I ran a session the other day that ended with a beloved priest of a community being killed in cold blood.
We are running rise of the Runelords AP and this priest in question doesn't seem to have any particular plot hook involvement of significance later on in the campaign.
The reason the priest died is because I am running a mini session of "murder's mark" within the AP as well.
Such module has some unfortunate events transpire, and eventually this priest was killed. It is suppose to add more mystery and yearning for the PC's to want justice done and the solve the mystery of the AP.
The PC's are devastated and want to pool all their savings to make a quick trip to Magnimar to find some sort or restorative magic to bring this priest back to life.
Now I am getting onto the odd meta/non meta field of NPC death.
In a world where you can have the means to bring people back alive, deaths... aren't important?
Mind you during this mini AP, a guard, and a Money Lender have died. But Sandpoint and its denizens would not have 5000gp cash to be dishing out for every wrongful death.
Also not to mention:
What are some opinions and advice concerning NPC death?
One way I can see mitigating this is the tiny description of raise dead that says "a creature must be willing to come back to life".
This priest was a good community leader, who often took care of the rites of dead people, and was also a healer. Would such a person want to come back to life?
Any input would be appreciated.
I believe there are other clauses within Golarion lore, such as if Pharasma has already judged the soul.
For conventional drama to work, resurrection shouldn't be taken for granted. "Let's conserve our spells, wait until after the king is dead, let the assassin escape, and raise the king. Then we can scry on the assassin to see where he goes."
The PCs should cast Speak With Dead and get the victim's opinion. Maybe he's an angel now, battling demons on the outer planes.
In a world where you can have the means to bring people back alive, deaths... aren't important?
This is a really interesting narrative question. If you remove the impact of death, what threat remains in this world? What grief? What motivation? I'm sure anyone can think of dozens of examples of entertainments where death has become another tiresome obstacle, and therefore when a character dies, the impact is blunted, because you know they could always come back, if the audience demands or the actor is popular enough or if the writer(s) get into a story-corner and need some mortuus ex machina.
In the economics of the game, it also has the potential to reinforce a plutocratic (etymological aside - notice the connection between the god of the underworld and wealth; discuss) hierarchy, in which the wealthy can afford to keep going forever, while everyone else has to endure the sorrow and cruelty of capricious death and suffering.
I usually (though not always, if players object beforehand) remove the ability to come back from the dead by any means short of major questing. It helps prevent the "revolving door" attitude at higher levels and a "pay-to-play" story style. But that's just me, and most gamers I know don't care for that approach.
One way I can see mitigating this is the tiny description of raise dead that says "a creature must be willing to come back to life".
This priest was a good community leader, who often took care of the rites of dead people, and was also a healer. Would such a person want to come back to life?
Here I think you've hit on a solution. After all, it's hard to imagine a good community leader so arrogant as to think "My return for a few extra years to my town will benefit everyone far more than the 5,000 gp that could be spent raising me from the dead." That humility may be the key. He could have left a will, or had this discussion at some point in a sermon, making it clear that, when called to dwell with his god, his friends should resist the temptation to bring him back and instead spend that 5,000 gp on helping the living through this vale of tears.
In a world where you can have the means to bring people back alive, deaths... aren't important?This is a really interesting narrative question. If you remove the impact of death, what threat remains in this world? What grief? What motivation? I'm sure anyone can think of dozens of examples of entertainments where death has become another tiresome obstacle, and therefore when a character dies, the impact is blunted, because you know they could always come back, if the audience demands or the actor is popular enough or if the writer(s) get into a story-corner and need some mortuus ex machina.
In the economics of the game, it also has the potential to reinforce a plutocratic (etymological aside - notice the connection between the god of the underworld and wealth; discuss) hierarchy, in which the wealthy can afford to keep going forever, while everyone else has to endure the sorrow and cruelty of capricious death and suffering.
I usually (though not always, if players object beforehand) remove the ability to come back from the dead by any means short of major questing. It helps prevent the "revolving door" attitude at higher levels and a "pay-to-play" story style. But that's just me, and most gamers I know don't care for that approach.
Here I think you've hit on a solution. After all, it's hard to imagine a good community leader so arrogant as to think "My return for a few extra years to my town will benefit everyone far more than the 5,000 gp that could be spent raising me from the dead." That humility may be the key. He could have left a will, or had this discussion at some point in a sermon, making it clear that, when called to dwell with his god, his friends...One way I can see mitigating this is the tiny description of raise dead that says "a creature must be willing to come back to life".
