D&D 5E Curse effects and Remove Curse

[CapnZapp]

Am I missing something or are there several effects in the game that are trivial to remove once the party spellcaster is off the lowest levels? What is the designer's intentions in these cases?

Let's take a particular example:

I invented a cursed dagger that "collect souls" each time it's used to down a foe, and can then be used by its wielder to inflict "evil" damage on a foe spending that energy.

(Mechanically, the dagger can store up to four charges, that can be used for a an automatic Inflict Wounds when you hit, cast at the spell level of the number of charges currently held; so +3d10 necrotic bonus weapon damage if the dagger is used while holding a single charge up to 6d10 at spell level four)

This can be used once a day.

Now, the "hidden" curse part (that Identify et al won't detect): each time the dagger is used this way, roll d20. On a 1, wielder's alignment shifts one step towards chaotic evil.

My RAI is: if a character wants to benefit from this dagger, he needs to risk getting alignment changes. If an alignment shift is absolutely unacceptable, he should have to stop using the dagger to inflict wounds on his foes. Having the party cleric cast Remove Curse once every twenty days on average is not meant to be a solution.
​

To my question:

What stops the adventurers from simply casting Remove Curse (or a similar spell; Protection from Good and Evil, Dispel Magic, Greater Restoration perhaps) to reset the adventurer's alignment each time it shifts, essentially getting to use an evil cursed item for "free"?

I'm not asking for advice along the lines "you can always keep the alignment shifts secret from the players, and simply remove that PC once he or she turns evil". I want the player to know the tradeoff and I want to present the player with a choice: to make an informed decision whether to keep using the item or not, and that means that once he uses the dagger for the first time, he needs to learn the full mechanics.

I'm wondering about what the RAW and RAI is here.

Is the design intent of the rules really to make curses trivially lifted? (Apart from artifact-strength curses that require you to cast the item into the Volcano of Doom etc).

Is there any precedent for ruling something like "sure, you can temporarily lift the alignment change, but if you keep using the dagger, you aren't really fighting the change in personality".

Or something like "the spell saves you from the effects of your alignment shift, but to truly reverse the changed alignment you must atone, by willingly leave the dagger behind and/or leaving the dagger to a Cleric for ritual cleansing that destroys the dagger"

Or something else along similar lines...

Asking because regular cursed items have curiously little in the way of actual mechanics. They mostly just say "this sword makes you fight backwards until the curse is lifted" which is pretty much a trivial thing once you get the right spell for that, and then you toss the sword and move on.

Do you have any examples of curses that remain somewhat bothersome even after the party reaches a level where the "counter-curse spells" become available. Precedent of a more involved, a more story-based approach, where getting rid of curses (including alignment changes) become more of a thing than "I cast a spell, fixed, let's take a long rest and move on" where the total cost is close to zero.

I'm primarily looking for official first-party 5E examples created by the official WotC 5E design team (with direct oversight by MMearls, Crawford & Co).

Thanks for any insight

 

[Sotik]

From what I understand, mind you I am a new DM, Protection from Good and Evil would not effect a curse. However, the point of remove curse is to remove a curse, so it is just something you have to be aware of when giving players cursed objects. To me they don't show up enough that players will be casting remove curse on every item.

I know you said you weren't asking for advice, but a way I would tackle this is that as the player uses the cursed item and their alignment slowly shifts. I would tell them away from the others, or if done in front of the players I would tell them that while they know this their characters don't, that they feel a little more inclined to do evil things. Slowly it would ramp into the overwhelming feeling and desire to do evil things. This would give the players a time to slowly figure out something is going on, and react to it.

Then, again new DM here, but as far as I know once the curse was removed, the alignment would stay the same. Looking over a quick google search I really can't find a spell that straight out changes the alignment of a player unless from a curse, a wish spell, or taking a trip to Bytopia and so on.

"Only a wish or a miracle can restore former alignment," is the closest answer I found on how to change a players alignment. If I am wrong, I am sure someone will correct me. Just my two cents on the subject.

To me, the curse it the changing of the alignment on the dagger, the changed alignment of the player is a permanent effect that isn't as easily dealt with as the curse.

