[Discussion] The Price of Death

[England]

Quoting Scotland from one of our PMs:

"Suggestions of the cost of death:

- loss of memories (one major thing is lost, such as their memory of a person or an event). Memories can slowly be recovered if other nations remind them and can trigger flashbacks and all that fun stuff.

- a devastating event happening to the people of their country like an earthquake, the outbreak of civil war (the people tear themselves apart) or a plague. This could put a nation coming back to life in a state of illness or depression as they mourn their losses. Having friends and support will be important. Allies and friends can reach out to each other after disasters. Without support they could die for good.

- they are dead for a significant amount of time (admin decides), and meanwhile their people have a revolution or some other significant event that costs a large population or the nation's leadership their lives, such as when the plane crashed with most of Nigeria's leaders. The nation that wakes back up isn't the same and suffers a personality change. They may eventually return to their previous state, but it will take time and the player must play out the new personality, such as acting completely different or having an odd phobia (fear of blondes). The player can arrange some event that shifts their character back quicker, but it should be a major event that affects or requires the help of other players

- some combination of the above

Suicide:

- If it's a nation that kills off their bosses, they are driven to self destruct and commit suicide. Such as it's commonly thought in fanon Russia himself killed some of his previous bosses and his scarf is hiding the damage of a failed or successful suicide attempts. Nations are tougher than humans so it takes more drastic measures to ensure death

- Since a nation will come back to life from suicide, it is only a temporary escape and they will be changed when they return. People they used to love, they could now hate. They will also bear the scars, burns, etc of the suicide until they heal over.

Dismemberment:

- if a nation loses a part of their bodies and dies, resurrection doesn't magically return the missing part. The nation can regrow it over time (time decided by admin), but must endure the loss in the meantime. This includes being blind, deaf, mute, or any other physical state outside the ordinary. This assumes characters that wear glasses won't need them forever and maybe only wear them for the looks, like Austria

- if a nation is torn into pieces, such as separation at the waist or decapitation, the burying/putting the parts back together in the right configuration will assist in the parts coming back together. However, the nation will be in a delicate condition and paralyzed from the damage point down until everything heals. A head could fall back off if treated roughly. Himaruya identified that Austria was in a wheelchair for an unknown amount of time, but he's perfectly fine now

Magick:

- the nations that perform magick can assist a resurrection or healing to happen quickly and with less death/devastation cost, but that magick user must identify an appropriate price. "I can bring him/her back, but they'll completely forget they were in love with you" or "I can bring them back just like before, but are you willing to go blind for them?"

Someone has to pay a price and it won't be the deceased. Either the magick user has to absorb the cost or pass it to someone else willing to accept. That way it doesn't just get to be the dead nation to play out the drama. The drama from the resurrected nation finding out the price paid for them could be fun.

Maybe pick prices for death out of a hat at random. If the magick idea is good, best identify who is powerful enough to resurrect, or leave it at just England."

DISCUSS.

What do you think of these? Should death have a price in the first place? Why or why not? How do you pick magic users? Other prices for death? Questions, comments, suggestions?

[[x] Spain]

*after reading through everything* Well, I like it. And I completely agree: death does have to have a price. I don't see why it shouldn't. In a way, it doesn't make sense as to why they can't just kill each other if they're angry or something, especially if there's no price for it in the first place. If they could just resurrect no problem, their views on death would be completely different - warped, even. They could see no problem with killing another nation if they'd just come back to life since it'd be the same for them. They'd also have no problem with rushing in headfirst into seemingly life-or-death situations if there'd be no repercussions.

However, giving a price for it instills that sort of survival fear. If something were to happen to them if they died, they'd be more careful. They wouldn't be crazy and rushing into things. They'd have to stop and think about how they could get out of it alive.

As for magic users, that'd be a bit trickier. Seeing as how only certain nations in canon can use it, that just throws everything off. Until we can think of a better idea, I say we keep the magic users just how they are canonly. It's the best way to avoid any bickering or arguments about it.

I can't think of any other price for death, so I'll leave that up for everyone else to decide.

[Egypt]

I agree that Magic should have a cost but nothing major yet. I guess it will have to depend on the type of magic being used Resurrection would obviously cost more than healing but healing would have its own scale (Lost of a limb vs scratched/gashes/bruises).