This priest was a good community leader, who often took care of the rites of dead people, and was also a healer. Would such a person want to come back to life?
I mean, my role as a GM should be to immerse the players into a world they are trying to become the saviors of. Especially at higher levels, the contingency of dragging your friends body and blowing some stashed money/loot on Resurrection seems not immersive in the slightest.
And as you mention it does strike up an odd narrative that the Wealthy elite can, for the most part, live in peace and comfort knowing that untimely deaths can be mitigated with chucking a diamond at a cleric.
I especially enjoy your last statement about resisting the temptation to be brought back to life. I will take Matthew's Idea of a speak with dead spell and make it clear that they can mourn, but should not exert themselves. After all the priest died trying to bring peace to the community, and the PC's should follow on that to mantain the peace as well.
I believe there are other clauses within Golarion lore, such as if Pharasma has already judged the soul.
For conventional drama to work, resurrection shouldn't be taken for granted. "Let's conserve our spells, wait until after the king is dead, let the assassin escape, and raise the king. Then we can scry on the assassin to see where he goes."
The PCs should cast Speak With Dead and get the victim's opinion. Maybe he's an angel now, battling demons on the outer planes.
I think Speak with Dead would be a nice touch on this matter. Maybe instead of crude responses as the spell leans towards, it might be a meaningful conversation explaining to the PC's to carry on and spread the love of Desna(that the priest worshipped) and the community.
RAW, speak with dead is more like echoes of the corpse's living self than speaking with their present discorporated soul. That shouldn't stop you if you're interested in altering it (story first!) but it's something to be aware of.
If he is a beloved member of the community though, perhaps his views on the matter will be sufficiently clear. In fact, since he's a priest of Desna, he may have given a funeral sermon or two in the past (that locals would remember and tell the PCs about) that death is one more great journey, which should be embraced by the followers of the goddess of travel. Would the PCs stop him from following the path wherever it leads, even if they were sad that it meant they might never see him again?
RAW, speak with dead is more like echoes of the corpse's living self than speaking with their present discorporated soul. That shouldn't stop you if you're interested in altering it (story first!) but it's something to be aware of.
If he is a beloved member of the community though, perhaps his views on the matter will be sufficiently clear. In fact, since he's a priest of Desna, he may have given a funeral sermon or two in the past (that locals would remember and tell the PCs about) that death is one more great journey, which should be embraced by the followers of the goddess of travel. Would the PCs stop him from following the path wherever it leads, even if they were sad that it meant they might never see him again?
Yeah, I figured that the "Answers are usually brief, cryptic, or repetitive." might pose a bit of a problem, so I might have to flavor it up.
Alternatively, I thoroughly enjoy the relation between Desna the goddess of travel and freedom, and traveling to the afterlife as a new journey. And based on story events, he has certainly have attended to the last rites and sermons of many individuals since The PC's have arrived at town. Before he was murdered himself, he helped in the preparations of a guard and Moneylender who were unfortunately dispatched as well.
Death is peace in a way.
Most people if given a chance to be risen would probably refuse after tasting afterlife, a life free of pain and suffering close to their gods.
Only heroes, the truly brave and bold would accept to go back and continue their quests.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ghost: "I can't imagine my return for a few extra years will benefit the town more than the 5,000 gp that you would spend raising me from the dead."
PC: "The town? Please, we'll just spend the money upgrading my Cloak of Resistance from +2 to +3."
In a world where there is definitiv proof of a Afterlive, good souls will literally go to enjoy heaven after they died. He earned his just reward. So why should he want to come back? After all it is against the natural order. And the costs are are several years's wages of a normal person.
I reat NSC death a bit like a ghost's existance. They need a great, pressing reason on why they come back. More then Uncle Oscar shelled out the diamond.
More on the lines "We need to stop Count von Bloodsuckington to unleast the Elder Sucker, or it will plunge eastern Taldor in a hundred years darkness", or "i want dire revenge for the death of my daughter"
To summarize: The players want to spend precious resources to raise a NPC, not for their PCs' profit but for good. Travelling to Magnimar is already a potential adventure and another burden. So why not simply accept their wish and let them raise the NPC, with their money and after their encounters?
To summarize: The players want to spend precious resources to raise a NPC, not for their PCs' profit but for good. Travelling to Magnimar is already a potential adventure and another burden. So why not simply accept their wish and let them raise the NPC, with their money and after their encounters?
