What ability set would be bad IRL?

[Quertus]

So, there's been threads about RPG abilities that would be good, or what D&D classes one would take IRL, but what about abilities that would be *bad* to spontaneously develop?

To make the challenge easier, this doesn't have to be bad for a fully clued-in Playground optimizer - you can even explain how it would be bad for someone with no gaming experience, or even someone from a parallel world where that particular system doesn't exist.

Is it bad because they might not understand the consequences? Bad because it's hard to control? Bad because they might come to rely on it, and find that it fails when they need it? Bad because other people *would* recognize it, and fear/persecute them?

Just how bad can we make this "gift" of abilities of an RPG character?

[Nifft]

So, there's been threads about RPG abilities that would be good, or what D&D classes one would take IRL, but what about abilities that would be *bad* to spontaneously develop?

High intelligence is linked to a host of problems, from loneliness (from inability to communicate meaningfully with most people who are ~30 IQ points lower or higher) to madness (from seeing the horrible truth of the universe).

So any ability set with Int 20+ will arguably be bad IRL, especially if you pair it with Cha 8-.


In terms of a class that's bad, 3.5e Fist of the Forest would be pretty awful in a modern, civilized society.

Anything that made you look non-human could be troublesome, too.

[Quertus]

High intelligence is linked to a host of problems, from loneliness (from inability to communicate meaningfully with most people who are ~30 IQ points lower or higher) to madness (from seeing the horrible truth of the universe).

So any ability set with Int 20+ will arguably be bad IRL, especially if you pair it with Cha 8-.


In terms of a class that's bad, 3.5e Fist of the Forest would be pretty awful in a modern, civilized society.

Anything that made you look non-human could be troublesome, too.

Ouch :smallfrown: High Int, low Chr is painful.

Any particular candidates for nonhuman appearance?

[Gnoman]

Many combat-relevant abilities would be not great for most people. Even if fully controllable, just knowing that you had an inherent ability to cast even something like Magic Missile (as a level 1 sorcerer, for example) would be a massive mental strain.

[Quertus]

Many combat-relevant abilities would be not great for most people. Even if fully controllable, just knowing that you had an inherent ability to cast even something like Magic Missile (as a level 1 sorcerer, for example) would be a massive mental strain.

Are you suggesting that this would be *worse* than owning a knife, or a gun, to know that you could chant some magic words to get a similar effect?

[Unavenger]

Are you suggesting that this would be *worse* than owning a knife, or a gun, to know that you could chant some magic words to get a similar effect?

The majority of humans don't carry a gun with them all or even most of the time, and at least a fair few very much wouldn't want to.

[Telok]

Wild magic anything. We're hanging this on that "spontaneously develop" thing. With full player knowledge of the risks, possible metacurrency, players having (mostly) control over a character's involuntary reactions, and only risking a character sheet... some people say yes to wild magic abilities, bloodlines, prestige classes, etc. IRL? You're the non-consensual character who will get a potentially lethal or crippling surprise some day. And if you survive that first wild surge you'll always have to live with having a power that improves your life and has only a tiny chance of going terribly wrong. Really, it's as safe as driving a car. Right?

[King of Nowhere]

Are you suggesting that this would be *worse* than owning a knife, or a gun, to know that you could chant some magic words to get a similar effect?

I am a teacher, and i had some really bad kids sometimes. I really would NOT want to be able to cast magic missile at them, just like i would not want to bring a gun. In the heat of a moment i may do something i may regret

[NichG]

Telepathy 100', as per Outsider racial abilities.

[Quertus]

Wild magic anything. … Really, it's as safe as driving a car. Right?

This one definitely depends on the nature of the "wild magic" (3e is pretty safe, for example), and how much of a gambler the imbued individual is.


I am a teacher, and i had some really bad kids sometimes. I really would NOT want to be able to cast magic missile at them, just like i would not want to bring a gun. In the heat of a moment i may do something i may regret

Fair enough :smalleek:


Telepathy 100', as per Outsider racial abilities.

And this could be bad because…?

[NichG]

And this could be bad because…?

The text of it is ambiguous, but suggests telepathic conversations not just transmission is possible. So that reads to me as some form of always-on awareness of valid targets of thought going on around you.

