Author |
Topic |
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jun 2021 : 23:30:34
|
Yeah, it was Yvonnel, and it was revealed that Lolth never had Zak's soul (which had been implied pretty much from the beginning), but we don't know who did.
I have no problems with characters being resurrected (I'm a sap), and I've always loved Zak, but the "Lolth doesn't care" thing irked me. Not the "she doesn't care" in and of itself, but the way it was presented. Lolth isn't a benevolent deity, so of course she isn't going to care in the conventional sense, but the way it was presented just felt like more ex-Catholic bitterness projection from RAS. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2021 : 15:45:49
|
yeah, I've always been surprised when people got upset that someone came back. I'm like "players do it all the time....". What could be interesting to see in the novels would be people doing resurrections and them not working to definitively show "he's dead". I mean with true resurrection (granted, very high level, so not used except with major people) you don't even need the body. Time has become the main limiting factor nowadays (which absolutely makes sense, as their soul may have "bonded with the plane it went to") |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3740 Posts |
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2021 : 21:14:35
|
quote: Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Its like comic books. Its use and/or overuse cheapens the drama and emotions you're supposed to feel when a character is perceived to die or actually does. Jean Grey dying, it's almost a joke.
Speaking of this, with Lord Ginsu, I personally think some of his companions should have remained dead, with the time jump. Not only is the Iraludoon thing just wonky, I think having him and maybe one of the original companions, with some new ones, would have been more interesting -- particularly if the composition of the group had been mixed up more. You'd've had a nice juxtaposition of the old and the new, with the old characters having to learn how to deal with the new ones, plus all the potential that new characters could bring.
Of course, that likely wouldn't have been popular, with that character's fans.
This Yvonnel II and Zaknafein thing... The comic book comparison is apt, there. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 02 Jun 2021 21:14:59 |
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2021 : 22:06:23
|
quote: Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Its like comic books. Its use and/or overuse cheapens the drama and emotions you're supposed to feel when a character is perceived to die or actually does. Jean Grey dying, it's almost a joke.
KIND OF... but not really... the big thing being that there's specifically rules for resurrection and/or raising in D&D. Comics SOMETIMES come up with some odd way that someone returns, but more often than not they don't even do that.
Don't get me wrong, I totally get the wanting to build up the feel that death is final in the game for dramatic reasons, but from a realistic standpoint we know that they can be brought back with a cleric's help (and not even an "overpowered" one either... a lot of small cities have a cleric of sufficient level).... so it shouldn't be surprising if it happens. A low level person coming back... yeah, that should surprise folk. A mid level person who dies in the wilderness with noone to bring their body somewhere to be raised, or whose body is somehow lost... that should possibly surprise folks too. High level folks? Much more believable that they have something waiting in the wings. This is partly why I maintain that many of the Zulkirs that "died" in the Thayan civil war aren't actually dead.
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2021 : 22:13:17
|
quote: Originally posted by sleyvas
quote: Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Its like comic books. Its use and/or overuse cheapens the drama and emotions you're supposed to feel when a character is perceived to die or actually does. Jean Grey dying, it's almost a joke.
KIND OF... but not really... the big thing being that there's specifically rules for resurrection and/or raising in D&D. Comics SOMETIMES come up with some odd way that someone returns, but more often than not they don't even do that.
Don't get me wrong, I totally get the wanting to build up the feel that death is final in the game for dramatic reasons, but from a realistic standpoint we know that they can be brought back with a cleric's help (and not even an "overpowered" one either... a lot of small cities have a cleric of sufficient level).... so it shouldn't be surprising if it happens. A low level person coming back... yeah, that should surprise folk. A mid level person who dies in the wilderness with noone to bring their body somewhere to be raised, or whose body is somehow lost... that should possibly surprise folks too. High level folks? Much more believable that they have something waiting in the wings. This is partly why I maintain that many of the Zulkirs that "died" in the Thayan civil war aren't actually dead.
There are in-game rules, yes.
But in fiction, it's not something that we see very often -- because it takes away a lot of the tension from the story if you know that someone can just keep coming back.
