Is it the right of a DM to change characters?

[tadkins]

Had a thought regarding this earlier.

A friend of mine had joined a game a while back and rolled a human factotum. In the middle of the campaign, said human picked up a cursed item that ended up transforming him into a half-ogre, with all that entails. He protested to the DM, not wanting the heavy +LA penalty on his character, and was told that "the world was not all cheer and rainbows".

This made me think about other situations that can happen in other campaigns. In my last game, we fought some wererats, and the risk of contracting lycanthropy would have been here. Hypothetically, let's say a game involved a heavy amount of undead, and the DM sends a vampire at one of the characters in the middle of the night, who fails to fight it off and ends up becoming turned.

Whether or not the player would have wanted their character to become a vampire, is it within the rights of a DM to pull this kind of change?

[Stormageddon]

I would recommend getting a remove curse for the character as soon as possible if the character is really unhappy about it.

The game builds in things that can change your character like you mentioned: vampires, were-X, etc. However, it does have mechanics to fix those changes if you don't like them.

[ZamielVanWeber]

On the one hand, the DM here is right. However, hijacking my character while choosing my next SIX levels is incredibly inapprorpiate. Challenges are part of the fun of DnD; stealing my character is not. That DM better be prepared to return those levels when the curse is broken.

In general yes, but as long as the change is reversible it is not too bad and can afford a fun RP opportunity too. Also, in the vampire example, the character does before he is turned anyways, so that really falls under character death.

[CoffeeIncluded]

I think the DM has the right to do it, but he's also got the responsibility to immediately take the player aside and talk it over with them, and try to find a middle ground. I'd be pissed if my DM immediately vamped my character and NPC'd them without my input, and if I were DMing and vamped one of my players I'd discuss it with them in private before going further.

[Hendel]

In third edition this is a bit more of a sticky situation. In first edition I had characters get gender changed, race changed, lycanthropy, etc. It did not have a LA per se but it did change what they could do or not do. We just had to live with it or find a way to break the curse or whatever did that.

In answer to your question, yes, the DM has the right to do that. Would you be upset if you were bit by a wererat and the same thing happened? It is part of the game. If you do not like it, you can retire the character and start fresh. You could also search for a cure or such. You could also try having fun with it and play it to see where it goes.

If the curse was lifted, I think most fair fair DM's would allow you to spend the levels that you may have "gained" during the curse.

[Alaris]

I'd say the DM has the right to do this, entirely. He can send a Lycanthrope after you guys, or a Vampire, or use a Cursed Item to change your race.

The only caveat as far as I'm concerned, is that he needs to make sure it can be reversed.

A Lycanthrope can have Remove Disease cast upon him.

A Vampire can be slain, and ressurected, being restored to normal life.

A creature cursed with a new form can have Remove Curse cast upon him.

Put simply, as long as the DM doesn't force the change with no way to undo it, I have no problem with him doing so. I've had characters change race multiple times in a campaign I've played:

Dwarf to Human

Human to Vampire

Human to Half Celestial

And I've seen many others. The DM gave me no choice in regards to the Vampire transformation (Though he had a much better template of +2, instead of +8), and I was able to find a way to restore it. Afterwards, I was actually given the choice of either gaining wings (no LA), becoming an Aasimar (+1 LA) or becoming a Half-Celestial (+4 LA).

Nonetheless, I'm droning on, and I apologize. My point is made, so long as a DM provides a way to reverse it (which may entail a quest), I don't see a problem.

[Krobar]

As a person who's had characters inflicted with lycanthropy, vampirism, mummy rot, curses, baleful polymorphs...

Yes. That's one of the risks adventurers take. Personally, though, I would provide a way to undo it.

[tadkins]

Would you be upset if you were bit by a wererat and the same thing happened?

Probably wouldn't be upset or anything. It'd feel weird to see my cute, innocent little gnome girl doing bloodthirsty, savage wererat things though.

So the general consensus is that it's okay for the DM to do that, as long as there's a reasonable way for the players to get it reversed? Sounds good, thanks for good answers everyone. :)

[Deophaun]

Yes, the DM has the right to do that. However, just because you have the right to do something, doesn't mean it's a good idea. Outside a court of law, "I have a right" is generally the first defense of a jerk.

