This is not D&D, better call it neverwinter nights 2
- no pvp, no freedom, the basic rule of a RPG
- instanced dungeons - no mmorpg, just multiplayer game
- no permadeath - in D&D you dont respawn, if you die you die unless you are rezzed

I was very happy when i heard long time ago i would see D&D online some day but now i am dissapointed.

I don't know what crazy version of D&D you've been playing but one where the players constantly kill each other, die all the time and have to compete with a dozen other parties trying to delve the same dungeon doesn't sound much like D&D to me!

---

Originally posted by GRIMACHU
I don't know what crazy version of D&D you've been playing but one where the players constantly kill each other, die all the time and have to compete with a dozen other parties trying to delve the same dungeon doesn't sound much like D&D to me!

---

Don't know what crazy version of MMORPG you've been playing but one with no persistant world, no crafting, no pvp and where you are forced to run the same dungeon over and over again just to level doesn't sound much like MMORPG to me!

All good points, but he was making assertions that those things were D&D things, not MMO things.

Besides which, what you mention sounds like an MMO, it doesn't sound like an RPG.

Obviouly you havent played D&D Grimachu

While I do agree that in a normal D&D session there usually isn't any PVP (if you allow this you usually end up with chaos), he does bring up a valid point that the game does not follow the ruleset for D&D very closely.

Tumble and some of the dynamics of the game are very different from D&D as it is set out.  Actually, I do think however that Neverwinter Nights was fairly close to the D&D rules.  I am disappointed in general that they did not follow the rules as laid out.  I would have thought it would have been simpler to follow the rules then to alter the rules in the fashion that Turbine did.

---

Originally posted by gurthgor

This is not D&D, better call it neverwinter nights 2
- no pvp, no freedom, the basic rule of a RPG
- instanced dungeons - no mmorpg, just multiplayer game
- no permadeath - in D&D you dont respawn, if you die you die unless you are rezzed

I was very happy when i heard long time ago i would see D&D online some day but now i am dissapointed.

---

not that i like DDO that much, BUT.....

- So your D&D sessions are all about killing other players? Really? well, that might as well be so, but i hope you DO realize that the majority of people do not play like that. In most D&D games, the players are a GROUP that goes around together, usually linked by friendship, love, companionship, you name it. There are the occasional arguments and fight, but the game is in no way centered on PvP, no RPG is beside, maybe, paranoia :)

- In a normal D&D session, how many other adventuring parties you encounter in your dungeons? 100? 5? 1?. It is left to the Master of course, but i have still to encounter a game in which i stumble over adventurers at every corner, you?

-True, when you die, you die. BUT a D&D master usually do not kill the characters just like that. For one, you can acquire easily enough resurrection scrolls or powers, for second, usually the game is ABOUT the characters. having them die all the time is no fun, at least in my opinion. The occasional heroic death (or stupid death if the player really screw up) is part of the game (and must be or then the challenge goes out of the window), but surely not something that happens every session.

So, bottom line: i do not find DDO particularly enticing either, but saying it isn't same as the P&P game BECAUSE of those reasons sounds wrong in my ears.

The wonder of pnp D&D was the freedom of behavior, freedom of world and freedom of game play.  I totally agree that DDO is NOT D&D, and never will be, until they can recreate the freedom on in the online world.

There is no way that anyone can start an argument to invalidate the pvp issue.  Some of the posters here have said that pvp is not what pnpD&D is about.  Perhaps not in their version, but the point is, we could do it if we wanted.  paper D&D was about a group of friends playing characters in a game run by the DM. The DM ran the NPC's and sometime they were friendly, sometime they were enemies.  The point is whether its a player character or a non-player character, the freedom was always there to spice up the game with freedom of choice, evil pc's, buidling a castle, setting up a magic shop or a black smith, or build a galleon...get the picture.Freedom of game play. 

DDO has none of it. Its just a mulitplayer dungeon hack, not RPG or MMO, due to the instancing of every adventure.  There is no validity in saying things like "...nobody wants to line up to kill the bad guy at the end"... to justify instancing.  That is a cop out.  They obviously had a mind set to make it a controlled quest situation, which then leads to the instancing decision, but with a little lateral thinking, they could have had a true MMORPG, with freedom, by instancing the quest handout, but running numerous different quests in the same dungeon, where parties can meet other parties, and are not chasing the same result.  SOME instancing is valid, but not everything.