In all the Realms fiction we've had, bringing someone back from the dead almost never happens. It has happened before, outside of the Companions, but it's rare enough that bringing the Companions back dramatically increased the number of Realms fiction characters that have done that. I'd say that it may have doubled the number of people it happened to -- that's how rare it had been across 20-30 years of Realms novels.
Outside of the RAS stuff, I can only think of three, maybe four characters that came back from the dead, in some way. Fflar "Starbrow" in the Last Mythal books, a reincarnation in the Netheril trilogy, and Kaverin Ebonhand making a deal with Cyric to avoid death, in Ring of Winter. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 02 Jun 2021 22:49:07 |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 02 Jun 2021 : 23:03:06
|
quote: Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote: Originally posted by sleyvas
quote: Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Its like comic books. Its use and/or overuse cheapens the drama and emotions you're supposed to feel when a character is perceived to die or actually does. Jean Grey dying, it's almost a joke.
KIND OF... but not really... the big thing being that there's specifically rules for resurrection and/or raising in D&D. Comics SOMETIMES come up with some odd way that someone returns, but more often than not they don't even do that.
Don't get me wrong, I totally get the wanting to build up the feel that death is final in the game for dramatic reasons, but from a realistic standpoint we know that they can be brought back with a cleric's help (and not even an "overpowered" one either... a lot of small cities have a cleric of sufficient level).... so it shouldn't be surprising if it happens. A low level person coming back... yeah, that should surprise folk. A mid level person who dies in the wilderness with noone to bring their body somewhere to be raised, or whose body is somehow lost... that should possibly surprise folks too. High level folks? Much more believable that they have something waiting in the wings. This is partly why I maintain that many of the Zulkirs that "died" in the Thayan civil war aren't actually dead.
There are in-game rules, yes.
But in fiction, it's not something that we see very often -- because it takes away a lot of the tension from the story if you know that someone can just keep coming back.
In all the Realms fiction we've had, bringing someone back from the dead almost never happens.
I have quite a problem with this, because it stinks of "the plot requires so".
In settings like this, you have two options. You either move the stakes away from survival, or you use conditions that prevent the use of resurrection. As Sleyvas says, mid level? Have the body lost or destroyed. High level? Have the enemy prepare strategies to prevent the resurrection of their foes--which even exist in the rules IIRC.
Moving the stakes away from life/death is also entirely possible, you just have to write a different kind of story. When you write a story, you have to establish the stakes (what the character can lose), and choose them to best deliver the thematic viewpoint that you have chosen. The stakes are what the character loses if they lose the conflict (aka, if they fail to understand the thematic viewpoint or put it into practice), or decide to no longer engage in the story.
The stakes help determine the type of story, and where the character's focus will be. If the stakes are life, the story is a survival tale, if it' knowledge, the story is a mistery tale, etc... This means that the consequences of a character's failure to learn the thematic viewpoint (aka overcome their fatal flaw) aren't necessarily death. For example, if the stakes of a detective story are about knowledge, the detective shouldn't lose their life if they decide to stop investigating. A sense of tension can also easily be built even in a world where death is a minor nuisance, and where the characters can die and then easily come back from the dead.
A stupid example: consider a story set in a theocratic world where resurrection is possible. Let's say that the main character is 100% sure that gods don't exist, that the afterlife is made up of people's soul going to an outers space and building their own dream realms, and that resurrection does nothing but shatter these people's dream to bring them back. This characters hates the theocracy, the churches, the gods, and their claim on the afterlife. He spends all his energies to uncover what he believes to be the cospiracy of the churches of his world, so that he can unravel the theocracy and prove his point. Perhaps he does this partly because of his hatred, but also and in large part because he wants to be respected by his society rather than condmned. So, let's say:
-thematic viewpoint=acknowledging and overcoming one's own biases lead to success;
-stakes=social respect;
-fatal flaw=close mindedness/denial of reality.
In this story, temporary death could be used at the midpoint to confront the character with his fatal flaw and with the truth he's been avoiding since forever: the gods do exist. At the midpoint, the character dies due to some situation that he caused due to his fatal flaw, and some deity commands their clerics to resurrect him, but binds his soul to them in the process. That's because, as he finds out, that's the only way resurrection can work. Resurrected people pay the price by doing the gods' bidding.