Now, does this mean the DM has done wrong in this case? Not necessarily. As others have stated, there are ways to do away with curses. If those means are available to the player, either through purchase or a quest, that's fair. Additionally, there should have been something that clued the player/party in to this item being cursed before they picked it up. That means that the player failed, instead of the player getting singled out by a RNG for punishment. If the player is now doomed to forever to be a half-ogre and so loses interest in the game? Then the DM has failed.

[Amnestic]

Remove Curse is a 3rd level Cleric spell, a scroll of which costs less than 400gp. You could purchase a spellcast for 150gp if you find a 5th level Cleric.

Annoying? Certainly. End of the world? Hardly. Ride the LA train until you get back to a decent sized city and problem solved.

[Deimosian]

Is it within the DM's powers? Yes.

Is it appropriate to do so when the party isn't equipped to deal with it? No.

Then again, my personal response to most of these situations is to use them to my advantage. Lycanthropes can make pretty good PCs.

[tadkins]

I was reminded of another possibility. I remember reading in one of the books, I think it was BoVD, that there's a spell that can automatically turn a character's alignment to Evil. Seems a little weird how there's a mechanic that a DM can use to just snap their fingers and go "Boom, you're evil, go do evil things now."

What are your guys' thoughts on that one?

[Spuddles]

I was reminded of another possibility. I remember reading in one of the books, I think it was BoVD, that there's a spell that can automatically turn a character's alignment to Evil. Seems a little weird how there's a mechanic that a DM can use to just snap their fingers and go "Boom, you're evil, go do evil things now."

What are your guys' thoughts on that one?

It doesn't have a very long duration, but I used a modified version of it once as a DM. Dying hag's final curse turned the party fighter evil. Heheheh.

[Arkturas]

I would point out tha the LA part of it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense as something that occurs right there point blank. Why would it get harder for me, or impossible, to learn and progress along the path I had chosen? It shouldn't. It could thus be argued that if the DM wants to change people willy nilly, there should be no LA.

Watch as it doesn't get used capriciously!



I was reminded of another possibility. I remember reading in one of the books, I think it was BoVD, that there's a spell that can automatically turn a character's alignment to Evil. Seems a little weird how there's a mechanic that a DM can use to just snap their fingers and go "Boom, you're evil, go do evil things now."

What are your guys' thoughts on that one?

If there was an interesting RP hook to it, I'd go along with it. Otherwise I'd just continue on as normal. (Dislike the alignment system, yeah)

[tadkins]

It doesn't have a very long duration, but I used a modified version of it once as a DM. Dying hag's final curse turned the party fighter evil. Heheheh.

Ah, interesting. How did it go? What'd he end up doing and such?

[Alaris]

I was reminded of another possibility. I remember reading in one of the books, I think it was BoVD, that there's a spell that can automatically turn a character's alignment to Evil. Seems a little weird how there's a mechanic that a DM can use to just snap their fingers and go "Boom, you're evil, go do evil things now."

What are your guys' thoughts on that one?

That's a big, resounding "No." Especially since, if I recall correctly, there isn't an easy way to reverse that. I believe there is a "Good" equivalent in the Book of Exalted Deeds as well. And Atonement can immediately change your alignment (though you have to be willing).

Nonetheless, forced alignment change is very... meh. I know that technically, becoming a Vampire changes your alignment (though I've played under no DM that enforces that, thankfully). Fundamentally changing how the character actually thinks is not my kind of thing.

[Seharvepernfan]

I know that technically, becoming a Vampire changes your alignment

I think it's because of the whole "undead are evil" thing that D&D has going on. One thing people tend to forget is that vampires are dead. The soul of the person who became a vampire is in its' afterlife while the body is currently being a vampire.

As a DM, once a character became a vampire, I would take control of that character until that character gets resurrected, if ever.

Yes, I think that the DM has that "right". D&D isn't a game designed for characters who never have anything bad happen to them, and players need to understand that and talk to the DM about it if they have a problem with it. I've had players get angry and quit over MW swords getting sundered or falling unconcious after getting dropped into negatives (despite getting healed later). If you're like that, D&D is not your game, unless your DM has prepared a game especially for your tastes and sensibilities.

[Krazzman]

In my opinion... yes and no in the same way.

Changing characters due ingame stuff happening to them: Yes.
Changing them inbewteen session saying Factotum is too overpowered, you are now a rogue is not OK.

Turning someone evil (permanently[or changing alignment generally])... isn't that accompanied with a level loss for the duration of the change?

