D&D 5E Removing the Once per Wedding Limit on Solemnization in Weddings in 5e

[howandwhy99]

I'm confused. Are people suggesting characters can have two or more familiars at once now? (or is this a potential horcrux problem?)

 

[Savage Wombat]

But what happens if you change alignment after solemnization? Do the effects go away, or can you re-solemnize a new target of the matching alignment?

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

Will the required targets of the solemnization be specified as one male and one female, or simply two creatures? Maybe this is an area for DM rulings, or advice in a sidebar.

Solemnization has always been defined as being between one male PC and one female PC, period. That's what the 1e DMG said, and that's good enough for me. Many male players play male PCs more than female PCs, so if you want to allow players to choose that lifestyle for their characters, they'll just use it for powergaming purposes.

And we haven’t taken this to its ultimate conclusion. You got male/male PC solemnization powergaming out there. How can we rule that full-party solemnization is illegal when you say that male/male PC solemnization is legal. What is it about the full party that’s different? Well, full-party solemnization wasn't allowed in 1e because it was considered unbalancing by Gygax's standards. But if we take his standards away in one case, what about the others? And what about animal companions for non-druids and ultimately what about undead minions for non-necromancers? What happens to role protection then? How can we disallow these things and at the same time have supplements allowing solemnization between two male PCs. You mark my words, this is just the beginning in a long downward slide in relation to all the things that we consider to be abhorrent.

[sblock]The previous paragraph written with apologies to Pat Robertson. [/sblock]

Why limit it to two? If you do so you eliminate hive minds and swarms from play, and lose the ability to share the benefit across the whole party. And what about oozes? If they split, which half gets the benefit? I'm thinking solemnization benefits should be area-of-effect based, rather than creature-based.

Absolutely not. I hate this MMO-ification of D&D, I really do. AoE solemnization is completely unrealistic. I mean, sure, it works in anime, where you can keep picking up partner after partner, but in AD&D you got one solemnized partner when you reached name level, in addition to your keep, your 2.5 followers and your dog--and that was it, and we were happy with it.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Because of this necessity, I think De-Solemnization should be an easily accessible, low-level ritual...but have a significantly expensive material component. Probably resulting in the loss of at least 50% of the characters wealth, and possibly on ongoing Feat-Tax (all treasure found is reduced by 25% for maintenance of Ex-Spouse Characters). DM's are also advised to roleplay this process out thoroughly. Especially as to the finding of a suitable Expert in De-Solemnization.

I'm thinking this ritual needs to be somewhat rare in order to maintain both the wealth redistribution mechanics of the campaign world and balance of power. Surely you weren't going to suggest that De-solemnization be solely a divine ritual?

Absolutely not. I hate this MMO-ification of D&D, I really do. AoE solemnization is completely unrealistic. I mean, sure, it works in anime, where you can keep picking up partner after partner, but in AD&D you got one solemnized partner when you reached name level, in addition to your keep, your 2.5 followers and your dog--and that was it, and we were happy with it.

Well, we do expect 5E to cater to multiple gaming generations. Insisting that we hold to an AD&D standard when clearly 3E and later editions removed both name level and power cap is a non-starter. As an old 1E grognard I share some of your nostalgia, but fear the horse has left the barn on multi-partner solemnization. There's probably room for either house rules or rules modules on this.

 

[Walker N. Waistz]

Sometimes I love the internet. This is one of those times.

God bless you all.

 

[Lanefan]

I think it is a travesty that 4e had a hard limit of one solemnization per wedding. After all, how difficult is it to say the words, "I now pronounce you [character] and spouse"?

Real difficult if it's two PCs getting spoused to each other, even worse if one of them is the only Cleric in the party. I mean let's face it, they're going to need a whole separate sub-system for PC-PC marriage as opposed to a PC marrying an NPC; and in either case the designers will be hard-pressed to ensure the Book of Erotic Fantasy doesn't rear its ugly head with its own system carried forward from 3e.

Lan-"and I don't even want to think about how this all interacts with the pregnancy option sidebar"-efan

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

Real difficult if it's two PCs getting spoused to each other, even worse if one of them is the only Cleric in the party. I mean let's face it, they're going to need a whole separate sub-system for PC-PC marriage as opposed to a PC marrying an NPC; and in either case the designers will be hard-pressed to ensure the Book of Erotic Fantasy doesn't rear its ugly head with its own system carried forward from 3e.

Lan-"and I don't even want to think about how this all interacts with the pregnancy option sidebar"-efan

Oh, don't even get me started on the whole "NPCs don't use the same marriage rules as PCs" thing. Sure, the 3e rules were kind of time-consuming and clunky at times--having to go through a rehearsal dinner and bachelor party and prenuptial agreements and such just to fully stat out every NPC wedding was a real pain sometimes--but the 4e approach of just handwaving everything and saying "Oh, NPCs are just game objects, you don't need to worry about all the preparations" swings way too far in the other direction.

So NPCs are just game objects, huh? No one cares that they're going on a honeymoon after the PCs head off somewhere else, which might have repercussions for later interactions with the PCs? We're supposed to just assume they pass the Decipher Script checks for the pre-nups and Profession (Bachelor) checks for the party and the Diplomacy for the speeches, instead of rolling them just like for PCs? Oh, wait, that's right, there is no Profession (Bachelor) skill anymore, or any other Professions for that matter. Seriously? No Profession skill!? How in Pelor's name is a PC supposed to prepare for a wedding without a Profession (Bachelor) skill!?!?

If 5e has separate subsystems for PC-PC marriage and PC-NPC marriages, and keeps ignoring the verisimilitude of the world and the narrative in favor of gamist mechanics, I'm out.

 

[FireLance]

Oh, wait, that's right, there is no Profession (Bachelor) skill anymore, or any other Professions for that matter. Seriously? No Profession skill!? How in Pelor's name is a PC supposed to prepare for a wedding without a Profession (Bachelor) skill!?!?

Just use unmodified Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma checks (as appropriate), a skill challenge, or page 42, of course!

As a side note, and for the record, this thread was started when the 5e forum was renamed "Planning Your Forthcoming Nuptials" or something similar for April Fools' Day.

 

[El Mahdi]

Just use unmodified Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma checks (as appropriate), a skill challenge, or page 42, of course!

As a side note, and for the record, this thread was started when the 5e forum was renamed "Planning Your Forthcoming Nuptials" or something similar for April Fools' Day.

Wouldn't getting caught up in a Solemnization require a failed Wisdom check from the start...

 

[Savage Wombat]

I think the Solemnic Knights should have been a prestige class anyway.