DDO is a flop, I am sorry to say.

1. I dont see how you can get any fun playing with a DM that helps you all the time and dont let you die anyway. Also i dont see how you can consider that your DM can be good not allowing you to fight vs other players. So what you play is a limited version of D&D, you just erase part of the rules and dont allow chaotic evil players, and you call that D&D. That is a baby care game what you play.

2. Well in D&D, me as DM, i have put many of other adventurers in the same dungeon. Actually that makes lot of fun cause you can fight vs them, cooperate with them or just interact with them. I suppose you just know to enter a dungeon and smash all in the way, and of course you dont fear to die, causse your DM wont let it.

3. As i said you play in a baby care center. If you like that its up to you and i dont like to play that and i dont like to make games as DM in that way. Players learn how to play and survive and just dont go madly in the dungeon. Many DMs just make some mobs impossible to kill or players impossible to kill, so just change things without any realism and without following the rules, that is crap. When i see a DM cheats i dont play any more with him, and i dont care he cheats to my favour, i dont want any help from DM. It is true that DM can change the rules of the game making his own version of D&D but never change those rules in any moment as he wishes, as they use to do.

If those reasons sound you wrong it is cause you have never readed the rules. Just a tip, there is an alligment called Chaotic Evil which players can choose, and i tell you cause i suppose you dont know about it or maybe you are just trying to win argueing things that you make up on purpose.

---

Originally posted by gurthgor

1. I dont see how you can get any fun playing with a DM that helps you all the time and dont let you die anyway. Also i dont see how you can consider that your DM can be good not allowing you to fight vs other players. So what you play is a limited version of D&D, you just erase part of the rules and dont allow chaotic evil players, and you call that D&D. That is a baby care game what you play.

2. Well in D&D, me as DM, i have put many of other adventurers in the same dungeon. Actually that makes lot of fun cause you can fight vs them, cooperate with them or just interact with them. I suppose you just know to enter a dungeon and smash all in the way, and of course you dont fear to die, causse your DM wont let it.

3. As i said you play in a baby care center. If you like that its up to you and i dont like to play that and i dont like to make games as DM in that way. Players learn how to play and survive and just dont go madly in the dungeon. Many DMs just make some mobs impossible to kill or players impossible to kill, so just change things without any realism and without following the rules, that is crap. When i see a DM cheats i dont play any more with him, and i dont care he cheats to my favour, i dont want any help from DM. It is true that DM can change the rules of the game making his own version of D&D but never change those rules in any moment as he wishes, as they use to do.

If those reasons sound you wrong it is cause you have never readed the rules. Just a tip, there is an alligment called Chaotic Evil which players can choose, and i tell you cause i suppose you dont know about it or maybe you are just trying to win argueing things that you make up on purpose.

---

Ok, i was gonna to just drop it as it seems you can't understand what i am saying. so i will go trough it one more time.

1)I never said that the DM do not let the players die, nor that you can't fight with other players. These things happens, conflict and a sane fight do happens. but they ARE NOT THE FOCUS OF THE GAME. they are occasional event, not the thing the game is centered around.

As such, dropping them, while limiting freedom (and freedom is always getting limited in a videogame, no matter what), are not seen by me as raping of the D&D concept .

About Chaotic Evil, that depends. sure as hell i won't allow a chaotic evil character in a mostly good party and other way around. it is not so definite, though, if the guy has a good story as of why he is joining such a party (maybe he is a spy of some arch villain or something else more creative) I would allow it. It won't last very long though. Either he will do his mission and leave the party, or somebody find out and it either ends in the prison or in the graveyard for the guy. Alternativly, it happened that the evil person just started to like working with these particular guys and continued to go along with them, never truly befriending each other, but having a sort of truce between them. the Good guys thinking that at least they can keep an eye on him and the evil guy thinking to use the group as his personal hit squad (or so he thinks).

2) at the same time? what you were mastering? hundreds of people?

3)as i said before, the players are not immortal in my games. They do die. Also about your "DM cheating", keep in mind this is roleplaying we are speaking about, not rollplaying. The story and the drama must come before the system. If I get lucky with the dice and roll 20 critical in a row, i will change the dice results. It makes for a more dramatic story if the dragon do not kill the whole party with the first attack, don't you think? The rules (and the dice) are there to give the DM a mechanical aspects of the game, but is all about the story in any case.

It is rule number one of any good roleplayer and i am surprised you do not know it: Story first, system second.

