Player contracted lycanthropy. Now what?

[GreyBlack]

So, in one of my recent games, a player contracted lycanthropy after being bit by a wererat and is now considering embracing the curse of lycanthropy. Honestly, I think it's super cool, but I am very much a fan of making this embrace of the curse a double edged sword. So, I'm wondering what y'all have done to your players who contracted lycanthropy?

A couple ideas I have:
1. The player needs to make a Charisma saving throw to keep themselves from going into an all out blood rage.
2. The player can transform back and forth willingly, even without a full moon.
3. The player gets all the damage immunities of a regular lycanthrope.
4. Alignment immediately changes to whatever alignment the lycanthrope should be (big whoop).
5. On a Natural 1, the player immediately transforms against their will and needs to make a Charisma saving throw at disadvantage to keep their mental faculties in check.

Any thoughts? Ideas? I'm perfectly happy with them gaining the lycanthropy abilities, but I just don't want to turn it into an all-out buff for the character. Lycanthropy, at least the way I play, is supposed to be a curse, not a buff.

[JackPhoenix]

Thing is, "embracing the curse" isn't just clicking on "I accept the terms and conditions". It's a process where your outlook and entire psychology changes to match the magically mandated behavioral pattern of the lycanthrope in question. It's not "I have superpower now, and the LE on my sheet doesn't really mean anything", it's "I'm now conniving, greedy, cowardly bastard with superpowers."

[GreyBlack]

Thing is, "embracing the curse" isn't just clicking on "I accept the terms and conditions". It's a process where your outlook and entire psychology changes to match the magically mandated behavioral pattern of the lycanthrope in question. It's not "I have superpower now, and the LE on my sheet doesn't really mean anything", it's "I'm now conniving, greedy, cowardly bastard with superpowers."

Hmmmm...... that's very true. Perhaps, then, I should be looking more at a graded approach, similar to a Warlock's patron? You do actions in line with your lycanthropic tendencies, you gain certain abilities?

[Schwann145]

Lycanthropy, as an affliction, is really more about either fighting it off, or the roleplay challenge of falling into a different (usually evil) alignment.
The powers are just a bonus.

You should have a chat with the player about what this alignment change is going to mean for their character, how quickly or slowly it should take place, and how their growing new evil outlook may (or may not?) clash with the party.
Generally speaking, it's usually going to, eventually anyway, end up in bringing in a new character. But the process is fun to go through and RP.

[greenstone]

In addition to the above: At a certain time of the month, the player loses control of their character. Completely and utterly.

As a GM, you just tell the player, "Your character wakes up in a ditch, covered in blood. They have no idea what time of day it is, or even what day it is."

Then let them deal with getting back to the rest of the party, who know only that when they woke up, their party member was gone.

All those whispers in the tavern about how the Smith farm was massacred last night? Just coincidence…

[Greywander]

Part of the problem is that lycanthropy tends to be a case of Cursed with Awesome. It's a curse, and you need to drive that home in how it's expressed mechanically. But that doesn't mean you can't also let the player have nice things. What I'd consider is offering three different paths they can take:

1. They give in to the curse. If the party is non-Evil, they become an NPC antagonist, else if an Evil party they just have to roleplay it.
2. They fight the curse. This allows them to keep the cool powers, but at the price of having to constantly struggle against falling to the curse.
3. They purify the curse. This might mean a total removal of all things lycanthropy, but a more interesting option might be to allow them to retain the shapechanging ability and nothing else.

For case one, this is really only viable in an Evil party. Even then, you should emphasize the downsides. Namely, becoming more feral and bloodthirsty. They experience bestial urges that might be difficult to suppress. Probably call for a WIS save any time they try to do something contrary to their new nature. All in all, this is mostly a powerup, giving them cool powers at the cost of roleplaying a bloodthirsty brute. This won't appeal to every evil character, but it will appeal to some of them. As long as their natural tendencies align with the beast, there isn't really a downside. For non-evil parties, this one isn't even worth considering.

For the second case, you'll need to strike a tricky balance between the powers they get and the curse they fight. And the thing is, no matter what downside you give, the players will likely find a way to circumvent those downsides. Not really any way around that. I'd start by making the player lose complete control every full moon, no save. And during that time, they will try to kill anything and anyone that crosses their path. Other players, beloved NPCs, the BBEG, anyone. To build on this, you could make the PC occasionally roll to resist bestial urges, similar to the above option. The exact results of failure will need some tuning; do they just follow the urge (e.g. attack someone they don't like), or do they full on transform and lose control? (Maybe they have a chance to transform and lose control every time they roll initiative.) I'd also make the DC scale with the moon phase, and possibly give advantage to the save during the day, and disadvantage when in direct moonlight, or something like that. You can possibly include a quest to gain better control over the beast, and possibly even tame it to some degree.

For the third option, there's a simple answer with Remove Curse. But that's boring. Instead, I'd suggest some kind of quest, e.g. involving an order or druids or other "natural" or "pure" shapeshifters. The idea here is that lycanthropy was once a natural thing, and not evil or a curse. But it became corrupted, making it what it is today. The goal is to remove the corruption. Doing so will also remove many of the cool powers, but leave you with the shapeshifting ability. It's a neat quest with a cool reward at the end.