If you live in a city, that could be a thousand people at any given time. Good luck sleeping...

[Batcathat]

And this could be bad because…?

I don't know about NichG's motivation but personally I'm already a cynic bordering on misanthrope without knowing the deepest, darkest thoughts of everyone else.

I guess there's always a chance I'd be pleasantly surprised but... well, I doubt it.

[Mastikator]

And this could be bad because…?

Imagine that you have a twitter account, you auto-follow everyone within 100 ' and can't turn off notifications. That's like nightmare + hell + horror story all in one.

[Saintheart]

Direct, replicable proof of the existence of a deity in one's person might make social occasions somewhat awkward.

[Willie the Duck]

As has already been alluded to:
Anything that makes you obviously monstrous (look like a troll, Marvel's The Thing, etc.) would have serious social complications.
Anything that makes you innately hazardous (anything from being on fire to being able to cast magic missile) would have social and emotional/mental well-being consequences (how many people who have ever had suicidal ideation would have real problems with a lethal power which could not be taken away?).
Anything that gives you massive control over others, or the world in general, could have self-identity concerns (I don't love that people die from preventable reasons, but in general I don't have a lot of control over that fact. If I did...).
Anything that allows you to know things you'd rather not know (knowing what people really thought, knowing when and how you and your loved ones will die), or perhaps not be able to turn off (being a telepath in a large city)
This is all part and parcel of the superhero genre (teenagers discover that they are mutants, The Thing, 'with great power comes great responsibility,' etc.) as well as classical mythology (examples being Herakles, Cassandra, etc.), and I think it has been explored exhaustively there.

[Quertus]

twitter notifications.

Enough said.

Best to *very quickly* get/make yourself a home in the middle of an empty parking lot.


Direct, replicable proof of the existence of a deity in one's person might make social occasions somewhat awkward.

What are you thinking would grant this ability - especially the *proof* part?


Anything that makes you innately hazardous

Alas poor Radioactive Man. Always the (half) life of the party.


Anything that gives you massive control over others, or the world in general, could have self-identity concerns (I don't love that people die from preventable reasons, but in general I don't have a lot of control over that fact. If I did...).

"self-identity concerns"?


Anything that allows you to know things you'd rather not know (knowing what people really thought, knowing when and how you and your loved ones will die),

I can see that being… problematic.


or perhaps not be able to turn off (being a telepath in a large city)

That one's a classic.



This is all part and parcel of the superhero genre (teenagers discover that they are mutants, The Thing, 'with great power comes great responsibility,' etc.) as well as classical mythology (examples being Herakles, Cassandra, etc.), and I think it has been explored exhaustively there.

Well, I guess that that's the advantage of having a new audience.

Besides, I imagine that they never… hmmm… parodied "first world problems" with a "Fight Club"-worthy meeting group of powered individuals discussing their problems. Or… made a team with powers that would make most jealous… who were all baffled/troubled by their powers long-term (in a way that doesn't make me eye roll or face palm).

I'm guessing "exhaustively" is a bit strong of a stance. But I'll happily be wrong.

[Psyren]

There are whole trope pages dedicated to this concept. I'd start with the abilities noted there and then simply point to the myriad D&D methods of obtaining these abilities.

Required Secondary Powers (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RequiredSecondaryPowers)
Blessed With Suck (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlessedWithSuck)
Too Awesome To Use (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TooAwesomeToUse)

[Gnoman]

Are you suggesting that this would be *worse* than owning a knife, or a gun, to know that you could chant some magic words to get a similar effect?

I can lock my gun up. If I can just wiggle my fingers and blast somebody that annoys me, I can't lock that up.

[Calthropstu]

Summoning and necromancy.

Seriously, how long do you honestly think it would be before someone oopsed and unleashed a self replicating undead or got tricked by some outsider?

[Kitten Champion]

Being a Barbarian - as in a Berserker - would be genuinely terrible in most any real-world context. Unbridled rage doesn't generally make your life better.

[t209]

Being Locatha, Drow (though shut-in is viable, and they can do night-shift), or Ranger or Druid as well.

