FA+
Shop
A question for gamers:
14 years ago
General
Even if you don't play pen&paper RPGs, go ahead and answer this anyway with your personal opinion.
Should a game cause players to suffer a permanent penalty of some sort by being brought back from death?
-The game has players unrealistically tough to where being shot or stabbed once won't cause death.
-This question is more for game balance than context, so disregard -how- they are being revived.
-There's already a cost for bringing people back to life (buying the right stuff, paying a ressurector, etc.), so justifying the penalty -as- the cost is irrelevant.
Let me hear your thoughts!
Should a game cause players to suffer a permanent penalty of some sort by being brought back from death?
-The game has players unrealistically tough to where being shot or stabbed once won't cause death.
-This question is more for game balance than context, so disregard -how- they are being revived.
-There's already a cost for bringing people back to life (buying the right stuff, paying a ressurector, etc.), so justifying the penalty -as- the cost is irrelevant.
Let me hear your thoughts!
Some ideas might be like how Pokemon is: You revive one and it comes back with half its initial health, but can heal it fully with additional items.
Or how about going after stats, like movement, range, attack, defense, magic, ect. I mean, you just came back from the dead, you think you'd just be able to jump and be on your way? Lower 1 or a few of their stats permanently, or make it temporary in that it eventually comes back to "full" after having been alive for a while.
The setting is for a game in development called Jadefall; a post-apocalyptic sci-fi fantasy setting (though describing it like -that- makes it sound ridiculous...). The whole... big cataclysmic event happens that destroys almost all of civilization, but at the same time introducing methods to create supernatural effects and funky Jade crystals that mutates things into monsters. The two primary methods of bringing a person back to life is by either using super advanced science (exact methods are not described) or with supernatural methods (regenerating flesh, then bringing the life back), though they're just two different flavors for the exact same effect. Using either Medic skills or the Regeneration talent only differ in what other ways those skill themes can do with other things other than healing.
To be even -more- specific, my idea is to have the trial of coming back to life cause Corruption. Corruption currently works like this: interacting with Jade in different ways offers a different percent chance to gain a 1/2 point of Corruption. 1/2 points can be cured with effort, but full points cannot. Each full point has pros and cons as you start to change, but if you change too far then you come to the point where your body is either destroyed or you become a monster. The amount of Corruption caused, or rather the chance that Corruption happens will likely depend on the details of death, such as duration dead and how... many parts has to be replaced... I'm still thinking on that, or I could just make it simple and give it a flat rate.
Thoughts?
Usually in my games, if a character is revived from death, they'll typically suffer some short-term effects at least (Getting killed is rather more than most people go through getting PTSD already...), with mental fortitude having a strong effect on it. If they roll badly, it may even be more lasting. But most of it can be dealt with through proper mental care, even if it might take some time. Some methods, though, particularly more questionable magical methods, can bring them back different, with perhaps some mental (Or even physical) changes and disadvantages.
...no, my game does not have light sabers, but for some reason that was the first 'hardcore death' that I thought of. >>
but yeah, permanent negatives is a big no no, it puts people off from playing
...but at the same time, might be perfect. I'll have to think about it, I think
...no, my game does not have light sabers, but for some reason that was the first 'hardcore death' that I thought of. >>
I would also say, if you're going to have it get progressively worse with each resurrection, it shouldn't affect hit points or other measures of health in any way, because that would lead to a vicious cycle of getting progressively more fragile and dying more easily. Much better to just have one's combat and non-combat effectiveness decreased temporarily.
It's justifiable, too: you'd need fairly advanced technology or magic to raise the dead in the first place, capable of rebuilding a living body and functioning brain with the memories and personality of a corpse, but there'd still be nerve re-wirings you wouldn't QUITE be used to, so it'd take a while to get used to your new legs, new frontal lobe, etc. ;)
The thing is that in a pen and paper system, players tend to become attached to their characters, and death is a big deal for them. Often, simply replacing the character is unfeasible for story, balance, and emotional purposes, so they are simply -forced- to deal with the penalties of a resurrection. If they are too lenient, as in DnD where "death is just a status effect", you get far too many monsters or encounters where death can happen quickly or with a single blow and an unlucky roll of the dice. It can lead to a VERY counterproductive mindset in the game master's mind where he WANTS to start killing players, simply because he knows they can afford the price of undoing it.
If you are too harsh with the penalties, then you need to provide alternatives in case that price becomes too much to pay. I am used to playing (and am designing) Fire Emblem style games where death is (usually) permanent and irreversible - unless you want to restart the chapter from the beginning. The punishment there is a permanent one in that you either deal with the character's permanent loss or the permanent loss of time spent playing up to that point.
It also, predictably, has the inverse effect on the players and the game master. Players become extremely cautious (which can be seen as good) but so can the GM, as he wouldn't want to accidentally irreversibly wipe out half of the players because one battle was too hard.
Permanent losses need to not be too severe - things that are an inconvenience to be without, or can be re-obtained with some effort. EXP and stat drain are examples. These can get out of hand if there are too many deaths, but this is perhaps a good thing, as it discourages recklessness, and the first death can be treated as a very dire warning. In that sense, successive deaths and rebirths can become more and more harsh in their penalty, either through larger effects (that are more expensive to reverse) or cumulative effects (repeated, permanent stat drains).
tl;dr In favour, if it is thought through carefully.
Hmm.. I'll think up a list of possible ailments since I've got nothing better to do
Stiff muscles: Your body is still recovering from mild rigor mortis, your agility is decreased
brain rot: The body is easy to fix, but the brain may take a while. Lower intelligence
Jaundice/rotted skin: Your flesh is reacting badly with the (whatever revives them) and may take a little longer to heal. Your charisma is lowered
Atrophy: Your muscles have degenerated slightly from lack of use. Dexterity is lowered