Remove Curse

[MrStabby]

How do people handle remove curse in their games?

I am leaning towards adopting a hourse rule/generous interpretation to make it a viable spell to use more generally.

Counterspell, dispell magic and remove curse do not seem particularly well balanced between them. With dispell magic and counterspell there are at least some advantages to dispell magic.

When it comes to remove curse, it seems like you would almost always prefer dispel magic.

I am thinking that remove curse will explicitly remove the effect of any hostile spell on the target creature - hold person/monster, contagion... the advantage of remove curse is no role is needed. The disadvantage is that it it can't deal with effects like buffs to enemies, summoned creatures or similar. Narrowness of use vs not needing a roll for ending high level effects? Though then this creates some similar issues with respect to the restoration spells...

I also feel that clerics should be the better class whan it comes to curing afflictions so would be good to have a boost over dispell magic.

Does anyone else rule this way? Any thoughts?

[LudicSavant]

How do people handle remove curse in their games?

I am leaning towards adopting a hourse rule/generous interpretation to make it a viable spell to use more generally.

Counterspell, dispell magic and remove curse do not seem particularly well balanced between them. With dispell magic and counterspell there are at least some advantages to dispell magic.

When it comes to remove curse, it seems like you would almost always prefer dispel magic.

I am thinking that remove curse will explicitly remove the effect of any hostile spell on the target creature - hold person/monster, contagion... the advantage of remove curse is no role is needed. The disadvantage is that it it can't deal with effects like buffs to enemies, summoned creatures or similar. Narrowness of use vs not needing a roll for ending high level effects? Though then this creates some similar issues with respect to the restoration spells...

I also feel that clerics should be the better class whan it comes to curing afflictions so would be good to have a boost over dispell magic.

Does anyone else rule this way? Any thoughts?

Curses tend to last a long time. Simply knowing the spell (not preparing it) is sufficient to ensure that they don't last more than a day.

[Unoriginal]

How do people handle remove curse in their games?

I am leaning towards adopting a hourse rule/generous interpretation to make it a viable spell to use more generally.

Counterspell, dispell magic and remove curse do not seem particularly well balanced between them. With dispell magic and counterspell there are at least some advantages to dispell magic.

When it comes to remove curse, it seems like you would almost always prefer dispel magic.

I am thinking that remove curse will explicitly remove the effect of any hostile spell on the target creature - hold person/monster, contagion... the advantage of remove curse is no role is needed. The disadvantage is that it it can't deal with effects like buffs to enemies, summoned creatures or similar. Narrowness of use vs not needing a roll for ending high level effects? Though then this creates some similar issues with respect to the restoration spells...

I also feel that clerics should be the better class whan it comes to curing afflictions so would be good to have a boost over dispell magic.

Does anyone else rule this way? Any thoughts?

Dispel Magic doesn't work on everything. Almost all serious curses have a "only Remove Curse or Wish can remove this" clause or similar in the text.

And like LudicSavant said, the Cleric can just ask the divine to give Remove Curse to them when needed and not have it otherwise.

[MrStabby]

I think you misunderstand. Why would you by default have remoe curse prepared? What can be done to make it somewhat more attractive?

[Chronos]

And the answer to that is that you wouldn't by default have it prepared, and that's not a problem.

[Unoriginal]

I think you misunderstand. Why would you by default have remoe curse prepared? What can be done to make it somewhat more attractive?

And the answer to that is that you wouldn't by default have it prepared, and that's not a problem.

Seconded.

The Cleric's spell selection isn't the same as the one of any of the arcane classes. There is no reason to treat them the same.

[Silly Name]

I think you misunderstand. Why would you by default have remoe curse prepared? What can be done to make it somewhat more attractive?

You prepare Remove Curse when you suspect or are sure that you need it. If you want people to use Remove Curse more, then you simply have to make curses more present.

That said, if you want to make it more useful, you could let Remove Curse remove the Petrified condition, increasing its utility.

[MrStabby]

And the answer to that is that you wouldn't by default have it prepared, and that's not a problem.

On the contrary, this is exactly what the problem is. You have an evocative spell that to many exemplifies the ability to lift the deleterious effects of evil magic, a staple of the cleric trope. And these clerics who can ward and cure and protect and who get access to the spell that should do it, find that it's pretty much unplayable on most days.

Having most effects in the game be immune to something that feels like a core part of the class fantasy is like rolling up a Red Dragon sorcerer and finding the campaign is 98% immune to fire... you dont need fire damage to be a sorcerer but forcing such a staple spell flavour as fireball into obscurity isnt really great for the game.

