Death

[Monte Carlo]

What do folks think about death mechanics in games. Will PE have perma-death? Will it have resurrection with penalties? Will it have drag-the-corpse-to-the-temple-for-raising like BG/BG2/IWD?

 

I open the floor.

 

One thing I would like is that if my main character dies, my party takes me somewhere and gets me rezzed. But where? How much do they spend? What sort of funkiness do I get up to while I'm dead? Do they sell my best magic item?

 

I know there's going to be this soul idea, if that impacts on death Devs please feel free to tell us. xD

[BruceVC]

There must be some death penalty. Similar to BG and NWN, where you had to resurrect players that were killed or when you get Turned to Stone you needed Stone to Flesh. If not you stayed that way, certain poison should be able to kill you slowly and inexorably. Lets bring back the risk and required strategy to win combat.

 

But please not the auto-resurrection after combat features that DA1&2 used.

Edited September 17, 2012 by BruceVC

[Dermi]

I hope that PE won't have this lately popular mechanic that until whole party dies, nobody actually die. If a party member is killed, then he/she should stay that way until resurrected (if there will be such mechanic at all). Otherwise, it can lead to neglecting party members' deaths, because in the end they will simply stand up and dust off, ready to go further, so you don't have to work that hard to keep them alive.

But, if exploring the dungeon you have take in the account, that after one NPC dying your whole party becomes crippled (i.e. your melee fighter or wizard is dead and can't perform his duties), then it's completely different story. Yes, I know that probably having NPC "knocked out" at the end of the fight will revive them with almost none hit points, but still it's different to fight boss with only two party members instead of six (I'm making the numbers up ), compared to fighting the same boss with full party, maybe only a litlle weaker.

Oh, and there should be perma-death

[Meshugger]

Make ressurection/raise dead a high-level spell, only achievable through the highest tier of magic. Also like Monte stated, this game is about souls apparently, then let there be some punishment as well. Souls need their final rest as well.

[Bos_hybrid]

Make ressurection/raise dead a high-level spell, only achievable through the highest tier of magic. Also like Monte stated, this game is about souls apparently, then let there be some punishment as well. Souls need their final rest as well.

 

Agreed. Fights become more interesting when there is a chance your meat shield might not get back up.

[WestFlame]

Make ressurection/raise dead a high-level spell, only achievable through the highest tier of magic. Also like Monte stated, this game is about souls apparently, then let there be some punishment as well. Souls need their final rest as well.

 

Agreed. Fights become more interesting when there is a chance your meat shield might not get back up.

Agree, I actually prefer when player can die as well. No more death

[japol]

Definitely no auto-resurrection after combat for me.Things like Stone to Flesh and a high level Resurrection spell are good options to include

and they even add to the depth of the combat someone could argue.A Resurrection cost in gold if you don't have the spell is also fine with me.

 

Also since they will make souls an important part of the world,every time someone gets resurrected maybe their ''soul'' would shift towards a darker

side or something with tangible effects on the character stats or his ability to cast magic.

 

All of this however won't make a big difference in my opinion if you can just load a previous save for a member of your team to survive the battle.

These mechanics would tie really well with some kind of a risk/reward mechanism that would make death have a serious effect that is mostly unavoidable

but not as punishing of course as permadeath.What that mechanism is,i don't know Maybe not being able to save during battle?Use of checkpoints?

Edited September 17, 2012 by japol

[generic.hybridity]

I do like perma-death but I must admit that I used to just reload in games with permadeath until I had access to the resurrection spell. There is a lot more tension knowing that your party member will actually die rather than lie down for a moment.

 

If they could work the life death mechanic into the story like TNO in Planescape then I think it would be going in the right direction.

[MinotaurWarrior]

The problem I have with perma-death, is that it really amounts to "reload quite frequently", and I prefer games to menus / loading screens. I'd like it if they could figure out some other way to create consequences for your death, kinda like they did in PS:T, but different. Dragon Age handled this better than, say, NWN2, so maybe there could be something like that, but more severe? Like, after getting knocked out, you come back with 1/6th less of everything (max hp, your attributes, skills, et cetera) until you get treatment? This way, death has significant in-game consequences (unlike NWN2) and you'll actually end up playing with those consequences (unlike BG, especially BG1)

[Dermi]

The problem I have with perma-death, is that it really amounts to "reload quite frequently", and I prefer games to menus / loading screens. I'd like it if they could figure out some other way to create consequences for your death, kinda like they did in PS:T, but different. Dragon Age handled this better than, say, NWN2, so maybe there could be something like that, but more severe? Like, after getting knocked out, you come back with 1/6th less of everything (max hp, your attributes, skills, et cetera) until you get treatment? This way, death has significant in-game consequences (unlike NWN2) and you'll actually end up playing with those consequences (unlike BG, especially BG1)

OK, but what will stop you from reloading then, just because you don't want to have those NPCs crippled? Is it any different then reloading after a death of one of companions? Let's be honest - unless there will be save system from rougelikes (save only on exit), save/reload will be used exactly to achieve best possible outcome. Maybe not by all, but it will be.

