"Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Discussing all things Ravenloft
User avatar
Hell_Born
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 705
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:51 am
Location: Queensland, Australia

"Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Hell_Born »

So, I recently got my hands on the 3.5 Ravenloft Player's Handbook, and I was surprised at all the changes it made to the original 3.0 Ravenloft Campaign Setting. Some, such as the vastly expanded details on the various domains, were pleasant. Others... less so. The supposedly gothic "Class Weaknesses" mechanics were definitely on the negative side. I mean, forcing sorcerers and wizards to roll a 5% Powers Check every time they learn a spell from the Enchantment, Evocation or Necromancy schools? Even AD&D wasn't that harsh - in fact, being a specialist wizard actually halved all Powers Checks provoked by use of the spells of your speciality school.

And so I had to ask: did anyone actually like and enjoy these Class Weaknesses? Or even just used them in general?
"Is there any word more meaningless than 'hope'? Besides 'blarfurgsnarg,' of course."

"Seek and Locate! Locate and Destroy! Destroy and Rejoice!"
User avatar
Wolfglide of the Fraternity
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 1233
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 12:33 am

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Wolfglide of the Fraternity »

Most of them seem rather strange or complicated, such as the fighter having a flat chance of corruption with each level outside of the player's actual actions. That in particular seems like a ham-fisted way to force some sort of roleplaying. Some of the weaknesses might be better suited as ad hoc judgment calls by the DM.

The one that most baffles me is the druid weakness regarding sinkholes of evil. It gives little clear information I can find as to how often one checks for taint from evil land, and it doesn't state how one should execute "evoking evil acts." If the land corrupts treants, then it makes sense for it to corrupt druids, but there must be a better or clearer way to handle it. I once saw this particular weakness make a player switch characters to avoid putting his druid into a sinkhole of evil.

That being said, I have never run a Ravenloft campaign, so I have never had to mess with the weaknesses.
User avatar
brilliantlight
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 1003
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:02 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by brilliantlight »

I ignore them, the whole thing doesn't make sense. DP checks and the like should ONLY happen due to things the PCs can control not the whim of the dice.
User avatar
ewancummins
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 28523
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 1:35 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by ewancummins »

brilliantlight wrote:I ignore them, the whole thing doesn't make sense. DP checks and the like should ONLY happen due to things the PCs can control not the whim of the dice.

I agree. Powers checks checks are for choices. The choices that carry the risks of attracting the notice of the Mists/Dark Powers are usually wicked and evil choices (some might seem morally neutral, but nonetheless involve transgressing boundaries between life and death or otherwise doing forbidden or dangerous things).
Delight is to him- a far, far upward, and inward delight- who against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, ever stands forth his own inexorable self.

-from Moby Dick (Hermann Melville)
User avatar
ewancummins
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 28523
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 1:35 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by ewancummins »

RE Evocation, I can't really see why it would require powers checks to learn such spells. Fireball? Do artillerists have to make powers checks in the course of their training?
I'll have to check my copy of the book. Maybe this change was suggested to reduce PC reliance on magical blasting of foes and play up a "swords , guns, and crosses against the vampire" feel?


Some enchantment/charm might make more sense, except I don't think learning these spells should provoke anything at all.
It's how one uses it. A PC with charm person will often be tempted to use it, and eventually to misuse it, perhaps.


Necromancy has always been a special case in Ravenloft. Not just many of the spells are wicked in nature (evil type in 3E) but because the school involves transgressing those aforementioned barriers between life and death.

A good-aligned cleric casting raise dead merits a powers check too.

I think it makes more sense to restrict checks to spells that have actually been cast. The knowledge may be dangerous in itself, but it is the use or abuse of dark lore that draws the attention of Fate/the Mists/the Dark Powers.
Delight is to him- a far, far upward, and inward delight- who against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, ever stands forth his own inexorable self.