So now he has a real truth to reveal to others, not just a conspiracy. He has a justification for his hatred, but not only no one will believe him due to how his fatal flaw ruined his reputation, he'll have to answer to the gods he's always fought and hated, because his fatal flaw also put him in that situation. So, he came back from the dead like nothing, but the stakes are still relevant, the suffering/threat was escalated, and he still needs to fight for the stakes and overcome his fatal flaw. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 02 Jun 2021 23:23:11 |
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1288 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2021 : 23:57:51
|
Well...one of the problems with D&D fiction is that death can be undone by magical ressurection or raise dead spells. This should take away much of the tension and consequences of bad actions that work in real world setting fiction. Authors a lot of the time act like death is final when writing Realms fiction; but think about it - if on earth you could resurrect a loved one who died tragically young you would do that regardless of the cost if it was in your means.
Also hard agree Wooly that The Thousand Orcs stuff turned me off Drizzt. I couldn't get through that trilogy it was just the same nonsense and didn't seem like Bob was having fun writing it. |
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1288 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 00:02:00
|
Manshoon has Fzoul raised when he is killed by Shandril at the end of Crown of Fire - to me Ed gets resurrection and the Realms. There's no reason a high ranking member of the Harpers or Zhent or X power faction should ever stay dead if they have access to a reasonably high level priest or some wealth to buy access to one. Which they all would have. |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 01:02:58
|
quote: Originally posted by Seravin
Well...one of the problems with D&D fiction is that death can be undone by magical ressurection or raise dead spells. This should take away much of the tension and consequences of bad actions that work in real world setting fiction.
You can very well set up a story where the fact that death is but a nuisance doesn't take away from the tension. I discussed this in a post here.
quote: Authors a lot of the time act like death is final when writing Realms fiction; but think about it - if on earth you could resurrect a loved one who died tragically young you would do that regardless of the cost if it was in your means.
Which is precisely why I have problems with FR novels pretending that death can't be undone. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 04 Jun 2021 01:03:35 |
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 01:34:31
|
I am inclined to agree with Irennan here. I personally have never felt that death being but a nuisance hasn't lessened the stakes. As Irennan said, life/death doesn't have to be what is at stake. And, at least for me, even if a character returns, I still feel the pain of the other characters during the time he/she is dead. Their return doesn't lessen that pain--if anything, it can add to the rollercoaster of emotions. You grieve at their loss and rejoice at their return.
I have had my favorite characters die on me many times--I would love to see them return. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 02:10:46
|
quote: Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I am inclined to agree with Irennan here. I personally have never felt that death being but a nuisance hasn't lessened the stakes. As Irennan said, life/death doesn't have to be what is at stake. And, at least for me, even if a character returns, I still feel the pain of the other characters during the time he/she is dead. Their return doesn't lessen that pain--if anything, it can add to the rollercoaster of emotions. You grieve at their loss and rejoice at their return.
I have had my favorite characters die on me many times--I would love to see them return.
Indeed, though you have to be careful. Even if the stakes for the protagonist aren't about life and death, they could be about their loved ones, which means that death of a loved one should still be a threat. In a world where rezzing people is perfectly feasbile, the antagonist should prepare accordingly. Besides, if in a story with that kind of stakes the protag loses a loved one (because they failed at something due to their fatal flaw), even if death is reversible,the quest for reversing it (finding the cleric, traveling to the city, gathering materials, retrieving the body etc...) can still be used to provide plenty of conflict and tension (just like the character suffering for the loss of the loved one, as you say), and force the character to face/overcome the fatal flaw in order to resurrect the person that they lost. The event of the death could be a good end of first arc (the point that propels the character in the heart of the story), midpoint, or end of second arc (which is ironically called "point of death"). Even if the protag *is* the cleric, you can un-trivialize death by giving the cleric a problematic relationship with their deity (tie it to the fatal flaw&thematic viewpoint), which impairs their magic, and making the transformation about sorting out the relationship with their deity through whatever events best fit the story. Or yet again, make a substantial part of the conflict about the issue of whether it's right or not to pull a soul from a good place into a hellhole, and build key scenes around this.