And this same sorcerer is just as effective (or more in fact) at removing and protecting allies from hostile and baleful magic as the cleric. The narrowness of the usage of remove curse limits the clerics ability to be outstanding in this area of the game that I think clerics should legitimately be able to excel at.

[Unoriginal]

On the contrary, this is exactly what the problem is. You have an evocative spell that to many exemplifies the ability to lift the deleterious effects of evil magic, a staple of the cleric trope. And these clerics who can ward and cure and protect and who get access to the spell that should do it, find that it's pretty much unplayable on most days.

Having most effects in the game be immune to something that feels like a core part of the class fantasy is like rolling up a Red Dragon sorcerer and finding the campaign is 98% immune to fire... you dont need fire damage to be a sorcerer but forcing such a staple spell flavour as fireball into obscurity isnt really great for the game.

And this same sorcerer is just as effective (or more in fact) at removing and protecting allies from hostile and baleful magic as the cleric. The narrowness of the usage of remove curse limits the clerics ability to be outstanding in this area of the game that I think clerics should legitimately be able to excel at.

Remove Curse removes curses. There is no "having most effects in the game be immune to something that feels like a core part of the class fantasy".

What make you think that other classes are better at removing curses than Clerics?

[Frogreaver]

On the contrary, this is exactly what the problem is. You have an evocative spell that to many exemplifies the ability to lift the deleterious effects of evil magic, a staple of the cleric trope. And these clerics who can ward and cure and protect and who get access to the spell that should do it, find that it's pretty much unplayable on most days.

Having most effects in the game be immune to something that feels like a core part of the class fantasy is like rolling up a Red Dragon sorcerer and finding the campaign is 98% immune to fire... you dont need fire damage to be a sorcerer but forcing such a staple spell flavour as fireball into obscurity isnt really great for the game.

And this same sorcerer is just as effective (or more in fact) at removing and protecting allies from hostile and baleful magic as the cleric. The narrowness of the usage of remove curse limits the clerics ability to be outstanding in this area of the game that I think clerics should legitimately be able to excel at.

If all that bothered me, the solution I would use would be to let all clerics have remove curse always prepared.

[MrStabby]

Remove Curse removes curses. There is no "having most effects in the game be immune to something that feels like a core part of the class fantasy".

What make you think that other classes are better at removing curses than Clerics?

Firstly it isnt other classes being better at removing curses, in whatever mechanical sense you want to use to define curse. It isnt even other classes being better at protecting allies from the baleful effects of other spellcasters, it is that the cleric is not better at this than other classes.

When an enemy casts a spell like bestow curse, feeblemind, bane or hex I think that the cleric should be better than the sorcerer or warlock at protecting their allies from this kind of magic rather than worse. They have no access to counterspell (fine on it's own as that might cause other problems) but it does mean they are less good.

Letting remove curse be more broadly applied would mean that a cleric could actually step into this protector role a bit better. Now I get that not all clerics are seen as the guardian of their flock against supernatural threats; it isnt universal. I would argue that it is common enough to warrant some mechanical nod in their direction in the same way that other tropes like clerics healing or blessing have been catered to.

[Frogreaver]

Firstly it isnt other classes being better at removing curses, in whatever mechanical sense you want to use to define curse. It isnt even other classes being better at protecting allies from the baleful effects of other spellcasters, it is that the cleric is not better at this than other classes.

When an enemy casts a spell like bestow curse, feeblemind, bane or hex I think that the cleric should be better than the sorcerer or warlock at protecting their allies from this kind of magic rather than worse. They have no access to counterspell (fine on it's own as that might cause other problems) but it does mean they are less good.

Letting remove curse be more broadly applied would mean that a cleric could actually step into this protector role a bit better. Now I get that not all clerics are seen as the guardian of their flock against supernatural threats; it isnt universal. I would argue that it is common enough to warrant some mechanical nod in their direction in the same way that other tropes like clerics healing or blessing have been catered to.

Clerics already have Dispel Magic on their spell list. They can be just as good at anyone else at removing feeblemind or bane or hex.

EDIT:
Then out of the box the cleric gets the ability to prepare remove curse the next day for anything dispel magic didn't solve.

Seems to me the Cleric is already better at removing negative effects than other casters. The only thing he doesn't get is counterspell which doesn't seem like it should really be a cleric spell to me.

Oh and they have lesser and greater restoration for ending everything else.

I can't comprehend why you believe clerics aren't better at removing status effects from allies than other classes.

[MrStabby]

Clerics already have Dispel Magic on their spell list. They can be just as good at anyone else at removing feeblemind or bane or hex.

