D&D 5E Curse effects and Remove Curse

[CapnZapp]

Thank you for all ideas. In this case, my original idea seems to have worked, since the player decided to keep it. I was clear Remove Curse could only lift unwitting alignment shifts. Now that the player knows the dagger's full mechanics and can make a fully rational decision, any further usage is considered part of that characters normal, natural and unforced behavior. And so, any further alignment shifts will be handled just as a DM-mandated alignment shift; that is, something no Remove Curse can even attempt to reverse.

Now I know the player is gambling on the fact he's LN (or was he CG? Anyway), so he can stay a player character even after the first shift (and essentially postpone the decision until such time).

We'll see how often he actually uses the soulsucking ability (the Inflict Damage part). If he ever does so publically, he might get into trouble even without ever rolling an alignment shift.

Not to mention my future possibilities If he ever does alignment-shift, I might consider having an avatar of Besheba pay him a visit...

Again thank you. I'll keep this as an useful reference thread. (Feel free to keep up the discussion)

 

[CapnZapp]

Like I said above, as far as I'm aware, nothing have officially been said one way or the other. Thus, what appears to be the case at first blush is probably the way it was intended-- low-level spells that remove the conditions they specify are meant to be removed at the levels those spells are at.

Let me clarify:

I'm not really talking about the default rule when asking for examples. Perhaps I should have been clearer on that.

I don't question what is the RAI on a generic cursed item.

I'm talking about those obscure items tucked away in old corners of Magic Compendiae, Dragon Magazine or Realmslore or Dragonlance articles, for whatever edition, where the editor clearly needed something else than what the core rules allowed.

I would be very interested to learn how "official" writers/articles struggled with the way RAW often gets in the way of story, especially for components such as curses that are heavy on the saga or legend angle.

 

[Ilbranteloth]

Let me clarify:

I'm not really talking about the default rule when asking for examples. Perhaps I should have been clearer on that.

I don't question what is the RAI on a generic cursed item.

I'm talking about those obscure items tucked away in old corners of Magic Compendiae, Dragon Magazine or Realmslore or Dragonlance articles, for whatever edition, where the editor clearly needed something else than what the core rules allowed.

I would be very interested to learn how "official" writers/articles struggled with the way RAW often gets in the way of story, especially for components such as curses that are heavy on the saga or legend angle.

I think the answer there is simple. You define an exception to the rule. The specific trumps general. If you state that a remove curse doesn't work against this object, at least without other things taking place, or provide an alternate way around it, then that's the answer. It really doesn't have to be any more complicated than that.

So if you have the One Ring, and you can't actively give it away (unless you're a hobbit), and the only way to destroy it is to throw it in Mount Doom, then that's the answer. A remove curse is insufficient. On the other hand, you could state that a remove curse is sufficient to remove the attunement, but the danger still exists and the party will have to do something about it now that they know about it.

Which leads me to a new thought, regarding the danger. Perhaps a cursed item automatically attunes with a creature that dons it. If you put on this ring, you are attuned, and cannot remove that without remove curse. Furthermore, for very powerful items (like the One Ring), simply carrying it on your person risks this attunement and the effects of the curse. It could require a saving throw each day, and perhaps the DC increases daily as well.

If that's the case, it puts some teeth into the idea that this powerful evil artifact can't just be left here for somebody else to find.

 

[CapnZapp]

I think the answer there is simple. You define an exception to the rule.

But please dear sweet Ilbranteloth - I know this already. I'm looking for WOTC (and TSR, and Paizo) writers exceptions to the rules!

 

[Ilbranteloth]

But please dear sweet Ilbranteloth - I know this already. I'm looking for WOTC (and TSR, and Paizo) writers exceptions to the rules!

Yes, you may know that. But I think it's worth reiterating. Because I'm not sure everybody knows that already, or at least accepts that as the answer. And that's the official answer as best I can tell.

There has been very little converted from earlier editions that WotC has updated to 5e. Also, I can't think of anything offhand in any of those that would answer your question. In fact, I'm not sure I remember any published adventure offhand that would curse one of the PCs with a significant curse. Certainly in TSR-era there were lots of new rules and such in adventures, but not curses.

The closest I can think of that makes significant alterations is Ravenloft itself and the alterations to several spells in CoS. No spell, including wish will allow you to escape his domain. You could consider that a curse. The only way to end that curse is to kill Strahd. If you're looking for earlier examples, then many campaign settings of the TSR era - Krynn, Athas, Spelljammer, Planescape, Ravenloft, all had alterations to everything from a few rules, spells, to classes and races. Perhaps it started in Q1 - Queen of the Demonweb Pits and the many spell alterations in that adventure.

They are making alterations to dying and resurrection in ToA. That's another 5e example.

 

[Blue]

[MENTION=12731]CapnZapp[/MENTION], I want to address this in both the specific and the general.

First the specific. Don't have it be a curse. Have that the souls are collected but eventually dissipate/free/whatever. but using the power actually send them to a dark god. That usign the item is a form of worship and empowering of the dark gods. Continued use of it turns you eveil not through magic, but because you are committing evil acts that are staining your soul.

I know, that doesn't address your issues writ large, which is why I want to address your bigger question. I will use this as my example but take these as more generalized.

Many D&D curses and the like are meant to be short term - they lie in wait and then trigger. And while triggered they are quite bad, but are ultimately transitive in nature because it wouldn't be fun for a fighter to be cursed to forevermore wield a backbiting blade, or whatever. But it sounds like you want a slow, lingering, (and in this case cumulative) curse, but the game fixes are for short duration/hard hitting curses, and taking a slow curse to a short duration basically negates it.

You could make it that a simple remove curse will just delay the effects for a day, not remove them. Then it becomes an addiction - get he remove curse every day or turn evil. (And of course, have it come up in play once or twice, such as if they are captured or separated from the caster.) And even then it's a continual drain of a 3rd level spell just to hold ground. Back in AD&D & 2ed there were many curses that the simple spells would not be sufficient to remove, or could only remove in the opening stages like lycanthropy, and once it had manifested took much stronger measures. So there's precedent, you're not just nerfing the spell.

Alternately remove curse works as specified, but the paths of evil are laid and continued use will allow the curse to happen more frequently.

Or even combine them - once you know it turns you evil, make it clear that continuing to use it - even with magical precautions - is an evil act. So there would be both the curse which could be magically countered, and the fact that once they know how bad it is, they are consciously chosing evil means to go on and that will have an effect as well. The ends don't justify the means.

But ll in all you are correct - curses in D&D are usually immediate when triggered and brutal, but not long term. Just like long term wounds can be done in D&D but the system isn't set up natively to support it, the same for long-term curses. but you can make it work if you want to.