 

[CapnZapp]

I'm inclined to make this ruling:

The dagger detects as evil on a Detect Evil spell. So if you still use it even when you know it's somehow evil, you must roll the d20 the first time you use it, and then I'll reveal the curse and its mechanics.

If that single roll is unlucky, you can use Remove Curse or otherwise atone for your sins, as long as you dump the dagger.

If you aren't unlucky, but (willingly and voluntarily) keep using the dagger even after learning its full details, my ruling is that any alignment changes are no longer considered a curse, but your voluntary personal development, and any further alignment shifts are just as permanent as if a lawful good person starts running around killing and raping innocents (which is already something the rules empower the DM to impose permanent alignment changes for).

---

So it's not that I need Mearls to tell me I can do this.

But I would appreciate it if you can point me to some instance where 5E has gone beyond the bare minimum regarding a curse in an official supplement somewhere, that I can point any disgruntled players to as precedent.

Thanks in advance

 

[CapnZapp]

Thanks for your input Sotik!

I know you said you weren't asking for advice

Oh, I am asking for advice alright!

I just wasn't primarily interested in solving this by "the character doesn't know" route. I want this to be a decision point for the player: do I risk my character's existence to gain a cool power spike, or do I feel it isn't worth it?

This pretty much boils down to: how big a disaster would it be to have to roll up a new character...

PS. If the character is good (LG, NG, CG) or lawful neutral he or she does get a second chance, since the first shift will "only" bring him to LN, TN, CN or LE respectively (which means the character remains playable - I'm using the Adventurer's League alignment rules in my home game: player characters can remain in play as long as they aren't Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil).

This means that a calculating player that is prepared to subtly change the way he's playing his character can keep using the dagger until he strikes out the first time (which potentially doesn't happen during an entire campaign), and then make it a personal quest to claim back his original alignment as a wholly secondary consideration. DS

 

[Dualazi]

Thanks for your input Sotik!


Oh, I am asking for advice alright!

I just wasn't primarily interested in solving this by "the character doesn't know" route. I want this to be a decision point for the player: do I risk my character's existence to gain a cool power spike, or do I feel it isn't worth it?

This pretty much boils down to: how big a disaster would it be to have to roll up a new character...

PS. If the character is good (LG, NG, CG) or lawful neutral he or she does get a second chance, since the first shift will "only" bring him to LN, TN, CN or LE respectively (which means the character remains playable - I'm using the Adventurer's League alignment rules in my home game: player characters can remain in play as long as they aren't Neutral Evil and Chaotic Evil).

This means that a calculating player that is prepared to subtly change the way he's playing his character can keep using the dagger until he strikes out the first time (which potentially doesn't happen during an entire campaign), and then make it a personal quest to claim back his original alignment as a wholly secondary consideration. DS

Well, first off, I dunno that most players I know would consider the cursed item in question to be a big enough power spike to be worth losing a character over, but I digress.

Relating to the actual topic, the answer as far as I can tell is that yes, curses are largely trivial in 5e, which I do consider something of a detriment. Even the spell Bestow Curse, a favorite of witches and the like in just about every fairy tale, has to be cast at 9th level to have an indefinite duration, and is still ended by a regular at-level Remove Curse. I'm not really sure what prompted this design decision, as players aren't really encouraged to abuse bestow curse anyway since it would probably just be used to soften up a target they intended to kill anyway, but it does lessen the fear of monsters packing the spell.

My advice with your situation specifically would be to find another, more consistent drawback for players to contemplate. As you yourself said, there's a chance they might not have to deal with the curse at all, which isn't any more interesting than abusing Remove Curse.

 

[Quickleaf]

Am I missing something or are there several effects in the game that are trivial to remove once the party spellcaster is off the lowest levels? What is the designer's intentions in these cases?

Let's take a particular example:

[SBLOCK=cursed dagger]

I invented a cursed dagger that "collect souls" each time it's used to down a foe, and can then be used by its wielder to inflict "evil" damage on a foe spending that energy.