I know Egypt can use Magic, it is because of the curved staff... (and it was stated on his wiki page o3o )

[Japan]

As I read through these and think more, I'll comment more. For now, I'll just comment on the one thing that stood out to me.

I think the idea of having a magic user being able to pass off their consequence, even to someone willing, isn't very appropriate. Magic is already itself an 'unfair' advantage (but one that cannot be ignored for the sake of keeping things rather canon~), so why should it be given even more power by giving it an alternative sacrifice?

This is the only thing to make that makes it seem a little bordering on godly to allow such a thing. It's also not necessarily true that all nations believe in magic (or still believe in it), so we also have to ask would the magic work on a nation that doesn't believe in it? Would magic act more like a superstition to them (where some believe so strongly that when something happens, it feels like karma/the evil spirit/etc.) or would it ACTUALLY do what it is intended to do?

I feel we're at a toss up. If England could have just used magic to heal himself all this time, then there wouldn't have been any need to create a vaccine, as he was the one we were intended to save at the time. Later of course, it would have become far more necessary (since we would have had to save someone EVENTUALLY), but to explain why England didn't just do that, we ought to have some limiting factor on magic that can be explained as having occurred from the start of the entire RP premise, not just thrown in at this time.

One more for now--as well as practitioners use magic, there could be a time in which it would be appropriate to have the consequence of magic accidentally transferred to someone else. Magic can be unpredictable, and so in this case it would be fine if the two RPers are willing to allow it to happen that a healing works, but the partner of the magic user goes blind or something to that effect. It would probably also be someone the magic user has a strong bond with, either of great like or great dislike, as occasionally it seems magic channels the emotions into the final result.

Magic is one of the hardest things to limit properly, but I also agree that it shouldn't be tossed out the window. But we do need to give some realism to this fantastic thing...as backwards as that sounds. O.o (I'm not bashing the idea at all; I'm just trying to analyze it from various points of view, like say, from a nation that no longer can see spirits but at one point believed in them/is a bit superstitious still)

*crawls off to be invisible again*

[England]

In England's case, he can't cast healing magic. He only casts black magic in canon, and a bit of white magic in fanon. So that wouldn't have worked out anyways.

And I believe that the magic caster should always bear the consequences of his acts, no exception. That's the price they gotta pay, I guess. That would explain why they'd have the need for a vaccine: they can't just keep asking the rare nations capable of healing (who can, even?) to heal others that are infected, because those nations would have to bear the consequences of their healing all the time.

[Japan]

It was mentioned in the explanation (the passing on the cost) so I figured I'd cover it while I was babbling out my opinion ^^'

And it might not be so much healing as resurrection magic (but then you have to put some limiter on the injured/dead/dying nation if they happen to be the one in that situation.

[Egypt]

I think Egypt can a little bit (not sure) e.i Tracking, summoning, minor healing, pushing force (Fus-Ro-Da?)
So little is known about him that it open up a whole plethora of opportunities.
Even then, I don't think he would actually resurrect anyone. It goes against his religion.

[Scotland]

Continue tearing it up. These were just ideas that came within an hour, and they really need to be picked apart and examined or even tossed. I like the feedback being left. Have at!

[Argentina]

I have skimmed over this list one or two times, but for once, I decided to read the ideas in full to get a better idea and maybe put in my own input on the matter.


Memory loss/personality change in general death:

I personally think this little tidbit was one of my favorites of this list. It allows an RPer to further their experience in roleplaying with characters of different personalities, all the while still RPing with the same canon character or OC.

And on the topic of personality change; who doesn't want to flip personalities from a stubborn and sassy character, to a shy, meek child? Or a happy-go-lucky, smiley nation, to a blood-lusting psychopath who needs to be restrained to avoid hurting anyone in the warehouse? I know I would. *Shot*

The memory loss is a great way to build up some drama and suspense, particularly for the people who are closest to said amnesiac nation. (Example; Spain would be distraught over Tina or Turkey, England would be lost without America, and so on...) It could also drive the people closest to them to be ready to rise to unspeakable stakes to get their friend/lover/sibling back.