Such a thing do not make things "unrealistic", just more drammatically appropriate. The Archvillain SHOULD escape, unless the players really have a good plan and prevent his last minute escape.

I know perfectly there is a Chaotic Evil alignment. and i know it is 1 of 9. Chaotic Evil, also, are NOT team players. they tend to kill each other before too long.

Let me restate my points: A) "PvP": is not the main focus of D&D. it might happens in a session, yes. But it is definitly not the main focus, or the game is over for at least 1 player very very shortly.

B) "instancing": DMing multiple groups of adventurers at the same time it is hard and very rare happening. the averager gaming group is 4-6 people and that makes 1 group. period. If you, with your leet skillz, can DM 10-20 people succesfully, well good for you, but i don't believe it.

C)Permadeath DOES happens in D&D games, but it should be occasional. Or then your players like to reroll characters every session?

Bottom line: No PvP, No permadeath, instancing do not ruin the D&D atmosphere in my opinion. They might ruin the MMorpg atomsphere, making the game not so good (at least the pvp and instancing parts, permadeath as harsh as you want has no place in any mmorpg), but they surely do not go against the D&D spirit.

1 - Focusing in keeping the players alive and not letting them be chaotic evil ( so that they can kill other members of group ) is not the best way to make a good game, but i suppose your players are similar to you so they will like a game without challenge and freedom

2 - I tell again for the slow ones. Obviously i talk about adventurers npcs that they find.

3 - The story and the drama cant be out of the rules, that is crap. A good story is realistic, and players must fear what they find, other things are just a happy tale, Harry potter tales.
OMG , you just dont follow the rules and besides change the rolls....and you say you play D&D. You remind me a lot a DM me and my friends played a long time ago, and he just cheated all the rules and rules were "unknown". Of course you couldnt die either, maybe you changed but you didnt die. At first everybody liked it but soon ppl realized how it was and they left. We had very fun moments laughing about their games. Also he tried to cheat playing with me, when i was the DM, several times, and belive me ppl didnt like that.
It is true that there are ppl that like cheating, even paying money for better stats and such, that is quite sad.

Hahaha, a good rp ??? you call yourself roleplayer?? come on. You are anti-roleplayer, you just play something you make up and thatdoent have any rules and any logic. You know its better you just write a small book aboout the adventure and the players can read it cause anyway you are going to do what you want. You dont even let them be as they want, man, you are just writting a book for yourself. And i bet you are very young, i dont think a more mature person can think like you, maybe i am wrong but i dont think so.

Of course for you permadeath doesnt have any sense, unless its part of your book. You say it happens but it is just occasional... as i said you just take care of your baby adventurers so that they die the right times...pathetic.

I am amazed how some ppl get fun. As i said some ppl even pay money for better stats or items, and ppl that like playing a game where there are no rules, where all is what DM says, so why to play ? i dont find the sense why your players play with you really.

Btw, check games like Trials of Ascension that has very good ranking or The Chronicle, both are with permadeath. You cannot play them yet but they have lot of followers.

yo guy, you REALLY cannot comprehend plain english or what??

So, the rules come first in your game? I feel sorry for you and your players and you think THAT is roleplaying "oh sorry, you were the Hero fated to save the world and kill the Red Dragon Amber, but hey, this little goblin just rolled 3 criticals in a row and he killed you with a rusty dagger... way to go hero"

I NEVER said to change the rules! learn to understand what i Write for God's Sake! I NEVER said there should be no challenge!

Let me get this straight. You get 2 situations, in one your group, that are heroes, by the way, or villains, you choose. (The game, by the way, should be decided between the DM and the players, a player should make a character in relation to what game you are playing, making a sailor pirate to a game that will never see the sea, for example, is not a very good thing, so the DM and players should talk beforehand on what game is gonna be)

Situation 1: the group is entering the classical Dragon's Lair. They have tracked down the beast that laid waste to few villages around and have been paid to make it stops. They enter the lair and encounters some of the minions of the dragon. the Minions, trough sheer luck (and unluck on the player part) manages to actually wound them seriously. By mere happenstance what was supposed (in the plans of the DM AND the players) to be a epic fight (and challenging!) fight against a mighty dragons, ended up being a bloody skirmish with a few ogres that were strangely blessed and managed to put unconsious the mage, severely maul the cleric while the rogue, chaotic evil, backstabbed the warrior and fled with their gold.