[TyGuy]

My player embraced the curse and the character became a NPC because he didn't want to roleplay evil and it would have detracted from the fun even if he did.

[sithlordnergal]

For case one, this is really only viable in an Evil party. Even then, you should emphasize the downsides. Namely, becoming more feral and bloodthirsty. They experience bestial urges that might be difficult to suppress. Probably call for a WIS save any time they try to do something contrary to their new nature. All in all, this is mostly a powerup, giving them cool powers at the cost of roleplaying a bloodthirsty brute. This won't appeal to every evil character, but it will appeal to some of them. As long as their natural tendencies align with the beast, there isn't really a downside. For non-evil parties, this one isn't even worth considering.


I don't know about that, you can have an evil being in a non-evil party. What matters is the players and how open they are to having evil party members.

[Jervis]

Lycanthropy, as an affliction, is really more about either fighting it off, or the roleplay challenge of falling into a different (usually evil) alignment.
The powers are just a bonus.

You should have a chat with the player about what this alignment change is going to mean for their character, how quickly or slowly it should take place, and how their growing new evil outlook may (or may not?) clash with the party.
Generally speaking, it's usually going to, eventually anyway, end up in bringing in a new character. But the process is fun to go through and RP.

I really need to get a werebear to bite my next evil player, going on a lawful good rampage every month would be hilarious.

[Lunali]

Fortunately it was a wererat and not a werewolf so the character would become lawful evil rather than chaotic evil. That means they become selfish, but consider the consequences of their actions. If it is to their benefit to be a part of the party, they will make efforts to not overly offend the party's morals (at least while they're watching) for their own gain. A chaotic good character is far more likely to cause trouble for the party by doing what's right without thought for the consequences.

[kingcheesepants]

I had a player bit by a weretiger in one of my games. A weretiger is just neutral so the RP aspect was fairly tame (they mostly just became a bit less enthused about doing things to help folks). And mechanically I had them go crazy during the full moon with no control of themselves (the other players would chain him up in a cell and throw some cows in for him during these times) and for the rest of the time he could shift in and out of tiger form at will but the damage immunites only worked while in tiger form and while in tiger form they couldn't cast spells, or use weapons or items. This let it be pretty well balanced since while in tiger form they had immunity to normal damage but also their offensive potential was pretty heavily curtailed.


I really need to get a werebear to bite my next evil player, going on a lawful good rampage every month would be hilarious.

I'm just trying to even imagine what a lawful good rampage would entail. Giving evidence of evildoing to the proper authorities? Donating their money to good causes and taking on difficult or dangerous quests with little thought to reward? Closing loopholes that they found as evil characters so that nobody can take advantage of them anymore? This sounds like fun in any case.

[GreyBlack]

Thank you everyone for your input! I'm working out the details as we speak.

I just wanted to take a moment to respond to the longest answer here, just so I can give kind of my thoughts on the situation.


Part of the problem is that lycanthropy tends to be a case of Cursed with Awesome. It's a curse, and you need to drive that home in how it's expressed mechanically. But that doesn't mean you can't also let the player have nice things. What I'd consider is offering three different paths they can take:

1. They give in to the curse. If the party is non-Evil, they become an NPC antagonist, else if an Evil party they just have to roleplay it.
2. They fight the curse. This allows them to keep the cool powers, but at the price of having to constantly struggle against falling to the curse.
3. They purify the curse. This might mean a total removal of all things lycanthropy, but a more interesting option might be to allow them to retain the shapechanging ability and nothing else.

For case one, this is really only viable in an Evil party. Even then, you should emphasize the downsides. Namely, becoming more feral and bloodthirsty. They experience bestial urges that might be difficult to suppress. Probably call for a WIS save any time they try to do something contrary to their new nature. All in all, this is mostly a powerup, giving them cool powers at the cost of roleplaying a bloodthirsty brute. This won't appeal to every evil character, but it will appeal to some of them. As long as their natural tendencies align with the beast, there isn't really a downside. For non-evil parties, this one isn't even worth considering.

For the second case, you'll need to strike a tricky balance between the powers they get and the curse they fight. And the thing is, no matter what downside you give, the players will likely find a way to circumvent those downsides. Not really any way around that. I'd start by making the player lose complete control every full moon, no save. And during that time, they will try to kill anything and anyone that crosses their path. Other players, beloved NPCs, the BBEG, anyone. To build on this, you could make the PC occasionally roll to resist bestial urges, similar to the above option. The exact results of failure will need some tuning; do they just follow the urge (e.g. attack someone they don't like), or do they full on transform and lose control? (Maybe they have a chance to transform and lose control every time they roll initiative.) I'd also make the DC scale with the moon phase, and possibly give advantage to the save during the day, and disadvantage when in direct moonlight, or something like that. You can possibly include a quest to gain better control over the beast, and possibly even tame it to some degree.

