D&D 5E Orcish Magic Belt

[PnPgamer]

[MENTION=6786484]PnPgamer[/MENTION]: That's a cool idea. I was just thinking along similar lines myself in terms of barbarian rage and having a side effect that only affects non-orcs. The only thing is, the PC most likely to use the belt wears heavy armor (and has the heavy armor feat), so wouldn't be able to use the rage feature.

Instead, how about this:

- You must attune to the belt to gain its benefits. If you are not an orc (or a half-orc), you must succeed on a DC 15 Charisma check to attune to it. Even if you succeed, you emit a sour stench noticeable from up to 10 feet away.
- While wearing the belt, you can use the barbarian's Reckless Attack feature.
- Gruumsh's Blessing: When you reduce a hostile creature to 0 hit points, you gain temporary hit points equal to your Constitution modifier + your character level (minimum of 1).
- Because the belt is made from the skin of a dwarven battlerager, you have disadvantage on all Charisma checks made to interact with dwarves.

are you sure that heavy armor prevents rage? I don't think it does... lemme check juuuuust a little moment... oh it does. well darn.

 

[CapnZapp]

It attracts the unshakable devotion and physical attraction of a half dozen orcish women.

Hmm. Less sexist, maybe just the unshakable devotion and physical attraction of a half dozen orcs?

I think you're safe with sexist stereotypes in this case.

We are, after all, discussing Orcs. They're not only fictional, they're specifically there to be the exact opposite of sensitive equal-rights metrosexual modern (male) humans.

The entire reason for having that tribe be specifically Orcs (rather than, say, cave men or pygmies) is so we can play without having to stop and ponder either why we have given them a stereotypically evil rape-and-pillaging life style or, more poignantly, why we don't have to feel bad when we slaughter them.

In this context, choosing to have the Orc tribe of your adventure choose a big brutish male as their leader, and choosing to portray their women as dreaming about having that male sire all their children, is pretty uncontroversial if you ask me.

Cheerio

 

[CapnZapp]

It was flavourful, but the players are good enough RPers not to change gender just for a stat bonus.

Are you talking about a player whose character is female to start with?

Or how do they change gender to qualify for the "can only be worn by females" requirement of the belt?

(It would be all kinds of amazing if a player were so power-hungry he actually sought out a Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity for his brutish Axe Slayer Dwarf character just for this purpose )

 

[CapnZapp]

I think I've got it:

Orc Champion's Belt
Wondrous item, rare (requires attunement)

This thick leather belt is fashioned from tanned dwarf skin. While wearing this belt, you gain the following benefits:
Reckless Attack. As a bonus action, you can gain advantage on melee weapon attack rolls using Strength until the end of your turn, but attack rolls against you have advantage until the start of your next turn.
Gruumsh's Blessing. When you reduce a hostile creature to 0 hit points, you gain temporary hit points equal to your Constitution modifier + your character level (minimum of 1).
Enmity of the Dwarves. While wearing this belt, you have disadvantage on all Charisma checks made to interact with dwarves.
Gruumsh's Curse. If you are not an orc, attuning to this belt causes Gruumsh to curse you for your insolence. Removing the belt fails to end the curse on you, and you cannot end your attunement to the belt until the curse is broken, such as with a remove curse spell.
As long as you remain cursed, you cannot benefit from Gruumsh's Blessing. In addition, whenever a hostile creature damages you, you must succeed on a DC 15 Charisma saving throw or go berserk. While berserk, you must use your action each round to attack the creature nearest to you with a melee attack. If you can make extra attacks as part of the Attack action, you use those extra attacks, moving to attack the next nearest creature after you fell your current target. If you have multiple possible targets, you attack one at random. You are berserk until you start your turn with no creatures within 60 feet of you that you can see or hear.

Comments:

I see you made it overtly cursed. Personally I think I prefer items which avoid this mechanism, and instead offer "advantages" that are so inherently ambivalent as to be a sufficient deterrent in themselves.

