What's in a curse?

[MrStabby]

So I was looking through XgtE and reviewed the Eldritch Invocations section. Maddening Hex and Relentless Hex caught my eye;they refer to a creature "cursed by your hex spell or a warlock feature of yours". I was wondering how people would rule this.

So somethings are explicitly ruled in: hex spell, sign of ill omen. By extension I would include any spell from an invocation that has a duration longer than instantaneous and has a deleterious effect on an enemy.

Next up are effects like thrall. Adverse effect, warlock feature - the case for it being a curse comes down to the remove curse spell removing it. Probably fine.

How about others? Fey presence - if they are frightened of me by this warlock ability does it count as a curse? How about Beguiling defences? Dark Delirium?

If an Eldritch Invocation is a warlock feature, then is Pact Magic a warlock feature and other spells should be included? How about Mystic Arcanum? Like Eldritch Invocations this is a warlock feature that tells you to pick something from a list - can I use dominate monster and then use relentless hex to teleport to them?

What about features like pact of the tome? Like the example invocations it gives spells... sometimes spells that have a bad effect on the target that lasts for a duration. Friends springs to mind.



How would people rule these?

Touching a party member in their sleep (should I reword this?) to turn them into a thrall simply so you can bonus action teleport to them in battle seems pretty hilarious. If pact magic is "a warlock feature of yours" and you can cast hold person on a bunch of enemies and then teleport about dispatching them all it seems pretty good - not specifically better than doing it with Hex, which is explicitly allowed, but it makes the ability a little more versatile.

[sophontteks]

Only the things listed count.

[MrStabby]

Only the things listed count.

I would argue the words "such as" imply that the list is not intended to be exhaustive. Also if there were only three things, why bother with the excess phrasing?

[Rukelnikov]

I'd say anything that can be removed by "remove curse" counts.

[Lunali]

I would read it as simply leaving language in to allow for more to be added in a future supplement (presumably as part of a new subclass) rather than to allow a wide variety of abilities to be used. As such, I would limit it to those 3 unless a particularly good argument were made for something else being allowed.

[MrStabby]

I would read it as simply leaving language in to allow for more to be added in a future supplement (presumably as part of a new subclass) rather than to allow a wide variety of abilities to be used. As such, I would limit it to those 3 unless a particularly good argument were made for something else being allowed.

Which is reasonable, but what would you class as a "particularly good argument"? For example, I would rule without much hesitation that if Sign of Ill Omen (casting bestow curse) is eligible, Thief of Five Fates (that casts bane) is also eligible. Dark delirium on the other hand is less clear tome how it was intended.

I wouldn't have a problem with create thrall - if remove curse gets rid of it, it probably qualifies as a curse. But Mystic Arcanum? My instinct says not, but I can't articulate why.

[sophontteks]

I would definately allow any other warlock feature called a curse or a hex.

[Lunali]

Which is reasonable, but what would you class as a "particularly good argument"? For example, I would rule without much hesitation that if Sign of Ill Omen (casting bestow curse) is eligible, Thief of Five Fates (that casts bane) is also eligible. Dark delirium on the other hand is less clear tome how it was intended.

I wouldn't have a problem with create thrall - if remove curse gets rid of it, it probably qualifies as a curse. But Mystic Arcanum? My instinct says not, but I can't articulate why.

I would require a very good argument to allow thief of five fates since it targets more than one creature.

[MrStabby]

I would require a very good argument to allow thief of five fates since it targets more than one creature.

A reasonable point, the language does only seem to suggest one creature.

[Rukelnikov]

I swept the locks features and the only one I'd allow is Create Thrall, since "That creature is then charmed by you until a remove curse spell is cast on it[...]" that means its definitely a curse.

Accursed Specter could maybe also be allowed, it says "[...]you can curse the soul of a person you slay, temporarily binding it to your service. When you slay a humanoid, you can cause its Spirit to rise from its corpse as a specter[...]".

I'm leaning towards "no", since, if the spirit is the result of the curse, i'm unsure whether the spirit itself is cursed or not, and it doesn't have the clause of a Remove Curse ending the effect.

