Using the Madness Rating from WoT

[Hzurr]

Hey.

So a friend of mine is starting up a campaign in a couple of weeks, and I've been tossing around a few ideas, and the one I'm leaning to at the moment is a Warlock. However, to make things interesting, I was considering using the insanity/madness stuff from the Wheel of Time RPG that male channelers use.

However, I've only talked to one person who has ever actually played with it, and the campaign didn't last long enough for him to really be able to get a feel for how the madness rating effects play. Have any of y'all ever used this before?


For those of you who don't have the book, a quick explanation of the madness rating.

Basically, the DM rolls a d6 in secret, and writes down the number. Every time you level, you add that number to your madness rating (i.e. if the DM rolled a 5, at level 3 you'd have a madness rating of 15. If he rolled a 2, at level 10 you'd have a madness rating of 20. Etc.) Early on, it doesn't do much, but as it gets higher, you start to go more and more insane. The effects start out minor, like being shaken, or being very mistrustful of others, but they can progress into hallucinations and violence against teammates. Also, as you level, the "madness" is more and more difficult to avoid. Early on, it might happen only when you take damage, but eventually, it will start happening every time you cast a spell or make a save as well. There are saves you can make to avoid it, and feats you can take to lower your rating (by 20 I believe), but it's difficult, especially since you, the player, never know exactly what your madness rating is.

[Kizara]

I have the WoT campaign setting, but sadly have never got a chance to use it.

I'd ask for some kind of compensation for having to deal with such a drawback with an already weak class.

[Hzurr]

Eh, we already have the main party roles filled, so I'm not too worried about being optimized or "teh 1337 aw3s0m3" member of the party. At this point, I'm simply looking for something that would keep me entertained, but I was hesitant to try something this different without getting some input first.

Although, that being said, I guess there's no harm is seeing if I can get fun stuff in exchange. :smalltongue:

[MammonAzrael]

I'd ask for some kind of compensation for having to deal with such a drawback with an already weak class.

/signed

It's cool that you're wanting to play it for fun, and tossing in madness, but you really should try to get something out of it for tossing a (potentially devastating) drawback on a class like Warlock, which isn't overpowered. Perhaps increase the damage EB does, or your HD size, or more skills, or whatnot.

But it sounds pretty interesting, and could be quite flavorful. if you do decide to try it, let us know how it turns out!

[NamelessArchon]

I'd caution you against this path. That mechanism, as written in the WoT RPG, is a one-way street. Taking it (if your DM does more than pay it lip service) is a guarantee that you will eventually be expected to play a loon - and not in a good way, but in a "smite anything and everyone that even looked at me" sort of way. Like, off the rails and beyond the tracks. Nutso and loving it.

If this character is for a one-shot, or a small, limited duration campaign, it might be interesting. For a campaign where other characters are not constantly concerned about a blade of Damocles hanging over them, but you are guaranteed to be so, forever? I'd pass, lest I become a drama queen all unknowing.

If you will not be dissuaded, then work out with your DM a mechanism by which you can reduce your rating by some unknown amount by performing some set of tasks (which could be problematic to your party/PC, but also makes a better plot hook) rather than expecting you to burn feats just so you're not needing to roll a new PC.

Any mechanism which you volunteer for, but which will invariably result in "Your PC just became an NPC" is terrible, IMO, and this one is no exception.

[Shishnarfne]

I've played with the mechanic. Generally, characters who were on this path repeatedly took feats to reduce this, so that it wound up being a total non-factor in actual gameplay. I don't think Warlocks merit this compared to full casters. In WoT, this was generally a mechanic applied primarily to full casters (as the system is low magic item, full casters are even more ridiculously powerful than normal, despite a short spell list). Basically, without taking feats to reduce this, at low levels, the madness score is low enough not to greatly impact play. At higher levels, either characters take feats to reduce it, or their character dies from it (yes, literally, at the highest levels).
Regarding the madness system, I think that it's a nice idea for the setting, but I don't think it was especially well implemented (this last comment can be repeated for 90% of the sourcebook, unfortunately). I'd adjust the scale so that the "low-level" madness effects start sooner and are more prevalent to make it both more commonly used, and less fatal.
...and I don't think Warlocks deserve this.

[Sucrose]

Now, I haven't played with this mechanic, but something in your post concerns me: one of the possible effects of madness that you listed is violence against teammates.

I'd caution against this, for the same reason that I'd caution against playing a Frenzied Berserker. Playing a teamkiller is selfish; you're saying, in essence, that your character's flavor or combat power that you gain by becoming a threat to your allies is more important than them sleeping at night.

If you explain exactly what might happen, and they're okay with it, or you have some way to prevent the madness from manifesting that particular symptom, then go nuts, but otherwise, I'd be very wary of this sort of thing.

[drawingfreak]

I had one of my player's put together some sort of insanity thing for his Warlock.

When ever he used his eldrich blast, I had him make a Will save. I forget the DC. If he failed it, I rolled 1d4 to see who many rounds he would go mad and just blast anything in sight.

[Person_Man]

I've never used it. And in general, my group stays away from formalizing roleplaying (madness, taint, exalted, vile, etc) with crunch. I personally think it puts a straitjacket on the player. But I'd be interested/open to hearing about players who used it and had positive experiences with it.

[Hzurr]

A lot of good points. If I do decide to use it (I'm still not 100% set upon it yet) This will definitely be something I'll discuss in more detail to the DM to avoid some of the issues you've discussed (being a party killer, a 1-way street to NPCdom, etc.)