For the third option, there's a simple answer with Remove Curse. But that's boring. Instead, I'd suggest some kind of quest, e.g. involving an order or druids or other "natural" or "pure" shapeshifters. The idea here is that lycanthropy was once a natural thing, and not evil or a curse. But it became corrupted, making it what it is today. The goal is to remove the corruption. Doing so will also remove many of the cool powers, but leave you with the shapeshifting ability. It's a neat quest with a cool reward at the end.

I'll go in reverse order here.

Option 3: That's kinda right out as it is in campaign. I have intentionally told the players that curses tend to be less of a "Cast Remove Curse and done" type deal and more of a "You have to complete an action in order to no longer be afflicted." Reason for this is that I've described a "Low magic towns, high magic wilderness" kind of campaign setting, where you won't find Clerics above level 3, but there's definitely eldritch abominations below ground and ancient civilizations that were capable of doing much greater stuff.

Option 2 and Option 1 are kind of a sticking point, as they feel pretty diametrically opposed (intentionally so; not a knock on you). Personally, I'm super okay with them succumbing to the curse _or_ choosing to fight it. The big question, for me, is how to best mechanically represent the "embracing" of the curse.

And, actually, this might be a pretty big plot point. For example, the party patron is trying to cure his lycanthropy; why would he want to continue the patronage of someone who doesn't want to end their curse, and actually embraces it? That said, it's too cool a potential conflict that I can't pass it up and I really, REALLY want to give my players cool subplots when I can.

At this point, I am more just curious what other people have done in the past to mirror the "Embracing/rejecting the curse" type deal. How do you give your players cool powers with drawbacks without making it feel unfun?

[Lunali]

At this point, I am more just curious what other people have done in the past to mirror the "Embracing/rejecting the curse" type deal. How do you give your players cool powers with drawbacks without making it feel unfun?

In my games, for lycanthropy specifically, the PC has to reject the curse or become an NPC, which inevitably leads to them purifying the curse in the future. This is largely because lycanthropy is broken powerful and I don't want it in my game. It's hard to make a fun encounter for a party where one or more characters are immune to all attacks from most monsters.

[Sigreid]

Fortunately it was a wererat and not a werewolf so the character would become lawful evil rather than chaotic evil. That means they become selfish, but consider the consequences of their actions. If it is to their benefit to be a part of the party, they will make efforts to not overly offend the party's morals (at least while they're watching) for their own gain. A chaotic good character is far more likely to cause trouble for the party by doing what's right without thought for the consequences.

You set about plotting to infect the party of course.

[Greywander]

Option 3: That's kinda right out as it is in campaign. I have intentionally told the players that curses tend to be less of a "Cast Remove Curse and done" type deal and more of a "You have to complete an action in order to no longer be afflicted."
So... you're agreeing with me, but at the same time what I said is "right out"? I get the feeling you stopped reading as soon as you got to "Remove Curse".


The big question, for me, is how to best mechanically represent the "embracing" of the curse.
Indeed, and I don't know that there's a good answer for this. D&D isn't really designed to represent something like this. You might borrow some ideas and mechanics from Werewolf: The Apocalypse or Werewolf: The Forsaken (I'm not familiar with either of these, in fact I'm only somewhat familiar with their sister series, Vampire: The Masquerade).


At this point, I am more just curious what other people have done in the past to mirror the "Embracing/rejecting the curse" type deal. How do you give your players cool powers with drawbacks without making it feel unfun?
Unfortunately, I'm not sure how much solid advice you'll get here. I've seen threads like this pop up a few times, but I don't think I've ever seen an elegant solution proposed. Most people seem to default to "just make them an NPC if they don't get it cured". This feels like something that needs its own source book with a tailored subsystem for dealing with lycanthropy. I think there might actually be a homebrew book someone wrote that deals with things like this, along with becoming a lich or vampire. I think it might have been Grim Hollow or something?

Or you could use it as a narrative excuse for the player to dip into Beast barbarian, or something. Which might actually be the more elegant solution, but not a very satisfactory one if they had no plans/desire to dip into barbarian. You could give them free barbarian levels, but then you're back to giving power with no drawback, for something that is supposed to be a curse. (Also, Beast barbarian fits a wererat a lot less than it does most other lycanthropes.)

[Angelalex242]

I could always recommend the 'Oz' approach.

Oz, in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, had to be locked in a cage during his monthly time, but eventually gained some control over his curse through meditation and beads and such.

However, when he gained enough control to unleash the wolf as he saw fit, the wolf was generally more lethal than he wanted it to be. It would've murdered Tara hardcore for stealing 'his mate.'

In human form, he just gained better senses. By better senses, he basically had Alert, Observant, Expertise on Perception, and Advantage on Perception.

[qube]

I'm just trying to even imagine what a lawful good rampage would entail. Giving evidence of evildoing to the proper authorities? Donating their money to good causes and taking on difficult or dangerous quests with little thought to reward? Closing loopholes that they found as evil characters so that nobody can take advantage of them anymore? This sounds like fun in any case.To quote a meme


"it says "Lawful Good", not "Lawful Nice" "

https://progameguides.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Featured-Pathfinder-Wrath-of-the-Righteous-Angel-Mythic-Path-900x506.jpg

[ProsecutorGodot]

Unfortunately, I'm not sure how much solid advice you'll get here. I've seen threads like this pop up a few times, but I don't think I've ever seen an elegant solution proposed. Most people seem to default to "just make them an NPC if they don't get it cured". This feels like something that needs its own source book with a tailored subsystem for dealing with lycanthropy. I think there might actually be a homebrew book someone wrote that deals with things like this, along with becoming a lich or vampire. I think it might have been Grim Hollow or something?


