Whether you're old-school or new-school, if you want your #dnd #ttrpg #OSR campaigns to have more meaning and intensity, just do this one thing. Or two things, really.
#dnd5e
To be honest, I was hoping for more then banning raise dead from your game.
There's a lot that needs to be done to take 5e out of the default easy mode. Unfortunately, the game isn't as modular as it was originally advertised to be, and some of the quick fixes can quickly lead to unintended consequences. IMO, better to just play a game that defaults to the type of play you want (like WFRP) than to try and bend 5e into something it's really not (no matter how hard you squint).
Quote from: Shasarak on November 30, 2020, 05:33:44 PM
To be honest, I was hoping for more then banning raise dead from your game.
To be honest, that's exactly what I was expecting from Pundit though. His ideas are as predictable as a Swiss watch.
My limited experience with 5e though is that this wouldn't actually make it more tense because you almost never end up close enough to death past about level 3.
So here's my alternative to make 5e actually more tense... every time you drop to 0 hp, roll two 1d6s. The first determines an attribute (i.e. 1 is Str, 2 is Dex, etc.) the second is the penalty to that attribute that you suffer until you get a week's rest per such lasting injury suffered or a greater restoration spell cast on you (one per ability score affected as the spell notes).
Now being dropped to zero hit points isn't just a momentary inconvenience as you yo-yo up and down with the monsters unable to actually keep you down. Now every time you go down you're getting more and more disabled and with greater restoration being a 7th level spell it's probably going to be a lasting disability (at least the rest of the current adventure).
That'd make fights a LOT more tense than just no raise dead (which is frankly the most boring option I can think of... it's so intense having to sit out the rest of a session because something actually killed me until I make a new PC that's the same level as the one that died (because that's how 5e rolls) but has zero roleplaying connection to the existing party).
"Crap, I lost 5 points off my Strength and lost three points from my hit and damage! The wizard hits harder with his dagger than me now" or "-4 to Dex? Even with my Mage Armor up my AC is down to a 13" are both more tense in my experience because you're still in the action, but now everything is harder.
Quote from: Chris24601 on November 30, 2020, 08:18:27 PM
My limited experience with 5e though is that this wouldn't actually make it more tense because you almost never end up close enough to death past about level 3.
I have noticed in my Pathfinder games that no PC is completely safe from dropping, often it is only a crit or two away - and Pathfinder monsters get three attacks ;)
Quote from: Chris24601 on November 30, 2020, 08:18:27 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on November 30, 2020, 05:33:44 PM
To be honest, I was hoping for more then banning raise dead from your game.
To be honest, that's exactly what I was expecting from Pundit though. His ideas are as predictable as a Swiss watch.
My limited experience with 5e though is that this wouldn't actually make it more tense because you almost never end up close enough to death past about level 3.
So here's my alternative to make 5e actually more tense... every time you drop to 0 hp, roll two 1d6s. The first determines an attribute (i.e. 1 is Str, 2 is Dex, etc.) the second is the penalty to that attribute that you suffer until you get a week's rest per such lasting injury suffered or a greater restoration spell cast on you (one per ability score affected as the spell notes).
Now being dropped to zero hit points isn't just a momentary inconvenience as you yo-yo up and down with the monsters unable to actually keep you down. Now every time you go down you're getting more and more disabled and with greater restoration being a 7th level spell it's probably going to be a lasting disability (at least the rest of the current adventure).
That'd make fights a LOT more tense than just no raise dead (which is frankly the most boring option I can think of... it's so intense having to sit out the rest of a session because something actually killed me until I make a new PC that's the same level as the one that died (because that's how 5e rolls) but has zero roleplaying connection to the existing party).
"Crap, I lost 5 points off my Strength and lost three points from my hit and damage! The wizard hits harder with his dagger than me now" or "-4 to Dex? Even with my Mage Armor up my AC is down to a 13" are both more tense in my experience because you're still in the action, but now everything is harder.
I'm oddly reminded of Darkest Dungeon and its penalties to characters that get knocked to death's door. Even if you heal them, they're still weaker until you leave the mission.
Greater restoration is a 5th level spell, though, not a 7th. Also, I'd be awfully damn careful about springing this on low level adventurers. One or two bad rolls could leave a party crippled and unable to extricate itself (yes, I know, but again, I don't go in for casual TPKs; if I kill off a party it's because They Done Fucked Up, not because the dice gods are feeling fickle).
I would roll 1d6, and reduce the appropriate score by 2 points. That's effectively a -1 to any checks involving it, which is still painful but not horrendously so.
If it's 5e D&D we're talking about, why not just add a level of Exhaustion when PCs hit 0 HP? That's what all the cool kids do.
As pointed out in the Players Handbook (1e), p. 40:
QuoteFirst, second, third, and even fourth level spells are granted to the cleric through meditation and devout prayer. This spell giving is accomplished by the lesser servants of the cleric's deity. Fifth, sixth, and seventh level spells can be given to the cleric ONLY by the cleric's deity directly, not through some intermediary source. Note that the cleric might well be judged by his or her deity at such time, as the cleric must supplicate the deity for the granting of these spells. While the deity may grant such spells full willingly, a deed, or sacrifice, atonement or abasement may be required. The deity might also ignore a specific spell request and give the cleric some other spell (or none at all). Your Dungeon Master will handle this considering a cleric's alignment and faithfulness to it and his or her deity.
This means that clerical spells of 5th level and above are not necessarily to be handed out like candy, and some cost could be given to them -- this is left to the DM's discretion as it should be. A good cleric for example who is well played might be trusted by his deity (i.e. the DM) to use
raise dead sparingly, which means not
raising non-heroic characters, those who died foolishly, and so on. Evil clerics will certainly demand outrageous fees for such services, even from fellow PCs. While those clerics who use such spells willy-nilly will be castigated by their deity and/or simply have the requests for such spells denied.
This is changed in the DMG, with only 6th and 7th level spells granted directly by the cleric's deity, but I believe it works better using the PHB's method.
With respect to
healing spells, assuming psionics are in play, any such spell has a chance of provoking a roll on the psionic encounter table (DMG 1e, p. 182), which means that simply casting
cure light wounds can result in an encounter with a demon prince or arch-devil.
