Suggestion: Rework the death/raise mechanic

[zhazz]

Branching off from gedweyignasia's request for feedback regarding a change to the penality surrounding death, I have decided to start a new topic based on months of talks and discussion with a few other players regarding the whole death and resurrection mechanic.

As is mentioned in gedweyignasia's topic by a few other players, several players, myself included, do not treat death as actually dying, but rather being knocked out.



Reasoning

I cannot speak for the others, but in my own case I don't find it reasonable that a character can die multiple times, and be brought back repeatedly. Least of all be given a "get out of afterlife for free" card by the god of death, Myrkul. It doesn't make sense, and seems a wholly unnecessary mechanic. If my character dies on a solo trip, I treat it as them having had to retreat. If my character dies while in a group, I treat it as them having been knocked out. Similarly I always rename my universal Raise Dead scrolls to Smelling Salts to fit with my aforementioned treatment of "death".

The above is the basis for the suggestion(s) I am going to make here, and while I am aware some of them may require some (extensive) work by the developers, I do wholly believe that it will ultimately be for the betterment of the server. For each suggestion I will attempt to explain what positive change it will bring, without alluding to the reason. The reason for all of the suggestions is stated in the paragraph above.

I have decided to divide the suggestions into separate sections, with each building upon the latter. As such anything suggested in the "Character death" section, assumes that the suggestions in the "Knocking a character out" section would also be implemented.

Knocking a character out
This section revolves around a general change of the death mechanic to knock a character out, rather than sending them to the Fugue as a dead character.

1. Knock characters out per standard, rather than sending them to the Fugue
Several players on the server are heavily invested in the RP surrounding their character. Some for the story. Some for the emotions. Some for the bonds they form with other characters. With this change these players will be able to follow along in the RP done surrounding their character falling in battle. No longer are they disconnected from the reactions and actions by their comrades.

2. Change universal Raise Dead scrolls to Stabilize/Smelling Salts
Clerics and other divine classes, capable of causing Raise Dead and/or Resurrection have been heavily sidelined ever since the universal Raise Dead scrolls were added to the game. With this change they get some of their territory back, while allowing non-divine classes to still save a knocked out or dying ally before it is too late. Just like the current Raise Dead option this will also set the target's Hit Points to 1.

3. Make a knocked out character suffer fatigue once they get back up
When a character goes down in combat, they will experience some after-effects once they come to, such as headaches and nausea. Whether through passive regeneration, Stabilize, or Smelling Salts, a time-limited non-removable Fatigue effect added to the character will help maintain the immersion. Rather than standing right back up, and going back to battle at full strength, they are now slightly weakened. Even just a movement speed penalty, rather than Fatigue, will help to properly display the recovery period they require.

Character death
This section handles the issue of a character actually dying, and the circumstances of them being brought back to life.

4. Let the fallen character's player choose death/knockout, but don't Fugue on death
This puts the choice in the player's hands, and lets them decide if/when their character dies. Death can be a powerful story-telling tool, and just like the first suggestion, this will allow a player to experience the outcome of their character's death.

5. Give the player of a dead character the option to reject a resurrection
In lore it is possible for a character to ignore the attempt to raise them. Usually this happens because they feel they have accomplished all they wished in life, and thus have no desire to return to life. Other times it is due to the one attempting a resurrection being of a faith too misaligned with the dead character. A follower of Ilmater, for example, would be unlikely to accept a resurrection from a priestess of Loviatar.

A whole new branch of RP opens up, with this change. A seer might be called in to attempt to contact the spirit of the deceased, and figure out why they are unwilling to return to life. Or closer examination of the body might uncover clues that reveal or hint at a certain faith/pantheon being necessary to bring the character back to life.

6. Require multiple castings of Raise Dead from scrolls too
Use Magic Device is already plenty strong. Currently a single casting of Raise Dead from a scroll is all that is required for the spell to work. Whereas divine classes that actually cast that spell innately, are required to perform multiple castings. This fixes that issue, and levels the playing-field. It will also increase the monetary cost of casting these spells through Use Magic Device, making it much cheaper to find someone capable of innately casting Raise Dead.

7. Make Raise Dead from a scroll add a Level Drain to the target
Dying and being brought back to life is a harrowing experience, where the raised will require time to reorient themselves and reconnect with their body. By adding a non-removable time-limited Level Drain to the raised character, the immersion of such a harrowing experience is kept.