[Rynjin]

Being a Barbarian - as in a Berserker - would be genuinely terrible in most any real-world context. Unbridled rage doesn't generally make your life better.

Nah, that would be great. Barbarians get to control their Rage; when it activates and when it deactivates. Unless you're a Frenzied Berserker or something similar, it's all upside. You basically have the ability to not just control, but to OVERCLOCK your adrenaline. Forget the combat applications; make millions playing pro football with your mild superhuman levels of strength and endurance. Limited duration sure, but that's where it being a Free action to activate/deactivate comes in. Just use it for key plays and sticky spots.

Nah, the real curse would be being something like a Blight Druid, with this ability:


Miasma (Ex)
Starting at 5th level, if a blight druid is adjacent to a creature at the beginning of its turn, the creature must succeed at a Fortitude save with a DC of 10 + 1/2 the druid’s level + the druid’s Wisdom modifier or become sickened for 1 round. A creature of the animal, fey, or plant type that fails its save is nauseated for 1 round and sickened for 1 minute thereafter. If the creature makes its save, it is immune to this effect for 24 hours, as are creatures immune to disease.

This ability replaces trackless step and resist nature’s lure.

Most always on Aura style abilities would be similarly bad.

[Wraith]

What are you thinking would grant this ability - especially the *proof* part?

Being a Cleric, Paladin, or Divine Soul Sorcerer mostly. Even if someone looks at your Divine Intervention abilities and says that they're "just weird spells", they would have a much harder time if one of the spells you cast is Commune and you can reliably talk to God 5 times per day. To say nothing of what would happen if you were a Cleric of one deity and you met another Cleric who could similarly demonstrate that they were in contact with a different deity, immediately disproving monotheism.

Other spells like Contact Other Plane or Planeshift would have a similar effect on any religion whose creation story says that there is only one 'Earth' with sentient life upon it.


"self-identity concerns"?

Imagine that your magic power is mind control. You can enforce your will on another person and keep them under your thrall for as long as you like, controlling them like an extension of your own body, indefinitely. They have no free will, but what you choose to give them.

So... Who are you? What are you? Can you even remember which of the two bodies you control is your 'real' one? Can you even understand what 'your real body' means? Could you even let go if you wanted or needed to? What if you could control 2 other people? 5 more? 50? What if one of them dies while under your direct and unassailable control - is a part of you dead now, too?

If you could even get over the cripplingly immense pressure of being responsible for so many other people then you'd probably have to be some flavour of psychopath, which would only get worse as your control became more complete and your inhibitions weakened further. The human psyche isn't built to be a Hive Mind, even if we didn't know already what Absolute Power does to it as well!


Besides, I imagine that they never… hmmm… parodied "first world problems" with a "Fight Club"-worthy meeting group of powered individuals discussing their problems. Or… made a team with powers that would make most jealous… who were all baffled/troubled by their powers long-term (in a way that doesn't make me eye roll or face palm).

It kind of has, in a few fairly mainstream examples. The Pixar movie Wreck-It Ralph is probably the biggest and most recent one I can think of - the Bad Guys Support Group, wherein the villains of video games get together and engage in group therapy to discuss the pressures and expectations placed on them for just doing their jobs. :smalltongue:

[MoiMagnus]

"Pact magic", especially with a devil, is a very bad sign for your soul after death.

[HumanFighter]

I think the worst would be Pathfinder Sorcerer, Aberrant Bloodline. You would literally turn more and more into a freak over time. Even as early as 5th level, you grow long weird wiggly arms. And by 20th level (I think?) Your body has become so messed up that you're immune to critical hits! Think of how messed up that would be, slowly turning into an alien creature. Your life would become a body horror story essentially. I would rather eat week old moldy old rolls than endure such a fate. :yuk:

[Troacctid]

Being a Cleric, Paladin, or Divine Soul Sorcerer mostly. Even if someone looks at your Divine Intervention abilities and says that they're "just weird spells", they would have a much harder time if one of the spells you cast is Commune and you can reliably talk to God 5 times per day. To say nothing of what would happen if you were a Cleric of one deity and you met another Cleric who could similarly demonstrate that they were in contact with a different deity, immediately disproving monotheism.
All that proves is that you personally believe your magic is granted by a deity. It doesn't prove the deity's existence. You say you talked to a deity? Cool, get in line behind every prophet in history. You have miracles to back it up? That just proves the existence of magic, not the existence of Mystra. And miracles can be faked, so it might not even prove the existence of magic!