Depending on the circumstances, this is solid advice. I'll add an addendum though - poll your players. If they're not bothered by the idea that there will only be minor repercussions to contracting lycanthropy, let it be.

My personal opinion is that there should be drastic consequences for this, if you don't make big commitments to this (I'd say taking levels in a class to emulate these abilities, beast barb or the lycan blood hunter homebrew class) then you probably shouldn't reap the significant benefits in being a lycanthrope without the significant downsides, such as potentially becoming an NPC. Don't let my strong opinions dictate your table though, I'm just offering them for perspective

[Zhorn]

Like many others have expressed in this thread, I take the view that lycanthropy needs to maintain its identity as a curse first and foremost.

For my games this is always "while transformed, the DM controls the character" just to hammer home that this isn't a buff or a superficial change you can metagame around. The consequences need to motivate the character into resisting and finding a cure, or accepting and transition to NPC status.

As Greywander says, lycanthropy is too easily treated as Cursed with Awesome, and that undermines the whole threat such an affliction is supposed to represent.

Now when a player wants to have a playable lycanthrope, like suggested above I'm also direct the player to Path of the Beast Barbarian, Order of the Lycan Blood Hunter, the Shifter race. The fundamental flavour of an 'in control' lycanthrope is perfectly achievable via PC options.
But for the monster afflicted condition? That stays in the naught corner.

[JellyPooga]

This is very much something that doesn't need rules, in my opinion.

There are many aspects of play that can inflict dramatic changes on a character. To name just a few;
- gross physical change (loss of limb, lycanthropic curse, mummy rot, aboleth goo, reincarnation as different Race)
- mental change (experiencing domination, lycanthropic curse)
- death and resurrection (sense of mortality, touching the divine)

Any of these could or require a character to experience or undergo changes to their personality, but roleplaying through these changes is part of roleplaying a character. Characters that don't change as their story is told get boring and stale; whether that change is in how they learn and grow from their experience or from how they're damaged or altered by their adventures is irrelevant; the change is what's important. That, for me, is what makes lycanthropes, shapeshifters and skin-changers one of the most compelling literary tropes; the frequent gross physical and mental change that comes from their abilities colours their activities and personality.
- The Selkie who pines after her shapechanging freedom after having her "seal skin" stolen by her human captor, but eventually risks forgetting who she once was.
- The Druid who spends too much time as a Bear and starts thinking a bit too much like one.
- The Werewolf that lusts for the full-moon and the taste of blood but is also a respected noble, so must tame their inner beast (or try to).
- The Bard that gets a little too comfortable casting Alter Self to the point they start fetishising it and begin feeling that their "natural" form is ugly or inadequate; addicted to the change, they seek a more permanent solution.

None of these require the GM to force a player to do anything. The player should want to play the change. If all they want is the mechanical bonus to their character...well, I probably wouldn't be playing D&D with them (though I'd probably be happy to play a boardgame with them).

My advice for the OP is to talk to your player. Discuss the curse and the ramifications of it.
Do they want to roleplay a descent into madness, or a struggle against their darker instincts?
Do they want to revel in the change and become the monster or do they want to seek redemption for the monstrous things they've done or still do in their alternate forms?
What story do they want to tell by embracing the curse?

Lean in to every aspect, don't shy away by just slapping some rules on it or taking away the character from the player and calling it a day.
Think about how other characters (player and non-player) are going to react to the curse.
Pit NPC's against them that have come to "hunt the monster" (especially if your Player wants a redemption arc). Explore the morality of the hunter/hunted scenario.
Have witnesses spread rumours about their invulnerability and other abilities, even if they're not directly related to the curse itself ("Blades break on his skin!" "I heard his eyes glow in the dark!" "He can run faster than a horse and turn to mist!") and have them act appropriately.
Introduce your own spins on the curse; how do "natural" rats (regular, giant or of unusual size) react to a wererat, for example? What about other wererats? Can they "smell" the curse on them? Do they accept them into their community and have expectations of behaviour? What happens when the player does or doesn't meet those expectations?

It's so much more than just "Oh, you're Lawful Evil now, so you have to play it or I'll NPC your character until you do, like a good little player" or "Ok, it's full moon so make a wis save".

[Keravath]

In the games I have run, lycanthropy is too much of a mechanical bump to one character which ends up trivializing a large number of possible encounters and making some if not all of the other players superfluous unless you change the campaign to be challenging to the lycanthrope character which may not fair to all the other players.

Why?

Immunity to bludgeoning, piercing and slashing damage not silver or magical. Most opponents will do these damage types. Veterans, most NPCs, most creatures. e.g. A lycanthrope can't be killed by a Tarrasque unless they get swallowed.