8. Remove Resurrection as a Scroll option
Raise Dead brings the character back to life with 1 Hit Points, and a Level Drain. Resurrection brings them back with full Hit Points, and no adverse effects. By removing Resurrection as a scroll option divine classes regain more of their territory and usefulness. Without one in the group, a new choice is presented to the survivors: Carry their fallen companion to a healer, or raise them in a weakened state. Both options can be difficult to chose, depending on where the group currently is, and their remaining resources.

Other mechanics
This section aims to handle the issue of a solo play, and death mechanic related issues not covered in the above.

9. Let a fallen character decide what to do
Tying into suggestions 1 and 4 above this is all about player choice. When a character is knocked out, they should be presented with an option to either: Remain knocked out, die, or respawn at a safe location. With the possibility of changing their choice later on. Except for re-spawning, of course. No changing that.

This allows a fallen character to wait in place for someone to come find them, just like they can now; or re-spawn at a safe location, also just like they can now. But without the need to go to the Fugue at all, as to allow various types of RP mentioned above.

Re-spawning in this case should be treated as having retreated from the battle, and the hardships endured during the escape is what takes away experience. Adding a penalty in the form of Fatigue or Level Drain should only be considered if the loss of XP would otherwise de-level the character, or if they are already max level.

10. Remove the Fugue and Myrkul
With all of the above, there is now no need for the Fugue or Myrkul to exist as an area on the server. It will free up (some) resources, and also remove any OOC knowledge of a character having died.

[Ewe]

Good stuff just want to chime in that we have a system on bgtscc called 'permadeath mode' which is an opt in system in the Nexus at level 1 with Death. Basically it makes a roll when you are "knocked out" and decides for you if you're permanently dead or not. Which prevents you from leaving the Nexus ever again on that PC. It's actually really cool because Myrkul has new dialogue with you that your time is up.

Also, we already removed the City of Judgment which was the main resource hog of Fugue. I'd suggest keeping it in still for DM's or plots that might take you there or if you really end up dead somehow.

Lastly, I think the PvP death mechanics could use some love, too.

[Hoihe]

As long as there's an insurance/guarantee that no matter what, even if someone chooses to "die" rather than be "knocked out", they can resurrect without external aid as they can currently - it looks like a good system.

Without that guarantee however, I can see this system prone to abuse by bad actors.

[EasternCheesE]

I like the initial topic starter's post, the system sounds reasonable and good. The only suggestion i have on that is adding more negative HP before PC dies based on their CON score. Right now, if someone goes below -12 hp, they die. If that would be increased (so some 30 CON PC would die at -120 hp), that would also allow for fun times trying to kill mobs before friend dies or suffering hits while trying to lure them away from fallen friend and stabilize him.

[Thaelis]

I definitely like the idea of less deaths, since it is pretty tedious to RP dying repeatedly and it begins to get a bit silly.

However...

The consequences still need to be just as harsh as if you had died. Otherwise there's no risk. Why wouldn't anyone go and repeatedly lemming themselves at the dragon a dozen times a day until they got lucky and beat it?

Small xp loss, perhaps (2*level^2), and 12-24 hour debuff. I don't think movement speed decrease is enough, it would be better if it's something that affects fighting ability, like -2 attack/damage/saves/skills.

As a slow leveler, the current loss of 100/level is already a big hit. If I lose 2200xp that could be 3-4 days playtime. Less xp loss and an 'injured' cool down period where you could still RP but not fight would be great from my standpoint.

I'd be fine with death de-leveling. Especially if the xp hit was a bit smaller.

[Kitunenotsume]

Another option that had been previously implemented elsewhere:

Vitality System:
Utilized on Sundren, a character had a metric of basically 'death-HP'. It had a maximum value of 100, and each death cost 30 vitality, while replenishing at a fixed quantity per time while alive (something like 1 vitality every hour or two). This basically provided a character a sustainable 'budget' of about 3 deaths a week - enough to support adventurous risk taking or server quirks, but providing good reason not to go right back out into risk if one fell.
Hitting 0 vitality (or less) meant that the player could not self-revive, but other options were available namely in the form of spells: PC-cast revival spells transferred vitality from the caster to the target, potentially pushing an otherwise 'permed' character back into a positive vitality if a powerful enough spell was used. Raise Dead restored 10 vitality, Resurrection restored 20, and True Resurrection restored the full 30 - but each was taken from the caster's own pool representing the effort and investment involved (plus material costs), so you can't just sit on the side and spam revives.
If the spell would raise the target back into a positive vitality the spell functioned, but Raise Dead on a target at -20 vitality would fizzle (with no indication if it was strength or rejection) with all costs (both vitality and gp) expended on fizzle.
It is worth noting that NPC clerics did not restore vitality, and the system also didn't fully impact characters below level 10 (relevant to note that Sundren had relatively few characters over level 20, 10% XP lost on self-revive, and level-loss from such XP over level 10). There was also a utility to check one's vitality via chat-command.

This system had no further mechanical implications that I can recall outside situations with negative Vitality (though @Thaelis might correct me), but was primarily an incentive to take your knocks when you got them and sit out for a bit. It is agnostic to being RPed either death or simply being knocked out, but represents the character needing time to recover from their unfortunate experience or risking more permanent disability through repeated misfortune.


Regarding some points in the OP

1. Negative HP is definitely a mechanical thing, but short of marking a character as 'dead', they are still a valid target for AI. I've seen it done where PCs fall in place until *everyone* in the area is down for the count, but IIRC it's not as easily compatible with a Fugue system.

2. Changing the name does not really solve the concern if the functionality still exists. This one is more a side effect of the UMD heavy meta and would be highly nontrivial to resolve. Additionally, considering that the fee for NPC revival is a paltry 500 gp, it can be cheaper and faster to skip scrolls and Divine PCs entirely.

3, 7. Negative Level for a duration seems reasonable here, though designing a new debuff that ignores Greater Restoration might be tricky.

4. See 1, though it is worth considering that the 'Fugue' is validly considered a "brush with Death" [link] or simply somewhere for the player to be unconscious and unaware, with no canonical significance on if you are actually dead or not.

5. Definitely support, having an "Accept/Reject" UI would also address some occasional issues of raising someone who hasn't loaded into the Fugue yet, or is in a conversation. Per SRD, the target knows the "Name, alignment, and patron deity (if any)" of the caster [link], all of which we can presumably present.

6. Not really new or unique to Raise Dead/Resurrection, since it applies to things like Sending as well. This has been discussed and brought up previously. [link]

7. see 3.

8. As a healer who practically never needs Resurrection during normal business, I appreciate having a scroll handy. Removing scrolls seems more like a heavy-handed way to address the UMD meta (see 2 and 6).


An additional consideration Regarding the NPC revival, on a topic previously discussed elsewhere (probably in the "Setting Immersion and ... things" thread):
It is currently the policy that such a utility exists for lowbies to make recovery and restoration cheap. this is reasonable. However, in making divine PCs at least comparable, and excusing the potential to apply gold-costs to such spells (raise dead, res, true rez), would be scaling NPC costs. For example, 500 GP for anyone 10 and under, up to few thousand for an epic level character such that a PC is strictly cheaper.
One such method could be doubling the cost per 5 levels, so 1-10 is 500 GP, 11-15 is 1000 GP, 16-20 is 2000 gp, 21-25 is 4000 gp, and 26+ is 8000 gp per NPC revival. Including such a change without addressing caster costs would be ill-advised, however.

[Hoihe]

Another option that had been previously implemented elsewhere:

Vitality System:
Utilized on Sundren, a character had a metric of basically 'death-HP'. It had a maximum value of 100, and each death cost 30 vitality, while replenishing at a fixed quantity per time while alive (something like 1 vitality every hour or two). This basically provided a character a sustainable 'budget' of about 3 deaths a week - enough to support adventurous risk taking or server quirks, but providing good reason not to go right back out into risk if one fell.
Hitting 0 vitality (or less) meant that the player could not self-revive, but other options were available namely in the form of spells: PC-cast revival spells transferred vitality from the caster to the target, potentially pushing an otherwise 'permed' character back into a positive vitality if a powerful enough spell was used. Raise Dead restored 10 vitality, Resurrection restored 20, and True Resurrection restored the full 30 - but each was taken from the caster's own pool representing the effort and investment involved (plus material costs), so you can't just sit on the side and spam revives.
If the spell would raise the target back into a positive vitality the spell functioned, but Raise Dead on a target at -20 vitality would fizzle (with no indication if it was strength or rejection).
It is worth noting that NPC clerics did not restore vitality, and the system also didn't fully impact characters below level 10 (relevant to note that Sundren had relatively few characters over level 20). There was also a utility to check one's vitality via chat-command.