Getting something that really gimps the character over. Int 16 Wizard getting a permanent -6 to int... with no way to resolve this in 1 or 2 sessions, no not ok. A similar situation as losing his spellbook. He might still be able to use Wands/Scrolls and stuff but otherwise this would make him a "glorified commoner".

Don't get me wrong. Loss is ok... in a certain limitation. It has to still be fun. A Factotum turning Half-Ogre... Why is this bad? This can be a nice boon for a short time if he didn't get penalities to his mainstats. And even then, finding someone lifting the curse would be... "easy". Maybe talking to the DM about making it a quest. It's roleplay opportunity.

I think the DM already has a metric ton of NPC's he can control. As such he should be able to help his PC's with overcoming unwanted stuff that happened to them.

Example:
I wanted to play an Assassin. Due to the DM not knowing sarcasm when I talked to a player (and me being lucky) I drank poison which turned my Hair Green. This character was magically made Albino, Had one arm be a Tentacle with claws that could shoot magic missiles and now had Green Hair. No not only his head/facial hair... everything. Neon Green.

Example 2:
I tried out a Duskblade. Everyone else was normal PHB stuff in class terms but everyone used the same pool of resources. Anyway I played a Neutral "Good" Duskblade with a BigF*Sword. Yes the 2d8 one. Due to some stuff we worked for some Red Mages of Thay. And Slavery wasn't that high on my priority and I said "I'm not ok with this" But he wouldn't do something idiotic as freeing them all, he just tried to let them feel "as good as he could". Being a laughed at why I wouldn't do something against it then, when I was not ok with it was mentioned and yadda yadda, he got a little figurine. This gave him +1 on nearly every roll... but made him Evil. Was cool I played along, got a bit Gollumesque about this figurine and in a Chaosfield even yelled at the BBEG to come back into my Pocket because for me he looked like the figurine.

We get capture by Drow, I lose the Figurine and... well we are in an Arena and have to fight and plan an escape... he has some time thinking about what has happened while he had the figurine and saw what he has done and started to be more badass. But before we oculd play again the campaign was set on hold (we played 2 or 3 sessions only...)

[Komatik]

Urk. Some stuff can make for pretty nice flavour. But slapping LA's or LA+racial hit die combos on players is cruel and unusual punishment. Bonus points for enforcing any mental disabilities if the new LA gimp has them and the character relies on such scores.
The change itself I'm pretty fine with, especially if it can be undone at some point. But the LA and sucktastic hit dice... just no.

[Greenish]

I was reminded of another possibility. I remember reading in one of the books, I think it was BoVD, that there's a spell that can automatically turn a character's alignment to Evil. Seems a little weird how there's a mechanic that a DM can use to just snap their fingers and go "Boom, you're evil, go do evil things now."

What are your guys' thoughts on that one?Well, again, if it is reversible, and especially if it's only short duration, it's fair game or more. After all, being Evil doesn't have to mean you walk around eating puppies and burning orphanages, or necessarily even screwing your team mates over. After all, even evil has loved ones (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvenEvilHasLovedOnes) (warning, Tv Tropes link).

[TexAvery]

This is questionable to me. If my character is subject to the whims of the DM (not just death, but serious long-term changes), I'm going to be less inclined to be attached to the game, which in turn lowers my enjoyment and effort.

Now, temporary or reversible changes, for a good (story) reason, sure. Saddle me with serious character concept changes? No.

[Alaris]

I think it's because of the whole "undead are evil" thing that D&D has going on. One thing people tend to forget is that vampires are dead. The soul of the person who became a vampire is in its' afterlife while the body is currently being a vampire.

As a DM, once a character became a vampire, I would take control of that character until that character gets resurrected, if ever.

Yes, I think that the DM has that "right". D&D isn't a game designed for characters who never have anything bad happen to them, and players need to understand that and talk to the DM about it if they have a problem with it. I've had players get angry and quit over MW swords getting sundered or falling unconcious after getting dropped into negatives (despite getting healed later). If you're like that, D&D is not your game, unless your DM has prepared a game especially for your tastes and sensibilities.

Well yeah, D&D seems to have that idea... thankfully my DM didn't go by RAW. But he also changed the fluff around vampires (you are the still in the body, the soul now trapped within it. And depending on how nice and/or powerful the Vamp who sired you is, you might still have control).