A similar reasoning can be used also for different kinds of stakes, even reputation. For a mercenary/bodyguard charged with protecting someone, the life of that someone should be at real risk, so you need to plan the story and the actions of the antagonists acknowledging that resurrection is real. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 04 Jun 2021 02:14:59 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 11:12:29
|
The Realms was designed to be a setting for fiction, not a constantly-changing ruleset. Just because rules say something is possible, it doesn't mean it happens every day.
Bringing someone back from the dead is not cheap, and it requires a high-level priest -- which aren't exactly common.
And seriously, how can the death of a loved one be a threat, if death isn't a threat for the protagonist? Are only protagonists allowed to come back?
Look at everything published for the Realms: coming back from the dead is a rare occurrence, even for those who can afford to come back. It's a cultural thing, even without the limitations built into the process.
You may choose to think death is only an inconvenience and that no one should worry about it, but that's not how the Realms has operated over the whole of the time it's been published. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 14:05:35
|
quote: Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The Realms was designed to be a setting for fiction, not a constantly-changing ruleset. Just because rules say something is possible, it doesn't mean it happens every day.
Bringing someone back from the dead is not cheap, and it requires a high-level priest -- which aren't exactly common.
And seriously, how can the death of a loved one be a threat, if death isn't a threat for the protagonist? Are only protagonists allowed to come back?
Look at everything published for the Realms: coming back from the dead is a rare occurrence, even for those who can afford to come back. It's a cultural thing, even without the limitations built into the process.
Resurrection isn't a rule. It's part of the setting, and it's been for a long ass-time. It's part of the worldbuilding, just like the fact that you can throw fire explosions at people.
As for the rest, I was talking from the perspective of how to handle the story when you're planning it. Yes, "in the events" death is obviously a threat to the protagonist too, but when you plan the story, if the stakes that you chose aren't about life&death but something else, then life is NOT what the protagonist is risking to lose, and you shouldn't use it as a plot point or even as a major factor, because it will change the whole point of your story, it will make it less coherent, and it will take away from the kind of feeling and concept you're trying to deliver. OTOH, the threat of losing a loved one in a story where, say, family is the stakes, is very fitting, and working one's own ass off to bring said loved one back to life is just natural in a world where resurrection is available.
quote:
You may choose to think death is only an inconvenience and that no one should worry about it, but that's not how the Realms has operated over the whole of the time it's been published.
I didn't add resurrection to my world, so I wasn't talking about what I do with death&resurrection.
The fact that Realms fiction tries to downplay (or ignore) the possibility of resurrection, when that's a very real possibility, means that the matter wasn't handled well from a storytelling perspective (in that a premise of the world isn't taken to its natural consequence). If a person loses a loved one to an illness or a violent death, you can bet they'll try everything to get them back. If said person is some kind of adventurer, often mid-high level like we see in the novels, they won't generally even find much trouble doing so. You *need* to take that into account when writing in this kind of worlds. If you want to make death stick because you need it in your story, then there are many ways to do that. If resurrection is possible, the characters--even antagonists--need to act accordingly.
IRL, if a life-changing technology is available, a lot people will try to use it and it will become a staple of the society, even if it's expensive. IRL, in countries that don't offer pulic healthcare, people will go into debt to have a chance at saving their loved ones, let alone a guardanteed result. People will even travel to the other side of the world to have a chance at saving their loved ones. That's how people work, and the fact that resurrection is treated like it barely exists in a lot of FR fiction doesn't make much sense. It's like trying to eat your cake and have it too (because of coure authors will not shy away from using it as a deus ex macina when it's convenient, rather than treating it as an integral part of the setting). This is one more reason why I liked Liriel, since a big factor in her turning to Mystra was the will to resurrect Fyodor. When Fyodor died, she eventually ended up thinking "hey, I can resurrect him!" Of course, that she didn't find the will to rob him of the peace/happiness that he was experiencing in the afterlife is a different matter, and a good source of conflict.