-from Moby Dick (Hermann Melville)
User avatar
Joël of the FoS
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6643
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:24 pm
Gender: Male
Location: St-Damien, Québec

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Joël of the FoS »

To my knowledge, in the last ten years, nobody ever said he used them.
"A full set of (game) rules is so massively complicated that the only time they were all bound together in a single volume, they underwent gravitational collapse and became a black hole" (Adams)
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 859
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Five »

On the light of it I see these weaknesses as heavy-handed, debilitating player character developments hard-lined into mathematical rules (less rules means purer imaginative output, IMO) and it reeks of someone else's Ravenloft tweak put to print...such as that which we post here.

Yet, it also carries seeds of interesting possibilities.

A druid who communes with Nature in a sinkhole of evil, should (in my view anyway) run the risk of going mad, picking up traces of the taint/corruption of the sinkhole's source, and other such mind-altering pseudo-psychedelic goodies that can earn a high spot on the druid's player's career RPG moments list.

Intentionally communing with a known evil/corrupted land/entity/booga-boo...that's a risk-reward scenario worth rping! Where does the druid stand? They teeter at the crossroads...

So yeah. Seed of good to it (class weaknesses) but as a rule? Not at all.

Ravenloft developers should take their own advice and use subtlety to tease our inner fears and imaginations out from our minds and those we play with. Rules like that are the slasher films that they warn us about (which I personally love, so strike two devs! :wink: )...
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
User avatar
brilliantlight
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 1003
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 8:02 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by brilliantlight »

Five wrote: A druid who communes with Nature in a sinkhole of evil, should (in my view anyway) run the risk of going mad, picking up traces of the taint/corruption of the sinkhole's source, and other such mind-altering pseudo-psychedelic goodies that can earn a high spot on the druid's player's career RPG moments list.
I never thought of that but that makes sense. Most sinkholes of evil are somewhat obvious.
User avatar
Hell_Born
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 705
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2004 1:51 am
Location: Queensland, Australia

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Hell_Born »

To give it what minimal credit is due, having to make powers checks just for levelling up isn't entirely unprecedented in Ravenloft - the Arcanist way back in 2e's Domains of Dread, a specialist wizard who could only cast Divination + Necromancy spells and could Turn Undead, had to make a Powers Check whenever it leveled up (5+level DC).

Doesn't mean it's not a stupid mechanic, of course. I have no qualms about getting touched by the Dark Powers if I do things that genuinely earn their attention, but having to retire my character just because of a bad roll I made upon leveling up? That's not fun, that's infuriating.

Honestly, I really don't approve of the "every Necromancy spell ever forces a Powers Check" rule. It feels like it's directly aimed at punishing the players - it's pointless for NPCs, so all it really does is continue the "DM vs. Players" school of thought associated with old-school D&D, which is really not the best attitude you should be nurturing when you're trying to run a game in a setting that's supposed to encourage players to get deeply invested in the inherent story.
"Is there any word more meaningless than 'hope'? Besides 'blarfurgsnarg,' of course."

"Seek and Locate! Locate and Destroy! Destroy and Rejoice!"
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 859
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Five »

Hell_Born wrote: Honestly, I really don't approve of the "every Necromancy spell ever forces a Powers Check" rule. It feels like it's directly aimed at punishing the players - it's pointless for NPCs, so all it really does is continue the "DM vs. Players" school of thought associated with old-school D&D, which is really not the best attitude you should be nurturing when you're trying to run a game in a setting that's supposed to encourage players to get deeply invested in the inherent story.
And including ewancummins'
Necromancy has always been a special case in Ravenloft. Not just many of the spells are wicked in nature (evil type in 3E) but because the school involves transgressing those aforementioned barriers between life and death.

A good-aligned cleric casting raise dead merits a powers check too.
...

Really though. It's a straight salvo from DM to the players.

The Red Box, and more specifically its definition of both the Powers Check and of Spells in Ravenloft, really mucked things up (*). It was good in a "this is an example of a chart we came up with", but with it's stackable percentages and loosely-defined definitions (!) it's been the source of debate (and confusion) for what?, 24 years now?