This system had no further mechanical implications that I can recall (though @Thaelis might correct me), but was primarily an incentive to take your knocks when you got them and sit out for a bit. It is agnostic to being RPed either death or simply being knocked out, but represents the character needing time to recover from their unfortunate experience or risking more permanent disability through repeated misfortune.


Regarding some points in the OP

1. Negative HP is definitely a mechanical thing, but short of marking a character as 'dead', they are still a valid target for AI. I've seen it done where PCs fall in place until *everyone* in the area is down for the count, but IIRC it's not as easily compatible with a Fugue system.

2. Changing the name does not really solve the concern if the functionality still exists. This one is more a side effect of the UMD heavy meta and would be highly nontrivial to resolve. Additionally, considering that the fee for NPC revival is a paltry 500 gp, it can be cheaper and faster to skip scrolls and Divine PCs entirely.

3, 7. Negative Level for a duration seems reasonable here, though designing a new debuff that ignores Greater Restoration might be tricky.

4. See 1, though it is worth considering that the 'Fugue' is validly considered a "brush with Death" [link] or simply somewhere for the player to be unconscious and unaware, with no canonical significance on if you are actually dead or not.

5. Definitely support, having an "Accept/Reject" UI would also address some occasional issues of raising someone who hasn't loaded into the Fugue yet, or is in a conversation. Per SRD, the target knows the "Name, alignment, and patron deity (if any)" of the caster [link], all of which we can presumably present.

6. Not really new or unique to Raise Dead/Resurrection, since it applies to things like Sending as well. This has been discussed and brought up previously. [link]

7. see 3.

8. As a healer who practically never needs Resurrection during normal business, I appreciate having a scroll handy. Removing scrolls seems more like a heavy-handed way to address the UMD meta (see 2 and 6).


An additional consideration Regarding the NPC revival, on a topic previously discussed elsewhere (probably in the "Setting Immersion and ... things" thread):
It is currently the policy that such a utility exists for lowbies to make recovery and restoration cheap. this is reasonable. However, in making divine PCs at least comparable, and excusing the potential to apply gold-costs to such spells (raise dead, res, true rez), would be scaling NPC costs. For example, 500 GP for anyone 10 and under, up to few thousand for an epic level character such that a PC is strictly cheaper.
One such method could be doubling the cost per 5 levels, so 1-10 is 500 GP, 11-15 is 1000 GP, 16-20 is 2000 gp, 21-25 is 4000 gp, and 26+ is 8000 gp per NPC revival. Including such a change without addressing caster costs would be ill-advised, however.

The vitality system is a slippery slope towards mechanics that will drive character-focused players away even more. The OP's system is good enough, and we have no need for anything that could at all support permadeath mechanics either through "soft-perma" (as shown above) or as precedent that people can cite to push further and further.

Characters should not have anything that can limit how long they can be played. Anything that lasts longer than a reset cycle (permanent debuffs, soft-perma through vitality system) creates a shelf-life.

[Kitunenotsume]

Could you elaborate a bit more what you mean by "soft permanent death"? We appear to be using different terms for permanence, which may not be conducive to discussing remedy.

The system I described above was a system that was implemented elsewhere. I do not mean to ascribe that it works perfectly with the existing very soft rules for BG, and changes could be made like permitting vitality to regenerate based purely off time, instead of status of dead or alive.

I am also uncertain how scaling NPC or spell costs leads to PC-lockout (if that is what you mean by 'shelf life'), if you could provide a bit more context. If you did not mean to implicate the latter half of my post in said comment, would you see any merit in the latter set of suggestions?

[LivT]

While I can understand the appeal of these sort of changes, let’s not forget that our code writer has been away from the game for an extended time with no set return date and that undertaking such an overhaul of a system might simply not be possible, at least not without a lot of new staff training or even poaching developers.

I only say this since the topic has been up for so much discussion lately, it’s beneficial to keep our expectations in check. There are after all already smelling salts and the like in game, and so it may be easier to simply to KOs than expect such a massive change to a large portion of code.

