Rule ideas for Heroic Sacrifice of PC

Janx

Hero
this is a fork from RW's new thread on ideas for D&D that ain't never been done.

I think lots of us have sensed that it is tricky to pull off a heroic sacrifice scene in D&D. Under the rules, it isn't covered, and in fact is often imprudent, avoidable, or bypassable (ressurection and healing).

I'm thinking of scenes like from LotR: fellowship of the ring with Gandalf vs. the balrog, or Boromir vs. the Urukai.

Big, important deaths. Granted, in the Gandalf situation, he got better. And Boromir failed to save Pippin and Merry, though I suppose in the big picture, Frodo and Sam got away.

I think it might open up some play options if the game better enabled it. But it's got to be simple, and worthwhile for the players.

Here's one idea I have for a Heroic Sacrifice rule (in the more traditional sense):

Heroic Sacrifice
This would be a full-round action. If the PC is in a situation where he could sacrifice himself, to save the party by some feasible means (destroying the bridge he is on, holding up the collapsing ceiling while his friends escape, etc), then he executes this move.

The party is granted a free and safe escape from the area/encounter region (just like the Fellowship completely exited Moria). The surviving party takes no damage, and gets 1/4 XP for "defeat of the monster" providing the roleplay some sadness and loss, or say something in memoriam.

The player of the sacrificing PC gets something too. There's a 25% chance his PC isn't dead, but will remain out of play for at least a day or so. If the PC suceeds, he'll get 1/4 XP for his sacrifice (just like Gandalf leveled up and became a white wizard). If he fails, his new PC starts off with an additional bonus of 1/4 XP of the encounter's value. Either way, the player gets paid for making the sacrifice, especially as the player may have to sit out a bit before his old or new PC can be introduced.

Commentary: I like the concept, but would want to fine-tune the numbers, which I just pulled out of my hat as I wrote this. Assuming the high-end of level approriate encounter, I wouldn't want 1/4 XP to result in granting more than 1 level to the PC, especially a new one.

Heroic Death
If the PC just took damage that would put him below 1, he can declare it a Heroic Death. This means, his PC stays dead. Healing or raise dead won't bring him back. The party is roused/enraged by this, and gets a bonus to their attacks, AC, damage and saves equal to his level divided by 5, rounded up for the duration of the encounter. This basically means they'll kick some butt and might win the encounter. They'll be expected to role play some sadness or give a few proper words in memoriam after the fight. And the fallen warrior will need to be buried/burned/sent off on a boat with all his gear.

the Player's next PC will start off with some extra XP, money, or one item from the previous PC (assuming he's next of kin). the player chooses.

Commentary: another newly made up idea. The right XP or money amount would need to be determined. Also, the bonus to the party should have some thought given as to how much is too much.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I prefer to ban Raise and Resurection from my games. That way, when a PC dies it is permanent. If the player is able to make this a great heroic sacrifice, then all well and good. Of course sometimes dying is just pointless and grubby.

What I would do is give role-playing XP to players who act appropriately. Including giving a hefty XP bonus to the player who died heroically. Obviously this XP would be for their NEXT character. How much XP would depend on character level. But about 1/2 a level's worth for the character that died with the others getting less.

And of course there's the eternal argument about what is a Heroic Sacrifice and what isn't. Thefre's always one retarded player who will go on and effing on. But in general, I like the concept.

The old 1st Ed Oriental Adventures had a system whereby the Honour score of the deceased added to the stats of the next character. This positively encouraged suicidal tendancies. Er, I mean Heroic Sacrifice. But it meant the game went in the way one epeceted a Samurai game to go. (Haven't read the 3rd ed version, no idea if it stayed.)

Just some random thoughts. Cheers. :-)
 

I think it might open up some play options if the game better enabled it. But it's got to be simple, and worthwhile for the players.

We had several memorable "heroic death" moments in AD&D 1e with no play/rules options stated in the books per se.

One of the more memorable ones was the party has retrieved an amulet and is assembling it on a special altar in an attempt to send an evil dragon back to the Abyss. Said dragon shows up and spits lightning at the wizard and cleric as they put the final pieces of the amulet together. Party's paladin decides to sacrifice himself by jumping in front of the incoming lightning bolt. Player makes a saving throw (I believe that's what we had him do) and he succeeded. Character dies. Amulet assembled, ray of light or whatever shoots out and destroys dragon. End of adventure.

The "reward" was that players still remember the event even now (I still have a couple of players that participated in that adventure which was played around 1987 or so.)
 

One of the more memorable ones was the party has retrieved an amulet and is assembling it on a special altar in an attempt to send an evil dragon back to the Abyss. Said dragon shows up and spits lightning at the wizard and cleric as they put the final pieces of the amulet together. Party's paladin decides to sacrifice himself by jumping in front of the incoming lightning bolt. Player makes a saving throw (I believe that's what we had him do) and he succeeded. Character dies. Amulet assembled, ray of light or whatever shoots out and destroys dragon. End of adventure.

Not discounting the fun y'all had, but how much of that encounter outcome was enabled by DM fiat/interpretation/ad hoc ruling?

obviously, you didn't go into round by round narrative with initiative scores, but unless the paladin saved an action, or init was simultaneous, he likely wouldn't have been able to move into position by the time the dragon took his turn. Furthermore, lightning by the RAW (even then) would have blasted through him and hit the folks behind him just the same.

