IMO there just aren't enough really bad things that can happen to your character, and since ID seems to be getting easier and easier I propose adding more heavy curses, ya know, for balance. Here's one that I came up with. Feel free to add your own stupid ideas of heavy and horrible curses for use in any variant (because I just don't see it happening in V).
CHA is essentially a useless stat that most players nerf. This heavy curse would exploit that weakness. Actually, this one isn't so horrible. Some, on occasion, may find it useful (for a time).
A sentient weapon (I believe they were called ego weapons in D&D). It would have an alignment of either good or evil, a few random properties consistent with a weaker randart, positive to-hit/to-dam bonuses, and every once in a while (1d(CHA*10)) would seek to destroy it's polar opposite, despite the wishes of the owner, even attacking the owner itself (that's the curse part).
'Evil' weapons would randomly strike their 'good' owner, or possibly worse, charge into battle vs 'good' enemies, dragging the wielder along for the ride. Conversely, 'good' weapons would attempt to destroy only 'evil'. A saving throw would overpower the weapon, keeping it in check until the next time. The saving throw would be based entirely on the PC's CHA, with a (-1) to save for each (positive) special property the sword possesses. If the save fails, then the weapon is in charge for the turn, and another save is required on the very next turn to break it's control, and so on. Similarly, you would have to overpower the weapon (each and every turn) in order to attack an enemy of it's own alignment.
But it's not all bad. If you and the sword are co-aligned, then nothing may happen if no one is around you. I'd even consider a a 'co-aligned combat bonus' when a 'good PC/good weapon' combo goes after an evil foe or vice-versa. Even if not co-aligned a 'good' PC with an 'evil' sword would have no trouble attacking 'good' enemies. PC's should be considered 'good' unless their class or race is inherently evil.
Thus a Paladin with a 16 CHA, wielding an 'evil' heavily cursed sentient weapon with 3 special properties would have a 65% chance ((16-3)/20) of keeping it under control, and would only have to make such a check once every 100 turns or so (assuming he is only attacking 'good' enemies). Of course, a PC with a CHA of 6 and a cross-aligned sword had better keep his finger crossed, lest he accidentally hack himself to death.
*Remove Curse* and a successful save would allow the item to be dropped. Failing the save would result in a random disenchantment of one of the special properties instead, making it considerably weaker, but also easier to attempt to remove next time. Remove Curse would keep the sword in check for an additional (20d10) turns, and automatically disenchant (by 1) either the to-hit or to-damage bonus.
It's probably a lot of work for something that you'll rarely find, and then probably toss away when you do, but it sounds like it could be fun too.
EDIT: Although these should be rare, they could, in a weakened state, be introduced into the early game, when things are relatively predictable and somewhat boring.
CHA is essentially a useless stat that most players nerf. This heavy curse would exploit that weakness. Actually, this one isn't so horrible. Some, on occasion, may find it useful (for a time).
A sentient weapon (I believe they were called ego weapons in D&D). It would have an alignment of either good or evil, a few random properties consistent with a weaker randart, positive to-hit/to-dam bonuses, and every once in a while (1d(CHA*10)) would seek to destroy it's polar opposite, despite the wishes of the owner, even attacking the owner itself (that's the curse part).
'Evil' weapons would randomly strike their 'good' owner, or possibly worse, charge into battle vs 'good' enemies, dragging the wielder along for the ride. Conversely, 'good' weapons would attempt to destroy only 'evil'. A saving throw would overpower the weapon, keeping it in check until the next time. The saving throw would be based entirely on the PC's CHA, with a (-1) to save for each (positive) special property the sword possesses. If the save fails, then the weapon is in charge for the turn, and another save is required on the very next turn to break it's control, and so on. Similarly, you would have to overpower the weapon (each and every turn) in order to attack an enemy of it's own alignment.
But it's not all bad. If you and the sword are co-aligned, then nothing may happen if no one is around you. I'd even consider a a 'co-aligned combat bonus' when a 'good PC/good weapon' combo goes after an evil foe or vice-versa. Even if not co-aligned a 'good' PC with an 'evil' sword would have no trouble attacking 'good' enemies. PC's should be considered 'good' unless their class or race is inherently evil.
Thus a Paladin with a 16 CHA, wielding an 'evil' heavily cursed sentient weapon with 3 special properties would have a 65% chance ((16-3)/20) of keeping it under control, and would only have to make such a check once every 100 turns or so (assuming he is only attacking 'good' enemies). Of course, a PC with a CHA of 6 and a cross-aligned sword had better keep his finger crossed, lest he accidentally hack himself to death.
*Remove Curse* and a successful save would allow the item to be dropped. Failing the save would result in a random disenchantment of one of the special properties instead, making it considerably weaker, but also easier to attempt to remove next time. Remove Curse would keep the sword in check for an additional (20d10) turns, and automatically disenchant (by 1) either the to-hit or to-damage bonus.
It's probably a lot of work for something that you'll rarely find, and then probably toss away when you do, but it sounds like it could be fun too.
EDIT: Although these should be rare, they could, in a weakened state, be introduced into the early game, when things are relatively predictable and somewhat boring.
Comment