On a final note, I'll add that, when you're planning a story, the world is usually built *for* the story you have in mind, and you use the thematic viewpoint to control the various elements and the scenes. So, I can understand why setting a story in a world that isn't built for it can cause some annoyance, and why you would be tempted to ignore some elements. However, I don't think that's a good way to write in an established setting--rather than try to hammer your story in the setting, you should use the various elements that the setting offers so that your story can work well in it. Not the optimal process for story-planning, but it's the price to use the work of someone else. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 04 Jun 2021 14:58:29 |
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 16:07:05
|
I am not familiar with the 5E rules at all but there was at least some inherent limitations for resurrections in previous editions so that they couldn't become all that common. The first was that a priest would have to have major access to the Necromantic sphere. The second limitation is finding a priest with that access who is willing to cast the spell. The final and true limitation is that the priest is asking his god for the power to bring this mortal back and the god may just say no because they don't deem that mortal worthy of the gift. Given those requirements to come back, death would be final barring what would in fact be a miracle (and should be viewed as such).
Edit: fixed a typo or two |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
Edited by - TheIriaeban on 04 Jun 2021 16:08:11 |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 16:51:42
|
Yes, I give you that it's very hard (though later editions made it far easier, hence why my assumption that for a farily powerful/wealthy character it wouldn't even be hard). The point is that it's a possibility, and that one of the most immediate thoughts occuring to a person who loses a loved one should indeed (generally speaking) be about working to resurrect that person. The character should be compelled to make an effort to bring back the loved one (save for characters holding very particular ideas about death). It's natural, and you can't just pretend it isn't. Especially for powerful characters, who have an easier time accessing resurrection. Imagine a decent parent losing their child, knowing that there's a chance for the child to come back (even a very small chance), and being like "oh well, too much work". Yeah, that's not going to happen.
Resurrection is always a *huge* factor, even if you make it hard. Its presence is a narrative game changer for any setting, and should be taken in account when writing stories. Not doing so is, frankly put, a narrative mistake. You can't just keep it aside and use it when it's convenient to you, that's crap writing. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 04 Jun 2021 18:27:14 |
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 19:12:24
|
As a parent who has lost children (yes, more than one; the universe can be exceptionally cruel), I can tell you that I have wished with all my heart that resurrections or raise deads were real. Were I in the realms, I can tell you for a fact that I would have done everything I could to get them back within reason. Would I pray to my patron and go to the temple to speak with a priest? Of course. If the priest said that I needed to do something to get that, I would have done it. BUT, and this is what kept me going in the real world, I wouldn't be able to abandon those that are still alive to get the ones that had died back. I could take solace in the fact that they were in a better place (remember, the world can be very cruel) while making sure my family is still able to survive and thrive (though sad). If everyone but me had passed, I may have become obsessive enough to do any- and everything to get them back. However, that is a dark place that I really don't want to think about. |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 19:13:04
|
quote: Originally posted by Irennan
quote: Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The Realms was designed to be a setting for fiction, not a constantly-changing ruleset. Just because rules say something is possible, it doesn't mean it happens every day.
Bringing someone back from the dead is not cheap, and it requires a high-level priest -- which aren't exactly common.
And seriously, how can the death of a loved one be a threat, if death isn't a threat for the protagonist? Are only protagonists allowed to come back?
Look at everything published for the Realms: coming back from the dead is a rare occurrence, even for those who can afford to come back. It's a cultural thing, even without the limitations built into the process.
Resurrection isn't a rule. It's part of the setting, and it's been for a long ass-time. It's part of the worldbuilding, just like the fact that you can throw fire explosions at people.
It absolutely is a rule. It's something that exists in the setting because the fiction setting that was the Realms had game rules placed on top of it.
And it's something Ed has spoken on before. Sure, it's available to adventurers and they oft use it freely -- but adventurers are the exceptions. Among nobility and royalty, it's actively discouraged and even illegal, because of the legal mess it causes with inheritances and titles and property and such.
And as I pointed out earlier, people coming back from the dead has been very rare, in the fiction. Aside from RAS characters and their permanent "Get out of death - free!" cards, there are only a handful of novel characters that have returned from the dead. At least one of those was a reincarnation and another involved making a deal with the then god of the dead, Cyric.