Your character, as a Vamp, would slowly become desensitized to things (and lean towards more Neutral or Evil alignments, but no forced changes) because of your new form, being undead. That's how my DM kept the "Most Vampires are Evil" shtick, without forcing a PC to change alignment if he fought enough for his own sense of self.

I can understand the fluff to a degree, but I don't usually force alignment changes in my own game, unless they are reversible, or the player is fine with it. I recently dropped a "Helm of Opposite Alignment" into my game, which the players eventually discovered what it was, and one of them used it intentionally to make his character more cohesive with the party (at the time, he was Lawful Evil, I believe).

Ultimately, I intended for them to discover what it was before putting it on... that, and it offers a save, so I had no particular problem with it really. If they decided to put on a random helmet without checking out what it was, I'm not gonna hold myself at fault. (Though the benefit was that it also functioned as a Helm of Brilliance).

[chainlink]

As a player sure similar situations have been inflicted upon my characters. If I was particularly unsatisfied with the result I would double my efforts towards changing the situation.

As DM sure villains do stuff to ppls characters all the time. You always leave a couple ways out if there isn't already a few options and there are usually quite a few options built into the game.

Remember, one of the staples of fantasy settings is, too low level to remove curse/polymorph/whateveryouneed yourselves? Find someone who can and go on a quest for them! Yay! There are a host of ways to change alignment, race, appearance, sex etc. in the game.

But ultimately it comes down to your group and how you play. My campaigns are very sandbox and can be quite lethal. If you want your character to be perfect, always wins, never has to make hard decisions or *gasp* sacrifice sometime in their career you will be asked to make room for another player at the table. Others do play like that so make sure everyone is on the same page and have fun!

[MikelaC1]

Its not like the DM arbitrarily changed the PC, without any reason. They picked up a cursed item, they fought a vampire or a wererat...bad things happen when youre an adventurer. To me, its a bit like saying the DM wasnt right to send a monster that might be able to kill you.

[Shining Wrath]

The DM is absolutely within his rights to make the job of "Adventurer" a dangerous one, and danger takes many forms. That's RAW.

The whole point of being the DM is to make the game fun for all. That's a higher rule than anything in RAW.

Therefore, the human factorum should probably seek to have the curse of half-ogre removed, perfectly in character. The reaction of the rest of the party depends upon alignment and so on. If the rest of the party doesn't want to help with the new side quest to remove the curse, then the DM either needs to allow for a solo quest, request that a new character be created and the half-ogre retired, or provide a miracle.


Well, again, if it is reversible, and especially if it's only short duration, it's fair game or more. After all, being Evil doesn't have to mean you walk around eating puppies and burning orphanages, or necessarily even screwing your team mates over. After all, even evil has loved ones (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvenEvilHasLovedOnes) (warning, Tv Tropes link).

The question of what it means to be evil has as many answers as there are DM's. I take the view that to be evil means there is something seriously wrong with you, morally, which is different than EVERYTHING being wrong with you, morally. Having said that, Rust Never Sleeps, and in a world with real actual demons and devils and vampires and evil gods, the amount that is wrong with you is likely to increase over time. It is a very well established trope in fantasy that you start out dabbling in evil and over time wind up ZOMGNONONOWHATHAVEIDONE evil. Think Elric killing his beloved Cymoril at the behest of Stormbringer. He thought he could use the sword to achieve his ends, but in the end, the sword used him.

[Flickerdart]

Its not like the DM arbitrarily changed the PC, without any reason. They picked up a cursed item, they fought a vampire or a wererat...bad things happen when youre an adventurer. To me, its a bit like saying the DM wasnt right to send a monster that might be able to kill you.
If you look at the actual cursed items, none of them are as severe as "now you lose your next two levels". It was the DM's decision to put in a cursed item that was out of line with the game's existing stuff. The only way such an action is justifiable is for plot reasons - the player's ogreness becoming an important plot point that is appropriate to hijacking their character. If it's just "hey, I should make an item that will make someone an ogre, and leave it for the PCs to find without warning them what it does" then that is arbitrary and without any reason.

[ArcturusV]

Well, I suppose it depends on where you first started RPGing. I mean, the first adventure I ran? There was a cursed scroll in a treasure horde which, if read, had a chance of turning you into a small monster form of the boss you just killed to get that loot.

