Death

[Fynwei]

I pulled this quote from the Spirit Forge discussion.

...Every death goes to the Rez circle. The starvation resurrection circle was via Highlander. Where when an Immortal 'dies' from starvation, he comes back to life, only to suffer the pain of starvation all over again in a short amount of time...

Since I didn't want to post an off-topic question that could possibly go on for a page, here's my pondering:

If every death (not counting oblits, of course) goes to the rez circle, does dying of old age count as an obliteration? If not, is it just that the spirit has become so weak that it doesn't have the strength to go to a circle anymore and just shatters? Do the elderly just go though a constant circle of resurrection and deaths until they die?

Also, what are your your thoughts on this? Does EVERY person* have 2 resurrections at least or is it a strength of spirit matter**?


*Newborns, peasants, adventurers, street rats, kings, sickly, elderly, good, bad, weak, strong, left-handed, right-handed...
** With all adventurers being strong enough of spirit to withstand at least 2 deaths

 

[Alavatar]

Yeah, I don't think I agree with Mark's assessment especially since his example is pulled from a seperate system (Highlander). Death from "natural" causes such as non-magical sickness, old age, starvation/dehydration, etc. do not allow for resurrection, IMO. Death from the elements, such as freezing to death in an arctic tundra, drowning, falling into lava, sudden impact from falling, though, should all allow for resurrection.

 

[obcidian_bandit]

Whether or not someone resurrects from dying of "not so violent as having orcs run swords through them" is up to the plot team entirely. However, PCs always attempt to resurrect, even if they died from natural causes, unless the Player chooses to retire them. It doesn't matter if they fell into lava or starved to death in prison, a PC will attempt to resurrect. NPCs might not, at Plot's discretion.

Personally, while running plot, I use the following rule:
*Little/crunchy/irritating/etc monsters like kobalds don't have any free resurrections, and fewer than 10 total deaths.
*All PC races (and 'near-PC races') have identical death situations as do PCs.
*Really Big/Important/powerful/etc creatures (Dragons, Gryphons, etc) have more free deaths, but generally not more total deaths than PCs, unless part of the IG knowledge about them is that they're Immortal or Nearly Immortal.
Really, all NPCs die when Plot wants them too, so 'how many deaths do you have' isn't really a helpful question.

 

[markusdark]

Well borrowing from the fact that the reason no one like Chaos magic is that it goes against the natural order of things, I would imagine that 'death by natural causes' would bypass the circle and their spirits would... well go to whatever non-religious place that they go after dying. They don't just 'disappear' since the "Spirit Farewell" ritual allows you to call back the spirit of a permed character.

It is when a person dies unnaturally that allows them the chance to resurrect. IMO, starving someone to death would be as unnatural as torturing someone to death or any other manner of slowly killing someone.

 

[Deadlands of Old]

Yeah, with NPCs it's a plot thing.

For example, in Deadlands roughly 90 percent of the population of all non-magical races die permanently after dying once, by any means. So that's most of the NPCs, by far, and they're called "True Mortals." The PCs are part of the 10 percent who can resurrect, and they're called "Twice-born."

Gary

 

[Wraith]

My advice is that you accept that the game mechanics and worldbuilding are not internally consistent and move in. Much less stress.

 

[jpariury]

It doesn't matter if they fell into lava or starved to death in prison, a PC will attempt to resurrect. NPCs might not, at Plot's discretion.

To the best of my knowledge, while not explicitly stated in the Rulebook, a PC may choose to permanently die at any time under the rules on pg 92.

 

[Gandian Ravenscroft]

My advice is that you accept that the game mechanics and worldbuilding are not internally consistent and move in. Much less stress.

Personally, making out-of-game rules explained in-game sounds like an excellent idea. It helps you stay and feel more in-game when you know what happens in-game, rather than just "the rules say you automatically come back twice". The more things are like that, the more out-of-game the game becomes, and that'll make the game a lot less fun for a lot of people.

 

[Wraith]

My advice is that you accept that the game mechanics and worldbuilding are not internally consistent and move in. Much less stress.