Quote from: Cloyer Bulse on December 01, 2020, 07:48:45 AM
As pointed out in the Players Handbook (1e), p. 40:
QuoteFirst, second, third, and even fourth level spells are granted to the cleric through meditation and devout prayer. This spell giving is accomplished by the lesser servants of the cleric's deity. Fifth, sixth, and seventh level spells can be given to the cleric ONLY by the cleric's deity directly, not through some intermediary source. Note that the cleric might well be judged by his or her deity at such time, as the cleric must supplicate the deity for the granting of these spells. While the deity may grant such spells full willingly, a deed, or sacrifice, atonement or abasement may be required. The deity might also ignore a specific spell request and give the cleric some other spell (or none at all). Your Dungeon Master will handle this considering a cleric's alignment and faithfulness to it and his or her deity.
This means that clerical spells of 5th level and above are not necessarily to be handed out like candy, and some cost could be given to them -- this is left to the DM's discretion as it should be. A good cleric for example who is well played might be trusted by his deity (i.e. the DM) to use raise dead sparingly, which means not raising non-heroic characters, those who died foolishly, and so on. Evil clerics will certainly demand outrageous fees for such services, even from fellow PCs. While those clerics who use such spells willy-nilly will be castigated by their deity and/or simply have the requests for such spells denied.
This is changed in the DMG, with only 6th and 7th level spells granted directly by the cleric's deity, but I believe it works better using the PHB's method.
With respect to healing spells, assuming psionics are in play, any such spell has a chance of provoking a roll on the psionic encounter table (DMG 1e, p. 182), which means that simply casting cure light wounds can result in an encounter with a demon prince or arch-devil.
Are we playing D&D or Call of Cthulhu here? Jeez dude, if you tried to implement that last rule it'd be a race to see which player could force-feed you your own DMG first.
Quote from: Trinculoisdead on December 01, 2020, 12:33:52 AM
If it's 5e D&D we're talking about, why not just add a level of Exhaustion when PCs hit 0 HP? That's what all the cool kids do.
The main issue I have with exhaustion levels is that they're both too severe and not lasting enough to really amp the tension hard. They also lack any magical recovery backstop where resources can be used to counter them in an emergency.
By too severe I mean they're designed to pretty quickly leave you not disadvantaged going forward, but debilitated (a cumulative effect per level of... disadvantage on ability checks, speed halved, disadvantage on attacks and saves, max hit points halved, 0 speed, death). By not lasting long enough I mean they go away at a rate of one per long rest as long as you ate and drank during the day.
Ability Damage lets you tailor both the injury level (ex. a previous poster felt my suggestion 1d6 ability damage would be too much for their preferences and would set it at a flat 2 points) and the recovery time (one injury per week, one lost ability point per day, 1d6 points per week, one injury per month, etc.) to meet the precise rate that you feel fits your campaign.
A heroic campaign could set the ability damage lost at a flat 2 to a random stat and they recover 1d6 per long rest. Characters can be beat down multiple times, but still be functional enough to not be useless for the rest of the adventuring day and can even recover in the field (particularly if they get a really good roll or a day or two where they don't get knocked down to 0 hp).
A more realistic campaign, particularly one set up for seasonal play (i.e. characters hunker in for the winter, overseeing planting in the spring, go on a few adventures in the summer months and do their best to be home by fall to hunker down again) might do better to have potentially crippling (1d6 loss) and lasting injuries (take a week of rest to recover each lost point), making the choice to sit out four weeks of the three month adventuring season to regain four lost points -or- to push on despite the injury and then recover in the fall and winter a real point of tension.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 01, 2020, 08:07:47 AM
Are we playing D&D or Call of Cthulhu here? Jeez dude, if you tried to implement that last rule it'd be a race to see which player could force-feed you your own DMG first.
People keep quoting things like that from the AD&D era and yet then also wonder why people prefer the later editions.
Here is what I do: I let PCs fight past 0 HP.
It feels more heroic and it's much more dangerous - but it is the player's choice.
There might be soem balance issues I'm missing here, but nothing hard to fix.
https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2019/12/sacrifice-d-5e-are-you-willing-to-die.html
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 01, 2020, 08:08:44 AM
Quote from: Trinculoisdead on December 01, 2020, 12:33:52 AM
If it's 5e D&D we're talking about, why not just add a level of Exhaustion when PCs hit 0 HP? That's what all the cool kids do.
The main issue I have with exhaustion levels is that they're both too severe and not lasting enough to really amp the tension hard. They also lack any magical recovery backstop where resources can be used to counter them in an emergency.
By too severe I mean they're designed to pretty quickly leave you not disadvantaged going forward, but debilitated (a cumulative effect per level of... disadvantage on ability checks, speed halved, disadvantage on attacks and saves, max hit points halved, 0 speed, death). By not lasting long enough I mean they go away at a rate of one per long rest as long as you ate and drank during the day.
Ability Damage lets you tailor both the injury level (ex. a previous poster felt my suggestion 1d6 ability damage would be too much for their preferences and would set it at a flat 2 points) and the recovery time (one injury per week, one lost ability point per day, 1d6 points per week, one injury per month, etc.) to meet the precise rate that you feel fits your campaign.
A heroic campaign could set the ability damage lost at a flat 2 to a random stat and they recover 1d6 per long rest. Characters can be beat down multiple times, but still be functional enough to not be useless for the rest of the adventuring day and can even recover in the field (particularly if they get a really good roll or a day or two where they don't get knocked down to 0 hp).
A more realistic campaign, particularly one set up for seasonal play (i.e. characters hunker in for the winter, overseeing planting in the spring, go on a few adventures in the summer months and do their best to be home by fall to hunker down again) might do better to have potentially crippling (1d6 loss) and lasting injuries (take a week of rest to recover each lost point), making the choice to sit out four weeks of the three month adventuring season to regain four lost points -or- to push on despite the injury and then recover in the fall and winter a real point of tension.
Planting in the spring? I thought we were talking about D&D! Adventurers plant swords in troll's bellies and sow fear amongst the goblins. The only harvest they take part in is a bloody and a golden one.
Well, anyway, adjusting ability scores too often sucks, because you must update the ability modifier, which in turn alters a number of other mechanics. If these mechanics did not exist or if ability modifiers were absent, then that would be alright. As it is, the amount of book-keeping required to implement ability loss is rather high.