Many combats, the lycanthrope can just run in while the rest of the party twiddles their thumbs waiting for the lycanthrope to kill everything off. Without silver or magic or secondary effects in the hands of the opponents, lycanthropes are pretty indestructible. PCs tend to have far more magic/silver options than anything in the MM and if you start equipping every opponent with silver weapons so that there is some risk to the lycanthrope you'll have to justify in game why all the opponents decide to have just the thing for fighting lycanthropes.

Lycanthropy, vampirism are both things that sound cool especially due to their popularity these days. "Good" werewolves, "good" vampires ... but these aren't typical of the D&D version.

Finally, if you really want to introduce an overpowered PC that will disrupt the campaign in more ways than I can count :) ... the main problem is that the benefits are balanced only by role playing and social consequences. If the player gets into it, role plays the angst, the internal conflict and all the consequences then at least there is some downside since otherwise they are just an overpowered PC immune to the most common types of damage.

Socially - if their status as a lycanthrope becomes known - most will try to kill them if they can't be cured. No one in their right mind will ever adventure with a character that could turn into a ravening beast and try to kill them especially at the full moon. If the character doesn't tell the party then the first full moon when the character is on watch will likely be a TPK as they transform and start slaughtering the party. Unless the party is reasonably high level with magical weapons - the party will likely die just like commoners would. Alternatively, if the party does know, then they will take precautions and likely try to get the character cured as soon as possible (unless the party is evil in which case they might just kill him since he would eventually try to kill them and his immunities make him a bit of a risk).

Anyway, just food for thought, some cool ideas should sometimes remain just cool ideas :) ... if you do decide to go ahead with it, I'd consider homebrewing a few changes to reduce the impact on the campaign - on the other hand, you then need to come up with a justification for those changes.

[mucat]

I'm just trying to even imagine what a lawful good rampage would entail.
https://i.redd.it/vfs8wh0fl5z51.jpg

[Angelalex242]

Lawful Good rampage...

Ya know, there's a man named Bruce Wayne who seems to be fond of those...

[Jervis]

Lawful Good rampage...

Ya know, there's a man named Bruce Wayne who seems to be fond of those...
I am vengeance. I am the night. I am bearman.




I'm just trying to even imagine what a lawful good rampage would entail. Giving evidence of evildoing to the proper authorities? Donating their money to good causes and taking on difficult or dangerous quests with little thought to reward? Closing loopholes that they found as evil characters so that nobody can take advantage of them anymore? This sounds like fun in any case.

I once had a NPC mob boss who was bitten by a werebear (long story the guy was a Paladin going around biting evil people to give them a chance to change their ways, it was a whole thing). He would go out breaking up his own smuggling operations and beating up his own enforcers. He was trying to keep it secret and afraid he might turn himself in if it kept up and ended up pulling some players in to get some help from the outside.

[Sigreid]

Lawful Good rampage...

Ya know, there's a man named Bruce Wayne who seems to be fond of those...

I don't think Batman is Lawful Good. Maybe the bottom end of Neutral Good as except for the 1960's tv show, he doesn't give a toss about the law.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I don't think Batman is Lawful Good. Maybe the bottom end of Neutral Good as except for the 1960's tv show, he doesn't give a toss about the law.

Lawful doesn't mean "follows the law" necessarily, his own code of conduct is incredibly rigid. I'd probably paint him as Lawful Neutral, he has an idea of what's best for society that might conflict with societies ideas but his intentions are good. Society probably doesn't look favorably on the fact that he's dead set on rehabilitation for villains that sometimes manage double or triple digit body counts. He doesn't kill or allow them to even die through their own error when possible, even if it only inevitably ends up with them escaping Arkham and repeating the process.

[Schwann145]

Batman has no respect for legitimate authority. He's definitely chaotic good.

[RedMage125]

I don't think Batman is Lawful Good. Maybe the bottom end of Neutral Good as except for the 1960's tv show, he doesn't give a toss about the law.


Batman has no respect for legitimate authority. He's definitely chaotic good.

The one Canon source we have on this is the 3.5e Complete Scoundrel which established that he is, in fact, Lawful Good.

He actually DOES have respect for legitimate authority. He leaves the villains for GCPD to put away. He works with the Commissioner. His methods make him a "scoundrel" type character. But he operates by a code, and strives to protect the innocent.

On topic:
I prefer the stance posited by Keith Baker (of Eberron fame).

Lycanthropy is a *curse*. It is a supernatural affliction that literally overwrites your personality. It's something that changes your very nature, who you are. The change of your alignment is a reflection of that, but that's more of a secondary side effect. The point it that you aren't "you" anymore.

It doesn't matter what the alignment is you change to (or if it even is a change for you). Your whole personality changes.

Even werebears, who become Lawful Good. The animal instinct goes further than that. Bears are not social creatures. A werebear who gives in to the curse finds themselves seeking to retreat from society, from their companions, and go live in solitude in the wilderness. Neutral weretigers, likewise.

Now the OP'S situation is a LE wererat. Rat's (and wererats) do not shun civilization, but still live on the outskirts. They hide in the dark places, and steal what they want. They may feel compelled to spread the curse, they may not. But they selfishly take what they can when they feel like they can get away with it.