[zhazz]

Another option that had been previously implemented elsewhere:

Vitality System:
Utilized on Sundren, a character had a metric of basically 'death-HP'. It had a maximum value of 100, and each death cost 30 vitality, while replenishing at a fixed quantity per time while alive (something like 1 vitality every hour or two). This basically provided a character a sustainable 'budget' of about 3 deaths a week - enough to support adventurous risk taking or server quirks, but providing good reason not to go right back out into risk if one fell.
Hitting 0 vitality (or less) meant that the player could not self-revive, but other options were available namely in the form of spells: PC-cast revival spells transferred vitality from the caster to the target, potentially pushing an otherwise 'permed' character back into a positive vitality if a powerful enough spell was used. Raise Dead restored 10 vitality, Resurrection restored 20, and True Resurrection restored the full 30 - but each was taken from the caster's own pool representing the effort and investment involved (plus material costs), so you can't just sit on the side and spam revives.
If the spell would raise the target back into a positive vitality the spell functioned, but Raise Dead on a target at -20 vitality would fizzle (with no indication if it was strength or rejection) with all costs (both vitality and gp) expended on fizzle.
It is worth noting that NPC clerics did not restore vitality, and the system also didn't fully impact characters below level 10 (relevant to note that Sundren had relatively few characters over level 20, 10% XP lost on self-revive, and level-loss from such XP over level 10). There was also a utility to check one's vitality via chat-command.

This system had no further mechanical implications that I can recall outside situations with negative Vitality (though @Thaelis might correct me), but was primarily an incentive to take your knocks when you got them and sit out for a bit. It is agnostic to being RPed either death or simply being knocked out, but represents the character needing time to recover from their unfortunate experience or risking more permanent disability through repeated misfortune.

This is a reasonable suggestion as well, and one that I wouldn't be opposed to seeing implemented. Though the numbers might need a bit of tweaking to fit with the balance on BG versus on Sundren.

Regarding some points in the OP

1. Negative HP is definitely a mechanical thing, but short of marking a character as 'dead', they are still a valid target for AI. I've seen it done where PCs fall in place until *everyone* in the area is down for the count, but IIRC it's not as easily compatible with a Fugue system.

All three single player campaigns actually handle this quite well. Not sure how the AI there is scripted, though from my own experience monsters change to living targets, while the fallen character remains knocked down until healed or combat ends.

2. Changing the name does not really solve the concern if the functionality still exists. This one is more a side effect of the UMD heavy meta and would be highly nontrivial to resolve. Additionally, considering that the fee for NPC revival is a paltry 500 gp, it can be cheaper and faster to skip scrolls and Divine PCs entirely.

The intention isn't so much to rename Raise Dead for the sake of renaming it, but rather entirely remove the current Raise Dead scroll, available to everyone regardless of build and UMD, and replace it with something that instantly gets a knocked down character back on their feet. This new item/spell won't have any effect at all on a character, where the player has opted for death.

3, 7. Negative Level for a duration seems reasonable here, though designing a new debuff that ignores Greater Restoration might be tricky.

I mention this option due to Zanniej mentioning something similar in gedweyignasia's post. I like the idea of something that can't easily be countered. Maybe requiring Greater Restoration would be enough, since I do not remember any non-UMD providing that. There is at least one item offering regular Restoration, however, and it is fairly cheap too.

4. See 1, though it is worth considering that the 'Fugue' is validly considered a "brush with Death" [link] or simply somewhere for the player to be unconscious and unaware, with no canonical significance on if you are actually dead or not.

The Fugue is definitely a real place. And I am not suggesting that the character's soul isn't sent there. Rather I am suggesting that the player isn't sent there. Thus providing the opportunity to witness the resulting RP, and easily react to it along with questions/rolls made to examine their character.

6. Not really new or unique to Raise Dead/Resurrection, since it applies to things like Sending as well. This has been discussed and brought up previously. [link]

I would be fine with this being normalized across the board. Even though I use the Sending amulet quite often.

8. As a healer who practically never needs Resurrection during normal business, I appreciate having a scroll handy. Removing scrolls seems more like a heavy-handed way to address the UMD meta (see 2 and 6).

Understandable. If these scrolls were to receive the multiple casting required treatment too, then I would be happy with that. Alternatively add an additional cost when not cast by by someone innately capable of casting the spell.