Isn't there a way to reduce Exhaustion's severity, while also slowing its recovery?
I'll re-post this here (originally posted in the Design sub-forum):
So, I had a brain fart listening to Pundit's latest video (the one about eliminating easy resurrection in new school games) and thinking about Microscope at the same time. It's like oil and water mixed and threw up a cloud of angry prickly steam. I want to know if this has been done before.
Given that:
1. OSR games are deadly and, in my view, this is a good thing. Character creation starts with "character creation" and arguably continues until the character dies; and
2. In Microscope, you can play dead characters by simply adding to the story at a time before their death. A character can die in the very first scene. If you want to know about that character, you just play a period/event/scene where that character was still alive. Essentially, you play a younger version of that character.
Q. Is there a published TTRPG mechanic/game that provides for play of earlier versions of dead characters?
Suppose during a campaign, Muffy the Mage gets axed in the head by a crazed gnome. Everyone is sad, but this is OSR and thems the breaks. Maybe later you play a one-shot set in the past where Muffy is alive and obivously younger. The other players could play younger versions of their characters or different characters entirely. Muffy is dead but can still be played. The one-shot might give rise to interesting things when the campaign is resumed, like: "We were sad when Muffy bought it, but reflecting on the past (the one-shot), she was kind of a bitch."
Quote from: Shasarak on November 30, 2020, 05:33:44 PM
To be honest, I was hoping for more then banning raise dead from your game.
I make raising dead so difficult that it becomes an adventure all of it's own, one with a high probability of failure. If it does succeed there are going to be consequences, the natural order does't like to be subverted. The person raised isn't coming back the same and something on the other side is almost certainly going to be pissed off.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on November 30, 2020, 10:08:52 PM
I would roll 1d6, and reduce the appropriate score by 2 points. That's effectively a -1 to any checks involving it, which is still painful but not horrendously so.
Sorry, this is weak sauce for
death. -1 is not a penalty. It does not register as statistically significant. The noise in your d20 is too high for even a -2 to register in a small number of rolls.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2020, 10:42:41 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on November 30, 2020, 10:08:52 PM
I would roll 1d6, and reduce the appropriate score by 2 points. That's effectively a -1 to any checks involving it, which is still painful but not horrendously so.
Sorry, this is weak sauce for death. -1 is not a penalty. It does not register as statistically significant. The noise in your d20 is too high for even a -2 to register in a small number of rolls.
Are you playing 5E, or something else? I mean, I was tempted to just toss 'all rolls at disadvantage', but I was on the receiving end of that once at an AL game and it
fucking sucked.
And this isn't 'death' -- it's 'you're down to 0 HP and get kicked back to positives'. You're not even MOSTLY dead.
Fair enough. "Death" was not the best word. So revise to "0 HP", whatever that means in 5E.
My point still stands about -1 being a nothing penalty.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2020, 11:34:15 AM
Fair enough. "Death" was not the best word. So revise to "0 HP", whatever that means in 5E.
My point still stands about -1 being a nothing penalty.
You could go with -1 max hp/HD after each time a character hits 0 hp. This would recover +1 max hp/HD per long rest. For those that do "yo-yo healing" this can rapidly drop such characters' maximum hit points. This really matters as it means the instant death threshold is lowered.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2020, 10:36:13 AM
Q. Is there a published TTRPG mechanic/game that provides for play of earlier versions of dead characters?
Suppose during a campaign, Muffy the Mage gets axed in the head by a crazed gnome. Everyone is sad, but this is OSR and thems the breaks. Maybe later you play a one-shot set in the past where Muffy is alive and obivously younger. The other players could play younger versions of their characters or different characters entirely. Muffy is dead but can still be played. The one-shot might give rise to interesting things when the campaign is resumed, like: "We were sad when Muffy bought it, but reflecting on the past (the one-shot), she was kind of a bitch."
Cool idea. I don't know of any
mechanic that explicitly addresses this (and I don't know what Microscope is), but I'd venture that if a game is sufficiently OSR it is simple enough to just regenerate the character "from scratch" -- erase any gear and change the "age" on her character sheet. Any other adjustments required by that game for a "younger version" of Muffy would ostensibly be similarly quick and easy to make.
Quote from: Zalman on December 01, 2020, 11:56:36 AM
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2020, 10:36:13 AM
Q. Is there a published TTRPG mechanic/game that provides for play of earlier versions of dead characters?
Suppose during a campaign, Muffy the Mage gets axed in the head by a crazed gnome. Everyone is sad, but this is OSR and thems the breaks. Maybe later you play a one-shot set in the past where Muffy is alive and obivously younger. The other players could play younger versions of their characters or different characters entirely. Muffy is dead but can still be played. The one-shot might give rise to interesting things when the campaign is resumed, like: "We were sad when Muffy bought it, but reflecting on the past (the one-shot), she was kind of a bitch."
Cool idea. I don't know of any mechanic that explicitly addresses this (and I don't know what Microscope is), but I'd venture that if a game is sufficiently OSR it is simple enough to just regenerate the character "from scratch" -- erase any gear and change the "age" on her character sheet. Any other adjustments required by that game for a "younger version" of Muffy would ostensibly be similarly quick and easy to make.
Yeah, there's have to be some simple and quick rules to make a younger version of a character. Like you say, regenerate the character from scratch and maybe take into account their current stats somehow. Does STR, DEX, etc. change and if so, up or down?
The biggest design challenge would be there would also have to be some way to handle death in the past. Muffy can't die in the past, nor can any other other younger version of a character. So maybe the one-shot ends in failure as soon as someone hits 0 HP or something and the GM just narrates a conclusion.
Quote from: Shasarak on November 30, 2020, 08:36:50 PM
...
I have noticed in my Pathfinder games that no PC is completely safe from dropping, often it is only a crit or two away - and Pathfinder monsters get three attacks ;)
PF2 does have some good core combat rules.
But then one has to deal with the rest of the PF system...
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2020, 11:34:15 AM
Fair enough. "Death" was not the best word. So revise to "0 HP", whatever that means in 5E.
My point still stands about -1 being a nothing penalty.
I'd need to playtest it. Bonuses in 5E are not near as deranged as they could get in 3E/PF.