But yeah, running it this way makes it not "Cursed With Awesome", but an actual curse that eventually erases the personality of the victim. And that's not something most players would go for.

OP: I had this idea (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?395281-Low-level-Lycanthropy-quot-cure-quot) a few years ago. If you aren't looking to allow that as a cure, you could use that idea for those who decide to fight the curse, but can't cure it yet. This method could be something they do on the nights of the full moon to avoid changing (if they make the save).

[GreyBlack]

So... you're agreeing with me, but at the same time what I said is "right out"? I get the feeling you stopped reading as soon as you got to "Remove Curse".

You'd be correct. Apologies and agreed.


Batman has no respect for legitimate authority. He's definitely chaotic good.

I'd argue Batman does have respect for legitimate authority, but that he does not view the Gotham government as legitimate given how corrupt he is. As such, he leads a crusade against this corruption to restore more legitimate authority.

Still Chaotic Good, just a different way to get there.




The one Canon source we have on this is the 3.5e Complete Scoundrel which established that he is, in fact, Lawful Good.

He actually DOES have respect for legitimate authority. He leaves the villains for GCPD to put away. He works with the Commissioner. His methods make him a "scoundrel" type character. But he operates by a code, and strives to protect the innocent.

On topic:
I prefer the stance posited by Keith Baker (of Eberron fame).

Lycanthropy is a *curse*. It is a supernatural affliction that literally overwrites your personality. It's something that changes your very nature, who you are. The change of your alignment is a reflection of that, but that's more of a secondary side effect. The point it that you aren't "you" anymore.

It doesn't matter what the alignment is you change to (or if it even is a change for you). Your whole personality changes.

Even werebears, who become Lawful Good. The animal instinct goes further than that. Bears are not social creatures. A werebear who gives in to the curse finds themselves seeking to retreat from society, from their companions, and go live in solitude in the wilderness. Neutral weretigers, likewise.

Now the OP'S situation is a LE wererat. Rat's (and wererats) do not shun civilization, but still live on the outskirts. They hide in the dark places, and steal what they want. They may feel compelled to spread the curse, they may not. But they selfishly take what they can when they feel like they can get away with it.

But yeah, running it this way makes it not "Cursed With Awesome", but an actual curse that eventually erases the personality of the victim. And that's not something most players would go for.

OP: I had this idea (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?395281-Low-level-Lycanthropy-quot-cure-quot) a few years ago. If you aren't looking to allow that as a cure, you could use that idea for those who decide to fight the curse, but can't cure it yet. This method could be something they do on the nights of the full moon to avoid changing (if they make the save).

I think I'm going to be working on something like what you're suggesting, but making it a more gradual descent into madness. If you want the powers of a monster, you have to _act_ like a monster and fully embrace that.

Now is probably also a good time to mention that the character afflicted is a Shadow Sorcerer, so being willing to hide in the shadows is probably going to be super natural for him.

Anyways, so far I have the following concepts for curse progression.

Step 1: Player becomes cursed. This does not change the character's personality in any way, but they will transform and become a monster per their trigger. Players in their natural/humanoid form do not get any of the benefits associated with being a lycanthrope, but do have the associated abilities while in their hybrid of animal form.

Step 2: Characters who decide they want to see how to embrace lycanthropy can begin by performing a ritual, requiring the mixing of their blood with the appropriate animal. In doing this, it deepens the character's connection to the Feywild. In times of intense emotion, such as when the character rolls a Natural 1 or a Natural 20, the player will involuntarily transform into their hybrid form. They do not have control over themselves in this form, but can be brought back to sanity under the effects of either a Calm Emotion or similar spell.

Step 3: After performing the ritual, characters must learn the personality of their associated animal and begin to act in accordance with it. In doing so, they must act in such a way that their alignment matches the alignment of the appropriate lycanthrope (e.g. Wererats must become Lawful Evil, Weretigers must become True Neutral, etc.). Once their alignment matches their appropriate lycanthrope, whenever the character transforms, they can attempt a DC 16 Wisdom saving throw to maintain control of their actions while transformed.

I'm thinking there's probably at least 3 or 4 more steps in this process, but how is it looking so far?

[herrhauptmann]

I'm thinking there's probably at least 3 or 4 more steps in this process, but how is it looking so far?

It looks similar to how my DM did it in ad&d ravenloft. In this case I had to make one of my saves at like a -6 penalty. I guess in 5e just say disadvantage. Anyway, if I failed the person running the ritual would have killed my character. I had already lost control once and murdered someone, so it was my punishment.

When it was over I didn't have full control of my transformation, but would be able to avoid killing the helpless. (Which happened during my first trigger. We had months of downtime and were expecting a full moon to trigger me. My trigger was not the moon.) My other trigger was hitting 0 hp, which happened in a fight soon after. (You could probably choose which triggers you avoid, or which actions out of character for you, that you want to avoid.)

Unfortunately, my party members weren't helpless, so they ended up at risk too.

The campaign ended there, but I would've had a chance to get proficiency in a skill controlling my transformation. In 5e that would probably be a non proficient skill you could learn, with a custom feat to get your proficiency bonus. So you're looking at multiple levels with a character almost as risky as a frenzied berserker.