EDIT:
Then out of the box the cleric gets the ability to prepare remove curse the next day for anything dispel magic didn't solve.

Seems to me the Cleric is already better at removing negative effects than other casters. The only thing he doesn't get is counterspell which doesn't seem like it should really be a cleric spell to me.

Oh and they have lesser and greater restoration for ending everything else.

I can't comprehend why you believe clerics aren't better at removing status effects from allies than other classes.

{Scrubbed} I didnt say best at removing curses, I said better at protecting allies from baleful magic, then immediately gave the example of counterspell as one tool other classes get to do this that clerics dont get.

Now of course you might argue that resoration/greater restoration are better than counterspell, and I am happy for you to try and convince me of that, but it isnt my default view.

[Frogreaver]

{Scrubbed}. I didnt say best at removing curses, I said better at protecting allies from baleful magic, then immediately gave the example of counterspell as one tool other classes get to do this that clerics dont get.

{Scrubbed} So let's go through the list of notable spells clerics get that help protect allies from baleful magic.
1. Bless
2. Calm Emotions
3. Lesser Restoration
4. Protection from Poison
5. Silence
6. Dispel Magic
7. Remove Curse
8. Freedom of Movement
9. Greater Resoration
10. Dispel Evil and Good
11. Heroes Feast
12. Antimagic Field
13. Holy Aura

Now of course you might argue that resoration/greater restoration are better than counterspell, and I am happy for you to try and convince me of that, but it isnt my default view.

Counterspell in 5e depends too heavily on how its ran.
1. Do you know what spell the enemy is casting everytime?
2. Must you make an arcana check to know what they are casting - is that check free or does it require a reaction?
3. Is the enemy more than 60 ft away (highly likely as many spell ranges are quite a bit further than that and it's not like the typical caster is going to try and close the distance gap).

I think you are highly overrating counterspell. Great spell for when it works, but no where near the sure anti caster thing it's presented as.

[Unoriginal]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}. So let's go through the list of notable spells clerics get that help protect allies from baleful magic.
1. Bless
2. Calm Emotions
3. Lesser Restoration
4. Protection from Poison
5. Silence
6. Dispel Magic
7. Remove Curse
8. Freedom of Movement
9. Greater Resoration
10. Dispel Evil and Good
11. Heroes Feast
12. Antimagic Field
13. Holy Aura

Protection from Evil and Good and Shield of Faith also enter that category.

[Ninja_Prawn]

What can be done to make it somewhat more attractive?

My approach has generally been to introduce more curses that can only be countered by remove curse. Particularly creating new spells that apply curses and having curse riders on monster attacks, which I feel are sorely lacking in the base game. I also had a few cracks at writing some cursed magic items that aren't just gotcha traps, though I don't think that's the best solution overall.

Also in games that start at level 1, I like to hit someone with a mild curse as they get towards the top of level 4, so the idea of it is fresh in their minds when remove curse becomes available at level 5.

[ff7hero]

Protection from Evil and Good and Shield of Faith also enter that category.

Also Death Ward. (Mass) Heal also removes an odd handful of conditions.

[Mikal]

On the contrary, this is exactly what the problem is. You have an evocative spell that to many exemplifies the ability to lift the deleterious effects of evil magic, a staple of the cleric trope. And these clerics who can ward and cure and protect and who get access to the spell that should do it, find that it's pretty much unplayable on most days.

Having most effects in the game be immune to something that feels like a core part of the class fantasy is like rolling up a Red Dragon sorcerer and finding the campaign is 98% immune to fire... you dont need fire damage to be a sorcerer but forcing such a staple spell flavour as fireball into obscurity isnt really great for the game.

And this same sorcerer is just as effective (or more in fact) at removing and protecting allies from hostile and baleful magic as the cleric. The narrowness of the usage of remove curse limits the clerics ability to be outstanding in this area of the game that I think clerics should legitimately be able to excel at.

No. Its really not a problem except in your head dude.
It’s ok to have situational spells that you prepare when you need them, and to have default go to spells that you keep prepared.

Having the ability to use it gives them the ability to excel. You’re literally creating a problem where none exists.

[Spore]

In my humble opinion, curses are stuff for specific types of stories. Most often these are fairy tale type or (gothic) horror stuff, including fey, werewolves, hags, evil priests and the like. Sword and Sorcery stuff CAN include this, as could "standard" D&D stories but things like that always are hard requirements. You simply cannot solve the side quest if you lack the spell, or you loose out on story if you simply solve the side story with the spell. Or the reward is purely fluff.