There's a huge difference between what happens in a novel and what happens at the gaming table. Some things work for one and not for the other. In a novel, a high-level character can get killed with a dagger in the throat -- a single stab from a non-magical one, at that. In game, even a high-level wizard could giggle off getting stabbed in the throat. Should we make all fiction characters able to survive getting their throats cut because it can happen in the game? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 19:34:27
|
It has become part of the Realms as a narrative the very moment the Realms were published. The possibility of resurrection is certainly a worldbuilding element, even if Ed didn't originally include it in his setting, because the novels aren't set in Ed's Realms (side note, it'd be cool to see novels set in Ed's Realms where they differ from the published ones). The fact that someone can do something is not a game rule, because it has very real repercussion on the world. It's not like the debate of "hit points are meat" vs "hit points simulate luck, stamina and what you have, that's why you can survive being hit--you're not *actually* being hit until your reach 0". Or "fireball does 8d6 damage in this edition". It's "in this world, death is not permanent, and there's a specific and well-known process that you can use to undo it". Huge difference.
In my posts I didn't consider games at all. I specifically addressed novels, and talked about the elements and processes that you use to make novels. The point remains that, if you write in a world where resurrection is possible, you have to outline the scenes in your novel and the actions of your characters with that in mind. Not doing so would be the same as pretending that teleportation doesn't exist because you need your character to travel from A to B for the sake of your plot. It's a mistake. Rather, you come up with obstacles that force them to travel. Or you change your plot.
Now, as for whether it's discouraged in-universe in certain cultures is a different matter. As I said, a character that loses a loved one *will* think about resurrection, because it's how people work (unless you specifically write this character to be anti-resurrection; even then such an event could put their beliefs to the test). Maybe this character will meet opposition from their peers or other troubles, but they *will* think about it, probably also act on it, and not act like someone in a world without resurrection would. That would be false, it would make them look clueless, and would make the story feel artificial.
A book delves into the human mind and emotions, we see the character's thought process, feelings, and filter the world through their senses and mind. Since human reactions are extremely important in a novel, if resurrection is possible, you need to write the reactions of your characters accordingly. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 04 Jun 2021 19:40:47 |
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 19:42:17
|
quote: Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote: Originally posted by Irennan
quote: Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The Realms was designed to be a setting for fiction, not a constantly-changing ruleset. Just because rules say something is possible, it doesn't mean it happens every day.
Bringing someone back from the dead is not cheap, and it requires a high-level priest -- which aren't exactly common.
And seriously, how can the death of a loved one be a threat, if death isn't a threat for the protagonist? Are only protagonists allowed to come back?
Look at everything published for the Realms: coming back from the dead is a rare occurrence, even for those who can afford to come back. It's a cultural thing, even without the limitations built into the process.
Resurrection isn't a rule. It's part of the setting, and it's been for a long ass-time. It's part of the worldbuilding, just like the fact that you can throw fire explosions at people.
It absolutely is a rule. It's something that exists in the setting because the fiction setting that was the Realms had game rules placed on top of it.
And it's something Ed has spoken on before. Sure, it's available to adventurers and they oft use it freely -- but adventurers are the exceptions. Among nobility and royalty, it's actively discouraged and even illegal, because of the legal mess it causes with inheritances and titles and property and such.
And as I pointed out earlier, people coming back from the dead has been very rare, in the fiction. Aside from RAS characters and their permanent "Get out of death - free!" cards, there are only a handful of novel characters that have returned from the dead. At least one of those was a reincarnation and another involved making a deal with the then god of the dead, Cyric.
There's a huge difference between what happens in a novel and what happens at the gaming table. Some things work for one and not for the other. In a novel, a high-level character can get killed with a dagger in the throat -- a single stab from a non-magical one, at that. In game, even a high-level wizard could giggle off getting stabbed in the throat. Should we make all fiction characters able to survive getting their throats cut because it can happen in the game?