What about tying deaths to some quests? I mean, make some additional quests for bringing NPCs back, or have some specific requirements to meet before resurrecting them (like getting this very rare resurrection spell component, or something)? It could contribute to enrich the game even more, IMHO.

[Bos_hybrid]

What about tying deaths to some quests?

 

No. Unless you can chose who bites it, or it can be avoided by previous choices.

[Dermi]

What about tying deaths to some quests?

 

No. Unless you can chose who bites it, or it can be avoided by previous choices.

Not what I meant. I don't want to have NPC dying because of overall plot (like in NWN2, for example), but what I wrote in the second part of that paragraph. Use companion's death as a quest starter (even a tiny one), not use quests to kill arbitrarily definied NPCs. Sorry, poor wording on my part.

 

edit:

So, like I said before, it may be like this, that resurrection spell must be specifically tailored for dead person and will require different components for different NPCs. That way we could have "death quest" tied to specific NPCs and after getting that component we would be able to revive them. Of course it would get boring to do it every time, so there might be two ways: we get the spell permanently, so after the quest we are able to revive NPCs without additional hassle, or the could be that second death is truly permanent We ran out of required component and there is not way to bring someone back. Or maybe souls of NPCs became to weak to get them back after second death.

Just speculating, since we don't know anything about spell and death system, after all.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Dermi

[duskwind]

I'd be happier with a resurrection-free world, with regular combat just temporarily crippling characters who get knocked out, and actual death only a possibility in special circumstances. Being able to bring people back from the dead at will rather cheapens death.

[Hoverdog]

Ideally, a Storm of Zehir-like death (agony when at 0 HPs, if not healed, death). And no Resurrection spell at all. At all. Magics like that completely break the setting. After all, if you can get revived for a thousand gold pieces, everyone that isn't a poor beggar should be essentially immortal (until death of old age) - but somehow that doesn't affect the world at all. See Baldur's Gates. How many times an important persona died permanently? Where were those spells then?

 

I could agree to Resurrection if the world was created in a way that reacted to this. But it's pointless to shape it according to a little gimmick.

[BruceVC]

I'd be happier with a resurrection-free world, with regular combat just temporarily crippling characters who get knocked out, and actual death only a possibility in special circumstances. Being able to bring people back from the dead at will rather cheapens death.

 

Okay but I suppose most of us looking are at the question in the context of the original cRPG like BG,NWN and Plancescape

 

In those games you didn't just die in Combat and needed to be resurrected. You could get poisoned, diseased, turn to stone and any of these could lead to death or a character being incapacitated. So the role of a healer was critical to address these ailments. Spells like Resurrection didn't just add to the realism but were very important as death could be very common

Edited September 17, 2012 by BruceVC

[Humodour]

Permanent death, please. With reloading.

 

Obsidian, I know you guys hate reloading. Just ****ing add it, please.

[Infinitron]

Storm of Zehir system is good. You had to get hit very hard to die there, because after knocking somebody unconscious your enemies generally chose another target.

[BruceVC]

Storm of Zehir system is good. You had to get hit very hard to die there, because after knocking somebody unconscious your enemies generally chose another target.

You have a good point, this is a compromise between permanent death and no death penalty.

[MinotaurWarrior]

OK, but what will stop you from reloading then, just because you don't want to have those NPCs crippled? Is it any different then reloading after a death of one of companions? Let's be honest - unless there will be save system from rougelikes (save only on exit), save/reload will be used exactly to achieve best possible outcome. Maybe not by all, but it will be.

What about tying deaths to some quests? I mean, make some additional quests for bringing NPCs back, or have some specific requirements to meet before resurrecting them (like getting this very rare resurrection spell component, or something)? It could contribute to enrich the game even more, IMHO.

It certainly doesn't stop you from reloading, but it allows you more of an option to play without reloading.

 

Whenever I think of this issue, I'm reminded of the early parts of Baldurs Gate 1 (and in particular, that one stupid wolf to the north of your starting position after the prologue). You really had no choice but to reload after almost every death, because of how exponential deaths would be (after minsc died, everyone was in for a hard time), and how you couldn't really afford to keep getting those resurrection spells because [Frequency of death]*[Cost of Resurrection] > [value of loot earned in the amount of time it'd take for one of your party members to die]. And so you get into the habit of always reloading, and get stuck in it.

 

In Dragon Age, I remember continuing on a lot, even after really racking up the injuries, because while they made things harder, forging on ahead seemed less inconvenient than reloading and playing a section all over again. Sure, there's the option of savescumming to get the absolute best possible outcome, but why bother?

 

Not that Dragon Age is the model we should be looking towards. I like those games (especially the first one) made death too inconsequential. It was only when I was being most careless, in the longest marathon dungeons, that the injuries started to rack up enough to really matter.

