Jump to content


Photo

Can the faithless be resurected in the Realms?


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 Efreet

Efreet
  • Member
  • 211 posts

Posted 19 August 2004 - 04:53 AM

Committing suicide is a big hint that she may not wish to return.


So, someone would have to go to wherever she is (through planar travel or by dying himself) and convince her to come back before the spell is cast?

Could be a starting point for interesting plot :turnip2:
Then she saw his eyes, red and mad as hell. And in that moment she knew that he could kill anyone, no matter how strong. Madness, true madness could put a fist through a plank.

#22 icelandismine

icelandismine

    Support your 2nd Amendment rights!

  • Member
  • 280 posts

Posted 19 August 2004 - 07:05 AM

Almost certainly true.  The problem is that so many dramatic plots depend on the lost lover, the fallen friend, the loved one beyond reach, etc.

It's very tough to write a tale of loss when the Death of X can be fixed at any time by a visit to the local priest. At most, you can get some mild pathos out of a poor family trying to save up to bring back a loved one, but then that says something dark about the motivations of "Good" priests.

For that matter, the certainty of an afterlife makes many sorts of story less viable.

For this dialog, I need a tragedy. If it's trite, I'll have to live with that. 


See, the problem is, most things can be fixed in the FR by finding a mage or cleric and having them cast X spell for Y money. Money is the major issue; almost everyone in the FR has never even had a quarter of the money to raise someone at once. Perhaps, you can make a tragety about a rich family, and about how money can't buy everything...
"What's wrong with being a trigger-happy, nationalistic, meat-eatin' neo-con who likes to shoot things, shoot 'em dead?"
-Me

"It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived."
- General George S. Patton

#23 kirkjobsluder

kirkjobsluder
  • Member
  • 222 posts

Posted 19 August 2004 - 01:50 PM

2nd Edition comments:

2nd Edition didn't allow for ....

Actually, 2nd edition allowed for almost anything within the bounds of roleplaying. It should always be remembered that higher-level clerical spells are a boon from a deity and could fail if the cleric failed to roleplay the required request.

#24 Zandilar

Zandilar
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 19 August 2004 - 01:54 PM

Heya,

Almost certainly true.  The problem is that so many dramatic plots depend on the lost lover, the fallen friend, the loved one beyond reach, etc.

It's very tough to write a tale of loss when the Death of X can be fixed at any time by a visit to the local priest. At most, you can get some mild pathos out of a poor family trying to save up to bring back a loved one, but then that says something dark about the motivations of "Good" priests.

For that matter, the certainty of an afterlife makes many sorts of story less viable.

For this dialog, I need a tragedy. If it's trite, I'll have to live with that. 


See, the problem is, most things can be fixed in the FR by finding a mage or cleric and having them cast X spell for Y money. Money is the major issue; almost everyone in the FR has never even had a quarter of the money to raise someone at once. Perhaps, you can make a tragety about a rich family, and about how money can't buy everything...



Unlike their 2nd Ed counterparts (which only require the cleric's holy symbol and some holy water), the 3rd Ed "raise dead" spell line all require a costly component. (The BG2 versions of the 2nd Ed spells require no components at all!)

Raise Dead (the 5th level spell) requires 500gp worth of diamonds.
Resurrection (the 7th level spell) requires 10,000gp worth of diamonds.
True Resurrection (the 9th level spell) requires 25,000gp worth of diamonds.

Most good churches would probably charge that as a minimum, but also they generally charge for the time and effort as well (:rolleyes: I don't agree with that idea if the person concerned can produce the actual component required - but donations are always well appreciated) - in the case of Raise Dead it would be 450gp on top of the 500gp of diamonds.

Now, take into concideration the number of 9th level clerics (the minimum level required to cast Raise Dead) in any given city - and you start to see that getting someone resurrected is not so easy. However, having said that, Athkatla is well and truely big enough to have several 9th level clerics... And if this story/plot involves the PC, they're almost certainly going to have a high enough level cleric in the party to perform the resurrection anyway (Jaheira advances VERY quickly as a Druid and generally has Harper's Call very shortly after the game commences, for example).

Sometimes there are reasons why writers ignore game rules, because generally speaking game rules don't make a good plot. You could just say it doesn't work and give no justification at all - after all Aerie doesn't get her wings back by casting a Regeneration spell (and restoring lost limbs is exactly the purpose of that spell). That's definitely not the best way to handle it, though.

#25 Bri

Bri
  • Modder
  • 1734 posts

Posted 19 August 2004 - 05:18 PM

At least Bobtokyo doesn't wish to use that old trick of resurrecting an enemy and killing them over and over for exp ;-)

"I read about the evils of drinking, so I gave it up." "You gave up drinking?" "No, I gave up reading..."


#26 Zandilar

Zandilar
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 19 August 2004 - 11:46 PM

Heya,

2nd Edition comments:

2nd Edition didn't allow for ....

Actually, 2nd edition allowed for almost anything within the bounds of roleplaying. It should always be remembered that higher-level clerical spells are a boon from a deity and could fail if the cleric failed to roleplay the required request.


We're talking about a CRPG here, and RP is a very minor part of a CRPG. A computer can't make judgement calls about RPing. :) And it would be odd to have a raise dead not work for an NPC when it never fails for an NPC in the PC's party (that hasn't been totally destroyed).

#27 kirkjobsluder

kirkjobsluder
  • Member
  • 222 posts

Posted 20 August 2004 - 06:10 AM

Heya,

2nd Edition comments:

2nd Edition didn't allow for ....

Actually, 2nd edition allowed for almost anything within the bounds of roleplaying. It should always be remembered that higher-level clerical spells are a boon from a deity and could fail if the cleric failed to roleplay the required request.


We're talking about a CRPG here, and RP is a very minor part of a CRPG. A computer can't make judgement calls about RPing. :) And it would be odd to have a raise dead not work for an NPC when it never fails for an NPC in the PC's party (that hasn't been totally destroyed).

I think the goal of a good writer/scripter for CPRGs is to provide for sensible roleplaying. Otherwise you might as well just play doom.

#28 Zandilar

Zandilar
  • Member
  • 57 posts

Posted 20 August 2004 - 04:01 PM

I think the goal of a good writer/scripter for CPRGs is to provide for sensible roleplaying.  Otherwise you might as well just play doom.



No, the job of the writer/scripter is to provide an entertaining experience within the confines of an interactive story. :) The way dialogue works in BG2 allows for a small amount of choice, but not the freedom of true Role Playing. If I want to do something not covered by dialogue/game scripts, I can't. I'm stuck with the options provided.

I must say there have been many many times when given options in dialogue (both in the main game and within mods) that I've gone, "but this character wouldn't say any of those things, where's the xyz option?"

Anyway, that's way off topic for this thread. :)

ObOT: In 2nd Ed, Raise Dead strips a point of Con from the person being raised... But I don't think it does that in BG2...

#29 Feanor

Feanor

    The Elven Lord

  • Member
  • 1808 posts

Posted 21 August 2004 - 06:38 AM

ObOT: In 2nd Ed, Raise Dead strips a point of Con from the person being raised... But I don't think it does that in BG2...


It does not, that's for sure. ;)