Other spells like Contact Other Plane or Planeshift would have a similar effect on any religion whose creation story says that there is only one 'Earth' with sentient life upon it.
Again, that doesn't really prove anything except that you believe you talked to, or traveled to, another plane of existence. Open a planar portal in a major metropolitan area and then maybe we can talk.

[Wraith]

All that proves is that you personally believe your magic is granted by a deity. It doesn't prove the deity's existence. You say you talked to a deity? Cool, get in line behind every prophet in history. You have miracles to back it up? That just proves the existence of magic, not the existence of Mystra. And miracles can be faked, so it might not even prove the existence of magic!

This is, of course, the problem with claiming ANY supernatural ability that could be generated from a D&D class.
You say that you're a Wizard and that you can do magic? Or maybe you're just a pyrotechnics expert and you have a team of guys nearby hitting detonators according to code-words heard through a radio. What, you can only throw that "fireball" 3 times per day? Or maybe you just need me to go away for 8 hours so that you can reset the charges and hid all the evidence! :smalltongue:

The problem is, I probably could prove to a sceptic that my Cleric class-levels are real, but I'd quite literally have to do it one sceptic at a time - demonstrating a spell or ability just for them in a controlled environment to eliminate any possibility of obfuscation, to their satisfaction. Even then some people would just refuse whatever evidence I could provide because it was me giving it to them, just as Flat-Earthers still exist IRL.

Hell, this is an argument that even exists within D&D - are Gods truly divine, or are they just immensely powerful beings who demand worship? Is there even a difference between the two things? That depends on whether you're asking a Wizard or a Cleric, to begin with.... There is a certain amount of good-faith required in the exercise that I couldn't necessarily get from everyone, but I think with time and strategy I could get enough people to believe me. :smalltongue:

Then again, this is assuming that my goal is to prove the existence of a specific deity. If my goal was to create upheaval in society in general, I'm one True Resurrection away from being able to prove or disprove the existence of the afterlife, the result of which will have heavy implications for any religion or culture and would be nigh-indisputable if I started with a finger bone and ended up with a breathing, talking Albert Einstein or Kurt Cobain doing a Q&A. :smallsmile:

[burpbot]

I can lock my gun up. If I can just wiggle my fingers and blast somebody that annoys me, I can't lock that up.

Magic missiles has verbal AND somatic components. The chance for that to go off accidentally are non-existent. The same goes for the vast majority of DnD spells.

[Mastikator]

Magic missiles has verbal AND somatic components. The chance for that to go off accidentally are non-existent. The same goes for the vast majority of DnD spells.

Also a secret sauce known as effort and intention. Only wild magic has the option of unintended uncontrolled magic.

[Willie the Duck]

Magic missiles has verbal AND somatic components. The chance for that to go off accidentally are non-existent. The same goes for the vast majority of DnD spells.


Also a secret sauce known as effort and intention. Only wild magic has the option of unintended uncontrolled magic.

I am pretty sure Gnoman's issue was not the fear of an accidental discharge, but instead the unsettling feeling of always having the ability to cause lethal damage to someone else -- at all times and in a way where you can't just say 'I'm not in the mindset to have control over someone else's continued existence right now'.

[MoiMagnus]

I am pretty sure Gnoman's issue was not the fear of an accidental discharge, but instead the unsettling feeling of always having the ability to cause lethal damage to someone else -- at all times and in a way where you can't just say 'I'm not in the mindset to have control over someone else's continued existence right now'.

Yeah, I also read it as "If I always had a gun on me, I would probably have shoot peoples more than once out of anger, and that's one of the reason I don't want to have a gun on me at all time, and even less magical powers that I can't lock away in a box."

[Telok]

Yeah, I also read it as "If I always had a gun on me, I would probably have shoot peoples more than once out of anger, and that's one of the reason I don't want to have a gun on me at all time, and even less magical powers that I can't lock away in a box."