[Bos_hybrid]

What about tying deaths to some quests?

 

No. Unless you can chose who bites it, or it can be avoided by previous choices.

Not what I meant. I don't want to have NPC dying because of overall plot (like in NWN2, for example), but what I wrote in the second part of that paragraph. Use companion's death as a quest starter (even a tiny one), not use quests to kill arbitrarily definied NPCs. Sorry, poor wording on my part.

 

Ah, that's fine. Gives an incentive to not reload(for those that do), even give the player XP for doing it.

[Humanoid]

While generally I'm opposed to the resurrection mechanic in just about any game - it tends to have serious storytelling implications* - permadeath combined with the size of the expected party and relatively small party member pool in this title somewhat magnify the impact of the loss somewhat disproportionately. Can't really say I have a good answer to that, unfortunately.

 

 

* My issue with implementing a player-only resurrection mechanic like many RPGs do is that is undermines the idea of death, perhaps most famously in FF7, without actually gaining any appreciable gameplay benefit - all it feels like is a sexed up reload button. So just reload instead.

[Thraxen]

OK, but what will stop you from reloading then, just because you don't want to have those NPCs crippled? Is it any different then reloading after a death of one of companions? Let's be honest - unless there will be save system from rougelikes (save only on exit), save/reload will be used exactly to achieve best possible outcome. Maybe not by all, but it will be.

What about tying deaths to some quests? I mean, make some additional quests for bringing NPCs back, or have some specific requirements to meet before resurrecting them (like getting this very rare resurrection spell component, or something)? It could contribute to enrich the game even more, IMHO.

It certainly doesn't stop you from reloading, but it allows you more of an option to play without reloading.

 

Whenever I think of this issue, I'm reminded of the early parts of Baldurs Gate 1 (and in particular, that one stupid wolf to the north of your starting position after the prologue). You really had no choice but to reload after almost every death, because of how exponential deaths would be (after minsc died, everyone was in for a hard time), and how you couldn't really afford to keep getting those resurrection spells because [Frequency of death]*[Cost of Resurrection] > [value of loot earned in the amount of time it'd take for one of your party members to die]. And so you get into the habit of always reloading, and get stuck in it.

 

In Dragon Age, I remember continuing on a lot, even after really racking up the injuries, because while they made things harder, forging on ahead seemed less inconvenient than reloading and playing a section all over again. Sure, there's the option of savescumming to get the absolute best possible outcome, but why bother?

 

Not that Dragon Age is the model we should be looking towards. I like those games (especially the first one) made death too inconsequential. It was only when I was being most careless, in the longest marathon dungeons, that the injuries started to rack up enough to really matter.

 

I like the DA:O method of party members going down and coming back up injured, but the injuries never really seemed to be that major and they were so trivial to heal. Maybe a system like that, but with bigger penalties for injuries (e.g. Broken arm - can't use that arm to fight with, for example) and if you're able to say, splint the damage it still gives a penalty (you can use the arm, but only do 25% damage with a weapon/shields are much less effective/bow have an huge chance to miss or do less damage) until you can find a healer and properly fix the damage. Then if someone gets too injured, say after accumulating three injuries, regardless of whether you've treated them or not they can't fight or do much of anything until you get them fixed up.

[Mabster]

I think actual permanent death adds a lot to shorter games, like roguelikes, and to games where you have a healthy pool of backups to keep you going. Here though, the limited amount of companions probably means a death would be an automatic a fail state. 'Death = reload' just seems boring and uninspired.

 

I'm kinda hoping they stay away from the raise dead mechanics of Torment and others. The system works well enough I suppose, but does bring with it two bugbears. It will probably have implications on how involved the companions can be in the story, and more importantly, will need some form of contrivance for resurrecting the dead, which rarely does any favors for any setting. Trivializing death is not a smart move in my opinion.

 

I would prefer an injury mechanic

[Zephyr Falcon]

In BG1 and IWD 1&2 (before you got raise dead) the death of a party member was an instant reload for me.

In those games I constantly saved and reloaded quite frequently. And I liked it because every death was my fault! I used a wrong tactic, didn't use any buffs, had to weak a party or just tried to slay a dragon.

 

Now the worst thing about the various "Raise Dead" Spells in D&D and so on is that it's implications are never properly explored. How would you live if death held no fear? If you knew with absolute certainty that there's an afterlive?

PS:T did explore that issue in depth, in fact you could argue that the whole game was about that question.

 

The mechanic in NWN2: SoZ or DA:O is build to avoid super-frequent reloading or super-cheap resurrections (and their implications).

 

So I'm perfectly happy with an old-school way of doing things (quicksave - quickload), since I can't think of a good solution.

[novander]

Auto-res after combat works for me, but inlcude a heavy penalty until you get some real healing (and I don't just mean a chance to rest.) Seems a fair compromise between the reloaders and the realistic resurrectionists.