Situation 2: same as before, but the DM changes those couple dice rolls to not be critical success, so the ogres still hit, but not as strongly as before. they are STILL a challenge, they still wound the party, but they are not a quest-stopping challenge as they were not supposed to be. The party defeat the ogres and come in the dragon's lair. Here is a challenging fight. the DM do not cheat in this fight. They could win or they could die, but in either way, the group came a long way, overcame obstacles and even if the dragon would defeat them, they would feel it worthy. Maybe the dragon was heavily wounded and their actions made him go to sleep for the next 2 centuries. the villagers will hail them as heroes and build statues to the fallen ones, that sacrificed themselves for the good of the village.

Now you tell me which one is the most desirable situation, the first or the second?

Cheating is NOT changing the rules, cheating is to change a die roll if needed. to make sure a guy hit or not. EVERY DM cheats, you should keep it to a minimum but you are saying that you prefer having a bad story (and a bad game) instead of changing something as little as a die roll? Every DM has usually a plan for his campaign, a story that the campaign follows. the players might or might not follow it but dramatic choices and situations should be helped. Not much, but just enough to have a more compelling storyline.

You, sir, are a Rollplayer and have NO right to be called a Roleplayer!

Go and worship your deity, Die is God, the Rules are God. Good for you, but don't come to me and tell me I'm "Anti-roleplayer". You tell ME what Roleplaying there is in rolling frakking dice!

Did I ever said it has no rules or logic? Nooooope, again learn to understand what other people say. But I suppose you don't care for a conversation, you are here to repeat what you say ad nauseam thinking everybody else is wrong and only you, the God of roleplayers, is right. I'm SO glad that is not so.

Oh, next time I want to play just to roll dice, i will go play a board game.

The first one without a doubt. The second is not roleplaying its just plain cheating. In a game.. Cheating in a social game of fun and chance, how pathetic are todays gamers, really?!!

Some of my best RPG moments has been when a character has died without 6 hour of creation. Just like my cleric who rolled against the odds on so many times the GM had to check my dice, some charactershad bad luck.. That is the fun part of RPGs, not to have some "win-button" on the GM..

Worst I have heard. I do not support DDO, but I am hell against RPG players like this one.

---

Originally posted by Harafnir

The first one without a doubt. The second is not roleplaying its just plain cheating. In a game.. Cheating in a social game of fun and chance, how pathetic are todays gamers, really?!!

Some of my best RPG moments has been when a character has died without 6 hour of creation. Just like my cleric who rolled against the odds on so many times the GM had to check my dice, some charactershad bad luck.. That is the fun part of RPGs, not to have some "win-button" on the GM..

Worst I have heard. I do not support DDO, but I am hell against RPG players like this one.

---

no, really you think that changing a coule 20s to 19s is such a bad deal?

I wonder what you think a Game master screen is for then.

And here i was thinking that the fun part of RPGs was actually playing your character and not rolling dice, how naive i was. Not that rolling dice is not fun, but is not the end and all of RPGs, if I just want to roll dice, i go play Descent.

The first one of course. As i told you there is no sense to play a game where the DM change the roll dice, there is no fair game like that. I would be very disappointed and angry if i find out that a DM change the rolls of the monsters. You should tell that to the players, maybe they dont know what you do and maybe they wouldnt keep playing with you, have you thought about that ?? You think all DM cheats and that everybody like the crap you make, ask them if they like the same crap you like.

Actually if a rogue chaotic evil sees a good chance of getting a good loot obviously he is going to kill others, and that is fine. Even some times some players are possesed and they act evil and do such things. Actually i have seen as the whole group just killed other player just to get his ubber sword, just cause they could do it. Some ppl dont like that others like it, but cheat is not allowed for roleplaying, if not it is not roleplaying, its just a book.

I am not having a bad story cause some ogres kill me. Actually i had very fun and funny games with a good DM playing Middle earth RPG where a village almost killed me, and that happened me twice, i had to run and save my life, i got it and it was good. If the village would have killed me then i would be upset, but i would have liked the game. And btw the village was not part of the big story or anything.

When i make a campaing i let players do whatever they want, sometimes they just ignore what i have made and try other thing, and that is ok, they have freedom and i am not going to change the situations so that they do what i want.

You know what you are? the kind of guy that cheats in exams and then show to their parents how good he is. What you make is not real, you are just deceiving your players. Maybe they even enjoy it and think how lucky they are, but what will happen if they find it out, something that probably will happen some day.

