their PC, they start at the same level as the rest of the party, with as much money as the poorest person (or WBL, it varies).
If someone starts changing characters without a death, I usually impose a level penalty to them.
As in, "dammit Frank, this is the third character in as many sessions, your new one starts at level 5, not 6."
Killing him wasn't enough, now you want to force him to play a character he doesn't want?
I answered the question... you didn't like my answer. That's fine, but forcing someone to play a character they don't want, AFTER killing them... that's just mean.
So the GM "killed" his character? Not poor choices by the player? Not bad rolls that no one had any influence over?
This sounds like a VERY antagonistic view, and you dont even know the whole story. Don't assume everyone has been as abused as you seem to have been. The game isn't about player vs GM. You are playing an RPG, you are gambling with your character's lives. Sometimes you gamble and lose. Most of the time you win. A player shouldn't be surprised or upset when they die, nor should they be pissy about not being able to bring clone 46859373 back into the game.
It isn't just about "you" or "me", the GM sets the tone for the game. As a player it is your right to bow out if you don't like it. No one is forcing "you" to play. The OP is giving options for the character to come back, as well as the option to bring in another character who isn't a clone. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, short of a sense of entitlement as a player expecting to get their way, and not being allowed to. Entitlement is the only complaint in such a situation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I highly doubt that the death was a personal vengeance, sometimes death does happen by accident even in situations that aren't expected to be life threatening. Sometimes it's a boss fight were it's intended to be dangerous (because if it's not challenging what's the point?) and a character dies because of that challenge.
Being mean implies that it was done with malice, which I doubt.
As for "forcing" someone to play something they don't want to, that's not quite what he's trying to do. He's trying to get them to pay a reasonable fee for the cost of being brought back to life or play a new character. However, the player just wants to bring back the old character without paying.
The most reasonable thing to do is create a penalty for new characters that makes reviving the old more advantageous than building a new.
If someone if dissatisfied with their character, offering in game time with retraining rules is a reasonable way to handle it. As well as offering a "resurrected as different" option. It's basically a trope for characters to come back stronger or different. Take Gandalf the Grey turning into Gandalf the White.
Death is part of the story of the character though, and a raise dead is available. Frank 2.0 is just a way to game the system, flat out. It isn't kicking the player while they are down. Sometimes $&#@ happens, and repercussions help drive the story forward and make it meaningful.He already lost a character, don't kick him while he is down... er dead...
Let him make the new one using whatever rules you use.
In my games, unless someone obviously suicides their PC, they start at the same level as the rest of the party, with as much money as the poorest person (or WBL, it varies).
If someone starts changing characters without a death, I usually impose a level penalty to them.
As in, "dammit Frank, this is the third character in as many sessions, your new one starts at level 5, not 6."
Killing him wasn't enough, now you want to force him to play a character he doesn't want?
I answered the question... you didn't like my answer. That's fine, but forcing someone to play a character they don't want, AFTER killing them... that's just mean.
So the GM "killed" his character? Not poor choices by the player? Not bad rolls that no one had any influence over?
This sounds like a VERY antagonistic view, and you dont even know the whole story. Don't assume everyone has been as abused as you seem to have been. The game isn't about player vs GM. You are playing an RPG, you are gambling with your character's lives. Sometimes you gamble and lose. Most of the time you win. A player shouldn't be surprised or upset when they die, nor should they be pissy about not being able to bring clone 46859373 back into the game.
It isn't just about "you" or "me", the GM sets the tone for the game. As a player it is your right to bow out if you don't like it.
1)Player loses character
2)Player creates new character3)GM forces player to play old character, after paying for res
What would YOU do, as the player, in this scenario?
Let me put it another way.
1)Player creates character, makes poor choices
2)Player continues to play character till it dies
3)GM does not allow new character
Or this way
1)GM forces player to play specific character player doesn't like
All of these are the same situation.