An additional consideration Regarding the NPC revival, on a topic previously discussed elsewhere (probably in the "Setting Immersion and ... things" thread):
It is currently the policy that such a utility exists for lowbies to make recovery and restoration cheap. this is reasonable. However, in making divine PCs at least comparable, and excusing the potential to apply gold-costs to such spells (raise dead, res, true rez), would be scaling NPC costs. For example, 500 GP for anyone 10 and under, up to few thousand for an epic level character such that a PC is strictly cheaper.
One such method could be doubling the cost per 5 levels, so 1-10 is 500 GP, 11-15 is 1000 GP, 16-20 is 2000 gp, 21-25 is 4000 gp, and 26+ is 8000 gp per NPC revival. Including such a change without addressing caster costs would be ill-advised, however.

Having a scaling cost seems fine in my opinion. I will also advocate for the NPC clerics/priests to only have access to Raise Dead, rather than Rescurrection. That way there is still incentive to seek out a PC caster of Resurrection, since that will negate the negative effects from Raise Dead (only 1 Hit Points, and Level Drain).

I like the initial topic starter's post, the system sounds reasonable and good. The only suggestion i have on that is adding more negative HP before PC dies based on their CON score. Right now, if someone goes below -12 hp, they die. If that would be increased (so some 30 CON PC would die at -120 hp), that would also allow for fun times trying to kill mobs before friend dies or suffering hits while trying to lure them away from fallen friend and stabilize him.

I like this suggestion too. Making hearty characters more resilient even after being knocked out.

Small xp loss, perhaps (2*level^2), and 12-24 hour debuff. I don't think movement speed decrease is enough, it would be better if it's something that affects fighting ability, like -2 attack/damage/saves/skills.

Fatigue adds a -2 penalty to both Strength and Dexterity, along with a 10% movement speed slow. Combining that with your suggested -2 Attack, -2 Damage, -2 Saves, and -2 Skills seems a good option. If it were to be only a movement speed slow, I would advocate for 30% reduction, stacking with encumberance.

[zhazz]

While I can understand the appeal of these sort of changes, let’s not forget that our code writer has been away from the game for an extended time with no set return date and that undertaking such an overhaul of a system might simply not be possible, at least not without a lot of new staff training or even poaching developers.

I only say this since the topic has been up for so much discussion lately, it’s beneficial to keep our expectations in check. There are after all already smelling salts and the like in game, and so it may be easier to simply to KOs than expect such a massive change to a large portion of code.

Definitely not something I would expect to happen next month, or even within the next 6 months. Before coding even begins, it is important that there be some agreement between players and staff on what the new system should entail. Especially since a new death system is a major change to the gameplay experience. Once there an agreement is had, it will go into the development pipeline to be picked up by whomever wants to do it at some point. Or staff might collectively agree on a priority list, with a death system change being placed somewhere in what is undoubtedly a long list.

[Kitunenotsume]

RE: Death vs Knocked Out

All three single player campaigns actually handle this quite well. Not sure how the AI there is scripted, though from my own experience monsters change to living targets, while the fallen character remains knocked down until healed or combat ends.

The single player campaigns did not have a "Fugue" area. There is "Dying" as a status from 0 to -10 HP where the PC can be targeted as "alive", and then "Dead" as a status after that where the character is marked 'dead', immobile, and so on (and marked on portrait with a big red X). From my current observations, the existing system (and most "Fugue" systems) sweep the character away when the "Dead" status occurs and revives them in an area set aside for dead people (Where they become mechanically alive-status), letting them out only when scripted to do so. Having a KO system would rely on holding off that transition until the player permits it, but also results in the PC being unmovable through the efforts of others - so you either need to recover after combat, or revive them on the spot, since taking them to a location to be restored is unavailable.

RE: Smelling Salts

The intention isn't so much to rename Raise Dead for the sake of renaming it, but rather entirely remove the current Raise Dead scroll, available to everyone regardless of build and UMD, and replace it with something that instantly gets a knocked down character back on their feet. This new item/spell won't have any effect at all on a character, where the player has opted for death.

This doesn't seem like a functional adjustment though. I think it is relying on having different treatment between "dead status" and "dead in fugue", which I discuss above. If that is the case, having an item only on someone who is not fugue-dead and only status-dead seems reasonable.

