Talk:Human, Verflucht (3.5e Race)

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


RatedNeutral.png Ganteka Future is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.
I'm actually rather neutral on this. I think it might be the situational nature and that it does require some adjustment to the world/culture structure if they're included. I probably wouldn't go out of my way to recommend it, but I'd allow it since it defines a character in an interesting way not already available (that I know of offhand anyway). For more thoughts on this, I left a big comment below.

How do you deal with an NPC commoner that the party drags around who maintains 16-20 corruption and spamming Bestow Curse on everything every round? Also, I would make their bestow curse a spell-like. --Ghostwheel (talk) 12:55, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The same way I deal with the efreet they enslaved so it keep granting them wishes. Also not a bad suggestion. --Leziad (talk) 13:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
So... just let them have it? :-/ --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:02, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Pretty sure he means "The consequences are looming". LenKagetsu (talk) 20:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
What consequences? Just lug them around, they're permanently staggered, but that doesn't stop em from using Bestow Curse every round, and it's not like it'll make them go insane and go half-fiends at that point. Post-adventure, reward them by removing all their corruption in 2 weeks with hallows at night and treating them to awesome wining and dining experiences. --Ghostwheel (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Being kicked out of town or lynched when they discover that he's a Verflucht. That and Paladins sensing an evil aura on a guy who can curse people at-will is going to cause problems of its own. That and if evil effects show up, he's damned to fail the save or take a curse token more often than he needs to. A DM could flare up all kinds of issues at a moment's notice for a Verflucht. LenKagetsu (talk) 20:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
There are lots of people who are genuinely Evil who never do anything hugely bad in their whole lives and they don't get smited. Oberoni fallacies and DM fiat are no excuse for poor, unbalanced, or poorly designed rules. --Ghostwheel (talk) 20:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Well Ghostwheel, this is an inherent problem with the system and absolutely NOTHING I can do. They could have enslaved a hag, a pixie or an efreet for much better result anyway. Finidng a verflucht commoner is in fact much harder than finding a hag and they cannot be summoned or called, so I say it is not an issue at all. --Leziad (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Also there the issue of him possibly cursing the entire party while they sleep. Or just take his chance during a combat and turn on the party. Also the near constant risk of the commoner growing wings and turning on the party even if treated well. --Leziad (talk) 21:28, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
At first I read this and didn't comment because the obvious ramifications are - to be perfectly blunt - obvious. If you enslave a person to fling curses around left, right, and center, you have enslaved that person to fling curses left, right, and center. If they do not enjoy being enslaved (as say would be the case of someone who was kidnapped and enslaved), there is literally nothing stopping them from cursing the kidnappers. The party wouldn't even get saves if he waited until they were asleep, which he would if he wanted to escape, which he does, because he was kidnapped and enslaved. If you're going to suggest that people will abuse something, you can't then say, "Well, they didn't intend for that to happen because of it" and call it DM fiat. --Undead_Knave (talk) 21:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Edit: It is also additionally worth noting that going around cursing everything with no good reason could rather conceivably be ruled an Evil act, even if done so at someone else's order. After all "I was just following orders" is not a valid excuse. --Undead_Knave (talk) 21:38, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
It says vile, not evil. Killing innocents is evil. Vile is when you impale them on spikes through their spines and leave them to be pecked to death by crows for the sheer pleasure of it. Any idiot can be evil, but it takes a true madman to perform a vile act. LenKagetsu (talk) 21:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Fair point, but I somehow have the feeling a party that kidnaps and enslaves a person won't exactly be precise about where they point their cursestick. Blighting an entire land with curses would most certainly be vile. --Undead_Knave (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Who said anything about enslaving? Why are people hell-bent on that? If they're basically decent, you tell them that if they help you it would do great things and a lot of good in the world. In exchange, on top of doing good, you'll make their lives hassle-free while not adventuring, and give them whatever they want. There's no coercion here. It becomes a job to them. Sure, they suffer horrible nightmares, but totally worth it to do so for a week through a dungeon crawl in order to live like a king during plenty of downtime. Or whatever. My point, at any rate, is that there's no need for enslavement, and I don't get why people are complaining that it's there. --Ghostwheel (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Well Ghostwheel first off I added a minim CL to curse abilities so I think the issue is fixed either way. Now why people said stuff about enslavement is because being literally constantly sickened and staggered by pain and be unable to sleep as well as the near constant risk of turning insane would probably deter most. But now we are going into the diplomacy problem and that a can of worm I'd rather not open considering the potential problem should be fixed. --Leziad (talk) 22:20, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

The Fuss About

Now, let's see, we've got cursed humans. Just a short bit of flavor text to set everything up for the mechanics, so let's head on down to that.