I just hate the idea of PCs getting utterly fucked -- and unable to extricate themselves from the situation, just because of a bad roll at a crucial moment. The game I'm running in particular has had the wild mage sorcerer roll the 'surge every round for ten rounds' wild surge effect TWICE now in the campaign.
You mentioned earlier versions of characters. I believe there is a 'young' template in 5E you could tack on to an existing PC. I considered doing that to the sorcerer after she managed to regress herself back to age 14 :D
Quote from: Jaeger on December 01, 2020, 01:43:40 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on November 30, 2020, 08:36:50 PM
...
I have noticed in my Pathfinder games that no PC is completely safe from dropping, often it is only a crit or two away - and Pathfinder monsters get three attacks ;)
PF2 does have some good core combat rules.
But then one has to deal with the rest of the PF system...
I know, its like a win-win scenario.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 01, 2020, 01:45:16 PM
I just hate the idea of PCs getting utterly fucked -- and unable to extricate themselves from the situation, just because of a bad roll at a crucial moment.
OK, I see your point...but, if the players are relying on one roll to carry the day, they must have made bigger mistakes to put themselves in that situation. Errors in planning and preparation maybe? Players should know very well that the dice can screw them over at a moment's notice and they need to plan accordingly. Yeah, they can plan and still get screwed over with several bad rolls, but that's very rare and I'd argue that the gods were against them and no bonus would have helped.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 01, 2020, 01:45:16 PM
You mentioned earlier versions of characters. I believe there is a 'young' template in 5E you could tack on to an existing PC. I considered doing that to the sorcerer after she managed to regress herself back to age 14 :D
Is this is the PHB or would you have a link? I'd be interested to take a look and maybe borrow from there.
Quote from: rytrasmi on December 01, 2020, 03:21:23 PM
OK, I see your point...but, if the players are relying on one roll to carry the day, they must have made bigger mistakes to put themselves in that situation. Errors in planning and preparation maybe? Players should know very well that the dice can screw them over at a moment's notice and they need to plan accordingly. Yeah, they can plan and still get screwed over with several bad rolls, but that's very rare and I'd argue that the gods were against them and no bonus would have helped.
True enough. Though cascade failure is a thing -- sometimes things can snowball spectacularly.
Quote
Is this is the PHB or would you have a link? I'd be interested to take a look and maybe borrow from there.
It's a homebrew, it seems (I swear I thought it was official, but guess not). Link: https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Young_Creature_(5e_Template)
Yet another problem which is solved by playing AD&D1e.
Yep, because ADnD does not have Raise Dead, Resurrection or Reincarnation.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 01, 2020, 07:44:52 PM
It's a homebrew, it seems (I swear I thought it was official, but guess not). Link: https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Young_Creature_(5e_Template)
Thanks! I'll check it out.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 01, 2020, 02:35:03 PM
...
I know, its like a win-win scenario.
A PF2 fan?
Say it ain't so!
Quote from: Kyle Aaron on December 01, 2020, 08:23:17 PM
Yet another problem which is solved by playing AD&D1e.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 01, 2020, 08:55:24 PM
Yep, because ADnD does not have Raise Dead, Resurrection or Reincarnation.
Well, to quibble AD&D had hit point limits when characters stopped rolling for HP around level 10 or so.
And in AD&D Elves could not be revived with Raise dead.
This is one empirical instance in which AD&D1e is better than 5e.
Because; Fuck Elves.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 01, 2020, 08:55:24 PM
Yep, because ADnD does not have Raise Dead, Resurrection or Reincarnation.
Typically these were not available in the market for tuppence next to the applecart.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron on December 01, 2020, 10:55:16 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on December 01, 2020, 08:55:24 PM
Yep, because ADnD does not have Raise Dead, Resurrection or Reincarnation.
Typically these were not available in the market for tuppence next to the applecart.
Dude, the spells are right there in the PHB.
The listed cost is thruppence and a bent copper spoon.
So is wish spell and creeping doom, that doesn't mean anyone has easy access to them.
Raise dead is a 5th level cleric spell, requiring a 9th level cleric to cast - that's a high priest, someone running their own temple with priests under them. There won't be many of these. Both the person requesting and the deceased would have to be devout followers of the relevant god for the deceased to be raised. Not coincidentally, quest is also a 5th level cleric spell - there may be more than a price in gold to pay.
Resurrection is a 7th level cleric spell requiring a 16th level cleric with 18 or greater wisdom. There will not be many of these around.
Reincarnation is a 7th level druid spell requiring a 12th level druid. There are only ever at most nine 12th level druids, with each having achieved or maintained their position by besting other 12th level druids in hand-to-hand combat.
Just because the spell is in the PHB does not mean the party has ready access to it. It may actually require some effort, or even be impossible. If it does not require effort, that's fine - but that's not the default assumption of AD&D1e. From which we can conclude that in vanilla AD&D1e, characters who die tend to stay dead. Thus, if you want to follow Pundit's advice to occasionally let PCs die, then AD&D1e is a better choice than later editions.
Now, if you want them to "die" and come straight back without trouble, or never die at all, that's fine - but that's not the advice here. If you want a system where characters who die tend to stay dead, then you can either just take 1e as it is, or take a later system and fiddle with it a lot. Fiddling is tedious and reduces time better spent talking shit, rolling the dice and eating snacks.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron on December 02, 2020, 12:01:00 AM
So is wish spell and creeping doom, that doesn't mean anyone has easy access to them.
Raise dead is a 5th level cleric spell, requiring a 9th level cleric to cast - that's a high priest, someone running their own temple with priests under them. There won't be many of these. Both the person requesting and the deceased would have to be devout followers of the relevant god for the deceased to be raised. Not coincidentally, quest is also a 5th level cleric spell - there may be more than a price in gold to pay.
Resurrection is a 7th level cleric spell requiring a 16th level cleric with 18 or greater wisdom. There will not be many of these around.
Reincarnation is a 7th level druid spell requiring a 12th level druid. There are only ever at most nine 12th level druids, with each having achieved or maintained their position by besting other 12th level druids in hand-to-hand combat.
