Creating the Snake Plissken Dilemna in D&D

[Felon]

So, has anyone here tried to create a scenario where some villains want to get a hero to do a job for them, and want to imbed some insurance into their pawn--something long-term and potentially pernicious? To properly exploit this plot device, you can't have the control be something easily overcome, nor can it be so totally overwhelming that the hero sees the situation as hopeless and his efforts as futile. It's a fine line to walk. A "shock collar" effect might go off once or twice in order to ratchet up tension, but for the most it just creates a dilemna for the heroes to resolve.

In D&D, the designers decided that eliminating down-time takes precedence over devious plot hooks, so most debilitating effects are easily and automatically alleviated by low-level spells. The rules never present poisons as something with long-term insidious ramifications, and even if they did, neutralize poison is easy enough to come by in spell or potion forrm. Same goes for remove disease and remove curse, although I notice that their descriptions actually make allowances for curses that might be particularly difficult to remove.

Geas is this obvious way to effect this scenario, but sufficiently obvious that most folks are familiar with circumventing it. A lesser geas is ripe for a remove curse, while a true geas is alleviated by break enchantment.

I have a few ideas of how to handle this. The necrotic cyst line of spells from Libris Mortis seem perfect for the job, and since they're official, rules-savvy players don't get that look they get in their eye that they get when the DM's coloring outside the lines.

But I figure this is a good topic for discussion at ENWorld. What kind of experiences have you guys had?

 

[Ceresco]

An interesting conundrum.

My question is what's wrong with coloring outside the lines? (not in a sniping way, just
wondering what contraints the project has)

Are you trying to circumvent the reaction of a particular player?

Or are you just going for that wierd term "balance" that keeps coming up when rules questions arrive?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

If the players are at a level where break enchantment is easy to come by, you're pretty much better off forcing them to do things by holding loved ones/kingdoms hostage.

Barring that, I'd say a series of geas and lesser geas spells that lock out getting someone to remove the spell would be the way to go. The spell can't really prohibit activity but it could, for instance, force them to attempt to stab anyone they met who would be capable of casting break enchantment.

 

[RangerWickett]

Whenever you come up with an idea, post it here and see how many ways we come up with to circumvent it. Fix those problems, then try again, until you've got a mostly-foolproof plan.

 

[Felon]

My question is what's wrong with coloring outside the lines?

Well, that's a fair question. I guess I think coloring outside the lines is kind of...sloppy. I've seen my share of slacker DM's flying by the seat of their pants and mistakenly labeling that as creativty, enough so that I personally don't like to just make up stuff that bypasses conventional rules simply as a matter of convenience. In this case, doing something along the lines of fabricating a poison that no spell can cure would resonate poorly with experienced gamers--they'd see it as the DM contriving some nonsense to railroad them into a course of action. They'd be more-or-less right too.

But if I stick to working with extant rules, then they have some confidence that it's not just some arbitary fiat being exercised. If I stick a necrotic cyst inside a character, there's certain explict vulnerabilities it carries and certain explicit ways to deal with it. Now, they don't have Libris Mortis so they can't just look up the spell, but they at least know I'm not just pulling stuff out of my...ear.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Tenacious magic is an epic feat, but perhaps it could be down-graded by adding prerequisites or restricting it, or something. The linked thread asks whether a tenacious bestow curse can be removed by anyone other than the person who cast it. Even if the rules gurus decide otherwise, I think the rules justification for this plot point would be secure enough for a DM to rule in favor of it.

 

[Land Outcast]

Fiend Folio: symbionts

 

[Joshua Randall]

Fiend Folio: symbionts

Dang, beat me too it.

The symbionts in FF have always seemed very Vancian to me; cf. especially the Cugel stories in which the main character is implanted with a creature that will know if Cugel strays.

 

[Herobizkit]

Well, just because those spells exist, does that also mean that by default they're also available?

Back in the 1e days, clerics would not cast their high-level spells "just because the players are heroes"; PCs had to PAY them (A LOT, by 1e treasure standards). If the PC did not follow the same faith as the caster, the PC would be required to do some crazy-ass quest OR, even better, the priest simply refused the PC outright.

This potential chain of NPC-chasing gives the PCs the DM's much-needed runaround, and by the time they find the "cure", it may already be too late.

Plus, if the PC's actually succeed at circumventing the geas/doohickey, what's to stop the bad guys from coming after them?

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Well, that's a fair question. I guess I think coloring outside the lines is kind of...sloppy. I've seen my share of slacker DM's flying by the seat of their pants and mistakenly labeling that as creativty, enough so that I personally don't like to just make up stuff that bypasses conventional rules simply as a matter of convenience.

It's not a problem so long as a means to circumvent it is possible. It doesn't have to be 'by the book', and it doesn't have to be easy, it just has to be remotely feasible. Experienced, mature players that trust their DM will have no problem with it so long as you play fair even if it is outside the RAW. If you explained up front what you were thinking of doing and why, they'd probably be cool with it. My players would, anyway.

Give them a curse that removes 1 from their max hit points a day (or week or whatever, depending on the quest). Let them discover through research and such that a way exists to break the curse, but it could take longer than doing what the BBEG wants them to do, and that time spent doing one is time taken from being able to do the other. Whichever way they decide to go, it could lead to interesting adventures with that 'ticking clock' sense of doom.


Personally, I abhor the notion that the DM is circumscribed by the same rules as the players. It's the antithesis of everything I think RPGs should be, and that I enjoy as a player and as a DM. It contributes to this notion that the players are entitled to complete control over their environment, encourages metagaming, and removes the sense of exploration and wonder and mystery that makes the games interesting.