Death is part of the story of the character though, and a raise dead is available. Frank 2.0 is just a way to game the system, flat out. It isn't kicking the player while they are down. Sometimes $&#@ happens, and repercussions help drive the story forward and make it meaningful.He already lost a character, don't kick him while he is down... er dead...
Let him make the new one using whatever rules you use.
In my games, unless someone obviously suicides their PC, they start at the same level as the rest of the party, with as much money as the poorest person (or WBL, it varies).
If someone starts changing characters without a death, I usually impose a level penalty to them.
As in, "dammit Frank, this is the third character in as many sessions, your new one starts at level 5, not 6."
Killing him wasn't enough, now you want to force him to play a character he doesn't want?
I answered the question... you didn't like my answer. That's fine, but forcing someone to play a character they don't want, AFTER killing them... that's just mean.
So the GM "killed" his character? Not poor choices by the player? Not bad rolls that no one had any influence over?
This sounds like a VERY antagonistic view, and you dont even know the whole story. Don't assume everyone has been as abused as you seem to have been. The game isn't about player vs GM. You are playing an RPG, you are gambling with your character's lives. Sometimes you gamble and lose. Most of the time you win. A player shouldn't be surprised or upset when they die, nor should they be pissy about not being able to bring clone 46859373 back into the game.
It isn't just about "you" or "me", the GM sets the tone for the game. As a player it is your right to bow out if you don't like it.
1)Player loses character
2)Player creates new character
3)GM forces player to play old character, after paying for resWhat would YOU...
I guess ignorance really is bliss....
Skylancer4, what is it that I'm ignorant of here?
2 characters died, and both players want to make new characters.
Just because one 'didn't like his character' it's okay for him, but not the other guy?
You either have rules regarding dead characters/replacing characters, or you don't.
If the GM is going to make every rule subject to opinion, the game won't function.
He will be showing favoritism, which is NOT COOL.
Either the two dead characters get raised, or they can both make new characters.
As a fair GM, I try to stay impartial. Just cause I don't LIKE what someone is doing doesn't mean I'm going to make a new rule that only applies to them.
That would be like saying Fireballs do extra damage to one specific character.
Would you play in that game if you were the one taking the extra damage?
|
|
oh he pretty much suicided. Started combat in a populated area full of town guards. refused to drink potions of healing he had on him. He basically got the other character killed as well. He has fallen below 0 hp every other adventure. This is the first time he died. But that's just how he plays and always has.
We have not gone over rules for raising yet. So that's why i was thinking, bring a new guy, or raise dead your old guy. but making the rule after the fact ... makes it sound like i'm singling him out, as alex pointed out.
So.. maybe if i want to do that, i'll have to do it AFTER this...
oh he pretty much suicided. Started combat in a populated area full of town guards. refused to drink potions of healing he had on him. He basically got the other character killed as well. He has fallen below 0 hp every other adventure. This is the first time he died.
So ... I feel like I have to make it cost something. Or he'll keep doing it. OTOH, this is how the guy plays and has for a decade, so he's not going to change.
We have not gone over rules for raising yet. It breaks immersion for "me" to have the "twin brother" show up and want to adventure. I am not sure any of the players even care.
That's new info.
I would allow him to change characters, but limit his gear selection/money and possibly bump him down a level.
You shouldn't prevent him from changing characters, but you definitely shouldn't REWARD him for it either.
Of course, TALKING to him about this should have already happened... he sounds disruptive.
If the other players don't care, that is arguably the most important thing...
Sometimes things happen you don't like, you just gotta roll with it.
Most GMs don't enforce this, but look at WBL and how you are allowed to spend it...
It limits how you can allocate starting gold into magic items and gear.
This alone might be enough to dissuade him from changing characters frequently.
Sorry i edited my post :) I think your point about treating everyone the same is important. I
I do try to treat everyone the same, but I also penalize repeat offenders.
If I have addressed a situation like frequent character changes, and they continue to do it...
they know what happens.