Just because the spell is in the PHB does not mean the party has ready access to it. It may actually require some effort, or even be impossible. If it does not require effort, that's fine - but that's not the default assumption of AD&D1e. From which we can conclude that in vanilla AD&D1e, characters who die tend to stay dead. Thus, if you want to follow Pundit's advice to occasionally let PCs die, then AD&D1e is a better choice than later editions.
Now, if you want them to "die" and come straight back without trouble, or never die at all, that's fine - but that's not the advice here. If you want a system where characters who die tend to stay dead, then you can either just take 1e as it is, or take a later system and fiddle with it a lot. Fiddling is tedious and reduces time better spent talking shit, rolling the dice and eating snacks.
That's a lot of convoluted movement of goalposts to try to sidestep the fact that Raise Dead and Resurrection spells do in fact exist in your preferred edition of D&D. The fact that these are high level spells—just like every fucking edition of D&D, without exception—does not change that fact. Low level priests do not get access to these spells in any edition of the game and all the waffling about characters having to be devout followers of the priest's god to be eligible for that service exists nowhere in the rules and, if applicable at any given table, would have to be a special campaign consideration up to the DM, which could be applied when playing ANY edition of the game.
Plus it takes ZERO fiddling around to get rid of these spells. All you have to do is say they don't exist in your campaign. The end. It's not like they're intricately connected to other rules that would fall apart if you remove them.
And since Pundit's advice is to
remove these spells from the game (an automatic task that takes zero effort) rather than look for the edition of the D&D, specifically, that supposedly provides the least access to them (according to someone's subjective opinion on the internet) we can conclude that we can easily follow this advice with any edition of any game that may have access to such magic. :P
Now, just to reassure rytrasmi and Pundit, I do think actual 'raising the dead' should entail a bit more than shelling out the gold at the nearest temple.
And just to make sure we're all on the same page: this means the PC is dead. Not at 0 HP and stable, not unconscious, not petrified. Dead. As in 'check his pockets for loose change' dead.
Example from experience: during a past PF campaign, our rogue managed to eat a disintegrate spell and wound up being stored in an empty snuffbox for a while till we could finally track down someone who could cast resurrection. At one point I had suggested using planar binding to call a djinn to see what he'd ask for in exchange for wishing the rogue back to life. It took several sessions (the rogue's player, in the meantime, ran one of our henchmen/hireling NPCs).
We eventually did get him resurrected, but after that I made a point to bind earth elementals and send them spelunking for diamonds. Just in case.
Yet another problem which can be solved by not playing DnD.
Quote from: VisionStorm on December 02, 2020, 01:02:21 AM
That's a lot of convoluted movement of goalposts to try to sidestep the fact that Raise Dead and Resurrection spells do in fact exist in your preferred edition of D&D. The fact that these are high level spells—just like every fucking edition of D&D, without exception—does not change that fact. Low level priests do not get access to these spells in any edition of the game and all the waffling about characters having to be devout followers of the priest's god to be eligible for that service exists nowhere in the rules and, if applicable at any given table, would have to be a special campaign consideration up to the DM, which could be applied when playing ANY edition of the game.
Plus it takes ZERO fiddling around to get rid of these spells. All you have to do is say they don't exist in your campaign. The end. It's not like they're intricately connected to other rules that would fall apart if you remove them.
And since Pundit's advice is to remove these spells from the game (an automatic task that takes zero effort) rather than look for the edition of the D&D, specifically, that supposedly provides the least access to them (according to someone's subjective opinion on the internet) we can conclude that we can easily follow this advice with any edition of any game that may have access to such magic. :P
Agreed and seconded.
I would keep the Resurrection spells as it makes it annoying to have to re-write a new character. Without those type of spells my "new" character would be (takes character sheet in left hand puts in his back grabs it with his right hand) the same character minus any equipment or other houseruled campaign restrictions. Other than that I also do not see where another player needs to be of the same religion of the Divine caster. If that is something a DM enforces expect everyone in the group converting as a whole to the divine caster religion.
I don't mind playing grim and gritty I would like at least the Resurrection spells.
Quote from: sureshot on December 02, 2020, 08:50:29 AM
Other than that I also do not see where another player needs to be of the same religion of the Divine caster. If that is something a DM enforces expect everyone in the group converting as a whole to the divine caster religion.
It could mostly make sense if the setting had properly constructed religious institutions, but it makes zero sense in the specialist henotheistic setup most D&D worlds have.
Why would a blacksmith who worships the god of smiths or a soldier who worships the god of battle be expected to convert to thd worship of the god of Sun and Agriculture just to get healing? Because default D&D treats each of those as separate religions despite each playing a vital role in maintaining civilization.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 09:20:37 AM
Quote from: sureshot on December 02, 2020, 08:50:29 AM
Other than that I also do not see where another player needs to be of the same religion of the Divine caster. If that is something a DM enforces expect everyone in the group converting as a whole to the divine caster religion.
It could mostly make sense if the setting had properly constructed religious institutions, but it makes zero sense in the specialist henotheistic setup most D&D worlds have.
Why would a blacksmith who worships the god of smiths or a soldier who worships the god of battle be expected to convert to thd worship of the god of Sun and Agriculture just to get healing? Because default D&D treats each of those as separate religions despite each playing a vital role in maintaining civilization.
Some settings have tried to weld the disparate faiths into larger pantheons (FR had the Triad, for example: Tyr, Torm, and Ilmater). I have no idea why everyone thinks benign fantasy deities can't get along any better than the old Egyptian, Norse, or Greek pantheons.
You know what would be interesting? Expand how raise dead and resurrection work in play. Here's my proposal:
Raising the dead is an arduous process, even under the best of conditions. The first step, of course, is to be able to cast the spell. Once the spell is cast, the caster goes on a 'spirit quest', similar to an astral journey or projection. He may bring along additional persons equal to his spellcasting bonus. This projection goes to only one place: the Halls of the Dead.
The Halls of the Dead are presided over by Anubis, the Guardian of the Dead. He is terrifyingly ruthless against those who would abscond or steal souls, but those who seek to legitimately restore a friend or lover to life may plead their case before him. The caster must argue the case before Anubis, using Knowledge (Religion). The presence of friends and companions can play a role: treat this as a standard DC 10 Assist Other check, using Diplomacy or Knowledge (Religion). Other options to improve a party's chances include testifying that they have slain particularly foul undead or soul-stealing creatures (no, you can't deceive Anubis on his turf. Don't even try), or alternately offering to take up a quest or task in exchange for the return of their comrade.
