How Do You Know if an Item Is Cursed Dnd
OP  | The Place spell kind of ruined the surprise of cursed items in the original BG. Historically, the original Advertizing&D Identify spell required the caster to actually wear, don, or grasp the item before it could be identified, and thus "any consequences of this use of the item fall fully upon the magic-user ..." In the new 5E rules, the caster must touch the item throughout the casting of the spell, just I don't know if that conveys any risks? I recollect that without having some sort of take chances during identification, and then there is no betoken in implementing cursed items at all, except for unavoidable plot devices. Wouldn't it accept been interesting to see a shop keeper petrified while attempting to identify a cursed scroll? |
| | |
| | |
| | Place does Non reveal a curse, as per the rules. That's one thing it specifically does not exercise. Most cursed items also double up on this reassurance past mentioning in their own text that Identify does not reveal the curse. If your DM is revealing that an detail is cursed to you lot when you bandage identify on it, then they're doing it incorrect. In most cases in 5e, Cursed items must exist attuned, and when they are attuned you can't voluntarily break your attunement to information technology. |
| | |
| | |
| OP | Hey, yous're right! I just found information technology in the 5E DMG, never noticed it earlier. This is great, as there are all kinds of cool story plots that can involve sneaky cursed items. OK Larian, I dare you to curse me! |
| | |
| | |
| | Hey, you're right! I but plant it in the 5E DMG, never noticed information technology before. This is great, as at that place are all kinds of cool story plots that tin can involve sneaky cursed items. OK Larian, I dare you lot to curse me! If Larian curses you, I think the mods volition have to ban them from posting. Oh expect - seems Larian has already been banned from posting on these forums !! |
| | |
| | |
| | I practise think that magic items should not be known when acquired , but must exist Identified with the spell, or worn/attuned to. Fifty-fifty some shop keepers trade might not be identified. (depending on the shop, they might not have the ability to cast the spell). This would definitely make things more interesting. |
| | |
| | |
| | Place does NOT reveal a expletive, equally per the rules. That'due south one thing information technology specifically does non practise. Where in the rules is that mentioned? https:/ You choose one object that y'all must touch throughout the casting of the spell. If it is a magic detail or some other magic-imbued object, you learn its properties and how to utilise them, whether it requires attunement to utilise, and how many charges it has, if whatever. You learn whether any spells are affecting the item and what they are. If the item was created by a spell, you acquire which spell created information technology. If you lot instead affect a creature throughout the casting, you learn what spells, if any, are currently affecting it. Nothing in the spell description online or in the player handbook which says that Place does not reveal curses. If it's in the DMG rules merely, I notwithstanding retrieve that the Identify spell description should at least contain a caveat such as "The Place spell might non reveal a expletive on the item at the discretion of the DM". Without a disclaimer such every bit that, I experience like the dominion is unfair and punishes players who try to have reasonable precautions. Equally an bated, under your estimation where Identify does not reveal curses, how is one supposed to know if an item is cursed without attuning to it and condign cursed? |
| | |
| | |
 | @Stabbey, yous are correct that information technology is but mentioned in the DMG Virtually methods of identifying cursed items, including the identify spell, fail to reveal such a expletive...A expletive should exist a surprise to the item's user when the curse'south furnishings are revealed I agree that the Place spell should comprise said caveat. As an aside, under your interpretation where Identify does non reveal curses, how is 1 supposed to know if an item is cursed without attuning to it and becoming cursed? That'southward exactly the betoken, that players don't realize its cursed until they've attuned to it. And at that bespeak, they become cursed and cannot remove the item! Why carp making cursed items if players, upon finding them, tin hands find the expletive and thus won't modulate to the item? |
| | |
| | Metagaming tends to ruin cursed items anyhow, as practise the binary on/off effect. I would prefer curses to affect RANDOM items (preferably in a style that doesn't permanently "ruin" that item). Secondly, I would have the curse initially work much more than subtly that the original BG'due south; wear/use > tin't remove, CURSED! The curse could exist weak and build strength with time/dependent upon acts. This way you could actually become attached to an detail and thus make the plot much more than impactful than simply getting a remove curse. I'm a hater of most of Larian'southward homebrew, but these are the moments they would be appropriate. Last edited by Seraphael; 30/03/21 08:37 PM. |
| | |
| | |
| | @Stabbey, you are correct that it is simply mentioned in the DMG Most methods of identifying cursed items, including the identify spell, fail to reveal such a curse...A curse should exist a surprise to the item'due south user when the expletive'southward effects are revealed I agree that the Place spell should contain said caveat. As an aside, nether your interpretation where Identify does not reveal curses, how is one supposed to know if an item is cursed without attuning to information technology and becoming cursed? That's exactly the point, that players don't realize its cursed until they've attuned to it. And at that point, they become cursed and cannot remove the item! Why bother making cursed items if players, upon finding them, can easily discover the curse and thus won't modulate to the detail? Why brand traps if a wizard tin send his familiar in to discover any? Careful players are rewarded in D&D and ever accept been. |