... I didn't fall for it (Thanks to being a thief and not yet a high enough level I cared about scrolls), but someone else did and sure, it had some "Aw dammit!" comments around the table when it happened. But it was also taken in stride as we killed the new mindless monster and had the guy roll up a new one.

It's... people who's first RPGing is 3rd edition or newer that tend to get into this mindset that honestly kind of surprises me. The Unwritten Rule of "You cannot mess with my character unless I say so". Which always just struck me as odd, because the game has always had things that messed with you as bad, or worse. Turned you into a Lycanthrope, Undead, Monsters, Alignment Changing Helms, hell, Doppelgangers are a lot higher on the "Screweth thy Players" scale as I count it. You get told that basically while you were up alone on watch in the night you were killed, stuffed away somewhere where no one would find you, and now replaced by an evil clone?

So, yeah. It's within his right/power to do so. It's not even a horrible screw to the character, for reasons listed like the ease of Remove Curse in game.

Oh, and for the mention of Alignment Changing? It's just like Charm Magics and such. It's not really changing "Who you are" so much as "How you look at things" (Which is an organic result of character growth anyway and should be happening over the course of a campaign). You're still you. The fact that you are now Evil instead of good doesn't really change your character, your friends, etc, beyond possible Alignment Based Class Features. Not going to have the DM tell you that because you're evil you now need to go murder your friends and bathe in their blood. It does mean that the DM might nudge you from time to time, "Hey, remember, you're evil now. Unless you got an Evil Reason, you're probably going to want to execute those bandits and keep their loot for yourself rather than take them to town for a trial and give the loot back to the victims..."

[Amnestic]

If you look at the actual cursed items, none of them are as severe as "now you lose your next two levels". It was the DM's decision to put in a cursed item that was out of line with the game's existing stuff. The only way such an action is justifiable is for plot reasons - the player's ogreness becoming an important plot point that is appropriate to hijacking their character. If it's just "hey, I should make an item that will make someone an ogre, and leave it for the PCs to find without warning them what it does" then that is arbitrary and without any reason.

Considering that some of the suggestions are:
65 Character gains two negative levels.
97 Character cannot cast arcane spells.
98 Character cannot cast divine spells.
99 Character cannot cast any spells.

Cursed Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/cursedItems.htm)

I'd say that having a few extra LA isn't nearly as detrimental to ones ability as a Wizard who gets cannot cast arcane spells.

[Deophaun]

It's... people who's first RPGing is 3rd edition or newer that tend to get into this mindset that honestly kind of surprises me.
I am intrigued. Tell me more personal history about the people you disagree with.

[Flickerdart]

Considering that some of the suggestions are:
65 Character gains two negative levels.
97 Character cannot cast arcane spells.
98 Character cannot cast divine spells.
99 Character cannot cast any spells.

Cursed Items (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/cursedItems.htm)

I'd say that having a few extra LA isn't nearly as detrimental to ones ability as a Wizard who gets cannot cast arcane spells.
A 3% chance on a random table is no justification for the DM homebrewing a new effect, and is especially no justification if the item serves no plot purpose and exists only to screw over PCs.

[Shining Wrath]

A 3% chance on a random table is no justification for the DM homebrewing a new effect, and is especially no justification if the item serves no plot purpose and exists only to screw over PCs.

I believe the point is that the RAW do allow the DM to include an item which does truly horrible things to a PC. Whether said item is the DM's own invention or the result of treasure table dice rolls seems to me to be of secondary import.

Some of Gary Gygax's stuff back in AD&D was truly random and truly debilitating, and included text like "No test distinguishes the cursed item from a beneficial one until ...".

I would reroll if I ever rolled one of those up, but different people play different ways.

[Amnestic]

A 3% chance on a random table is no justification for the DM homebrewing a new effect, and is especially no justification if the item serves no plot purpose and exists only to screw over PCs.

I wasn't aware DMs needed a justification to homebrew effects on anything.

We have no idea if the item serves a plot purpose or not - that hasn't been stated one way or the other and only the DM himself could likely answer that question. Is he gonna outright tell his players "Yeah, this is a plot item" if that would ruin the plot?

You argued that:

If you look at the actual cursed items, none of them are as severe as "now you lose your next two levels".

I disagreed, pointing to possible official ones which are far more severe to a character than being turned into a Half-Ogre. Now you're arguing the DM shouldn't have made a new effect at all unless it's directly plot related?