[Tawmis]

I am, of the mind, if the person is willing to roleplay the fact that they have Lycanthropy - then, by all means, go with it.
As others have stated, it is a curse - and should be treated as such.
As for the powers that you get with Lycanthropy - you could always make it that those who are freshly cursed, don't get all the benefits (Damage Immunities Bludgeoning, Piercing, and Slashing from Nonmagical Attacks that aren't Silvered), make this something that comes in time. The longer the person is cursed, the more the werewolf takes over. So for example, freshly turned - make a DC save of (12 or whatever), or the person shifts to wolf form and loses control of themselves. (Wolf form, because this will make party members easier to control, if that happens - and a reflection of the werewolf disease wanting to be more animal than man). As the months go by (full moons), each month the werewolf gains another benefit (Damage Immunities Bludgeoning/Piercing or Slashing from Nonmagical Attacks that aren't Silvered). By the third month (ideally the party is looking for a cure), the DC to prevent from shifting to wolf goes up (DC 15 or so). If it goes for 6 months, DC leaps up to DC 20. After 6 months, the person becomes a werewolf and no longer has control of themselves.

Make a quest out of it. A way for the party to help their comrade from becoming lost to the curse.

[Angelalex242]

I believe we're presuming a power gamer who sees 'damage immunity' and goes 'cool, I want that!' but doesn't act particularly ratish or wolfish or whatever.

[Cheesegear]

Lycanthropy is bad:


The DM is free to decide that a change in alignment places the character under DM control until the curse of lycanthropy is removed.

You'll note that the DM doesn't control the character only while they're transformed; They control them whenever they want.

1. It's a legal way for a DM to be able to say 'No, you can't do that, you're [alignment].' And the player can't respond with, 'Well I don't care about my alignment because can't it change?' and then just do whatever they want. Lycanthropy gives a character fixed personality traits, that the DM can - and arguably has to - enforce. Most players will not like this, because it removes their agency. Which, as I said, in this case, is totally allowed by both the narrative and mechanics. The player can't say ****. Most players would prefer to become an NPC and play something else that isn't under the DM's thumb...

2. The DM can point to the book; 'Remove from play, become NPC.' It's a rule. Getting removed from play - from the controlling player perspective - is the same as dying. When my players know they're walking into a Lycanthrope den, at least one of them prepares Remove Curse...And they'll often cast it during combat - they wont wait.

My players treat Lycanthropy as 'PC Death with extra steps.' Lycanthropes - even the Good ones - are serious business, because they can remove your character from the game with a single failed CON save. Unless you are willing to upend your character and play the role of a Lycanthrope...Which as I said, most players are not.

[Angelalex242]

People that /want/ to be werewolves generally play White Wolf. Ditto for people who want to be vampires.

[GreyBlack]

Lycanthropy is bad:



You'll note that the DM doesn't control the character only while they're transformed; They control them whenever they want.

1. It's a legal way for a DM to be able to say 'No, you can't do that, you're [alignment].' And the player can't respond with, 'Well I don't care about my alignment because can't it change?' and then just do whatever they want. Lycanthropy gives a character fixed personality traits, that the DM can - and arguably has to - enforce. Most players will not like this, because it removes their agency. Which, as I said, in this case, is totally allowed by both the narrative and mechanics. The player can't say ****. Most players would prefer to become an NPC and play something else that isn't under the DM's thumb...

2. The DM can point to the book; 'Remove from play, become NPC.' It's a rule. Getting removed from play - from the controlling player perspective - is the same as dying. When my players know they're walking into a Lycanthrope den, at least one of them prepares Remove Curse...And they'll often cast it during combat - they wont wait.

My players treat Lycanthropy as 'PC Death with extra steps.' Lycanthropes - even the Good ones - are serious business, because they can remove your character from the game with a single failed CON save. Unless you are willing to upend your character and play the role of a Lycanthrope...Which as I said, most players are not.

I have pointed this out to the PC, and said PC is amenable to this. I would never surprise the PC by just saying "You don't control your character anymore," and if this was an issue, I wouldn't even be posting here as I would have laid down the ultimatum of "You have to try and remove the curse, and if you embrace it, then please reroll."

Other reasons why I'm okay with the PC roleplaying this out:
A big part of the plot of the game is that they are under the employ of a man whose entire castle and lands were cursed, turning him into a Werebear who could not transform into a human or a full bear; he was always stuck in hybrid form. The way I have the "curse" written is that, in order to break the curse that was placed on his lands and prevent nature from fully overtaking them, then he has to "embrace" the Werebear curse. It's a neat Catch-22.

So, having a player wanting to explore what "embracing" the curse of Lycanthropy means also provides me with a way to show the players how the curse might affect their patron's personality and what the steps to break the curse on his lands might look like. Hence why I am all for this player wanting to study and embrace Lycanthropy; it forwards the plot of the story in an interesting way I didn't originally consider.

ETA:

I believe we're presuming a power gamer who sees 'damage immunity' and goes 'cool, I want that!' but doesn't act particularly ratish or wolfish or whatever.