The DC for the check should be high but not insurmountable; Anubis is not unreasonable, and is more than happy to offer tough but fair deals to adventuring parties. Note that any such encounter with Anubis is very much at his sufferance; if the party becomes obnoxious, Anubis can immediately banish them back to the Prime Material Plane (with no saving throw) and their chances of resurrecting their comrade get MUCH slimmer.
Meanwhile, while the spell is cast, the caster and any companions with him are in a semi-comatose state. They cannot make any actions (effectively helpless) and worse, they will not sense any injury. Wise parties will arrange to only cast this spell in secure environments, preferably with guards.
A successful dispel magic, disjunction, or anti-magic field will immediately end the spell, yanking everyone back into their body. Because of this abrupt return, all participants are stunned for 1d6 rounds. This does not occur if the spell ends normally (successfully or not), or if Anubis banishes the caster and his companions from the Halls.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 09:20:37 AM
Quote from: sureshot on December 02, 2020, 08:50:29 AM
Other than that I also do not see where another player needs to be of the same religion of the Divine caster. If that is something a DM enforces expect everyone in the group converting as a whole to the divine caster religion.
It could mostly make sense if the setting had properly constructed religious institutions, but it makes zero sense in the specialist henotheistic setup most D&D worlds have.
Why would a blacksmith who worships the god of smiths or a soldier who worships the god of battle be expected to convert to thd worship of the god of Sun and Agriculture just to get healing? Because default D&D treats each of those as separate religions despite each playing a vital role in maintaining civilization.
A lot of people fail to understand how a multi god pantheon works in practice and how rare it would be for some one to worship only one god.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 02, 2020, 03:18:34 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 09:20:37 AM
Quote from: sureshot on December 02, 2020, 08:50:29 AM
Other than that I also do not see where another player needs to be of the same religion of the Divine caster. If that is something a DM enforces expect everyone in the group converting as a whole to the divine caster religion.
It could mostly make sense if the setting had properly constructed religious institutions, but it makes zero sense in the specialist henotheistic setup most D&D worlds have.
Why would a blacksmith who worships the god of smiths or a soldier who worships the god of battle be expected to convert to thd worship of the god of Sun and Agriculture just to get healing? Because default D&D treats each of those as separate religions despite each playing a vital role in maintaining civilization.
A lot of people fail to understand how a multi god pantheon works in practice and how rare it would be for some one to worship only one god.
D&D polytheism is Protestant denominationalism in the context of American religious tolerance; i.e. what Gygax, et. al. saw in the communities around them in the 1960s and 1970s. Of course it is inconsistent with historic polytheistic cultures.
Quote from: RandyB on December 02, 2020, 04:06:33 PM
D&D polytheism is Protestant denominationalism in the context of American religious tolerance; i.e. what Gygax, et. al. saw in the communities around them in the 1960s and 1970s. Of course it is inconsistent with historic polytheistic cultures.
In my opinion, Greenwoods Forgotten Realms had more influence on DnD polytheism then Gygaxs Greyhawk.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 02, 2020, 04:37:51 PM
Quote from: RandyB on December 02, 2020, 04:06:33 PM
D&D polytheism is Protestant denominationalism in the context of American religious tolerance; i.e. what Gygax, et. al. saw in the communities around them in the 1960s and 1970s. Of course it is inconsistent with historic polytheistic cultures.
In my opinion, Greenwoods Forgotten Realms had more influence on DnD polytheism then Gygaxs Greyhawk.
Eh, that's fair.
Quote from: Shasarak on December 02, 2020, 03:18:34 PM
A lot of people fail to understand how a multi god pantheon works in practice and how rare it would be for some one to worship only one god.
The problem with most D&D pantheons is that worshipping only one god is NOT rare in the real world; over half the human population (and 70% of Americans) believes there's only one.
Frankly, I think D&D would have produced much more sensible cosmologies/societies if they'd either stuck to the "undefined religion of light and goodness" approach I recall from the Red Box and 1e PHB or gone with basically Fantasy Catholic (i.e. the dominant faith of the Medieval period in Europe most D&D settings seek to emulate).
Or, and this might be too radical for some, if they'd just kept religion and functional magic completely separate; i.e. use the white mage concept instead of clerics. Some priests might also be white mages (or fighters or thieves for that matter), but their priestly vocation isn't the source of the magic they wield.
And frankly, that's kinda how just about any homebrew setting in my area worked, because I know several players who find even pretend worshiping of pagan deities problematic for their Christian faith. 4E finally allowing non-divine healing magic was one of the reasons it was actually quite popular in my area; I saw multiple warlords, many bards and even a few artificers in 4E, but no one played clerics or other divine classes in my area and religion all but sidelined beyond generic mentions of priests (Raise Dead being a ritual theoretically anyone could cast in 4E also helped in that regard. Taking the recently deceased to a "Miracle Max" type figure slides it more into "only mostly dead" territory that avoids a lot of theological issues).
The other thing that a more Christian-like religion helps with in relation to the topic at hand is that Heaven as "the next life" vs. many of the fridge horror setups the official D&D settings have* means a lot fewer people (even mighty but godly kings) would WANT to come back into this "valley of tears" prior to the Last Judgement.
Basically, only those with a specific purpose ordained by God are going to come back from true death (vs. the only mostly dead option**) in such a setting.
* who wouldn't want to come back Eberron's endless grey nothing of an afterlife or from being turned into furniture because your soul loses its identity in a few years and turns into raw material for your god to use at its whim?).
** I'm a huge fan of a raise dead variant that only works if cast on a subject "dead" for no more than a minute per level (so as soon as the fight that killed them is over for all practical purposes) with fluff that was basically the magic equivalent of an EMT doing CPR and an adrenaline shot to the heart to "bring someone back." I would be perfectly okay with a setting that banned "raise dead works on weeks old corpses" but still had "raise dead works on someone who's been down only minutes."
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 07:52:01 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on December 02, 2020, 03:18:34 PM
A lot of people fail to understand how a multi god pantheon works in practice and how rare it would be for some one to worship only one god.