[molten_dragon]

I don't think things like that should necessarily be off limits for a DM, since they can end up being a fun opportunity. However, I think if a DM is going to do that, they owe the player a chance to undo it if the player doesn't like the idea.

If your friend doesn't want to be an ogre, I'd suggest just getting a remove curse cast at his next opportunity.

If the DM is trying to force the subject and not letting him reverse the curse, he should talk to the DM OOC and explain that this isn't how he wants his character to advance, that it isn't fun for him, and he wants a way to reverse it.

If the DM still won't budge, he could try killing off the character and bringing back the factotum's twin brother, but if the DM is that stubborn that probably won't work either, and at that point really his only options are to put up with it, or leave the game.

[Dire Panda]

Was it within his power? Yes. But with great power comes great responsibility, and the DM's primary task is to facilitate the group's fun. So without knowing more about the setting, I can't say if he acted rightly - though judging by the response, it sounds like he's simply on a power trip.

If there's some plot or roleplaying purpose behind the cursed item - for example, if the plot revolves around human/monster coexistence or an ogre invasion - then I can see the item and transformation serving the story. Ideally, there will be a way to reverse it, but it will be a few adventures away, and during that time the player will figure out ways his new form could be useful so that the choice has some weight. If not, though, arbitrary changes to a character (especially mechanical ones) can leave a player feeling somewhat violated. I love the onset period of 3.5 lycanthropy; homebrew cursed-item makers should take note. It gives player and DM a "grace period" to discuss the transformation out-of-game before it becomes permanent.

Pertinent example: In my most recent campaign, our neutral good swordsage got bitten by a were-anaconda and bungled her Fortitude save. She was outraged both in and out of character at first, but by the next game she'd already thought of a dozen interesting ways to roleplay the affliction and eventually asked me not to put Remove Curse items into random treasure hoards; if she was going to be cured, she'd have to seek it out intentionally. Subsequently, she made in-character decisions at several points to pursue Saving The World over her own personal cure even as she slipped closer and closer to a permanent alignment change. I even worked it into the story, rewriting a major prophecy so it mentioned a "tormented serpent maiden." In the end, it served the story and the player's enjoyment, and that's what mattered.

[Suddo]

Yes but doing so sends a clear statement that this isn't a serious campaign. I played a campaign where someone got turned into a were-frog and the paladin had all his paladin powers reverse (infict damage and give disease).

The thing I would state as the character is okay but I don't get any mental penalities (as this would probably function like polymorph) and I don't have to level the 6 (?) level I merely am 6 levels higher. If the DM said "Nope" I'd say I'm done and leave.

This is the same as having a dungeon full of level 1 orc fighters with improved sunder and sundering all the players equipment and then not letting them go back to town, or giving them more money. You are literally crippling the character and then, probably, throwing CR appropriate monsters at them.

[Flickerdart]

I wasn't aware DMs needed a justification to homebrew effects on anything.
They don't need to. But that doesn't make it justified.

[Deadline]

Cursed items have been a part of the game since forever. If you just willy-nilly pick up any bright shiny laden with magical radiation and expect it to be safe, then you aren't as paranoid as an adventurer should be. To this very day, no one in our party uses any magical item we find without first having it identified. You don't go hunting Mummies and blame the GM when your character contracts Mummy Rot. You don't go hunting Lycanthropes or Vampires and whine when you contract Lycanthropy or join Sparkle Motion.

And for all those folks couching their comments in "it should be reversible", what would you do if your human character Reincarnated as a gnome because you wouldn't wait or pony up for Resurrection? Is that the DM's fault too? What about bad things that come from the Deck of Many Things?

Look, nobody likes it when bad things happen to their character. Suck it up and get it fixed, deal with it if it can't be fixed, or better yet, take precautions to limit it from happening at all.

And if it is really such an issue, for goodness sake talk to your GM and let him know that none of his players find cursed items to be any fun.

[Flickerdart]

To this very day, no one in our party uses any magical item we find without first having it identified..
I've never really seen the point of this 100gp tax on magic items.

[Seharvepernfan]

This is the same as having a dungeon full of level 1 orc fighters with improved sunder and sundering all the players equipment and then not letting them go back to town, or giving them more money. You are literally crippling the character and then, probably, throwing CR appropriate monsters at them.

