136
I don't actually know how controversial or not this might be, but it does annoy me mildly.
(lemmy.ml)
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2024
136 points (95.9% liked)
RPGMemes
10404 readers
350 users here now
Humor, jokes, memes about TTRPGs
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, they're both very bland.
For remove curse, there's an easy bandaid fix: Remove curse must be upcast to remove stronger effects. Sure, you can break the ring of power's hold over the knight, if you cast remove curse at 9th level. Otherwise, you have to follow the plot.
The plot route should be like all cursed items have a custom way of removing them. The sword of betrayal can be removed if you return it to the original owner's crypt. The stones of drowning can be broken if you bury them in the desert under a new moon. The ring of power can be destroyed if you throw it into the volcano where it was forged.
For counterspell, well... Make it an extended check with some options on each exchange. You both declare in secret if you're putting more spell slots or hp into the check, or folding. If you fold, the other person gets their way, but any extra resources they committed are wasted. If neither folds, you roll with bonuses based on what resources you put in. More spell slots or HP or hit dice give you some sort of bonus.
Probably get rid of
counterspellas a spell on its own and just make this a thing you can do. Give wizards some more tactical depth. If you use the same spell you get a bonus to countering. If it's the same school, bonus.Like all of D&D 5e, there's so much you could do that the game just doesn't.
It would've been fine if it worked that way, but RAW it just ends the curse, no added effects from upcasting.
“Like all of D&D, you gotta fix it yourself”; essentially, yeah. He system is rigid so even small flaws must be fixed, tries to stay compatible with older editions so much of the system doesn't make sense to new players, and feels like it wasade hastily to me with its typos and mistakes.
/rantAs written in the spell description of dispel magic, a 3rd level dispel magic also can dispel a 9th level spell with only a check, that didn't stop them from writing some things that explicitly stated that dispel only works for that effect if cast at 9th level.
I've never seen it on a magic item so far, though I've often seen items or monster effects describe it can't be dispelled with anything short of Wish, maybe that's the one?