RE: Negative levels/Gresto

I mention this option due to Zanniej mentioning something similar in gedweyignasia's post. I like the idea of something that can't easily be countered. Maybe requiring Greater Restoration would be enough, since I do not remember any non-UMD providing that. There is at least one item offering regular Restoration, however, and it is fairly cheap too.

Looking into it, a Greater Restoration scroll is a DC 32 UMD, so non-trivial and a reasonable bound. Elixirs could also be made, but would cost a couple thousand gp each, so seems fair enough. I concur that on wishing to avoid bypass by Restoration potions, which are pretty easy to get.

RE: Fugue

The Fugue is definitely a real place. And I am not suggesting that the character's soul isn't sent there. Rather I am suggesting that the player isn't sent there. Thus providing the opportunity to witness the resulting RP, and easily react to it along with questions/rolls made to examine their character.

I think we agree the Fugue is real canonically. However, I am suggesting that the Fugue as implemented as an area is primarily an OOC and mechanical holding area for players so their bodies can actually be moved in the form of replacement items, and that while there it may be represented as more of a "near-death experience" than distinctly addressing if the character is dead or not. As it stands, anyone seeking to examine a corpse still has the ability to send queries via tells to the person who is downed - your corpse does have your name on it, after all.

RE: Debuffs
Level Drain, as implimented [link], applies penalties to most combat stats equal to it's magnitude, so probably accomplishes the suggested modifications by Thaelis.

Edit: Implicit agreement on any points in your post I did not explicitly comment on.

[tankteddy]

1 I don't think we can do Deleveling at all due to a few classes/feature that could be exploited. Unless this has been fixed already.

2 I would love to see some kind of fatigue after deaths. I know most people will just restore it away but having something in place would be nice.

3 raise dead scrolls and spell I would like to see some kind of cost added to them and make temples cost more.
Example diamonds get an active where you can crush them. Giving you 3-5 piles of diamond dust worth enough to raise dead.

You need a full diamond for rest
Or something like that.

[Thaelis]

Can I just clarify with the OP whether I'm understanding their proposal 100% right?

Upon reaching 0hp you fall in place, you are never Fugued unless you willing choose it.
You can be revived with Smelling Salts for zero xp/gold loss.
You receive a temporary debuff.

Real Death (Fugue) would be almost unheard of, because you have to choose it willingly.
Raise Dead/Resurrection would be used extremely rarely, since they have nothing to do with knockout.

(How about self-revival for knockout??? This is the part I'm hazy on, is self-revival impossible and so Real Death occurs if whole party is wiped?)

[zhazz]

Can I just clarify with the OP whether I'm understanding their proposal 100% right?

Upon reaching 0hp you fall in place, you are never Fugued unless you willing choose it.
You can be revived with Smelling Salts for zero xp/gold loss.
You receive a temporary debuff.

Real Death (Fugue) would be almost unheard of, because you have to choose it willingly.
Raise Dead/Resurrection would be used extremely rarely, since they have nothing to do with knockout.

(How about self-revival for knockout??? This is the part I'm hazy on, is self-revival impossible and so Real Death occurs if whole party is wiped?)

That is the essence of it, yes. To make actual death quite rare. Of course certain spells might cause instant death, such as Finger of Death, Disintegrate, Weird, and/or Wail of the Banshee. That is a tangent though, and subject to a later discussion.

Self revival is explained in #9:

9. Let a fallen character decide what to do
Tying into suggestions 1 and 4 above this is all about player choice. When a character is knocked out, they should be presented with an option to either: Remain knocked out, die, or respawn at a safe location. With the possibility of changing their choice later on. Except for re-spawning, of course. No changing that.

This allows a fallen character to wait in place for someone to come find them, just like they can now; or re-spawn at a safe location, also just like they can now. But without the need to go to the Fugue at all, as to allow various types of RP mentioned above.

Re-spawning in this case should be treated as having retreated from the battle, and the hardships endured during the escape is what takes away experience. Adding a penalty in the form of Fatigue or Level Drain should only be considered if the loss of XP would otherwise de-level the character, or if they are already max level.

Essentially it boils down to providing a fallen character with 3 options at all times, even when in a party:

1. Knocked out
2. Death
3. Respawn/Retreat

With both options 1 and 2 still allowing Respawn/Retreat at a later point.

Real Death wouldn't occur even with a total party wipe. Some might of course decide that for their character, but each is individually given the three options above, with the most common choice for a total party wipe of course being the Respawn/Retreat option.