That is effectively one of the problems.
I understand where you are coming from, Nice PC's doing Nice PC stuff.
But the topic at hand is mitigating NPC death. The PC's can with relative ease Find a way to bring back this NPC, But I am asking on people's perception with the death of an NPC.
So why not simply accept their wish and let them raise the NPC, with their money and after their encounters?
Because it cheapens death. Right now, it's an interesting and moving story where the party's friend tragically dies, motivating them to seek justice. If he can be brought back, it negates the story. If they speak with his ghost and he begs them to accept that people die and carry on without him, the story can continue to progress.
(By the way, well done to Fenn for creating player empathy for an NPC. Most of my players would just want to know if they could loot his body.)
So why not simply accept their wish and let them raise the NPC, with their money and after their encounters?Because it cheapens death. Right now, it's an interesting and moving story where the party's friend tragically dies, motivating them to seek justice. If he can be brought back, it negates the story. If they speak with his ghost and he begs them to accept that people die and carry on without him, the story can continue to progress.
(By the way, well done to Fenn for creating player empathy for an NPC. Most of my players would just want to know if they could loot his body.)
I thank you for your compliment, also the advice.
Maybe he will have already been judged by pharasma and is on his way to reside in Desna's realm. That by itself would be a favorable outcome for a devoted priest.
So why not simply accept their wish and let them raise the NPC, with their money and after their encounters?Because it cheapens death. Right now, it's an interesting and moving story where the party's friend tragically dies, motivating them to seek justice. If he can be brought back, it negates the story. If they speak with his ghost and he begs them to accept that people die and carry on without him, the story can continue to progress.
Alright, that's a good story - but going through major difficulties to raise him can be a good story on its own. Both versions have the potential to further amplify the bound between PCs and NPC.
From my point of view: If you allow PCs to raise from death, it should also be possible for allied NPCs. And monsters. And villains. Of course it can get weird fast, so it shouldn't be applied too often.
If the NPC tells the party he wants to stay dead, it should be really convincing. Else the players are left with the frustrating feeling 'But, but, I wanted to raise him...' - or, more generally spoken, with perceived control loss. Well, I could imagine the cleric to come up with a final helpful hint during speak with dead, or with a small quest for his final wish.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So why not simply accept their wish and let them raise the NPC, with their money and after their encounters?Because it cheapens death. Right now, it's an interesting and moving story where the party's friend tragically dies, motivating them to seek justice. If he can be brought back, it negates the story. If they speak with his ghost and he begs them to accept that people die and carry on without him, the story can continue to progress.Alright, that's a good story - but going through major difficulties to raise him can be a good story on its own. Both versions have the potential to further amplify the bound between PCs and NPC.
From my point of view: If you allow PCs to raise from death, it should also be possible for allied NPCs. And monsters. And villains. Of course it can get weird fast, so it shouldn't be applied too often.
If the NPC tells the party he wants to stay dead, it should be really convincing. Else the players are left with the frustrating feeling 'But, but, I wanted to raise him...' - or, more generally spoken, with perceived control loss. Well, I could imagine the cleric to come up with a final helpful hint during speak with dead, or with a small quest for his final wish.
See you get the point that it starts to get weird wayyy tooo fast.
OOh! That is a good point. I would hate to take the agency out of the character's role playing. The priest was very well liked by the group and their fondness might turn sour if they go through so many strides to try to raise him only to find out he doesnt want to. I could see how that will not sit well with the PC's. I'll have to write up a good dialogue, instead of having his response be "I dont wanna!"
My usual reason for why the rich stay dead is that it's a demand of inheritance law that unless someone is proven guilty of foul play in order to seize the inheritance in question, deaths must remain final to maintain proper family lineages and anyone who does otherwise will be stripped of their wealth as well as any lands, title, and good name as they're attempting to steal from their heirs.
Anyone without descendants of course has a little more wiggle room but most of the time creditors show up and challenge ownership of their assets for a long enough period that the window in which someone can be raised will have passed unless the PC's intervene.
raise dead etc. require the target be willing to return. I always understood the default assumption was that NPCs didn't want to return. Whether culturally, religious conviction or otherwise does not matter, PCs may never learn the reason why. A NPC will only return if it is required for the story you are trying to tell.
Bottom line, NPCs do not get raised with the same regularity or ease as PCs.
There is a fundamental difference between PCs and NPCs, just because PCs can and will do a thing does not mean that NPCs will do the same.