Personally, making out-of-game rules explained in-game sounds like an excellent idea. It helps you stay and feel more in-game when you know what happens in-game, rather than just "the rules say you automatically come back twice". The more things are like that, the more out-of-game the game becomes, and that'll make the game a lot less fun for a lot of people.

The problem, of course, being that the full resurrection system applying to everyone everywhere isn't something that plot teams bother with. After all, the King being assassinated isn't a big deal if he's only 10% likely to actually stay dead from it. Nor is being imprisoned any threat, since you'll be out less that 24 hours later if death is truly worth risking over years in a cell. Hell, even militarily, how do you stop an invading army when 90% of them on average will be back the next day after a massacre?

In short, the resurrection system is in place to make the PC's feel better about taking risks. It isn't a good thing for producing a believable and consistent world, but the powers that be have judged that the incentive it provides to players taking risks is worth the worldbuilding problems it brings.

Personally, I'd be happier if Resurrect was a Formal Earth Magic ability, but then we'd be even deeper into the 'those with powerful teams never die, and newbies can go suck it' problem.

 

[markusdark]

Again, this is just what I think but the two free deaths was so that new players could get used to the system without having to worry that an inexperienced mistake would end their character. It happened to me where I had seen players, NPC's and plot walking through some hanging tarps, both while IG and OOG and when I led two monsters back there and tried to run through them, I was informed that they were suppose to represent a solid wall. Now granted, I could have yelled and moaned about how unfair it was but instead, I took the death, learned not to take anything at face value, ask questions when they arise and moved on.

However, the fact that EVERY character gets 2 free deaths, IMO, sucks. In fact, I would love it if after your character reached level 5, those freebies went away. Sure, that would probably mean there would be some death seekers looking to go out in a blaze before those two freebies went away but still, you should have a handle on your character and what they can do by level 5. Or 7 or 10. In fact, it would be even more interesting if after you reached that level, any 'free' deaths you took became extra black beads in your bag. So you died 3 times but until you reached level 5, you only had one black bead. Once you reach level 6 though, you now have 3 beads.

This would also make it a lot more believable that when a soldier is killed on the field, the chances of him coming back are a lot less (at least the experienced ones - cannon fodder maybe not). And that the King who has warred his way to the top would be in real danger if he was assassinated - even one who never died would immediately have a 10% chance of dying upon his first death (assuming that a King is higher than level 5).

Right now, I and others do use tactics with the complete knowledge that I can die twice before I have to worry. That really skews tactics.

 

[Gandian Ravenscroft]

My advice is that you accept that the game mechanics and worldbuilding are not internally consistent and move in. Much less stress.

Personally, making out-of-game rules explained in-game sounds like an excellent idea. It helps you stay and feel more in-game when you know what happens in-game, rather than just "the rules say you automatically come back twice". The more things are like that, the more out-of-game the game becomes, and that'll make the game a lot less fun for a lot of people.

The problem, of course, being that the full resurrection system applying to everyone everywhere isn't something that plot teams bother with. After all, the King being assassinated isn't a big deal if he's only 10% likely to actually stay dead from it. Nor is being imprisoned any threat, since you'll be out less that 24 hours later if death is truly worth risking over years in a cell. Hell, even militarily, how do you stop an invading army when 90% of them on average will be back the next day after a massacre?

In short, the resurrection system is in place to make the PC's feel better about taking risks. It isn't a good thing for producing a believable and consistent world, but the powers that be have judged that the incentive it provides to players taking risks is worth the worldbuilding problems it brings.

Personally, I'd be happier if Resurrect was a Formal Earth Magic ability, but then we'd be even deeper into the 'those with powerful teams never die, and newbies can go suck it' problem.

I'm not saying that everyone should get the chance to resurrect (PCs would, of course), but we just need an actual reason why we adventurers/other notable folks can resurrect while the legions of goblins, kobolds, and whatever else we mercilessly cut down for their loot don't get the chance. I personally like the "strength of the soul" thing, because that also could encompass such people as kings, powerful other NPCs, etc, but goblins/kobolds/the average soldier/whatever, being who they are and what they do, not having the same strength and therefore would not come back.