Additionally, the paladin made a save to make this all work. Normally saves keep you from getting hurt.

So what you got is a situation where the DM made up a houserule (probably a one-use-only rule) to handle it. Nothing wrong with that. But that reinforces my point. By the RAW, heroic death/sacrifice isn't enabled/plausible. A rule that helps smooth over that gap would open up that opportunity.

In any event, you've inspired me for another action type:

Take the hit
If a fellow character is about to get hit with an attack or spell, and you are within double your movement range and haven't already acted this round, you can rush up and take the hit for him. This will move that character away from the attacker in a 5' step and you take his place. You will automatically fail the save if any, however, nobody else will suffer any effect of the attack or spell. You are effectively shielding another with your body. This may be combined with Heroic Death if the damage kills your PC.
 

I love this concept. I just read a blog last night talking about this. I wish I remembered the name, but I'm pretty sure I found it through the RPG Blog Alliance.

Anyway, I would lower the chance of the PC being not dead to 10% (DrunkonDuty's idea about banning the resurrection effects is good to use too). Otherwise, you should end up with one in four PCs sacrificing themselves and showing up again later.

I'm less of a fan of Take the hit. I would rather allow the Heroic Sacrifice be expanded to allow Take the Hit as part of the PC's last action.
 

I love this concept. I just read a blog last night talking about this. I wish I remembered the name, but I'm pretty sure I found it through the RPG Blog Alliance.

Anyway, I would lower the chance of the PC being not dead to 10% (DrunkonDuty's idea about banning the resurrection effects is good to use too). Otherwise, you should end up with one in four PCs sacrificing themselves and showing up again later.

I'm less of a fan of Take the hit. I would rather allow the Heroic Sacrifice be expanded to allow Take the Hit as part of the PC's last action.

I intended that Heroic Death and Heroic Sacrifice would bar resurection effect (thought I said that in their description). Mainly as the point of those 2 actions being that your PC has to die (and and basically stay dead). I left a "chance of not being dead" on Heroic Sacrifice to cover the Gandalf scenario of coming back. Plus, fiction is chock full of "you thought I was dead" moments where the guy comes back later.

In some ways, Take the Hit was intended to be like Heroic Sacrifice. Heroic Sacrificebasically meant that if there was a plausible way to use your abilities, without really having the rules for it (destroying the bridge, or holding up the mine's support beam so the party can get through), you just do it, it works, and then you die.

Take the Hit mostly implied a fast movement action and blocking or absorbing all the damage meant for another party member (kind of like Grazzt's story). I didn't assume the damage would kill the PC, but it might. if it did, then it could be declared a Heroic Death, in order to score the XP and combat bonuses for the party to finish the monster without that PC.

Granted, I just made all these rules up while posting, and folks are welcome to use them, modify them or ignore them.
 

Not discounting the fun y'all had, but how much of that encounter outcome was enabled by DM fiat/interpretation/ad hoc ruling?

obviously, you didn't go into round by round narrative with initiative scores, but unless the paladin saved an action, or init was simultaneous, he likely wouldn't have been able to move into position by the time the dragon took his turn. Furthermore, lightning by the RAW (even then) would have blasted through him and hit the folks behind him just the same.

Additionally, the paladin made a save to make this all work. Normally saves keep you from getting hurt.

So what you got is a situation where the DM made up a houserule (probably a one-use-only rule) to handle it. Nothing wrong with that. But that reinforces my point. By the RAW, heroic death/sacrifice isn't enabled/plausible. A rule that helps smooth over that gap would open up that opportunity.

I actually think it's preferable for it to not be a codified action. It seems more poignant if it's not on a laundry list of actions that can be taken but something the player asks for special dispensation to do. He asks to be allowed to sacrifice himself with a special action. That's something special right there.
 

I actually think it's preferable for it to not be a codified action. It seems more poignant if it's not on a laundry list of actions that can be taken but something the player asks for special dispensation to do. He asks to be allowed to sacrifice himself with a special action. That's something special right there.

You may be right, but then again, that move may only have worked with that GM. It's not like this thread is overfilling with comparable stories of "how we didn't need a rule when my PC sacrificed himself..."

Just like the old "can't run away" debates, personally, I feel like heroic death is something that is hard to pull off within the rules.

So making small blocks of rules to cover just the kind of game play I'd be interested in seeing may open up players to doing it if they see benefit, now that they see possibility.

On the other hand, it hasn't been tested that players would actually use the heroic exit option. Or that somebody who didn't like his PC wouldn't be using it to gank his character so he could make a new one, and set up some contra-intended cycle of death.
 

Heroic sacrifices are the one place I blatantly and openly fudge the dice. If the PC is willing not only to die for something but go in with no chance of survival (or resurrection) at a dramatically appropriate time I rig the odds massively in their favour - but however I'm rigging the odds, they are not walking away.
 

Heroic sacrifices are the one place I blatantly and openly fudge the dice. If the PC is willing not only to die for something but go in with no chance of survival (or resurrection) at a dramatically appropriate time I rig the odds massively in their favour - but however I'm rigging the odds, they are not walking away.

how often has that happened in your games? Is this codified as a house rule? Do the players know you would do this IF they ASKED?

In my view, most folks would answer seldom/never, no and no.

Which is where my thinking leads to "what if we had a few simple rules to signal that option is viable and available"
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top