  • +2 any score is pretty nice, doesn't make a dump stat and let's a character do some standard specialization in D&D as to be expected. Moving on.
  • Humanoid (Human), Medium, 30 foot movement, fine, standard, moving on.
  • Accursed Mark, extraordinary ability, makes them detect as magical/evil and count as evil (hooray unholy weapons I guess, if you're fighting goodly creatures). Basically this just looks to sum up what curse tokens do when you get them.
  • Bad Luck… looks to be pretty situational with the -20 on rolled 1s, with probably the worst situations being where bad stuff happens if you fail by a certain amount (like climbing). I could see that encouraging Take 10, which isn't a bad thing, just makes characters spread out skill points. Perhaps instead of the -20, just a "takes any additional penalties for an extreme failure without a check", so as to include things like drawing false conclusions. Probably a better way to word that, but that's less bad luck and more something else. Heck -10 is probably enough of a penalty if you really just are aiming for "1s are auto-fail" (other than just saying natural 1s are auto-fail).
  • Curse Abilities… gonna get to that last.
  • Cursed Existence suddenly strikes me as odd because it implies this sort of thing where the race is a template applied to normal humans that causes them to lose their normal human traits (like those extra skill points and feat) though provides no way for this race to be applied as such… unless it's listed below somewhere. It's also the first sentence of flavor for the entire article (changing races via curse/something/template that is). Anyways, not aging or needing consumables is fine, considering they suffer weakness for taking advantage of that.
  • Ill Fated is interesting as a mechanic, if rather situational. Fine here.
  • Mutter Curse is mean at the lowest levels, but once a day against NPCs isn't really a problem (when combat NPCs are rarely around for more than 1 encounter at that level anyways). Against the PCs though, this is mean since and NPC has less care about its total curse tokens, especially if surrounded and likely to die soon. At that level, there's no way for PCs to remove it with an appropriately-leveled/available counter.
  • Other traits are standard fine moving on.
  • So, those Curse Abilities. There's some groundwork laid for gaining and losing curse tokens, which are pretty easy to track with tallies or a number or whatever, so that's not a problem. To paraphrase, the "performing vile/selfless acts" clause is fair since it grants some effect on roleplay for the character. It could just be considered DM fiat to do so, but if the DM is being a dick about it or whatever, he's ignoring The Gentlemen's Agreement already and you've got worse problems on your hands. Here is basically boils down to circumstance bonus/penalty type stuff, but removing/granting tokens, and that's totally fine. So, what are the actual abilities of Curse Abilities then? Well, let's take a lookie! Oh, at 1 token, no penalty and take vile damage as non-lethal instead. That's fun, makes characters who are attacking evil get a nice little touch. At 6 tokens (and what looks to be at least 3 HD) you get some blindsight to detect cursed creatures. Kinda nifty, especially if you used your Mutter Curse 1/day from above and the target fled. Looks like the penalties like the fatigue apply regardless of your HD total, gaining only the ability if you have the minimum HD requirement. Anyways, at 11 tokens (and 6 HD) you crank out a radius of doom and desecrate, which is probably bad for any allies and most handy for evil villainy guys. Both effects are available at that level (2nd level spells, so no problem there). The nightmares are probably without saves I assume and probably against hope of dispelling to avoid the damage. Here's the biggee at 16 tokens (and minimum of 9 HD), Mutter Curse at will while being constantly staggered. Man, that's really handy, but staggered and fatigued is rough. You'd need some serious defenses and other protection considering its a touch ability to make this viable. There was a lot of talk of hiring an NPC to be your curse-mule of sorts, providing protection, and that's totally fair and doable, since you'd have to invest a lot into him to keep him safe (and actually allow him into melee). If you're doing that, paying him either a hireling wage or just as a cohort, that's a fine investment and you could totally roleplay that out very interestingly. Is the torture and suffering of one good man under your graces justifiable for the evil he can stamp down? If you're evil and you just enslave a dude, that's totally a dick evil thing to do and will drive drama and plot forward. Also, at 21 tokens you become an NPC, which is a bit of a bummer for players, but that's likely to be under their control (since it requires actions and making choices), rather than just straight up death (which generally isn't) and can even be played with interestingly, so I'm fine with that as well. Do you take the death effect from that Necromancy spell or do you double-roll your saves to get a high enough result to live, becoming insane? Drama! Intrigue! Evil!
  • So, final assessment here: It looks alright, though probably only most interesting in certain campaigns.

I like commenting on races. --Ganteka Future (talk) 23:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)