Really, the biggest "cheater", if you want to call repeated returns from death that, is Manshoon. That Stasis Clone spell makes his death such a non-event that it has even been written that he will do a suicide attack because he knows that death will just be a small inconvience. |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
|
|
TKU
Learned Scribe
USA
158 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 20:42:32
|
I was never a big fan of easy resurrection in D&D in general-either in my games, the novels, or the games. Never really liked the idea of the afterlife being a revolving door, and I think it takes a lot of the stakes out of things when anyone can theoretically come back from just about anything and removes something of the sense of closure when a character dies. It also lessens the impact of necromancy and the various forms of undeath IMO.
On the subject of the RA Salvatore characters, I thought it was interesting how they handled the resurrection of Quenthel (even if long term I question what the point to bringing her back was). Resurrections were treated as a basically unheard of event, shameful and scandalous even-with the Baenre's covering it up. My impression was that death in that society was treated as something from which there was no 'second chances' granted from Lolth, and indeed Quenthel came back not through the usual avenue of divine magic but by the depressed melting-candle hitching a ride with Skakti out of the abyss and getting ressurected with the help of a magical bauble. I think raising characters from the dead can work if it's used sparingly, the afterlife is acknowledged as something that the 'target' might not want to leave or might not be able to, and the social/cultural implications for a character's magical return is acknowledged. Death should never be something that you just 'go to the doctor' for because then the fact that most characters *don't* come back becomes something of an oddity, and it's overuse can really sour the emotional impact of a character's death. |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 21:19:08
|
quote: Originally posted by TKU I think raising characters from the dead can work if it's used sparingly, the afterlife is acknowledged as something that the 'target' might not want to leave or might not be able to, and the social/cultural implications for a character's magical return is acknowledged. Death should never be something that you just 'go to the doctor' for because then the fact that most characters *don't* come back becomes something of an oddity, and it's overuse can really sour the emotional impact of a character's death.
Which is why I'm not a fan of resurrection in narrative either. If the thing exists, a character who loses someone would immediately think about trying to prepare a resurrection, even if it's hard. But the thing is, either you don't include it at all in your world, or if you include it, you explore the consequence. For example, if resurrection exists, you can bet that people who kill for a job would develop countermeasures, and those contermeasures could even become common practice.
quote: I think it takes a lot of the stakes out of things when anyone can theoretically come back from just about anything and removes something of the sense of closure when a character dies. It also lessens the impact of necromancy and the various forms of undeath IMO.
I can't agree on this. Choosing the stakes is an extremely important part of planning a story, and you can write stories where the stakes aren't about life&death, so the possibility of resurrection doesn't lessen the tension (or doesn't lessen it significantly). I made a trivial example a few posts ago. Or yet a scenario in which resurrection isn't feasible (even just a large battle would make the matter complicated--if a character falls, since you can't rez everyone, the conflict arises about what gives this character the privilege of being resurrected over other people). There seems to be some tacit agreement that life is the ultimate stake to have in a story, but that's not true at all. Different characters have different priorities, and it's the job of a writer to make the reader put themselves in the shoes of said character, and feel the same as them as far as the story is concerned.
But yeah, overall resurrection isn't good to have in a novel setting (unless your story revolves around that, and you built the setting for the story), because it creates a large disconnection between the characters and the readers in how a fundamental and inveitable part of life is perceived, and while this kind of stuff can be a fun to explore in a story (so, as I mentioned, the story is *about* that), it isn't a good thing to have "just lying there" in the setting. It makes the construction of empathy much harder. Unfortunately, most D&D settings happen to come with this element. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 04 Jun 2021 21:31:11 |
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11827 Posts |
Posted - 04 Jun 2021 : 22:29:41
|
quote: Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Bringing someone back from the dead is not cheap, and it requires a high-level priest -- which aren't exactly common.
Just responding to this piece. On the cost thing. YES... this is true. Money can be a severe factor, and some folks may not get raised for just that reason. However, the high level priest thing... usually since at least 3rd edition (maybe even 2nd? Can't remember level of raise dead in 2e) the priest would only need to be like 9th level. Granted, they're not behind every blade of grass, but they're pretty prevalent in the realms to be of that level, such that most major cities will probably have several. Most small cities will have at least one.