Well if it was AD&D casting it wouldn't be too bad, what with the ten minute prep time, actual material components, and some DMs not allowing or requiring rolls to cast while drunk/impared. Post 3e where casting is more like a couple swear words in Klingon, a secret handshake, and maybe having a dice bag full of junk you have to touch... You think road rage and the like is bad already?

Thinking about it, anything where the fluff is "you're chosen by a <thing> and get powers" could be pretty bad. Because these are games we, as players, have lots of control over stuff like character builds. But that's not the in-universe stuff, it's all meta layer game decisions. In the fiction what's happening is Nurgle, Demogorgon, Vecna, whatever, chooses you like you're some piddly pokemon laying around. Then you get powers, that you didn't choose and may not even have consious control over.

Yay, you're a priest of disease and mutation now! Dosen't matter if you want the always-on ability to cause terminal cancer in people by proximity, the god chooses you.

[Troacctid]

Then again, this is assuming that my goal is to prove the existence of a specific deity. If my goal was to create upheaval in society in general, I'm one True Resurrection away from being able to prove or disprove the existence of the afterlife, the result of which will have heavy implications for any religion or culture and would be nigh-indisputable if I started with a finger bone and ended up with a breathing, talking Albert Einstein or Kurt Cobain doing a Q&A. :smallsmile:
You don't retain your memories of the afterlife after being resurrected, and even if you did, how would you prove your Kurt Cobain is the real deal and not an imitator?

[Quertus]

Nurgle

Yay, you're a priest of disease and mutation now! Dosen't matter if you want the always-on ability to cause terminal cancer in people by proximity, the god chooses you.

Tzeentch probably doesn't appreciate you reassigning his schtick… unless that was the plan all along.

[Gnoman]

Magic missiles has verbal AND somatic components. The chance for that to go off accidentally are non-existent. The same goes for the vast majority of DnD spells.



I am pretty sure Gnoman's issue was not the fear of an accidental discharge, but instead the unsettling feeling of always having the ability to cause lethal damage to someone else -- at all times and in a way where you can't just say 'I'm not in the mindset to have control over someone else's continued existence right now'.


Yeah, I also read it as "If I always had a gun on me, I would probably have shoot peoples more than once out of anger, and that's one of the reason I don't want to have a gun on me at all time, and even less magical powers that I can't lock away in a box."


That is precisely what I meant. There are times when having the ability to easily react lethally is a really risky thing. Having an ability to just straight up blast a fool might sound appealing, but think about things like road rage, let alone situations where you are sleep-deprived, drunk, or otherwise impaired.

[Wraith]

You don't retain your memories of the afterlife after being resurrected

Doesn't say that in the 5e spell description. Is there a general rule for Resurrection in the DMG, or is that from an older edition?


...and even if you did, how would you prove your Kurt Cobain is the real deal and not an imitator?

DNA testing and rigorous interview. The reason that I used Kurt Cobain as an example is because he was around within our (certainly my) lifetime, and there are members of his close family and friends around who could still confirm who they are - his daughter, bandmates, parents, etc. We'd struggle to prove that some rando we had just brought back to the dead really is Napoleon Bonaparte because everyone who knew him well is long dead also, but introduce Cobain to the surviving members of Nirvana? That could work, maybe.

Again there will be some people who believe that under examination Dave Grohl might be lying or incompetent or whatever, but that's always going to be the case in any 'supernatural' event. We'll never conclusively prove to everyone that the CIA isn't listening to their thoughts through their cell phone, but we can probably do so well enough to convince *most* people that what we're doing is real. :smalltongue:

[MoiMagnus]

Doesn't say that in the 5e spell description. Is there a general rule for Resurrection in the DMG, or is that from an older edition?

Rules of the afterlife are setting dependent, but up to my knowledge, this particular information has not be clarified in any 5e setting books.

In settings inherited from 3.5, it's reasonable to continue to apply the default from 3.5 (Complete Divine, pages 129 - 130):

When you come back to the world of the living, you remember in general terms what the afterlife was like, but your memories have a vague, dreamlike quality and you’re unable to recall the specifics of events. Whether the afterlife was torment or bliss to you, you have a good idea of what to expect should you die again—unless you alter your behavior markedly enough to change your alignment.

