Enabling True Resurrection on certain NPCs/Locations


  • Narfell DM

    What the title says, this is what we've have been discussing among DMs for quite some time now. Do keep in mind that if this gets implemented there will be two consequences:

    • A drastical reduction of xp gains during certain DM's events.
    • TR will cost a large amount of gold.

    We'd like to hear the opinion of our player base. Please vote. Do comment if you want to explain your decision better.


  • Narfell PG

    I voted yes, but wonder about the logic of reducing DM event XP, if the cost is absolutely ridiculous, then few people will use it. Then those who don't use it, and opt for a standard ress because they can't afford it, are then punished because they accrue the lost exp back slower.


  • Narfell DM

    Last 24 hours to vote. Do it now if you haven't.



  • That's weird...it wasn't there until I refreshed the page by sorting. Thanks...


  • Narfell DM

    @speedy_z_ Right above your last reply if you Sorted by Newest to Oldest the posts:

    alt text



  • Sorry, I must be blind. Where's the link to vote in the poll?



  • My two cents: I've been playing the same character (Shesarai) most of the time for seven RL years. I enjoy her story and personality so much that I've largely given up playing my earlier characters, and only have one other (Mathell) that I play with newbies. A year ago, Shesarai reached level 15 for the first time. It lasted five days! Then a series of unfortunate deaths dropped me all the way down to level 12. After most of a year working on it, I'm back to level 14, but still need about 90,000 xp to reach level 15 again. Shesarai has been everywhere, so gets no more exploration xp (except brand new maps), and she gets very little combat xp. So the only way to earn back all the lost xp has been from DM events. I love those. I also spend a great deal of time adding plot to the forums, for which the DMs have compensated me from time to time.

    Consequently, I voted for the TR Resurrection. If it costs 20,000 gold, I can afford it once, maybe twice if I sell a lot of the gems I've been accumulating. That's worth it since each death usually sets me back at least four months. I won't change my play style. I'm usually up for going to very dangerous places so long as I have a good group with me. I can't survive melee against powerful brutes, so I need that. It's good RP.

    AubreyMaturin


  • Narfell DM

    While I can only speak for myself, I will not be reducing the amount of XP I offer for my own events, but what I would certainly be thinking about is increasing the level of challenge and make my controlled spawns behave in a more realistic fashion. If there are archers they'll be more likely to try and pincushion enemy mages/healers, the heavy hitting boss might be less likely to switch focus from a near death PC without a legitimate distraction, unconventional strategies and planning might become more necessary to achieve victory.


  • Narfell DM

    @speedy_z_ said in Enabling True Resurrection on certain NPCs/Locations:

    By the way, when does this poll officially end? I still have not voted because I wanted to read what other folks were thinking.

    Poll is closing in three days (according to my 4 days old post saying I'd have it open for another week).



  • I've not voted yet either, but I'm starting to lean towards the benefits of the suggestion. We may have a smaller server population than way back when, but we also have quite a high level bunch of PCs around. Many players enjoy the thrill of adventure and like to venture out with their characters - but generally I'd say less so, the higher level and more established the character is. In part, it's natural - the basic equipment drive is finished, they've got enough gold, have been there and done that in most all maps. Now, with more maps and spawn added to cater to this crowd, the opportunity is there to adventure with the same thrill as before, though many don't seem inclined to take it.

    While I don't think the OOC fear of dying is the sole reason for that, or the sole fix, it could certainly be part of the equation. It's important that players know how to have fun on the server when there's not a DM around. If those that love adventuring best sit around the commons for OOC reasons, neither they nor those that sit there for enjoying the more social aspects of the game will have a good time.



  • Other thoughts...

    I’m pretty sure most people will vote for this because it’s a freebee and it’s VERY helpful on the individual level. However, on reflection, I’m starting to think it will harm the server as a whole. There are tons of servers out there where death is a minor inconvenience. One of the best things about Narfell (and sets it apart) is that death is significant. Good, that’s how it should be. This is supposed to be a RP server and power gaming should be discouraged. If xp loss is an issue, the death penalty from raises could be lowered, again. Do not lower the death penalty to zero by bringing TRs into the mix.