As for being put in a prison (not by the spell) for a while, I would think that experience would somewhat lessen the strength of your soul, making you less able to come back.

 

[markusdark]

Just a quick correction, the term is "Spirit" not "Soul". Soul refers to a religious connotation. And although Spirit often does too, is also refers to other things not noted by many of the major religions.

 

[Mobius]

the easiest solution is that Adventurers are, somehow, cut from a different cloth than regular folk. most farmers only get the one death, so they really hafta watch their butt - even most kings are just place-holders and their Spirit can only withstand the one shatter. 95% of Fortannis plays by the same rules as medieval Europe (well, plus a few spells and some nasty beasties)

Adventurers, on the other hand, are "gifted" by the Earth with an indomitable Spirit which can be split time and time again before it finally crumples and dissipates. this way, one doesn't have to rewrite the "conventional" rules of life as most terms still apply: warfare is still fought through sheer numbers; falling outta the apple tree is bad jou-jou; and poison in the ear is still a functional and frightening tool of statecraft. it also explains why Adventurers are so necessary, they're the only people who can consistently fight off the waves of trouble what springs ups

 

[Deadlands of Old]

the easiest solution is that Adventurers are, somehow, cut from a different cloth than regular folk. most farmers only get the one death, so they really hafta watch their butt - even most kings are just place-holders and their Spirit can only withstand the one shatter. 95% of Fortannis plays by the same rules as medieval Europe (well, plus a few spells and some nasty beasties)

Adventurers, on the other hand, are "gifted" by the Earth with an indomitable Spirit which can be split time and time again before it finally crumples and dissipates. this way, one doesn't have to rewrite the "conventional" rules of life as most terms still apply: warfare is still fought through sheer numbers; falling outta the apple tree is bad jou-jou; and poison in the ear is still a functional and frightening tool of statecraft. it also explains why Adventurers are so necessary, they're the only people who can consistently fight off the waves of trouble what springs ups

Yup, this is basically the concept we've used in NH, the adventurers are blessed, or the commoners are cursed, which ever way you want to look at it. I think it works well for the game mechanic.

 

[Wraith]

By the stronger spirit business, you realize you are creating an ingame religion, right? Not that tribal totems for barbarians and the spider/dragon argument for dark elves don't already do the same.

 

[Agahi]

anything can be a religion if someone wants to consider it to be one.

 

[Mobius]

By the stronger spiritc business, you realize you are creating an intake religion, right? Not that tribal totems for barbarians and the spider/dragon argument for dark elves don't already do the same.

don't even get me started. as though talking with the "Earth" isn't exactly the same as talking with "God", or seeking advice/gifts from Dragon-Mages isn't the same as praying to "saints". the "anti-religion rule" is something i've never understood about Alliance and never will - but hey, c'est la vie

 

[Wraith]

Preaching to the choir John.

 

[Michiko]

Just a quick correction, the term is "Spirit" not "Soul". Soul refers to a religious connotation. And although Spirit often does too, is also refers to other things not noted by many of the major religions.

Soul does not always have a religious connotation (philosophical and psychological connotations come to mind), any more so than Spirit does. In our game world clearly we have bodies and something that animates them. Calling that thing a Soul really is no more or less religious than calling it a Spirit. We use Spirit as the primary word, which is fine, but that doesn't mean that the word Soul must never be uttered in connection with the game.

 

[Mike Ventrella]

I don't like the "adventurers are special" concept. If a PC kills a farmer, I want that farmer to be able to resurrect and report the death. It makes the game world more real.

Some of what we are discussing IS in the Rule Book, on page 88:

If you are damaged (or dead) and you are then magically healed to your maximum (or resurrected), then you are returned to the state your body was in before the damage was taken. If you had a limp before you were healed, you still have a limp. If you were dying of old age, then you are still dying of old age. If you were pregnant, you are still pregnant.

The idea is that some things are not cured by resurrection. If you have an incurable disease, you will still have it when you resurrect. And technically, no one dies of "old age" they die of things associated with their body breaking down because of old age.