| | |
| | |
| | Why make traps if a magician can transport his familiar in to observe any? Careful players are rewarded in D&D and always have been. While careful play is rewarded in D&D, there are also many instances of things that players are not supposed to detect beforehand. There are numerous monsters that take the "while motionless, is duplicate from [inanimate object]" ability. Cursed items are also usually more impactful than traps. Traps are usually meant to sap resource in a dungeon and careful players are rewarded with less-sapped resources. And because traps are very mutual, it'south more fine if players tin can completely avoid any private trap. Curses are usually more rare, powerful, and ~permanent, and thus are more like to plot hooks (leading to a Also, your case would probably piece of work for a cursed object. The wizard could have his familiar attune to information technology. Then extreme conscientious play is all the same being rewarded, but the cost is greater (short residue to attune + temporary loss of familiar + 1 hr to resummon familiar vs x infinitesimal identify) In fact, I'd probably rule that the expletive affects any familiar you lot summoned, not just the specific i that put the item on. |
| | |
| | |
| | Goose egg in the spell description online or in the player handbook which says that Identify does not reveal curses. If information technology's in the DMG rules only, I still think that the Identify spell clarification should at least incorporate a caveat such every bit "The Place spell might not reveal a curse on the detail at the discretion of the DM". Without a disclaimer such as that, I feel similar the rule is unfair and punishes players who attempt to take reasonable precautions. As an aside, under your interpretation where Identify does not reveal curses, how is one supposed to know if an item is cursed without attuning to it and becoming cursed? Identify doesn't tell you that it provides y'all with food and h2o for the 24-hour interval when you cast it; ergo, it doesn't do that. Spells exercise what they say, and not what they don't, and formerly speaking a 'curse' is not a 'property' - these are specific terms with specific meanings. The DM knows this, while the players do not demand to. This isn't my interpretation - information technology'due south the base of operations blueprint philosophy of 5e. I'd too add, just to note, that most cursed items specifically call out whether Place will reveal their curse or not, as a secondary dorsum-up. The of import matter, though, is that in both cases information technology is specifically DM-side knowledge that only comes to players if they endure an ill-effect from a curse. They may non even know they are cursed until they endeavor to unattune from a cursed item (and discover that they can't), or they suffer its ill-issue. That's by and large the point of curses. Cursed objects fall on anybody more or less evenly, without rewarding or punishing anyone more than than anyone else - they don't reveal their presence under near common magic nigh of the time. Some particular items with depression class or obvious curses practice actually show up on identify, but when that is the case the magic particular itself specifically calls out that it does. These specific cases practice take hold of the incautious while rewarding the diligent. An example of a cursed detail that IS caught past identify is the Armour of Vulnerability: https:/ Some other is the Loadstone: https:/ These items are the specific exceptions to the general rule of place, which does not include curses in the information it gives; most other magic items make no mention of Identify revealing them, because it doesn't. Some parallel examples: https:/ Some are a piffling bit more nuanced, and tell you lot exactly how they foil Identify, such as the stone of ill-luck: https:/ Notation that information technology highlights the distinction between DM knowledge and player cognition, fifty-fifty while the player is actively affected by the curse. Good cursed items are the kind that seem a little flake also good to be true, but also, once the players observe the curse, still leaves them with strong incentive to utilise the item or to deal with the downward sides of the curse, to reap the detail's benefits, making it an interesting decision - how far to button it - both for the cursed individual and the party. Curses that are and then debilitating that no-ane would e'er bear upon the item are poorly made, every bit are cursed items that brand the particular in question functionally useless. At the end of the day, Identify is the "full general" rule, and lists the information it gives. The "specific" cases that trump this are the curses that affect some items, in the private cases where they practice ave some form of interaction with Identification - their specific cases tell y'all how to handle them, such every bit if and how they announced when identified. The players accept the general knowledge - how their spells work. The Dm has the specific knowledge to adjudicate the private specific results of that when there are exceptions to that generality, such equally a expletive would be. The Dm has the information to run the world; the players are experiencing the space and get to enjoy all of the surprise twists and unexpected discoveries, both proficient and bad. For a video game, this more often than not means that nosotros should really NOT know that an particular is cursed until we suffer its furnishings or attempt to rid ourselves of the item, unless in that location exists some external specific warning or other clue. |
burgesstheabsitters.blogspot.com
Source: https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=766419
0 Response to "How Do You Know if an Item Is Cursed Dnd"
ارسال یک نظر