*Remember that the Black Box's definition and interpretation of the Powers checks was left entirely to the DM!; as it should have remained IMO.
"The normal Ravenloft powers check is a percentile roll. If the result is 100, the demiplane's strange powers automatically respond. As DM, you can increase the chance, depending upon the act. If the act is utterly and completely evil, then the chance the dark powers will respond is at least 5%. The powers check is designed to help you, the DM, warn players they are treading a thin line as role-players. Assign the chances you think are necessary. In general, however, the chance should not exceed 10% for PCs.
The core of the Powers Check being:
A PC who intentionally commits an evil act (or willingly sides with evil forces) may trigger a powers check. (A few NPCs may also be subject to this check, at the DMs discretion.) In loose terms, a successful check means that Ravenloft’s powers notice the character, and decide to nudge him toward their “welcoming arms.” To trigger a powers check, the character must intend to do something truly evil. And he must succeed. Accidents with dark or deadly results don’t count.
One can argue that curing wounds, a manipulation of life force to fight off/delay Death (a necromantic spell in 2E), is pretty damn similar to raise dead (aside from sphere of magic), and vice versa. So, are we supposed to punish the sphere and its user/manipulator or the drawing and manipulation of life force? Raising dead is, or can be, just as benevolent as cure wounds, so why ding the PC for such an act of pure selflessness (an underlying theme of Ravenloft)? If they brought the dead back with evil design, then ok, roll the dice (after the intent is executed through action), but then the issue there is the powers check happens not because of the nature of the spell but due to the magic-drawer's intent. And if it's intent that we're eyeballing, then why the absolute powers check for certain spells? And if it's a category of magic were shit-hawking then why not cure spells?

I never did lean hard with this. I'm playing a game for christsake. We're good people trying to bring good to others; faceless and vastly outnumbered in a seemingly evil world that wants to crush us. And that's cool on its own. Let's not get carried away with rules and regs here!

And to be fair, The Black Box suggested that casting raise dead required a powers check as well...silly, silly rule. IMO. And that's coming from a DM who has traditionally run very low level magic games! Or, games where magic is more of a NPC thing (aside from priestly magic/"blessings"). Whatever.
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
nothri
Arch-villain
Arch-villain
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 8:20 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by nothri »

Soooo, a few thoughts.

1. Purely to play devil's advocate....isn't Raising the Dead inherently selfish? Aren't you defying the very laws of life and death simply to undo what Fate has decreed and return a being whose time has come and gone back to this plane for personal reasons? To expand on the question- if curing wounds and resurrecting are fine...why condemn the Lich for becoming immortal? What's the problem with that mad scientist cobbling together a dozen corpses and imbuing them with life as a golem? If you can return a soul to the living, why can't Strahd claim one for the ranks of the vampires?

To put it another way....maybe powers checks SHOULD be imposed on more spells. It somewhat depends on what your philosophy is when it comes to those pesky lines between good and evil and when the means cease to justify the ends.

2. I think there IS something to be said for forbidden knowledge and the corruption that comes thereof. I can see the thought process behind the Powers Check every level. Personally, if I wanted to run a game stressing the themes of greater knowledge threatening to corrupt the player, I'd probably opt for madness checks rather than Power Checks (classic "man was not meant to know this" result). In the alternative, simply keep the accumulation of levels in mind and add to a normal powers check if you the DM decide that the player is making use of sinister knowledge for a selfish or evil purpose (the greater power at their disposal inherently invites a greater fall).
I'm just a ghost in this house.
User avatar
ewancummins
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 28523
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 1:35 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by ewancummins »

Patching up a guy after a fight is one thing, but raising the dead is Frankenstein territory.

It's the kind of thing that attracts the attention of the Mists/''Dark Powers'' by transgressing moral, natural, and metaphysical boundaries.