(Mechanically, the dagger can store up to four charges, that can be used for a an automatic Inflict Wounds when you hit, cast at the spell level of the number of charges currently held; so +3d10 necrotic bonus weapon damage if the dagger is used while holding a single charge up to 6d10 at spell level four)

This can be used once a day.

Now, the "hidden" curse part (that Identify et al won't detect): each time the dagger is used this way, roll d20. On a 1, wielder's alignment shifts one step towards chaotic evil.[/sblock]

My RAI is: if a character wants to benefit from this dagger, he needs to risk getting alignment changes. If an alignment shift is absolutely unacceptable, he should have to stop using the dagger to inflict wounds on his foes. Having the party cleric cast Remove Curse once every twenty days on average is not meant to be a solution.
​

To my question:

What stops the adventurers from simply casting Remove Curse (or a similar spell; Protection from Good and Evil, Dispel Magic, Greater Restoration perhaps) to reset the adventurer's alignment each time it shifts, essentially getting to use an evil cursed item for "free"?

Here's how I'd play this:

1. Don't make it obvious to the rest of the party that it's the dagger which has caused the PC's alignment change. Use secret notes, and work it out with the player in question. So figuring out that it's the dagger should be something that's done as a slow reveal or provides some legwork for the PCs to figure out.

2. They actively don't want to receive remove curse, which requires the caster touching them. There's no wording about a potential attack roll (usually there is a clause about "unwilling" targets with other spells), so a reasonable ruling is that remove curse only works on willing creatures. So...tricking him into being willing could be a fun bit of roleplaying.

3. Once his alignment is restored, design the cursed dagger such that if a creature ever un-attunes from it, that creature can never re-attune to it.... with a possible exception made for committing a suitable act of evil as "contrition."

Problem solved. Adventuring awesome created.

Is the design intent of the rules really to make curses trivially lifted? (Apart from artifact-strength curses that require you to cast the item into the Volcano of Doom etc).

Yes, that's the intent of the rules. There are a few clever ways around it, but it does require forethought. My example of changing how attunement works for your cursed dagger is one example of an effective workaround.

Is there any precedent for ruling something like "sure, you can temporarily lift the alignment change, but if you keep using the dagger, you aren't really fighting the change in personality".

I wouldn't even go there. Just design the cursed dagger the way you want it to work.

Or something like "the spell saves you from the effects of your alignment shift, but to truly reverse the changed alignment you must atone, by willingly leave the dagger behind and/or leaving the dagger to a Cleric for ritual cleansing that destroys the dagger"

I routinely house rule remove curse to have other "special components" specific to the nature of the curse. This allows for scenarios like you describe. If you read the Witcher series or play those games, there are some great examples of what curse breaking looks like. You do this whole adventure, and THEN at the end, once you have all the "special components" in place, that is when you cast the remove curse. That's how I prefer to play it. But it's not RAW.

Asking because regular cursed items have curiously little in the way of actual mechanics. They mostly just say "this sword makes you fight backwards until the curse is lifted" which is pretty much a trivial thing once you get the right spell for that, and then you toss the sword and move on.

Those sorts of cursed items usually appeared in the context of old school dungeon-oriented play or organized play (and often appeared in significant number) where you didn't have the luxury of resting to get spells back, nor of going into town to purchase a casting of remove curse. IIRC, we had a party going through Slave Pits of the Undercity and we ended up having three cursed items and so the cleric was faced with a choice about her spells – who did she want to spare? and how many remove curse spells had she prepared?

In a game where you aren't under those kind of pressures or have easier access to magic (many 5e games), you'll either want to house rule remove curse or get creative.

Do you have any examples of curses that remain somewhat bothersome even after the party reaches a level where the "counter-curse spells" become available. Precedent of a more involved, a more story-based approach, where getting rid of curses (including alignment changes) become more of a thing than "I cast a spell, fixed, let's take a long rest and move on" where the total cost is close to zero.

I'm primarily looking for official first-party 5E examples created by the official WotC 5E design team (with direct oversight by MMearls, Crawford & Co).

Can't help you about official material. But I can give an example from my adventure The Beast of Graenseskov...