Not saying everyone will be raising everyone that dies mind you. Death will be final for many on their first fall. But it shouldn't surprise people if someone DOES come back. Some cities may pay for it simply because it's cheaper to resurrect their local sheriff/wizard/lesser priest than it is to try and train a new one up..... |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
Delnyn
Senior Scribe
USA
949 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jun 2021 : 17:04:59
|
The resurrection gambit got seriously overplayed. Why have characters killed off if they are only to be brought back? Now THAT is a sleep spell! Or just bad planning/writing.
On an alternative storyline, I would have laughed if the Companions were reincarnated as cute fluffy animals and Drizzt were hungry. |
|
|
Azar
Master of Realmslore
1309 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2021 : 04:51:39
|
It's easy to forget that raise dead is backed by a divine will; if a deity doesn't want a being revived, they're not coming back any more than a good priest - in a moment of insanity - is going to successfully flame strike an orphanage. |
Stand with anybody that stands right. Stand with him while he is right and part with him when he goes wrong.
Earth names in the Realms are more common than you may think. |
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2021 : 21:53:24
|
quote: Originally posted by Delnyn On an alternative storyline, I would have laughed if the Companions were reincarnated as cute fluffy animals and Drizzt were hungry.
To quote the writings of a very wise man: "Strangely enough, the only thought the potted plant had was 'Not again.'" |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2021 : 22:40:57
|
quote: Originally posted by Azar
It's easy to forget that raise dead is backed by a divine will; if a deity doesn't want a being revived, they're not coming back any more than a good priest - in a moment of insanity - is going to successfully flame strike an orphanage.
I should think it could involve two deities, myself -- the caster's and the recipient's. If a cleric of Mielikki tries to bring back a follower of Tempus, then I'd think that Mielikki and Tempus both would have to be fine with it -- Mielikki to approve the attempt, and then Tempus to approve releasing the soul back to the mortal world.
(Obviously, this wouldn't be an issue if both caster and recipient worshipped the same deity. And some deities might have agreements with their allies to "auto-approve" requests from each other's followers) |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 07 Jun 2021 22:42:30 |
|
|
HighOne
Learned Scribe
216 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2021 : 23:01:29
|
quote: Originally posted by TheIriaeban
quote: Originally posted by Delnyn On an alternative storyline, I would have laughed if the Companions were reincarnated as cute fluffy animals and Drizzt were hungry.
To quote the writings of a very wise man: "Strangely enough, the only thought the potted plant had was 'Not again.'"
It was a bowl of petunias. But yes. I would pay good money to read a story about Drizzt eating his Companions. Someone should pitch the idea to RAS. It could be a whole anthology. Treehouse of Horror XLII: Non-Canonical Tales from the Forgotten Realms. |
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2021 : 23:02:11
|
@Wooly
That goes back to the original problem: Mielikki shouldn't have had Regis' or Bruenor's souls/spirits to begin with. Moradin and Yondalla would have pipped up with "get your human-hugging mitts of our guys." And for them to come back, she should have had to come up with a better reason than "Look, they are a set. We can't just break 'em up." |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
Edited by - TheIriaeban on 07 Jun 2021 23:03:12 |
|
|
TheIriaeban
Master of Realmslore
USA
1289 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jun 2021 : 23:04:55
|
quote: Originally posted by HighOne
quote: Originally posted by TheIriaeban
quote: Originally posted by Delnyn On an alternative storyline, I would have laughed if the Companions were reincarnated as cute fluffy animals and Drizzt were hungry.
To quote the writings of a very wise man: "Strangely enough, the only thought the potted plant had was 'Not again.'"
It was a bowl of petunias. But yes. I would pay good money to read a story about Drizzt eating his Companions. Someone should pitch the idea to RAS. It could be a whole anthology. Treehouse of Horror XLII: Non-Canonical Tales from the Forgotten Realms.
Put me down for 2 copies. |
"Iriaebor is a fine city. So what if you can have violence between merchant groups break out at any moment. Not every city can offer dinner AND a show."
My FR writeups - http://www.mediafire.com/folder/um3liz6tqsf5n/Documents
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|