But to each his own. I think a powers check for raise dead or resurrection makes perfect sense. Other DMs may differ.
Last edited by ewancummins on Mon Jan 15, 2018 7:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Delight is to him- a far, far upward, and inward delight- who against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, ever stands forth his own inexorable self.

-from Moby Dick (Hermann Melville)
User avatar
ewancummins
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 28523
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 1:35 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by ewancummins »

I do prefer Black Box to Red Box, but I've actually been running 3E S&s-based Ravenloft (with various in-universe differences based on my preferences and notions) here on FoS.
Delight is to him- a far, far upward, and inward delight- who against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, ever stands forth his own inexorable self.

-from Moby Dick (Hermann Melville)
Five
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 859
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 9:59 am

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by Five »

nothri wrote:
1. Purely to play devil's advocate....isn't Raising the Dead inherently selfish? Aren't you defying the very laws of life and death simply to undo what Fate has decreed and return a being whose time has come and gone back to this plane for personal reasons?
I figured that would come up when I wrote "selflessness" haha Good catch. :)

Yes and no, from my personal philosophy (which I am more than willing to set aside for the sake of entertainment).

Defying the very laws of nature is exactly what healers (and scientists) do. Healers are the frontline grunts that stand up defiantly and say to both Fate and Death "Muck you!" Every time they wrap a wound, apply a salve, sew a gaping wound, cast spells...there they are: the thorn in the side of Nature's pets.

Scientists do the same to Nature herself. Depending on my mood I sometimes think that if it can be done then it is within tbe realm of Nature. Other days I think science itself, and therefore humanity, is unnatural. Haha Tad facetious, but only a tad ;)

As to whether or not it's selfish, sure there will be times (family, friends), but other times (strangers, acquaintances) not so much. All depends on the situation and healer I spose.

To expand on the question- if curing wounds and resurrecting are fine...why condemn the Lich for becoming immortal? What's the problem with that mad scientist cobbling together a dozen corpses and imbuing them with life as a golem? If you can return a soul to the living, why can't Strahd claim one for the ranks of the vampires?)
I wouldnt condemn anybody for striving to be immortal. Its the path that gets them there that I would judge.

Are you making victims of innocents for your personal journey? Then thats evil and should be stopped. Are you a hermit living in a cave pouring through tomes as old as mankind itself? Then godspeed my man. All the best to you. No harm, no foul.

Strahd claiming a soul for the ranks of vampires? If they're willing (and we all probably know someone who would be!) then no problem. Weird but to each thei own. If they're unwilling, again victims, then that's an entirely different story.

Scientist cobbling together parts to create life? If you can then why not? Desecrating graves to do so is grey-to-black (depends on the family's personal views I guess), murdering people for your chop shop most definirely black.

And so (just my belief) goes my view with everthing thus far discussed: its not who or what you are that makes you evil or good, its how you got to be who or what you are...

Interesting thread all the same. Thanks. :)

Any other views? Im getting sick of my own voice. Haha
"A very piteous thing it was to see such a quantity of dead bodies, and such an outpouring of blood - that is, if they had not been enemies of the Christian faith."

- Jean Pierre Sarrasin, "The Memoirs of the Lord of Joinville"
User avatar
ewancummins
Evil Genius
Evil Genius
Posts: 28523
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 1:35 pm

Re: "Class Weaknesses"; did anybody use these?

Post by ewancummins »

I don't think consenting to be made a vampire can be taken as other than a willful embrace of evil. Vampires are by their very nature unholy abominations. They are undead, evil-aligned monsters that feed on the living.


On the flipside there is one CN vampire in published TSR Ravenloft material. I think perhaps he was a nosferatu and not a level-drainer.I'm also pretty sure he did not choose to become what he is.
Delight is to him- a far, far upward, and inward delight- who against the proud gods and commodores of this earth, ever stands forth his own inexorable self.

-from Moby Dick (Hermann Melville)
Post Reply