Reckless attack: Having to spend a bonus action each round is a significant drawback. Do note Barbarians don't have this cost. This makes this benefit of questionable utility. I'm guessing you would have to think hard about when and where you use this ability (which thematically is kinda the opposite of "reckless"...) If opponent AC is low, there are many enemies and/or the foes are individually weak, you would be better off making three attacks instead of two. If opponent AC is high, the "advantage of advantage" quickly tapers off. I would consider removing the bonus action cost, and simply duplicate the Barbarian ability. Alternatively: add Orc-flavored utility to that bonus action, such as:

Reckless aggression: You can spend your bonus action on reckless aggression. This allows you to move up to your speed towards a hostile creature you see. It also gives you advantage on melee weapon attack rolls using Strength during this turn, but attack rolls against you have advantage until your next turn.

This way, the cost of using your bonus action is mitigated by an uniquely orcish benefit. Do note you can still do "reckless aggression" even if you don't want to move anywhere.

Gruumsh' Blessing: good to go

Enmity of the Dwarves: I have always thought leaving the attitude of NPCs up to random rolls (as per the DMG rules) to be wonky. If my player wore this and met a couple of Dwarves, I would decide they would not have anything to do with this character, no rolls needed (or allowed). I guess I would re-phrase this to "The attitude towards you and your allies, of any Dwarf you encounter, switches automatically to Hostile when and if he or she sees you wearing this belt". This wording would make it clear to the player what to expect with me as the DM

Gruumsh' Curse: Consider keeping only the berserker bit. That is, something like this:

Gruumsh' Wrath: Once a round, when a hostile creature damages you, you must succeed on a DC 15 Charisma saving throw or go berserk. While berserk, you must use your action to attack an adjacent creature with all available melee attack(s), dealing 1d8 extra damage with every hit. If no creatures are adjacent, you must move adjacent to the creature nearest to you. If you have multiple possible targets, you attack one at random. At the start of each of your turns, if no creatures you see or hear are within 60 feet of you, or if you make a DC 15 Charisma save, you stop being berserk.

This is based on the notion that berserking isn't a curse to a proper Orc Chief

 

[pukunui]

I see you made it overtly cursed.

The curse only applies if someone who isn't an orc or half-orc attunes to the belt. If you are an orc or a half-orc, you're good to go. I was expecting that either one of the two half-orc PCs in the party would take this belt.

Personally I think I prefer items which avoid this mechanism, and instead offer "advantages" that are so inherently ambivalent as to be a sufficient deterrent in themselves.

The idea is that if you are not an orc and yet have the audacity to use this item, Gruumsh curses you for your insolence.

Having to spend a bonus action each round is a significant drawback. Do note Barbarians don't have this cost.

I know. I didn't want it to be as good as the barbarian ability. It's a step down from that. We'll see how it goes. I'm not actually sure either half-orc in the party will want to use it after all. They both might decide it's too vile for them. Which is fine.

 

[iserith]

I'd have it where the orc chief removes a single eye from every elf he kills as an offering to Gruumsh and an insult to the Seldarine. These eyes are sewn into a belt. The belt gives the wearer advantage on Perception checks that involve sight, but negatively impacts any social interaction with elves.

 

[CapnZapp]

The idea is that if you are not an orc and yet have the audacity to use this item, Gruumsh curses you for your insolence.

I realize that and I understand where you're coming from.

But I still feel it's lazy design. (Talking about curses in general; please don't take offense.)

It's less elegant. It's writing you on the nose.

Besides, it begs the question why not more items are protected this way from being used by your people's enemies.

In fact, it's less of a proper curse, and more of a heavy-handed protection against improper use.

Do you see where I'm going with this?

My version isn't a proper "curse" in any form. But it can still make you curse the day you decided to use it!

To me, that's much more refined than blatantly calling out the curse.

And it's more akin to a true curse than the "not an orc" penalty. Which is more of a benefit (to Orcs) than something negative.

Oh well. Rant over [emoji6] I wish you the best of luck.

 

[CapnZapp]

I know. I didn't want it to be as good as the barbarian ability. It's a step down from that. We'll see how it goes.

Perhaps I was not direct enough. The problem isn't that you wanted to make it less good than the Barb ability.

The problem is that you might have made it not good at all.

Cheers

 

[pukunui]

Meh. I don't see what's so lazy or inelegant about a curse, but I don't particularly feel like debating it (especially since I already handed the item out after tonight's session). Ultimately, I think there's plenty of room for both methods to co-exist in the game.

 

[CapnZapp]

Again, this wasn't directed at you in particular.

I guess you just had the mixed fortune of being the one whose thread triggered my rant against so-called curses that are beneficial and valuable item properties in disguise [emoji4]