    The first post says, "A drastical reduction of xp gains during certain DM's events." - If DM dropped xp is reduced to compensate for having TRs, what's the point? It's a wash. Well, actually, it's only a wash for characters who die and get TRs. For everyone else it will be a loss because of the reduced DM xp drops. Are other DM actions going to change to compensate for TRs?

    The availability of TRs are going to encourage more power gaming. Tell: “Let’s run area x for phat loot and xps!” After the tenth run of the week, someone screws up and dies. No worries, they get a TR, the cost is easily covered by the loot they gathered on the previous runs, and they also gained a level (or more) in the process - win/win for the character. The next day, they are out doing it again. This already happens, to a lesser extent, but that one death would have sent them back to square one - balance.

    Level creep is definitely a thing, and TRs will make it a lot worse. Right now, we have a handful of high-level characters (18+). Sure, with the xp drip, explore xp, new areas with combat xp, more players, etc. this number is bound to increase. However, with TR, this number will increase a lot faster. It’s not a problem except that some builds (mainly caster builds) get so OP that they break the game at higher levels. That’s a problem...except for the players playing the OP characters, I guess.

    I get it. Dying in Narfell sucks, big time! Believe me, I know this first hand. But, it's not the end of the world. Even if you lose a level, your character is still pretty whole - it's not a HUGE difference (mechanically speaking - RP-wise, maybe).

    If the goal is to get more characters to explore the most dangerous areas, there are MANY other ways to solve that problem without opening the can of worms of TRs. It’s unnecessary.

    By the way, when does this poll officially end? I still have not voted because I wanted to read what other folks were thinking.



  • Well after my last 2 deaths at level 16, it is painfully slow to get it back. No real exploration xp anymore, No real combat xp anymore, so basically you are left with DM events and the xp drip. The DMs are great about dropping in a doing things, especially if you are going out and doing things. Play times and time zones are always fun to juggle to get a group together. Perhaps I am a power gamer at heart, I am 20% RP and 80% Action. I do not really like long involved multi-session political intrigue, because I miss 80% of what is going on. To say I am not playing my character differently because of those painful deaths, would be a lie. I still like to go out, but it becomes odd in a way. I withold attacks in support often because I do not want to get ftargeted, so I often just watch. Since most parties do not use scouts anymore, I often just drift about the party. You could say he has gained wisdom from his previous deaths, but that is not how I really like to play him. He is brash, mouthy and likes actions....

    That all being said, we need to do something to stir things up. Gold is not really an issue to most higher levels, things to do can be. Maybe a trip to the Illithid city would spark some interest with a TR possibility.

    On another note, "The story" is important, but few post anything anymore, me included. It is rare to see a rumor, not posted by a DM. Rare to see a characters story, (yes some still do). Rare to see posts in the guild forums, I hope others are busier than the one I am in.

    I think TR deserves at least a trial....but we need to think about what will breath life into the story of our server/forums somehow.



  • @caoimh said in Enabling True Resurrection on certain NPCs/Locations:

    To those worried about power creep, I will point out that Narfell allowed true ressurection for many years back in the 'hardcore' days, for the sum of 6500 gold. The reason it was removed was not due to power creep, but rather at the time due to concerns it was unfairly disadvantageous to new players (this was when we had a constant stream of them and you had to queue to log in), who had neither the gold nor the connections to afford the cost of resurrection.

    I think that was a legitimate reason to remove it then, and I also think it is no longer a concern anymore given the age of the game and the fact that the new player experience overall is much better today than it was back then (how many level 1 players died to rats in that barn never to return?). Given it was actually a feature of the hardcore days, I don't see a reason to consider it too big a deal where it comes to power creep.

    I do recall that one of Maya's quest rewards was a free future TR by Daisy.


