Party has to make deal with a devil as part of their quest to save the world

If the curse is suppressed then he can take the armor off

>Remove curse instantaneously removes all curses on an object or a creature. Remove curse does not remove the curse from a cursed shield, weapon, or suit of armor, although the spell typically enables the creature afflicted with any such cursed item to remove and get rid of it.
>Certain special curses may not be countered by this spell or may be countered only by a caster of a certain level or higher.

But nothing about Demon Armor says it can restrict your movements.

I'd argue that having a spell called 'remove curse' is a bad thing. Curses should be removed through means present on the curse itself, or by storyline. Removing curse by casting a spell makes the whole curse pointless.

Uh, anons, I have a feeling OP is talking about very specific armor. This one.

I like this
OP's original idea is kind of neat, but if the players have made this decision banking on the "remove curse" spell working, whether you like the idea of that spell or not, it feels a little unfair (unless this kind of thing has been foreshadowed, in which case plough on)

I smell 5e
If he has heavy (is it heavy?) armor proficiency he can totally cast while wearing it

And I'd argue that you're a gigantic faggot, who should play another game, if you don't like the rules of this one. Maybe something gritty and realistic, to cater to your Game of Thrones tastes.

Give the cursed armor +1 spell slot of the casters highest level. I guarantee even if they have to feed the damned thing baby blood they'll keep it on.

>Give players the option of cool new toy, if they're willing to take a drawback
>Except it's not a drawback

Reminds me of the time my GM gave the wizard a hat of +10 Int. It only worked when the wearer wasn't wearing heavy armor though, so it was totally balanced.

It's a bit daft to have the only person who can remove the curse put it on. Punish them.

he said "suppress," not "cancel"
it's moderate ad hoc bullshit, but you could just say the spell cancels only the negative modifiers/whatever the item puts on you

>the devil's cursed armor
>random +1 plate with a minor drawback
Either that's not the armor in question, or the devil is really bad at making deals.

Cursed magic items are always cancer. Like, every time I hear a story involving a cursed magic item, it goes one of those ways
>We find a cursed magic item, that we use in a "clever" way that we totally didn't read up on the internet.
>We find a cursed magic item, cast remove curse and get over this minor nuisance.
>We find an item that doesn't seem magical, except it turns out to be cursed with no way to detect it, or to remove it, and now one of our party members is borderline useless and wishes he was fucking dead, while the DM is cackling maniacally over how devious he is

You could have the armor magically re-apply itself, once the suppression was over.

Although then you've got a question about what happens when someone else puts it on.

Compare the pictures.

That armor is pretty meh

>allowing players to back out of Faustian deals by casting a 3rd level spell is the only way you can be a decent GM, guys!

You could also toe it so that the 'cursed' aspect of the armor is also magically tied to its benefits. Perhaps it actually weighs like 300 pounds and part of the magic makes it possible to actually move in it, so removing the curse suddenly puts the cleric in a very, very heavy suit of worthless armor.

Have the magic restore itself at midnight after they take it off, and make it clear that only repeated castings of remove curse would remove it fully.

But, if the players actually need the armor's benefits, then they won't be able to avoid the downsides.

I think you might have a very special kind of autism.

OP could've just used that for inspiration

Curse items has to give you something nice enough to overthink if you should use it or not.

There's a cursed battle axe in 5e that seemed like a well done cursed item, it gave you some bonuses but once you attacked a living being with it it forced you to keep attacking everything around you unless you passed a Will save.

Some curses can't be dispelled by that spell though. For example, cursed shields, weapons and armor. Remove curse just let's you drop them, or take them off.

That said No no, let him, and them have him find out in horror that the armor has replaced his skin in all places it touches, giving him a big penalty on resisting infection, and hold holding his organs in if removed. Meaning if he wants to survive he needs to keep his cursed armor on.

>Cast reduce person
Done

Check the the Cleric's deities portfolio, Deities can literally sense when a specific action is happening on the material plane, so if the deities is self-sacrifice or the like, then expect divine intervention

Why exactly would he want to remove the armor to begin with? I'm sure its a pretty cool armor? The devil wouldn't wear rags and shitty armor.

I had this issue once when I gave each of my players a cursed belt, each with a unique specifically tailored curse.

Of course the first thing that happens is the rogue (who didn't bother to appraise the belt or anything before putting them on) says "oh remove curse remove curse!" Before I even tell him what his was.

I guess they assumed I put these belts in just to make then spend a spell slot.