If you call roleplaying a DM that cheats all he wants ( that is cheat, though you dont like to face what you are doing, i dont care you make it for any reason, you cheat ), that deceives players, that dont let players any real freedom ( not evils, you lead them to what you want, etc.. ) then keep writting your books.

You dont know a shit about being a good DM, rolling dice is made to make the game real, that is the difference between a novel and a virtual world where anything can happen, not just what the DM says will happen. You just dont like realism, dont like freedom, its even worse than playing a computer game where there are dice.

Would you like a computer game where the game cheated you changing the roles? Most ppl dont like it.

Your games dont have any rule cause you said it yourself, you change the roles, you change the situations, you just change whatever is needed so that you are happy with it. That of course dont have any logic either, cause without roles there is no logic, just what you make up. Even if the ogre would have smashed the head of the player, cause that can happen, you just deny that possibility making your game completely ilogic.

Then pls go to a board game or tell your players what you do so that maybe they are aware of the crap they are playing.

look, I never said, and this is the LAST frakking time i repeat it for ***'s sake, that Cheating all the time is good or to be done.

I said, that the story should have precedence on the fate of the dice. if you like to be killed by a bunch of angry farmers just because the dice says so, well good for you. Sometimes it can be funny. sometimes it is frustrating. Changing the dice so that the frustrating situation isn't as much makes for a better experience for everybody.

I don't cheat my dice almost ever. Sometimes it is necessary, you are a DM, not a gambler. what you do is drive a story, not just roll the dice.

My players are fully aware of what i do, and they aren't. They never know if a die roll is changed or not, that is why i got a DM screen. I surely do not let them know when or if i cheat, but many of them are DMs as well and they know what goes on behind a screen as much as i do.

By the way, note that sometimes the change of the dice goes against the players, not in favor (but of course i never change the players rolls). As sometimes it just happens that villain i carefully planned to be a challenge just screw up and roll a botch. So what happens? the mighty lich lord trip on his robe and fall in the dust? that might be good for a comic game, but if i am leading a epic fantasy campaign that do not seems appropriate, now does it?

Finally, i do not cheat in competitions, i do not cheat in exams and i do not cheat at all. ever.

A GM is the director of the story, not a mere referee which only duty is to keep tracks of npcs and roll the dice.

From the Dungeon Master book 3.5

Page 18: "DM Cheating and player Perceptions"

Go read that small paragraph. it explain perfectly what i am trying to tell you. Maybe seeing it on the books you so much say to follow will convince you that my way to lead games is actually perfectly legitimate.

If you do not have the book, it basically says that you can cheat or not, depending on how you feel. Actually, a DM can't cheat cause he is the supreme God of his universe, so if he says the ogre misses, well then the ogre misses, no matter how many 20s he rolled. You might not be fine with cheating, and this is ok also. The important thing is to not let the player know about it.

Other books offer a similar approach to the question.

I apologize for my previous outburst, but being called "anti-roleplayer" when I consider myself a competent DM and a good roleplayer irked me.

This topic has been severely derailed and has no sembiance to the original discussion, i say we let it die now.

Have a nice day.

The most amazing of you is that you think you dont cheat, its really amazing!! you change roll dice and you dont cheat

What says in that chapter is just stupid. They say you can do it if YOU think it is right, and what? That doesnt change you are not roleplaying, you are just cheating. That idea has nosense cause they you just can ignore the entire rulebook and then why you should buy one ?? I cant think someone coulld have written something so stupid, so you write in a RULEBOOK that you can just ignore all rules and do whatever you want Its as stupid as if in a book about laws there was a law that said you just can ignore any laws and just judge as you think its right. You dont even need dice, anyway most things are going to happen in the same way. Why to put some ogres in the dungeon? anyway there is no real danger, its better just put the big mob and finish.

I dont understand why players cant cheat as you do, if you cant cheat why not players?? I mean they should be able to change their roles when they wanted. I dont really understand your concept of amusement, but well if you get fun that way its up to you, but dont say you roleplay cause you deny any chance so that your players can play fairly in the world they live. Actually they just live your world of puppets.

