D&D 5E The Ravenloft Rule and D&D5; or how to control player power

[I'm A Banana]

I think there might be a simpler alternative to turn undead, at least - and the rule probably works for any powerful feature: Let the players do it, and let RL deal with the consequences.

That doesn't seem great because functionally you either end up with an inappropriate class feature, or you have to nerf it somehow to keep it appropriate.

So, for every use of Turn Undead, give every undead creature in the domain a cumulative +1 bonus to the Will save for resisting it. If you're feeling nice, reduce that bonus by -1 for every day or so that it's *not* used, at all.

That's a nerf -- you've weakened the effect. It's also kind of a fiddly floating disembodied modifier.

Scrying? Let the players scry. Make the scrying sensor always visible, and as soon as they do it have things start scrying back at them.

That's a nerf, too. It's just a weaker version of the same effect.

Nerfs tend to feel lousy in play, because you just have a weak sauce effect of less value.

Instead, if you don't want someone doing something, I'd say just get rid of it. Replace it with something of similar value. Modularize it -- allow it to be swapped out for something else.

I'd much rather have scrying swapped out and replaced by something (perhaps Vistani fortune-telling!) than just a weak sauce scrying ability.

 

[ccooke]

That doesn't seem great because functionally you either end up with an inappropriate class feature, or you have to nerf it somehow to keep it appropriate.

<snip: Turn Undead with cumulative penalties>

That's a nerf -- you've weakened the effect. It's also kind of a fiddly floating disembodied modifier.

Yeah, I suppose. But then, isn't your replacement also a nerf? As presented, I can't see it being useful as anything but a last-ditch attempt to not TPK - which is probably one of the ways my version would end up. I think we end up in a pretty similar place. Point about the modifier, though - it's not something I'd have a problem with, but it would probably annoy a lot of people.

<snip: scrying>

That's a nerf, too. It's just a weaker version of the same effect.

Nerfs tend to feel lousy in play, because you just have a weak sauce effect of less value.

Instead, if you don't want someone doing something, I'd say just get rid of it. Replace it with something of similar value. Modularize it -- allow it to be swapped out for something else.

I'd much rather have scrying swapped out and replaced by something (perhaps Vistani fortune-telling!) than just a weak sauce scrying ability.

Yeah. Getting carried away, there. I'll claim the the excuse of feeling lightheaded with elation after finally escaping work at 21:30. Convinced?

Scrying is always a problem, but it's at least a *spell* in 5e. If you tell a party that the spell doesn't work, it's nowhere near as bad as saying that a class feature doesn't work - the party can just not prepare the spell, after all.

 

[Remathilis]

The problem is the "Ravenloft Rule" is supposed to invoke dread because a familiar ability doesn't work quite the way you expect it to. That is part of the essence of the rules and the setting. A PC priest finds his power over the undead isn't what it should be. A paladin find's she cannot sense evil, but only chaos. A wizard discovers his divinations are unreliable. A ranger discovers his ability to talk to the wolves of Barovia fails to stop their attack. This makes the character have to deal with the mysterious implications of his change. Its not merely "A paladin gains Detect Chaos rather than Detect Evil", its a perversion of the power that keeps him off balance.

 

[I'm A Banana]

The problem is the "Ravenloft Rule" is supposed to invoke dread because a familiar ability doesn't work quite the way you expect it to. That is part of the essence of the rules and the setting. A PC priest finds his power over the undead isn't what it should be. A paladin find's she cannot sense evil, but only chaos. A wizard discovers his divinations are unreliable. A ranger discovers his ability to talk to the wolves of Barovia fails to stop their attack. This makes the character have to deal with the mysterious implications of his change. Its not merely "A paladin gains Detect Chaos rather than Detect Evil", its a perversion of the power that keeps him off balance.

I think that works fine for a "weekend in the Mists" type adventure, or even for a slightly longer haul. If you're just going to strap Ravenloft to the end of a normal campaign for a few weeks, that makes a lot of sense, and I agree that late 3e/4e's "everyone can always do what they do!" mantra worked against things like that.

If you're going to run a campaign in Ravenloft -- a complete story arc spanning some big chunk of 20 levels -- that is going to require something different than "Surprise! You're nerfed!" What is intended as a realization that your abilities don't work as you intended simply becomes the way things are. And if the way things are is "wizards can scry, but it sucks," then it's just going to be less problematic to say "wizards can't scry, but if you'd like to use some divination-style abilities, grab a Mist Gypsy and we'll see what you can do with that."

 

[Klaus]

The problem is the "Ravenloft Rule" is supposed to invoke dread because a familiar ability doesn't work quite the way you expect it to. That is part of the essence of the rules and the setting. A PC priest finds his power over the undead isn't what it should be. A paladin find's she cannot sense evil, but only chaos. A wizard discovers his divinations are unreliable. A ranger discovers his ability to talk to the wolves of Barovia fails to stop their attack. This makes the character have to deal with the mysterious implications of his change. Its not merely "A paladin gains Detect Chaos rather than Detect Evil", its a perversion of the power that keeps him off balance.

I think those examples show the two guidelines that are the basis for all the ability changes in RL:

1 - The Mists Are Unknowable: they block, alter or misdirect divinations and all abilities that convey information to the characters. Fear the unknown, as it were.

2 - The Mists Corrupt: outside "help" (from the gods, from familiars, from the animals of the land, from Commune with Nature) carry the mark of the Mists. The "help" becomes unreliable, or ends up manifesting an "id" of sorts (the familiar does evil things on his master's behalf when he is asleep). There's an element of "body horror" here.

Since it is so easy to alter monsters in DDN, I'd be tempted to *not* tamper with it, and instead just up the HD of all undead (or of undead in the domain of an undead darklord). AND I'd couple that with the Black Box suggestion of how to handle a paladin: the very use of TU would feel like salt in the wound for the realm, drawing the attention of the darklord.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

To keep it viable, you had to start breaking the Ravenloft Rule and thus defeat the point. Things got even worse when you started adding any sort of optional material: It was far too easy to build PCs geared at fighting the supernatural via feats, magic items, and PrCs, to the point to even try to maintain the Ravenloft Rule you had to ban whole swaths of rules, even whole books.

This proceeds from an incorrect assumption which was never corrected but so widely accepted as default that it nonetheless became the default. It was never supposed to be a matter of banning things you didn't want players to have because otherwise players were allowed to use anything every published by anyone, anywhere. It was always supposed to be a matter of the DM APPROVING books and rules that were deemed acceptable to add to or alter core rules. Just sayin'...