Maybe give him a warning, tell him next time there will be a disadvantage.
Start small, pick a Flaw to apply to his character.
If you have replacement PCs start a level behind it can strongly discourage killing off the current PC. If you also have new PCs above 1st level start with an NPC’s WBL it will further discourage switching PCs as well as helping to ensure the group doesn’t experience FNG Syndrome, where a new PC built with all the hottest new options and perfectly equipped with whatever gear the player wants shows up and outshines the existing PCs who labored for months or years to get to their current state.
Our groups generally use Hero Points, so dying requires getting unlucky repeatedly or ending up in a terrible situation (which still happens sometimes)
If you are unhappy with how a player with a dead PC gets back into the game, even though you've made accommodations to make it pretty simple.
Why not insist that the new PC require that the old PC be given a proper send off, perhaps costing up to half of what the Raise Dead and Restorations would cost. Especially if the new PC is a sibling or cousin.
Have a big funeral, introduce new PC before, during, or after.
If PCs just want to leave him where he fell - and was looted, plant him in an unmarked shallow grave, or build him a pyramid, use it. Every PC death should be at least a major traumatic event and nobody likes cookie cutter characters. Bring back the old PC as an undead or haunt.
Hah hah, have the old PC come back as a Wight wanting vengeance on the group... or have him just develop a hatred for 'the usurper who replaced him'.
That could be fun.
Heck, make him a ghost that follows them around.
I advise against punishing new PCs. Talk it over and make it known that you don't like the idea of having the new PC be too similar to the old one.
I have a set of principle when gaming. One of those is to not play in games/walk away from them if rolling a new pc is punished. Works great so far. I still have more offers to play than I have spare time.
Some good ideas. The other characters loot the body and only give the new character items only they can use.
The new character should adjust their character to survive next time. I would have my new character show up wearing a ring of regeneration and a loincloth. :)
Go to Rituals. Pay special attention to the funeral ritual. Unless a party member spends a mental inventory slot on the ritual, that money is leaving the party. No funeral, the character comes back as undead. Some of the dead characters stuff can be sold to pay for the funeral.
Some good ideas. The other characters loot the body and only give the new character items only they can use.
The new character should adjust their character to survive next time. I would have my new character show up wearing a ring of regeneration and a loincloth. :)
Go to Rituals. Pay special attention to the funeral ritual. Unless a party member spends a mental inventory slot on the ritual, that money is leaving the party. No funeral, the character comes back as undead. Some of the dead characters stuff can be sold to pay for the funeral.
That undead or funeral thing sounds like a kick-*** campaign to play a cleric with Command Undead in.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some good ideas. The other characters loot the body and only give the new character items only they can use.
Loot what body? The dead PC?
This is a bad idea in general. See below.
Some of the dead characters stuff can be sold to pay for the funeral.
All of it. Every copper. Anything not spent should go to the legal firm of Dowe, Cheatem, & Howe when they immediately show up as executors of the dead PC's will (or life insurance taken out by his next of kin) and claim all of his property down to the last copper - it's all going to be inherited by a NPC relative.
If not, then the party just gets richer each time a PC dies - a new guy joins the party with full gear and the dead guy's gear gets "looted". Assuming the GM is trying to stay fairly close to Wealth-by-Level guidelines, this process will push the party well above those guidelines. The more it happens, the richer the party gets.
This alone is incentive for the players to re-roll instead of raise dead; paying for the spell reduces party wealth while re-rolling and looting the dead guy increases it. No brainer.
¿por qué no los dos?
have him raise dead with the appropriate costs
and also give him his rebuild if bob 2.0 is just a refined optimization of bob
That undead or funeral thing sounds like a kick-*** campaign to play a cleric with Command Undead in.Some good ideas. The other characters loot the body and only give the new character items only they can use.