"Terrible things can hapen in the game because the dice just go awry. Everything might be going fine, when suddenly the players have a run of bad luck. A roun later, half the party's down for the count and the other half almost certainly can't take on the foes that reamin. If everyone dies, the campaign migth very well end then and there, and that's bad for everyone. Do you stand by and watch them get slaugtered, or do you "cheat" and have the foes run off, or fudge the die rolls so tht the PCs still miraculously win in the end?

Do you cheat? The answer: The DM can't cheat. You're the umpire, and what you say goes. As such, it's certainly within your rights to sway things one way or another to keep people happy or keep things runnning smoothly, it's no fun losing a longterm character who gets run over by a cart. A good rule of thumb is that a character shouldn't die in a trivial way because of some fluke of the dice unless he or she was doing something really stupid at the time."

I already told you you dont RP, you just make a game that ppl like to playing even knowing you are cheating ( something that i dont understand but everyone likes different things ). You can also play cards and call that roleplaying. Roleplaying is playing a role like in Real life but in a fantastic world, and that means freedom and realism like in real life. That was the purpose of RPGs, make a virtual world where you can role play your character. But if you just say what the players are going to do or what they can kill, when they are going to die then there is no roleplay, you just make what you want.

geez. so the book is wrong too now?

And for your informations, EVERY single RPG book ever published says as GOLDEN RULE NUMBER ONE: "This is YOUR game, if a rule in this book do not suit you, CHANGE IT!"

But I suppose that is stupid for you as well right? RP rules are like laws? where you got that sentence?

Rolling dice has nothing to do with Roleplaying, by the way. playing a character has. That is why i find it silly your obstinacy about me not "being a roleplayer", you have no idea how good or bad i play my characters, just that,as a DM, i change the results of dice, rarely, when needed for the story.

If you think rolling dice is roleplaying, well. i think i have wasted enough of my time.

Have a nice day.

You cheat just if you try to make a real world. To emulate a real environment in a fantastic world. Most RPGs were made with that intention, but some crappy versions like D&D 3.0 and 3.5. If you dont try to emulate anything real as i see you do then you dont cheat, but you dont roleplay either, you just make up a story, a book and tell them that. You just can skip all the secondary monsters that actualy dont have any chance to kill them. Noone can feel inmersion in something that actually dont follow any rule, that is more like playing cards or a PC game. To feel inmersion you must feel like an actor what the DM is telling you and trying to imagine you are in that world. That is impossible if you know everything is change by the DM as he wish.

When you try to make them really feel inside a fantastic world with realism you will cheat.

Yes, other version of D&D said you could change the rules if you didnt like them. That is not cheating, you just change the rule and then you FOLLOW that rule.

If you can cheat and change the rules at you wish in any moment, then you just can change all the rules so that you play chess and call that D&D 3.0, cause one rule is that you can change whatever you want anytime you want.

I have found a very interesting text in Rules Encyclopedia of D&D first version :

Title is : THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE . In chapter 17 : Campaigning - page 262

"There is one RULE which applies to everything you will do as Dungeon Master. It is the most important of ALL the rules! This is it : Be Fair.
A Dungeon Master must not take sides. A DM who likes his monsters and NPCs better than he likes the PCs, and maliciously sets out to abuse the PCs at every opportunity is not a good DM.
As DM, you will play the ROLES of the creatures encountered, but should do so FAIRLY, without favouring the monsters or the characters. Play the monsters as they would actually behave, at least as you imagine them.
For example, it's not fair to change the rules unless everyone knows about the change. When you add optional rules, apply them to everyone, players and monsters. Do not make exceptions; STICK TO THE RULES AND BE FAIR."

There it is said clearly that you are not a good DM. What you make is not role-playing, as i said many times there is no fair play, no fair or real interaction with the environment.

Other interesting title is : DEATH IN THE CAMPAIGN - page 266

"If you want your campaign to behave more like the fantasy stories you read or see in the movies, you might get rid of spells and magical items that bring people back to life. This includes spells such as Raise dead, raise dead fully, reincarnation and clone.
This makes the campaign a lot more dangerous. When a character is dad, he's dead. The player characters will be a bit choosier about the fights they pick, and will run away from fights more often. High level characters will be rarer, as bad luck and player alpses will take a higher roll.
This option gives character deaths more impact. It is not recommended unless the players are MATURE enough to handle losing a favourite character"

Permadeath is not just an obvious part of D&D, they even tell you it might be a good idea ignore the resurrection spells if your players are mature enough.

But well, as you play D&D 3.0 or 3.5, you just can play cards and call that D&D.