[Mastikator]

DNA testing and rigorous interview. The reason that I used Kurt Cobain as an example is because he was around within our (certainly my) lifetime, and there are members of his close family and friends around who could still confirm who they are - his daughter, bandmates, parents, etc. We'd struggle to prove that some rando we had just brought back to the dead really is Napoleon Bonaparte because everyone who knew him well is long dead also, but introduce Cobain to the surviving members of Nirvana? That could work, maybe.

Again there will be some people who believe that under examination Dave Grohl might be lying or incompetent or whatever, but that's always going to be the case in any 'supernatural' event. We'll never conclusively prove to everyone that the CIA isn't listening to their thoughts through their cell phone, but we can probably do so well enough to convince *most* people that what we're doing is real. :smalltongue:

Doesn't prove he was brought back from the dead, more likely is that someone cloned him so perfectly that it's indistinguishable from Kurt before death. Everything he knows? The clone merely learned everything about Kurt.

The problem with miracles is that as soon as you apply occams razor to it any natural explanation (no matter how contrived and implausible) is more likely than the supernatural explanation.

Even if the miracle is performed right before your eyes under the most controlled experiment possible occams razor still states that you pick a non-magic explanation over a magic one.

[MoiMagnus]

Doesn't prove he was brought back from the dead, more likely is that someone cloned him so perfectly that it's indistinguishable from Kurt before death. Everything he knows? The clone merely learned everything about Kurt.

"Perfect cloning" is probably too much of a stretch to be the Occam razor's result (which is probably "you are a fraud that pay good money or blackmail peoples to claim that it works").

I agree that a single miracle will be discarded as a fraud.

But it doesn't really matters how you claim to do it, if you're on a daily basis able to recreate dead peoples that are indistinguishable from their previous self, and that you are able to replicate this feat even on an arbitrary dead person, your method will eventually get investigated scientifically.

You will have a rocky start where you will need to financiary rely on rich persons believing in the occult, but unless you want to remain discrete and just be rich, your fame will attract peoples trying to debunk you, and you will be able to accept those challenges and prove them wrong.

[Wraith]

Rules of the afterlife are setting dependent, but up to my knowledge, this particular information has not be clarified in any 5e setting books.

In settings inherited from 3.5, it's reasonable to continue to apply the default from 3.5 (Complete Divine, pages 129 - 130)

Fair enough. We can perhaps agree that there is at least the possibility that a resurrected people might remember, dependant on setting and what exactly we're bringing into IRL. Or at the very least; if their memories are dreamlike and vague, eventually we can resurrect enough people that they can combine their experiences and fill in the gaps to create a more full picture.


...more likely is that someone cloned him so perfectly that it's indistinguishable from Kurt before death.

And THAT isn't remarkable enough for you!?! Even if all I have to do is lie and say that I *did* make a perfect clone of someone who has been dead for 30 years, are you not even a little bit impressed? :smalltongue:

The implications derived from being able to do that every single day is just as staggering and will have collossal impact upon society. And then, like MoiMagnus says, if it happens often enough then SOMEONE is bound to take notice and research it formally and eventually the ability to clone and/or raise the dead will become science fact.

Some people will still think it's a hoax, like the moon landing or JFK's assassination. Fair enough; Those people will be left behind to their own little conspiracy theories and there's nothing that we can really do about that, but for everyone else it reinterprets how we look at science, creation of life, the afterlife and religion. I don't imagine it would be a particularly peaceful process. :smalltongue:

[MoiMagnus]

We already have this situation, ostensibly.
There are people alive today that have up to a million eye witness accounts that they performed miracles, not just over their lifetime but in a single day. What's more likely, that all those people are wrong or that miracles were performed. If you ask me it's the former that is more likely.

And they're most likely pretty wealthy out of the peoples that believe it, and most likely never actively tried to have their "talents" scientifically tested because they know they have much more to lose than to win, and are probably even ignoring mails from professional debunkers trying to challenge them.