How is this any different from him throwing regular orcs who are trying to sunder all your hp, blocking your exit, and continuing to throw CR appropriate enemies at you?

[nobodez]

I've never really seen the point of this 100gp tax on magic items.

Yet another of the many reasons why I prefer Pathfinder.

But, as for the example, I'd say that the GM should have run it like a reincarnate (physical stats are the only thing that changes, along with racial abilities, but you don't lose any feats or skills). If that GM did it like that, then I'd have no problem playing a half-ogre (or even a full ogre) factotum.

As for the LA/HD, well, just bring the character up to the equivalent point so that they're proportionally as far from their new adjusted level as they were from their old, and they'll just get less xp (or need significantly more xp in the case of Pathfinder) to reach the next level. Maybe slap a negative level or two on them to cover the level adjustment (though it can be removed with Restoration as normal).

[Flickerdart]

How is this any different from him throwing regular orcs who are trying to sunder all your hp, blocking your exit, and continuing to throw CR appropriate enemies at you?
Because being a 1 hp is not preventing the character from having level-appropriate abilities, while access to level-appropriate magical gear is hard-coded into the game and its CR system.

[snoopy13a]

I think it depends on the relationship between the GM and the players. Some players will find a template change to be literally worse than death--i.e., they would rather have their character die than have them become vampires, werewolves, etc. I can understand this feeling. The character's essence is the player's contribution to the story; if the GM changes who the character is, then it diminishes the player's role. Even worse is if the template change forces the player to alter the character's personality and actions to comply with the GM's demands.

If a GM is running a game with a player like this, then she should avoid changing that character's template. Otherwise, a GM runs the risk of alienating that player. Character death is a possibility that most players understand and accept. A forced change to your character's personality and being is something different.

[ArcturusV]

Well, the thing is that a DM often doesn't know a player would have a problem with it until after it happens. Even if they were asked about things in general beforehand.

Example: I ran a campaign, asked my players if they were okay with their actions having logical consequences. I even listed things like unleashing an uncontrolled monster in a city as something that is going to have consequences beyond just the immediate destruction. Everyone said cool, interesting, I expect as much, etc.

Then one of the characters cracked open a dungeon, unleashing a group of savage monsters on a city by leaving everything from their cell to the city streets completely unlocked and unprotected. So they got out. And bad things happened the following night. Later on the players heard about it while picking up random rumors in a tavern. And yes, the guy who cracked them out was upset about it.

[BowStreetRunner]

Does the DM have the right...? As I see it, any DM who stands behind his 'rights' as a DM has already missed the point. The DM has a responsibility to his players to make the game fun. He can take any approach he wants, but he needs to make that approach work with the group of players in his game.

With the right players, just about anything the DM thinks up could work. Those same ideas that make a great game for one player may just ruin the game for another however. The DM should be careful - feel the player out - make whatever reassurances are necessary to keep the player from getting upset - and above all, remember that no matter what the DM may have the right to do, every player reserves the right to quit!

[Deophaun]

I've never really seen the point of this 100gp tax on magic items.
Also, identify has a low, low percentage chance of picking up that an item is cursed, which is why my group has rarely bothered with it. If you want magical identification to be of any significant use, you need to wait until level 11 when the wizard gets analyze dweomer. Until then, your DM is a jerk if he randomly drops cursed items on you and there's no ready way to undo it.

That said, the "Behind the Curtain" section in the DMG on cursed items gives very good advice.

[Spuddles]

Ah, interesting. How did it go? What'd he end up doing and such?

Well, he's a bad player. Or was, he's gotten better, but despite being chaotic good and in a mostly good group, he always wants to kill party members for some reason. He also doesn't even know how to play his characters- it took him almost a year to learn how to make a goddamn attack roll.

Anyway, for some reason he got it into his head that his CG alignment "I can do whatever I want really," but I am digressing.

I took him aside, informed him of his alignment shift, that now he was twisted and wicked but it wouldn't necessarily change his alliances, etc.

He got a little gleam in his eye, then tried to kill the monk. They fell off a cliff (can't remember who took who), but monk slow falled, he took a **** ton of damage, monk then beat him unconscious.

I just shook my head. It didn't do much, other than change how all the other characters viewed his character. In character, it was an evil enchantment spell. As players, we were all like "why did you do that?"

Later when he got killed by Drow, the party just retreated, though.