Suicide:

Suicide seems to be a good topic to build upon, particularly in this AU setting. There's many reasons for one of the nations to contemplate suicide, such as cracking under the pressure of their allies, who are counting on them. Maybe we could also create some sort of domino effect, where a nation lost their memories after dying once, and their loved one ends up committing suicide over it, because they feel like they'll never get their friend back the way they once were?


Magic:

I like the idea of some sort of resurrection, although, in defense of this piece, I do think the magic-wielder should be prepared to suffer some sort of cost of their own in exchange for bringing a dead nation back to life. Although the healer does have the power of resurrection, no one can come out unscathed. That way, it seems like a much less - as Japan put it - "godly" approach. It really puts teamwork and loyalty to the test.

Put yourself in their situation. Would you be prepared to suffer some sort of physical consequence (Much less so than the death of your ally, but a consequence no less) in exchange for your friend's life? Better yet; would you trust someone with your life in their hands to give self-sacrifice and help you in your time of need?

Yet again, this builds up much drama and suspense, and can make for a very good plot.

I also enjoy the thought of the relationship or animosity between the magic-wielder and the nation affected to have some sort of impact on the resurrection. It could be good, or it could be bad, depending. The bad impact could be something like... the nation returns to the land of the living, but is left blind, deaf, or paralyzed from the waist down for a temporary (or extended?) period of time.


And these are just a few of my thoughts on the matter. I'll probably add more later on.

I think the whole idea of the "cost of death" is something we could really build upon together, as a team. Then maybe have some kind of a vote to see which ideas stick? I love how this site is progressing so quickly after being semi-quiet for a short time now. ;w;

[England]

Well I don't like the notion of resurrection at all. The nations aren't gods, they're just humans that have been gifted with extraordinary capabilities and cursed with immortality. The thought of magic is already far-fetched enough, but is canon, so could work. Resurrection is just a big no-no for me because that would mean that nations have the power to play with life and death and I don't like the sound of that, especially for what it would do to the fandom. Oh, your character casts magic? He/She can automatically smite/resurrect an entire population. Your character doesn't cast magic in canon? You're jealous of those who can? No problem, your character just didn't wanna show his/her capabilities and is actually an even stronger mage/warlock than the rest of them (but you guys are much better than that, I believe in you xD).

Also, I love the idea of equivalent exchange FULLMETAL ALCHEMIST YES, so what would be the equivalent sacrifice for bringing back someone from the dead? Nothing. There is nothing that costs as much as a life. Point #2 against resurrection. As for regular spells, dark magic would probably sap energy from the person, making them feel physically weak after a few spells, inhibiting a sense or a vital function if pushed too far (blindness, cardiac arrest, etc), and white magic would probably take something they have and turn it into a variable (think "stem cells") that acts onto the target of the spell (taking someone's hearing to restore someone else's broken spine, for example). Equivalent exchange.
Though I personally believe that nations re-create themselves over time if ever they're hurt, so I wouldn't see much use in white magic, unless it's for instant healing in a time-pressing instance.

See, I don't really like playing with magic :I And if it gets down to resurrection, my vote is a solid "NO".

Also, my thoughts would be that mental/psychological damage caused by death is not permanent. The re-created nation would, for example, be extremely aggressive for a month or two (example), and then gradually return to how he/she once was.

Suicide theories that Tina came up with are good, but I still like to think that the nations have been conditioned way too much from the time and the tide to be driven so easily to something like suicide. Of course, I'm not against anything, any of you can do what you want xD

[[x] Spain]

Just throwing this out there: I wonder what Hima-papa would think of us contemplating this. o3o

[England]

He'd probably be all "sigh.... goddamn westerners..." :'D

[Argentina]

We Westerners just complicate everything.

[America]

Meri takes offense to this. *scoffs and goes back to humming the Star-Spangled Banner*

As for magic (since I obviously must contribute to something, I love giving my input), I think there's such thing as too much magic. A nation shouldn't be allowed to resurrect anyone, even if it comes with a price. For normal spells, such as minor healing (possibly, though I'm not even sure about that, since nations CAN heal themselves rather quickly) or minor spells, it'll probably take some of their energy.

Basically, I'm just saying what you guys have said. ^^;