The player is not a power gamer, and this really feels to me more like they're looking for a storytelling beat and a side quest that they can participate in. Which, honestly? I am super cool with. I love it when my players pitch sidequests or stories that they'd like to see in game that I can sprinkle in.

[Cheesegear]

I have pointed this out to the PC, and said PC is amenable to this.

...I would wait a few sessions before believing this.
The second it becomes a problem, and the player can't work with the rest of the party, or you take away their agency for an entire combat because of the Lycanthropy, or you rule that they can't participate in an activity because of the Lycanthropy...They might change their tune.


I would never surprise the PC by just saying "You don't control your character anymore,"

It's only a surprise the first time. :smallwink:
I very much enjoy having options in the game that can 'kill' a player without them failing three death saves; It means that life isn't just a race to 0 hit points.

Knowing that there's not a readily available cure for Petrification makes Basilisks quite terrifying to players.
My players feel the same way about Lycanthropes...Because I didn't hold back the first time.


I love it when my players pitch sidequests or stories that they'd like to see in game that I can sprinkle in.

Players often have good roleplaying ideas they can't execute on.

But I'm not at your table, I don't know the player. Right now, it also seems like you're only talking about the player having Lycanthropy. An actual conflict hasn't arisen yet in what the player wants to do, and what the character does.

[Greywander]

As an aside, it would probably be pretty fun to run an all-lycanthrope party. The animal forms adds some interesting utility usually reserved for druids with Wild Shape, and which animal they pick can add some cool flavor to the character. You can also do some interesting things like throwing them into what would normally be an impossible meat grinder, but thanks to BPS immunity they would have a much easier time (though BPS immunity doesn't make them invincible).

If a player was actually playing as a lycanthrope, especially from character creation, I'd probably drop the stat changes. Otherwise, you'd be incentivizing them to dump that stat, since lycanthropy would set it to a specific value anyway.

I've heard that only those who are infected with lycanthropy experience it as a curse, whereas those who are born into it are in full control of themselves. Not sure if this is present in 5e lore anywhere, so it might be something from older editions. But this would probably be the way to go for an all-lycanthrope party.

[GreyBlack]

...I would wait a few sessions before believing this.
The second it becomes a problem, and the player can't work with the rest of the party, or you take away their agency for an entire combat because of the Lycanthropy, or you rule that they can't participate in an activity because of the Lycanthropy...They might change their tune.

It's only a surprise the first time. :smallwink:
I very much enjoy having options in the game that can 'kill' a player without them failing three death saves; It means that life isn't just a race to 0 hit points.

Knowing that there's not a readily available cure for Petrification makes Basilisks quite terrifying to players.
My players feel the same way about Lycanthropes...Because I didn't hold back the first time.



Players often have good roleplaying ideas they can't execute on.

But I'm not at your table, I don't know the player. Right now, it also seems like you're only talking about the player having Lycanthropy. An actual conflict hasn't arisen yet in what the player wants to do, and what the character does.

Having played with this player for the better part of a year and a half, I can assure you that this player is more interested in the roleplaying opportunities presented by this than the in-game mechanical benefits.

So...... from what I'm gathering, your response is, literally, "Just have the player reroll; they're effectively dead." Is this correct?

I ask because this feels like it is ignoring the absolute mountain of context I have provided regarding this question, such as it being an exploration of one of the themes of the game, the fact that _we already have another lycanthrope in party_ (the second one didn't embrace the curse and would like to be cured at some point), and the fact that it is an interesting challenge for me as a DM.

[Tawmis]

Having played with this player for the better part of a year and a half, I can assure you that this player is more interested in the roleplaying opportunities presented by this than the in-game mechanical benefits.
So...... from what I'm gathering, your response is, literally, "Just have the player reroll; they're effectively dead." Is this correct?
I ask because this feels like it is ignoring the absolute mountain of context I have provided regarding this question, such as it being an exploration of one of the themes of the game, the fact that _we already have another lycanthrope in party_ (the second one didn't embrace the curse and would like to be cured at some point), and the fact that it is an interesting challenge for me as a DM.

Man, I feel ignored. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=25408103&postcount=31)

For me, it's a game of D&D - imagination. Rules are more of a... guideline, so to speak.

The entire game is based on imagination - so, don't restrict yourself or your players, if they're willing to work with things.

At the end of the day, doesn't matter what people on a forum say - it's your game, your table, your players.

[GreyBlack]

Man, I feel ignored. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=25408103&postcount=31)

For me, it's a game of D&D - imagination. Rules are more of a... guideline, so to speak.

The entire game is based on imagination - so, don't restrict yourself or your players, if they're willing to work with things.

At the end of the day, doesn't matter what people on a forum say - it's your game, your table, your players.

You're right; I ignored you. Mostly because I read over what you had and liked it, so I needed to more respond to the people who were not being so helpful. Often, I find that, in responding to the more vocal critics, it can provide me with a better sense of clarity of what I _should_ be doing while also focusing the conversation on the topic at hand.

Sorry about that! I did agree with you, and even incorporated some of your concepts into my "Curse embracing" workup (e.g. gradually gaining immunities, having the curse gradually take them over time, etc.).