The problem with most D&D pantheons is that worshipping only one god is NOT rare in the real world; over half the human population (and 70% of Americans) believes there's only one.
I dont track how that it is a problem with DnD Pantheons that they dont resemble real life fictional religions that never raise anyone from the dead anymore.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 07:52:01 PM
Quote from: Shasarak on December 02, 2020, 03:18:34 PM
A lot of people fail to understand how a multi god pantheon works in practice and how rare it would be for some one to worship only one god.
The problem with most D&D pantheons is that worshipping only one god is NOT rare in the real world; over half the human population (and 70% of Americans) believes there's only one.
But it was throughout human history, and people worshiping only one god within a polytheistic religion is uncommon, outside of people who focus on one patron deity or such, which still doesn't discount the (presumed) existence of other gods or their reverence. I also have my doubts about how may people genuinely believe in one (or any) god, as opposed to just doing what they were told since they were kids without giving it much thought, considering most people I've met are only nominally Christian.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 07:52:01 PMFrankly, I think D&D would have produced much more sensible cosmologies/societies if they'd either stuck to the "undefined religion of light and goodness" approach I recall from the Red Box and 1e PHB or gone with basically Fantasy Catholic (i.e. the dominant faith of the Medieval period in Europe most D&D settings seek to emulate).
That sounds pretty bland and empty, to be honest. And doesn't really lend itself to a simulated experience, where characters dwell in a life-like world where different cultures and civilizations have emerged.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 07:52:01 PMOr, and this might be too radical for some, if they'd just kept religion and functional magic completely separate; i.e. use the white mage concept instead of clerics. Some priests might also be white mages (or fighters or thieves for that matter), but their priestly vocation isn't the source of the magic they wield.
This I totally agree with and have proposed similar things before. I HATE the artificial Arcane/Divine magic split, which is almost entirely a D&D invention that bears zero resemblance to real life mystical traditions or even fiction outside of works that copied D&D's cosmology later on. And priestly roles and duties should not be tied to a specific RPG "class". That's just an occupation, and tying it to a "divinely inspired" magic using class creates unrealistic expectations of what a priest should be and how religion functions in the game world, where every "priest" is necessarily casting "miracles" all over the place, and if they can't, we "know" they're out of favor or something's "wrong" with them. Religious mystics could have magical abilities, but magic should not be intrinsically tied to religion.
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2020, 07:52:01 PMAnd frankly, that's kinda how just about any homebrew setting in my area worked, because I know several players who find even pretend worshiping of pagan deities problematic for their Christian faith. 4E finally allowing non-divine healing magic was one of the reasons it was actually quite popular in my area; I saw multiple warlords, many bards and even a few artificers in 4E, but no one played clerics or other divine classes in my area and religion all but sidelined beyond generic mentions of priests (Raise Dead being a ritual theoretically anyone could cast in 4E also helped in that regard. Taking the recently deceased to a "Miracle Max" type figure slides it more into "only mostly dead" territory that avoids a lot of theological issues).
The other thing that a more Christian-like religion helps with in relation to the topic at hand is that Heaven as "the next life" vs. many of the fridge horror setups the official D&D settings have* means a lot fewer people (even mighty but godly kings) would WANT to come back into this "valley of tears" prior to the Last Judgement.
Basically, only those with a specific purpose ordained by God are going to come back from true death (vs. the only mostly dead option**) in such a setting.
* who wouldn't want to come back Eberron's endless grey nothing of an afterlife or from being turned into furniture because your soul loses its identity in a few years and turns into raw material for your god to use at its whim?).
** I'm a huge fan of a raise dead variant that only works if cast on a subject "dead" for no more than a minute per level (so as soon as the fight that killed them is over for all practical purposes) with fluff that was basically the magic equivalent of an EMT doing CPR and an adrenaline shot to the heart to "bring someone back." I would be perfectly okay with a setting that banned "raise dead works on weeks old corpses" but still had "raise dead works on someone who's been down only minutes."
This reflects more your personal/religious prejudices and hang-ups more than a universal attitude or the way that the game should be presented or played. I have zero problem accepting that my fictional character could have different believes and values than me, and I don't pretend to worship my character's gods*, but simply role-play my character as worshiping those gods, which I personally might not believe in (there's a difference). But then again I'm not a Christian nor subscribe to Abrahamic prejudices, so I have no problem with different religions existing, specially make-believe ones.
*unless they worship Odin, or some other real life pagan god, then I totally pretend (j/k) :P
Quote from: VisionStorm on December 03, 2020, 07:51:54 AM
This I totally agree with and have proposed similar things before. I HATE the artificial Arcane/Divine magic split, which is almost entirely a D&D invention that bears zero resemblance to real life mystical traditions or even fiction outside of works that copied D&D's cosmology later on. And priestly roles and duties should not be tied to a specific RPG "class". That's just an occupation, and tying it to a "divinely inspired" magic using class creates unrealistic expectations of what a priest should be and how religion functions in the game world, where every "priest" is necessarily casting "miracles" all over the place, and if they can't, we "know" they're out of favor or something's "wrong" with them. Religious mystics could have magical abilities, but magic should not be intrinsically tied to religion.
OTOH, I don't mind the arcane/divine divide when it is done well and really tied into the lore/fluff of the game world. My best example of this is WFRP (most familiar with 2e, warming up to 4e). The magic of the wizards and the magic of the priests is very different, even as each college of wizards has differences as does each order of priests. This setting also has lots of pious non-spellcasting priests, many of whom hold immense political power in their orders. So, basically, they did well what D&D tries (and often fails) to do.
Quote from: Torque2100 on December 02, 2020, 08:43:49 AM
Yet another problem which can be solved by not playing DnD.
That has the terrible disadvantage that at this point, you're not playing D&D.
This is a stupid solution. It's like cutting off your arm to avoid getting a hangnail.
D&D is super easy to modify. You can modify it into anything. The OSR proves that.
Did I mention not raising hit Points above Level 1?
Make characters fragile and they respond with greater thought vs. greater force.
