Yeah, it seemed that this concept was running amok.
After watching all the reactions to this idea, the only suggestion I can make is.....
If a character dies and can not be raised by a party member, his body is returned to town and an appropriate Cleric employed.
While the success of this action is never going to be in question, the cost will vary because of the characters Constitution and the
sentiment of the Cleric (via the Church) to the character.
Cost is 1% of the characters XP total, but a saving throw of 10 on a d20 plus the stat modifiers from his CON and CHA for a 50% reduction to cost.
This cost is paid for by the Base Value of Magic Items donated from the characters equipment, but can be offset by the
Base Value of any GEMS he may possess.
This is just about as simple as it gets. From what I've heard, anything else is going to be unacceptable.
Tukcc, your idea works for me.
I think they will just go with whatever.
Grondley and Ktorr still have to speak.
It would not be "fair" to begin such a thing realizing we've sold gems all along.
It would not be a bad thing if everyone used whatever means at hand to accumulate 1% of their XP total in gems.
Short of adventuring with Guild characters solo.
It's prob the only "twinking" allowed, but only to get started.
For me, I am learning to do those things simply through experience in playing with the group, and not wanting to disappoint fellow players by ruining our chances of successfully completing the quest. With our limited (2 hours per week) play time I don't want to be responsible for wasting anyone's time. So for me, it is discipline and courtesy. Is it a learning process? Sure. Am I perfect? No. But I don't think the death consequence would really add to this - in fact I think it may take some of the heroic boldness out of it - for me at least. The paladin hang back because he's afraid of dying?
Regarding the "no reason not to continue onwards toward suicide" is something that just has not happened in our group since the first week or two. Again, courtesy rules. We all want to spend the 2 hours "playing", not watching someone else play. If there is a death early on, we do something else. If there is a death (or even two) near the end - a decision is made whether or not to continue based on aproximate time remaining to completion and the chance of success with a short-manned party.
Anyway to each their own, no opinion is "more right" than someone else's so I am certainly not saying my way is better, it's just my thoughts. Thanks for sharing yours, I can certainly see where you're coming from.
I don't think there is anyone in THACO or Storm who needs something like this to modify their questing.
I think it's best to just be carried to the end so at least you can see what goes on and let the penalty be missing out on the off chance of a chest and be behind a bit on xp. I'm not sure how close to resurrection our clerical help is, but once we have that, this discussion will be less relevant.
I'm surprised that Kierik thought he was OP. Sometimes I feel like I'm a npc being shepherded through a dungeon so I can unleash my magic at critical moments. I wish I had something more to do at each fight, even if it was just my Korthos wand.
No Char left behind; original join date, Oct 2010
There are more than a few oppinions that while the purpose of a death consequence is mainly to give a feeling of "mortality" and instill caution, it just really isn't neccessary.
Do we zerg? No, well maybe after 2-3 hours and we're getting careless.
With Magic Items SOOO scarce losing ANYTHING would be considered extreme.
That leaves the resurrection "FEE".
It just doesn't seem appropriate.
I have listened and listened these past few weeks for all sides of this problem, and done my best to suggest the best compromises I could think up.
Bottom line is this playstyle doesn't seem to afford any type of acceptable consequence for this situation.
Kierik, while everyone understands your passion for this, it looks like you're the only one who actually wants it adopted.
I want to comment on Grondleys statement that he feels like an "NPC".
Maybe I missed something but currently, our two spellcasters are prob the most potent "Death Dealers" we have.
I can't count how many times I have rushed to engage a monster, just to see it disappear in a firey explosion.
D&D Characters are more than just the sum of the Magic Items they equip.
Our party spell-slingers each have GOD-like Primary Stats!
I WISH I could have a method of creating a Quest to emphisize D&D Character abilities other than Fighters swinging a sword and casters casting spells.
Then there are a few situations where a high INT or WIS gets to some areas otherwise inaccessible.
Then there are a (very) few "puzzles" where at least the first time it takes player (not character) intelligence to figure out.
But yes, you are correct, these other areas are not "emphasized", they are merely nice little "once-in-a-whiles".
Now we're at a point were there is no death consequence whatsoever. You stay in the party, you get the XP, nobody is getting chests anyway, and nobody is getting end loot. Where the heck is the compromise? I feel cheated. If there will be no compromise, then return the group to the original rule (which everybody "agreed to" when they joined).
Last edited by Magiker; 06-19-2013 at 07:39 AM.
Don't you think Tukcc has been doing the best he can to adjust and adapt for everyone's benefit? Sometimes he has to make decisions that don't please everybody. I'd hate to be in his shoes because I don't like conflict. lol
Again, STORM doesn't have a dog in this fight because we are not considering death penalties. Nor am I donwplaying your arguments and opinion on this particular matter. I do, however, follow with great interest all the experiments THAC0 has running, which is why I comment.
No, I don't. We used to be a magic-restricted guild that ran elite quests with a significant death consequence. Now we're a magic-restricted guild that runs normal quests without any real death consequence at all. That is a massive change.
Others agreed to rules they didn't like when they joined, and that should have been good enough. But everything since that point has been one-sided. Take a close look at the original rules versus what we have now before you make comments that insinuate I don't know how to compromise.
Last edited by Magiker; 06-19-2013 at 02:12 PM.
Does anyone in the guild have experience playing lotro, and have an opinion they'd wish to share?
After a quick discussion last night with the group, we will retain the original action upon a character death.
Taking the same standpoint as STORM does, if it happens early on, we will recall and restart.
Later on, the character will recall and drowns his sorrows at the Tavern and wait for the party's return.
No Quest XP plus a "time out".
Characters in THAC0 will now progress in level individually.
Characters no longer Quest alone nor outside the group to "catch up".
This is priceless! Goes to show you the differences in players that are here.
(Can anyone tell me the ORIGINAL concept for D&D?)
EXTREMELY???Originally Posted by someone
DUH! Dungeons and Dragons, remember?Originally Posted by someone
Originally Posted by someone
I'd say my opinion of fun is 100% opposite that poster. His defintion of fun is my definition of boring. Takes all types I guess?
This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.Reload