[SBLOCK=spoilers]A hag curses those who participated in the execution of her sister. The curse afflicts four NPCs, though no one realizes that at the beginning. Only one turns into a wolf monster and terrorizes the countryside. If the curse is ended on one (by means of remove curse or killing them), it jumps to another of the NPCs. If the curse jumps through all four NPCs, it ends up afflicting the mayor of the town and "Bad Mojo Happens."

Now, the adventure is meant for lower levels without access to remove curse, and I present options for tweaking how remove curse works, but even if those two things weren't true, my approach with "the curse that jumps from victim to victim" would still work.[/SBLOCK]

 

[Sotik]

Well thinking about this, the best example I can think of is Critical Role, so be mindful of some SPOILERS here and sorry in advance if you hate CR lol.

[SBLOCK=spoilers]But when Grog had Kraven(sp?) Edge he didn't know what the curse was or what it was doing to him. It was a real complex relationship offering Grog, a guy who craved power, well power. While on the inside slowly doing something to him that he wasn't aware it. It wasn't until he actually broke free from it that Matt Mercer gave him the sheet that explained the curse.[/SBLOCK]

So it's not really against the rules to hide the effects of a curse. If you wanted to hint at it, you could say "As you use this dagger it satisfies you, the power in which it gives you to kill others excites you." Or you could, if you wish, just drop the bomb shell that this thing is effecting his moral standards. Just remember that it's something he has to tell the other players or they have to learn it some how. The only problem with that, is that when they smell a curse, it's going to be gone. So the hiding it isn't terrible in this situation.

Then when his alignment changes from say LG to LN, tell him that his moral outlook on life isn't the same. As he has traveled over the days/weeks/months and witnessed murder and death it has changed him. He is more satisfied when he uses the dagger to slay things, he craves it. This should be a huge hint that his alignment has taken a big fall and it has something to do with the dagger. Then present him with a moral delima, like a Man being killed by his neighbor for taking fruit from a tree and remind him that he is indifferent to it. He stole, and justice was served, that's all that matters. Then if he keeps using the dagger and he doesn't tell anyone about it, when his alignment drops from LN to LE do more of the same, and present him with another moral test. Like a man having his hand cut off for stealing fruit from the same tree, and remind him that deep inside it angers him, he feels the man should be killed for breaking the law.

Then at the end of it all, if his alignment has changed and they remove the curse, tell him that while the curse from the dagger is gone his evil moral standing has not shifted, it seems to have a lasting effect on him that needs to be cured in another way. Introduce him to a quest giver who knows of a rumor that says there is a stone deep within a cave that is said to give a person 1 wish before it dissolves, but no one dares go and try to get it because the cave is now a home to a beholder. And those who have tried to obtain this stone were never heard from again.

Again, just my 2 cents on how I as a new DM would tackle this. I am sure you will get some good advice but hopefully this helps you brain storm a bit on the subject.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Just because you use the word 'curse' doesn't mean remove curse works on it. Remove curse works on the things that say remove curse gets rid of this curse. You can easily decide that this item, since it requires voluntary action, doesn't respond to a remove curse to revert the alignment change. So long as the players CAN find a way to correct things, and you don't overuse the 'but this curse isn't removed by remove curse' it should be fine.

And, in this specific case, the alignment change should be lasting and not temporary, and the solution to prevent continued alignment changes should be to stop using the dagger, and the solution to correcting the alignment change should be whatever method is used in your game to atone.

 

[UnknownDyson]

There is a very simple solution to this problem and one that is built into the rules. Treat the alignment shift caused by the continued use of the dagger as a form of indefinite madness. It is stated in the DMG that indefinite madness requires a greater restoration spell or higher to cure. The madness caused by the dagger is too potent to be cured by a greater restoration spell and requires a quest, a wish spell, or whatever the DM decides. Or maybe.......there is no fix.

I love the madness rules, great to use when you have the party member that doesn't mind trucking with demons and accepts "gifts" from those kind of individuals.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I think UnknownDyson has the right of it, and "madness" can easily be refluffed. I am also good with a "helpful" NPC telling the PC's that this is a special "curse" and remove curse isn't going to handle it.