I DMed a Pathfinder module wherein

Spoiler: Carnival of Tears Spoiler

Show

a dog-headed child was on display by a particularly vile ringmaster. The girl was treated like an animal, shoved onto stage and ridiculed on stage. The players had the choice to cure her curse (speak with animals would allow communication as she was otherwise mute and could only bark) for a tiny token of her appreciation, which is used to prevent an upcoming fight. But she does not need a cure until after the very sudden carnage during the carnival, and after the story this is purely a cosmetic and incidental thing for the DM to improvise her being thankful for being cured.

Basically curses are story motivations, and remove curse simply removes a whole reason for action and adventure. Imagine if Ariel could have simply gone to the church and have the priest remove Ursula's curse because reasons. The whole story would loose any tension and meaning. That is why curable curses are bad storytelling vehicles.

[Catullus64]

The biggest disadvantage of Remove Curse isn't its viability relative to Dispel Magic or Counterspell, since, as others have pointed out, it gets rid of stuff that those spells can't. The biggest problem with Remove Curse is that it's dull.

An adventurer bitten by a werewolf: I must hide this dread affliction, searching for a cure while fighting an inner struggle between reason and savagery.

An adventurer bonded to a Sword of Vengeance: I feel this blade eating away at my soul with every life I take, and yet I find I cannot bear to part with it, in a terribly compelling metaphor for addiction/revenge.

An adventurer failing his save against a Medusa's petrifying gaze: Alack, shall I now suffer the rest of my days in a silent, stony prison? The horror!

Cleric 5+: Quit whining, I'll fix it tomorrow. Now what should we have for lunch?

[micahaphone]

The biggest disadvantage of Remove Curse isn't its viability relative to Dispel Magic or Counterspell, since, as others have pointed out, it gets rid of stuff that those spells can't. The biggest problem with Remove Curse is that it's dull.

Catallus is right on the money here - that spell doesn't exist in my homebrew. Curses have specific causes and cures. Having a "fix everything" spell for such a big potential narrative tool is very boring.

[Tawmis]

The biggest disadvantage of Remove Curse isn't its viability relative to Dispel Magic or Counterspell, since, as others have pointed out, it gets rid of stuff that those spells can't. The biggest problem with Remove Curse is that it's dull.
An adventurer bitten by a werewolf: I must hide this dread affliction, searching for a cure while fighting an inner struggle between reason and savagery.
An adventurer bonded to a Sword of Vengeance: I feel this blade eating away at my soul with every life I take, and yet I find I cannot bear to part with it, in a terribly compelling metaphor for addiction/revenge.
An adventurer failing his save against a Medusa's petrifying gaze: Alack, shall I now suffer the rest of my days in a silent, stony prison? The horror!
Cleric 5+: Quit whining, I'll fix it tomorrow. Now what should we have for lunch?

This here is my exact problem with Remove Curse.
So the two games I DM for - 99% of the people are brand new to D&D.
As such, I've made it so that they can only select from the PHB, and only spells in the PHB are available.
This way they're not overwhelmed by thousands of choices.
However, I have plans (and a quest) to unlock more magic (Xanther's) that will be part of a quest (when they're around Level 6, and more familiar with the game).
In the mean time I have been eluding to it - with ancient relics that have been surfacing, some of which is good, some of which is cursed.
One of the players, found an item - that was cursed, and put it on.
Now the easy - since they're Level 5 now - is Remove Curse.
And to me, I thought, "Well here's this ancient magic that's got all this potential - and a simple Remove Curse is going to get rid of it?"

So I've thought about Remove Curse in different levels.
Like the normal Remove Curse, anything CR0-CR3 type magic.
Greater Remove Curse, CR4-CR10.
Remove Ancient Curse, CR11+

I have not not figured out how to level it. It's essentially the same spell - but if a Hag curses a player, and they're a CR5, they'd need Greater Remove Curse. Or if the item has a CR that the DM comes up with, it'd go along those scales.

[Satori01]

Why would you by default have remoe curse prepared? What can be done to make it somewhat more attractive?

Remove Curse is a fine selection for any day spent delving in long forgotten vaults of forbidden lore and treasure.

In an old 1e style Dungeon Crawl, 2 cursed magic items per Dungeon Level is not uncommon.

The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan is a good example of a scenario where Long Resting to prepare Remove Curse, is not generally available.

A group with Remove Curse, can sail through the Dungeon. A group without ....Trigger Warning: Imagine the movie, The Shinning 🪓

[Kurt Kurageous]

If all that bothered me, the solution I would use would be to let all clerics have remove curse always prepared.

Or made it a second Channel Divinity option for all clerics.