Played under a DM who had an interesting solution to the raise dead question; the spell was available as normal, but being brought back meant you left something behind, you started having problems similar to failing a ravenloft powers check, you'd come back for example with your eyes a funky color that glow in low light, maybe you got infravision, but it came with a social stigma, you would be shunned and treated like a witch/warlock/devil worshipper, the term was "the fallen" or "the risen". The more you got raised the worse it got until eventually you were not human anymore, might suffer alignment change, and could be relegated to npc villain.
Quote from: Theory of Games on December 15, 2020, 08:49:23 PM
Did I mention not raising hit Points above Level 1?
Make characters fragile and they respond with greater thought vs. greater force.
You don't need to go that far, but in retrospect 1E and 2E were smart about not allowing PCs to gain hit dice beyond a certain level. It limited how many hit points even a fighter could bring to the table.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 16, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
You don't need to go that far, but in retrospect 1E and 2E were smart about not allowing PCs to gain hit dice beyond a certain level. It limited how many hit points even a fighter could bring to the table.
In addition to Hit Dice, the changes to Con modifiers in 3e especially contribute to this.
In AD&D non-fighters capped at +2 hp/HD from a high Con.
In 3e, start with a Con 14, then add a +6 stat booster, +5 inherent bonus and maybe +1 for a level bump and you're at Con 26 or +8 hp per Hit Die (so 80 extra hit point at level 10, 160 extra at level 20).
There's a reason my system has 'hit points' scale at either 16+4/level, 20+5/level, or 24+6/level with a cap at level 15 (so 95 for most players at max level; by contrast your 'zero level' warrior would have 5-10 hp) while an attack from a level 15 monster would do about 38 damage (so yes, a level 4 PC could take ONE non-critical hit and still be upright... and know they should rightly be running for their life not trying to engage; I consider that a feature not a bug).
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 16, 2020, 11:02:15 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 16, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
You don't need to go that far, but in retrospect 1E and 2E were smart about not allowing PCs to gain hit dice beyond a certain level. It limited how many hit points even a fighter could bring to the table.
In addition to Hit Dice, the changes to Con modifiers in 3e especially contribute to this.
In AD&D non-fighters capped at +2 hp/HD from a high Con.
In 3e, start with a Con 14, then add a +6 stat booster, +5 inherent bonus and maybe +1 for a level bump and you're at Con 26 or +8 hp per Hit Die (so 80 extra hit point at level 10, 160 extra at level 20).
There's a reason my system has 'hit points' scale at either 16+4/level, 20+5/level, or 24+6/level with a cap at level 15 (so 95 for most players at max level; by contrast your 'zero level' warrior would have 5-10 hp) while an attack from a level 15 monster would do about 38 damage (so yes, a level 4 PC could take ONE non-critical hit and still be upright... and know they should rightly be running for their life not trying to engage; I consider that a feature not a bug).
It doesn't help that the way ACs and attack bonuses scale, sometimes you need all the HP you can get as ablative armor.
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 16, 2020, 05:22:59 PM
Quote from: Chris24601 on December 16, 2020, 11:02:15 AM
Quote from: Ghostmaker on December 16, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
You don't need to go that far, but in retrospect 1E and 2E were smart about not allowing PCs to gain hit dice beyond a certain level. It limited how many hit points even a fighter could bring to the table.
In addition to Hit Dice, the changes to Con modifiers in 3e especially contribute to this.
In AD&D non-fighters capped at +2 hp/HD from a high Con.
In 3e, start with a Con 14, then add a +6 stat booster, +5 inherent bonus and maybe +1 for a level bump and you're at Con 26 or +8 hp per Hit Die (so 80 extra hit point at level 10, 160 extra at level 20).
There's a reason my system has 'hit points' scale at either 16+4/level, 20+5/level, or 24+6/level with a cap at level 15 (so 95 for most players at max level; by contrast your 'zero level' warrior would have 5-10 hp) while an attack from a level 15 monster would do about 38 damage (so yes, a level 4 PC could take ONE non-critical hit and still be upright... and know they should rightly be running for their life not trying to engage; I consider that a feature not a bug).
It doesn't help that the way ACs and attack bonuses scale, sometimes you need all the HP you can get as ablative armor.
Indeed. Which was another of my personal changes... hp and damage scale linearly... Defenses and to-hit were nearly static (you could get at most +3 to each out of leveling and talent options). And part of that was because my version of hit points were entirely non-physical and so are INTENDED to be ablative armor that recovers quickly with rest.
A master swordsman in my rules deals more damage (likely to drop a mook with each attack that hits) and can lose more hit points before dropping (and mook hits also do less damage; easier to spend a little stamina to prevent anything more than a scratch), allowing him to take on multiple less-skilled foes.
Yet even against someone only basically trained there are some spans of six-seconds where even a master won't have a good opening to drop them (i.e. a missed attack roll) and even with the best of training sometimes it takes a bit of effort to turn aside an amateur's attack (and enough of that will tire you until you make a mistake eventually).
The big key is figuring out where you want the balance point for your system. For mine, a mook has about 10 hp and deals about 4 with about a 50% "hit" rate. A first level PC has about 25 hp (can rally by giving up a turn and some long term endurance to regain 12 once or twice in a fight) and deals about 10 hp with about a 55-60% hit rate. The result is that 3-4 mooks are unlikely to kill a first level PC, but once you're at 10 or so, the fight is almost certain to end badly for the PC without some other advantage on your side.
My system also is relatively forgiving by default of being dropped to 0 (each turn requires a recovery check with a failure causing you to lose a point of the same long term endurance you use to rally with the average PC having about 8... at zero hp and long-term endurance you succumb to your injuries and die... long term endurance comes back at about 1 point per hour of rest and can also be lost through certain other exertions like taking an extra action or using ritual magic; so the more you use it to gain benefits the more risk you're in of death if you run out of hit points in a battle).
That said, I've also got some alternate tone settings where if you want it softer the long term endurance check only happens once a minute or hour... for more danger, each time you drop to zero hit points you also take cumulative lasting injuries (by default a week or more to heal without magic). Tune it to where you find it the most interesting for your campaign.
There's also a distinction between using a "raise dead" ritual when the target suffered the 'dead' condition just minutes ago (in which case they're not actually dead, just beyond non-magical help of recovery) and using it on someone who is "dead-dead" (and even that caps out at just a few days for all but one-in-a-million holy men with a once-in-a-generation figure maybe being able to resurrect someone up to two weeks gone).