Pseudo-sciences like homeopathy were scientifically tested (and debunked multiple times). We've plenty of examples in current society where frauds are debunked, but peoples continue to believe in them nevertheless. But we're quite short on cases where attempts to debunk supernatural events consistently failed.

Obviously, it is reasonable for you, as an individual, to doubt those claims up until there is a scientific consensus that says that it works. But I think you're underestimating how much the scientific community would try to honestly debunk you if you're actually trying your best to collaborate with them rather than just trying to extract money out of peoples believing in you.

[Mastikator]

Fair enough. We can perhaps agree that there is at least the possibility that a resurrected people might remember, dependant on setting and what exactly we're bringing into IRL. Or at the very least; if their memories are dreamlike and vague, eventually we can resurrect enough people that they can combine their experiences and fill in the gaps to create a more full picture.



And THAT isn't remarkable enough for you!?! Even if all I have to do is lie and say that I *did* make a perfect clone of someone who has been dead for 30 years, are you not even a little bit impressed? :smalltongue:

The implications derived from being able to do that every single day is just as staggering and will have collossal impact upon society. And then, like MoiMagnus says, if it happens often enough then SOMEONE is bound to take notice and research it formally and eventually the ability to clone and/or raise the dead will become science fact.

Some people will still think it's a hoax, like the moon landing or JFK's assassination. Fair enough; Those people will be left behind to their own little conspiracy theories and there's nothing that we can really do about that, but for everyone else it reinterprets how we look at science, creation of life, the afterlife and religion. I don't imagine it would be a particularly peaceful process. :smalltongue:

Of course it's impressive, it would change what I believe about the possibilities of cloning humans. It would shatter my understanding of the world.

Still way more likely than actually raising the dead using magic. Infinitely more likely to be cloning than miracle by definition.

[Troacctid]

Doesn't prove he was brought back from the dead, more likely is that someone cloned him so perfectly that it's indistinguishable from Kurt before death. Everything he knows? The clone merely learned everything about Kurt.
The actual more likely possibility is that the DNA test was falsified.

[Jay R]

Yeah, I also read it as "If I always had a gun on me, I would probably have shoot peoples more than once out of anger, and that's one of the reason I don't want to have a gun on me at all time, and even less magical powers that I can't lock away in a box."

"As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of solving approaches zero."
Edit: "And that would be wrong."

[Silly Name]

Of course it's impressive, it would change what I believe about the possibilities of cloning humans. It would shatter my understanding of the world.

Still way more likely than actually raising the dead using magic. Infinitely more likely to be cloning than miracle by definition.

I would argue that the ability to create perfect clones of long-dead people with their memories intact is functionally the same thing as resurrecting them, and it has INCREDIBLE implications for historical research. Imagine being able to bring back William the Conqueror and ask him who the hell is that lady getting punched by the priest in the Bayeux tapestry, and why it's connected to the Norman conquest of England!

And that's just a tiny bit of historical trivia: there are so many things we can't know for sure due to spotty or incomplete reporting, and this would be a method to talk with direct witnesses of the events! Historians would go crazy! Who the hell was the guy in the Iron Mask? We can just ask him now!

And, again, it's functionally the same thing as bringing someone back from the dead. You're going to have a line of people begging you to bring back their loved ones, heal their sick and all that stuff. If you can cast True Resurrection, you can also cast Remove Disease, upsetting all of modern medicine by being able to cure a terminal patient with just a touch, which is far easier to test for in a controlled environment: bring the purported miracle-caster in a cancer ward, find a patient and let the caster do their magic. Boom, healthy, cancer-free patient right there.

[noob]

So, there's been threads about RPG abilities that would be good, or what D&D classes one would take IRL, but what about abilities that would be *bad* to spontaneously develop?

To make the challenge easier, this doesn't have to be bad for a fully clued-in Playground optimizer - you can even explain how it would be bad for someone with no gaming experience, or even someone from a parallel world where that particular system doesn't exist.

Is it bad because they might not understand the consequences? Bad because it's hard to control? Bad because they might come to rely on it, and find that it fails when they need it? Bad because other people *would* recognize it, and fear/persecute them?

Just how bad can we make this "gift" of abilities of an RPG character?
Any ability that spawns or calls dangerous monsters can make you get persecuted.