  • Narfell DM

    To those worried about power creep, I will point out that Narfell allowed true ressurection for many years back in the 'hardcore' days, for the sum of 6500 gold. The reason it was removed was not due to power creep, but rather at the time due to concerns it was unfairly disadvantageous to new players (this was when we had a constant stream of them and you had to queue to log in), who had neither the gold nor the connections to afford the cost of resurrection.

    I think that was a legitimate reason to remove it then, and I also think it is no longer a concern anymore given the age of the game and the fact that the new player experience overall is much better today than it was back then (how many level 1 players died to rats in that barn never to return?). Given it was actually a feature of the hardcore days, I don't see a reason to consider it too big a deal where it comes to power creep.


  • Narfell DM

    @crazymojo for now, we are focusing on implementing this on NPCs only.



  • One thing I would like to point out is that making it available via NPC only is an important component of this proposal.

    As an example, say you’re on a great quest. This could either be a “Deep in the Underdark” player driven quest, or a DM quest in far off lands.

    You die in the middle of the adventure.

    At this point, you have a very important choice. Either forego the rest of the adventure and likely a share of the loot for the True Res once you get back home, or take a regular resurrection from an accompanying player, lose the XP and continue the quest.

    Death is still very real there.

    There are some quests where I would take the regular resurrection and continue. Diadne’s Sea of Glass quest is one good example. That quest was absolutely critical for the character’s development, and there is no way I would have said, “Quest over. I’m keeping my level and losing 25k gold”. Absolutely no way.

    I don’t see TR as necessarily a bad thing. I have reservations due to power creep, but the power creep ship sailed into port a long time ago and isn’t going away. DM’s have been very lenient recently, and the presence of TR is only going to mean that they don’t have to be. It might also deplete some of the overflowing bank accounts some players have too.



  • Can Non NPCs cast this (with a very expensive component?)


  • Narfell DM

    Thanks fo the discussion we are having here. Do keep in mind the whole situation for a True Resurrection to be granted via an NPC:

    1. The unfortunate PC must (ideally) be in a party.

    2. One or more PCs, survivor of what killed the unfortunate PC, took the corpse to said high priest in order to cast the spell. You spend X amount of Ks and that's it.

    Now think as if more than two or rather the whole party was killed and the implications.

    We are discussing, among DMs, other topics regarding death of PCs. We want to make Narfell better by re-thinking this kind of things, specially when more content has been added and only few enjoy it because sometimes it's not completely an IC reason not going outside and take the risks on an adventure, it's more an OOC statement, deny it or not, about thinking months, years, decades of progress with one of your PCs could be lost in the blink of an eye.

    Don't forget to vote, because this is a poll after all!



  • @winterhawk99 Agreed on the concept of true death. But there a few things that can never make this idea possible to be implemented.

    1. Death from lag/connection issue (unless DMs are willing to risk give in to false or true statements each time and revive PCs).
    2. The player wants his PC's story to end after he has offered what he had in mind. A story to be told is the most important concept in roleplay. Having this ability is fun.

    Having said that the lack of consequence is certain to lead PCs roleplay differently than what their creation intended to serve. Lack of death leads to reckless decisions the PCs would not take otherwise. I am pretty sure OOCness will prevail. And this fact is confirmed every single time important moments challenge the players. A trial period is the safest way to test it, and I am in fact curious about how this will affect the players.



  • Speaking from a personal standpoint, the risks I take or avoid taking with my characters are based in their own personalities and motivations, as well as my own preferences as a player. I attempt to treat each PC as though they were a real, living, breathing person, generally not braving mortal peril for the sake of it (though some are more dare-devilish than others). Would that change with the proposed alteration? Probably not, though if it adds to the overall enjoyment of the server without turning it to hack-and-slash then I'd be fine with it. My explorer character for one, means to see ALL the server at some point - the limitations to that are usually a scarcity of players and time, rather than a fear of death and level loss as such. But perhaps the proposed changes would make those that are available more prone to take the extra risk - could be something to test at least on a trial basis.


Locked