The new character should adjust their character to survive next time. I would have my new character show up wearing a ring of regeneration and a loincloth. :)
Go to Rituals. Pay special attention to the funeral ritual. Unless a party member spends a mental inventory slot on the ritual, that money is leaving the party. No funeral, the character comes back as undead. Some of the dead characters stuff can be sold to pay for the funeral.
"This is my undead minion Bob, my minion Bob, and my other Minion Bob."
I'm confused. Berti, is it literally a twin brother, or is a mechanically identical, different background and story character.
If one of my players wanted to play 15 THF fighters in a row, but put the time and effort into making each one unique, I'd be in favor of that. As well, THF fighters are super common in the PF world.
If it's a twin type play, did the twin exist beforehand? How many identical kids are there? Wiping out the whole clan of Bob is a pretty awesome story, and likely if this player plays poorly all the time. Have the player agree that there are only so many Bobs (3? since the ruling came up after #1 croaked) and once the Bobs are gone, he has to move on.
I lean towards 'what difference does it make...'
Honestly the popping back up from the grave and keep running breaks immersion more for me then 'new guy shows up'.
I mean... that happens on tv shows all the time. tough fighter guy 1 leaves the show in season 2... season 3 brings in new fighter type to fill that hole left.
This is of course dependent on a lot of things. The more unique a character is... (undersea prince with magic curse that lets him walk on land) then yeah... turning the corner and seeing a clone of him is silly...
but if he's an archer or axe fighter or something... they're lining up in the next tavern looking for work.
I think the different feat choices says a lot... It sounds like he had a character idea that something when wrong with and he still believes in the character idea... I wouldn't beat him down because he wanted to try it a different way...
Sounds like the rules of your game make it better to bring in Faramir instead of Ressing Borimir. I Think you should either change Those rules or accept the consequenses.
I generally offer a almost free rebuilt as part of coming back from the dead.
oh he pretty much suicided. Started combat in a populated area full of town guards. refused to drink potions of healing he had on him. He basically got the other character killed as well. He has fallen below 0 hp every other adventure. This is the first time he died. But that's just how he plays and always has.
We have not gone over rules for raising yet. So that's why i was thinking, bring a new guy, or raise dead your old guy. but making the rule after the fact ... makes it sound like i'm singling him out, as alex pointed out.
So.. maybe if i want to do that, i'll have to do it AFTER this...
Some one playing like this wouldent generally get to chose between raise or new character. He would get to chose between not playing or not playing. But before this i would take a out of game talk with him about expectations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If he plays poorly, he doesn't need additional penalties, he needs support. Not support for metagaming, but support for better playing. Talk with him about what he wants, what he thinks about the death and how you want to treat everyone in a fair way.
If it's about his feat choices, give him the opportunity to change them. If you are bound to PFS rules (brrrr), use a backdoor - a NPC patron simply gives him the money to retrain. This patron could be a relative or a noble seeing a lot of potential or whatever. Probably he wants a favor in return later...
If someone's character keeps dieing for the same reason, how are they having fun? They need a talk alright, about strategy.
Some folks like dying, especially if they can pull other PCs down with them. I definitely play with a few folks who will sometimes wander away from the party in dungeons and starting opening other doors, especially if they get a little bored or don't like the current encounter but sometimes for no particular reason.
Heck, one DM even put in a giant pipe organ which causes bad things to happen explicitly because she felt sure that one of us would start playing it before anybody had a chance to examine it and figure out what it would do (which is exactly how it went down though we all survived)
I've seen lost balloon syndrome. One of my coworkers has it. She keeps wandering away from her register. I often have to tell her, "You have a customer!" Even worse is a customer who won't wait for the expert. If you are waiting for help picking out a switch, why are you heading for plumbing?
I think you should find their new character in a live capture trap.
Mock up a deck of many things. One of those characters will be toast, but another will be greatly improved.
Another possibility would be mutations. A fast wanderer would be funny. A character who picks up healing touch would be fun. Suddenly damaged allies would be high fiving him all the time. Suddenly, grappling the undead is a valid tactic.
Go to Leveled Mutations.