[No brains]

If your book of shadows lets you learn Vicious Mockery, a warlock feature lets you curse at someone.

[Mjolnirbear]

The Blood Hunter features abilities that are expressly curses, though the invocations' wording suggests it may be limited to 'warlock abilities'.

I would not include 'any deleterious effect' as a DM. I played a Hex-lock based on curses, and with Hex and Hexblade Curse it was already eating enough of my actions. It was fun as hell, though!

During my research I found that very, very few spells counted as a Curse. My DM allowed me a new spell list including de buffs that could be flavoured as curses, but only Bestow Curse on that list was an actual Curse ability. This was decided between he and I by the simple expedient of looking for the word curse.

As a DM, I'd rule that if it had the word curse in it, or was subject to the Remove Curse spell, then its a curse that functions for maddening Hex. I don't yet know if I'd restrict it to warlock-only. It seems pointless to do so since so few abilities use the word and those are almost all curses, at least until I saw the blood hunter.

[Lunali]

In a similar vein, would you consider Bestow Curse from a spell slot to work or does it only work if it's from the invocation? If you allow it to work from a spell slot, does it have to be a warlock slot?

My inclination would be to say no to one cast from a spell slot, even a warlock slot, but some might think otherwise.

[Mjolnirbear]

"... Or a warlock ability that curses."

Bestow Curse is not on the warlock spell list, though it darn well should be. If your DM allows you to take the spell as a warlock, it is thence a warlock ability that curses.

[Lunali]

"... Or a warlock ability that curses."

Bestow Curse is not on the warlock spell list, though it darn well should be. If your DM allows you to take the spell as a warlock, it is thence a warlock ability that curses.

The actual text is "target cursed by your hex spell or by a warlock feature of yours, such as Hexblade’s Curse or Sign of Ill Omen. "

Not on the warlock spell list, but if you multiclass you can cast it from warlock spell slots. So the question is does it count if the warlock feature is pact magic? Also, if you allow it to work from pact magic, is it really that different if you cast it from your other class's spell slots?

[Unoriginal]

If the Warlock feature says it's a curse/that you curse the target, then it works. Otherwise it doesn't.

Pretty straightforward. You'll note the text specifically call for Warlock features, not other types of curses.

[sophontteks]

"... Or a warlock ability that curses."

Bestow Curse is not on the warlock spell list, though it darn well should be. If your DM allows you to take the spell as a warlock, it is thence a warlock ability that curses.
Warlocks gain this spell from an invocation.

[Lunali]

Warlocks gain this spell from an invocation.

The invocation explicitly counts, the question is whether it works if it's used from something other than the invocation.

[Arcangel4774]

Besides whats mentioned explicitly, id add chains of carceri (hold monster invocation), dark delerium (fey), and create thrall (goo) without question. Since the abilities have a single target, id allow thief of 5 fates(bane) as its its just potential targets, not allowing the targetting of all at once.

Theres 3 that id want to to add but dont think theyre at all rai intended. Gaze of two minds, accursed specter, and the biggest stretch: pact of the chain. Heck i may even throw in pact of the blade if you get a sentient weapon.

[Lunali]

Besides whats mentioned explicitly, id add chains of carceri (hold monster invocation), dark delerium (fey), and create thrall (goo) without question. Since the abilities have a single target, id allow thief of 5 fates(bane) as its its just potential targets, not allowing the targetting of all at once.

Theres 3 that id want to to add but dont think theyre at all rai intended. Gaze of two minds, accursed specter, and the biggest stretch: pact of the chain. Heck i may even throw in pact of the blade if you get a sentient weapon.

I can't see any reason you couldn't target all of them at once with maddening hex if you allowed bane.

Edit: Nvm, getting confused with a different discussion on hexblade's curse.

[Arcangel4774]

I can't see any reason you couldn't target all of them at once with maddening hex if you allowed bane.

Mostly because the wording says the target. Not the targets

[DarkKnightJin]

I would argue the words "such as" imply that the list is not intended to be exhaustive. Also if there were only three things, why bother with the excess phrasing?

Honestly? Probably future-proofing this stuff for when they add new things down the line that act a bit like Hexblade's Curse.