But if you pay attention remove curse requires a check in some (all?) Editions meaning if the curse was made by a high level caster the DC is more difficult.

Of course the rogue says I am that GM and railroading them

If you are defining that beforehand, it doesn't sound bad at all. If you are defining it in reaction to the player trying to cast Remove Curse, then it is a bit adversarial.

That's pretty cool. Or, for the bullshitmode equivalent, the armour is actually a destructive, powerful golem kept dormant by the devil's magic

This.

Make the armor move by itself while the Cleric is sleeping. So he wakes up in different locations and has no idea why. Make the armor kill the exorcists and stuff while the cleric sleeps.

What makes you think that would work?
What sort of magical realm do you play in where clothes fall off or rip apart to leave people naked whenever someone changes size?

I think that's alright, but it depends on what the curse is otherwise.

Fucking this. Remove Curse, much like Resurrection. Don't do anything but shit up on the game's mechanics and flow.

Both are easy way out with no roleplaying involved, they fucking suck dick.

I once had a Cursed Belt of Dwarvenkind that had the normal benefits, but the curse made it so anyone who put it on immediately shrank to half their normal height (same width) and grew a full beard.

The party already knew that an Elven spy had been using the belt to impersonate a Dwarf.

For some reason the party's Dwarven Wizard decided he absolutely needed to put it on and became a 2 ft tall, 4 ft wide Dwarven pancake with a beard so luxurious he was unable to walk as it literally held him up off the ground.

Did I mention they were level 3 and no one could cast Remove Curse?

There is nothing wrong with resurrection.

>here we go.jpg

>removing the curse frees the demon that was bound to it
Your call cleric.

...

If it is simply Demon Armor® as described in the DMG, that might be a 'That DM' move.

If its a set of demonic armor, that might be a reasonable limitation, since you can explain that Remove Curse doesn't work on powerful curses. That'd better be a damn good set of armor to prevent a half-caster from utilizing some spells though.

As long as there is a great enough cost associated with it, requires some level of effort, and can fail due to certain circumstances, I see no issue with having a mechanic that allows you to bring back dead pcs.

...

I like to use resurrection but give it so.e role-playing weight.

In my scenario every time a cleric tries to resurrect someone, they are put in a trance and their spirit goes to an empty plane where they are met by the voice or idol of whichever God they worshipn and told that they must sit there until they are abolutely sure that this is whats best for everyone. From the clerics perspective they stay in this dimension for 6 months to a year in meditation, risking madness. If they give up at any point the resurrection fails but if it important enough they return to a few seconds after the casting, having experienced up to a year of meditation. Then they make a will save to see how crazy they went.

>we
Who the fuck is we? Reddit? Go back there then.

>Gold cost + Losing a level + unless high level it only works on people dead a few minutes ago
I think is acceptable

>and make it clear that only repeated castings of remove curse would remove it fully.
How would a GM do that?
>"alright, the curse is lifted"
>night comes "Guys the curse is back :^)"
How do you tell them without metagaming and adding "btw if you keep casting the spell it will go away in a few days"

>+1 full plate
And cursed? pfff, all yours, Demon

Your Rogue seems like That Guy.

How do we stop players from believing this?

Because presumably, they would take off the armor in the meantime, and they'd find out the next morning, assuming they waited around under the assumptuo they needed it.

Otherwise, I would probably allow an easy Arcana or Religion check to identify that while the curse is nullified, it still lingers due to its strength.

>I see no issue with having a mechanic that allows you to bring back dead pcs.
You are the cancer, how about you bring back every villager from the dead too? If your setting is that retarded that people don't die when they are killed what's stopping evil guys from returning, and good kings from living forever?

Die

>how about you bring back every villager from the dead too?
Because you don't have enough money and because it only works on recently dead peole (as in mins)?

>As long as there is a great enough cost associated with it, requires some level of effort, and can fail due to certain circumstances
Stop shitposting.

>Because you don't have enough money
Bringing back a farmer shouldn't cost that much. How much does it cost to bring a PC? Who is in heroic level. I can quantify how much it costs for a mere peasant that's worth nothing to anyone based on how much money you have to spend on resurrection a hero.

Teach them what railroading is and make them face their actions with consequence.
Then, when they have fun instead of suffer and throw fits, we say "Told you so."

Nobody cares about your dumb houserules.

>How much does it cost to bring a PC?
5k in diamonds?

from my pleb perspective, just this
>only works on people dead a few minutes ago, even at high level
is enough to make it work out, barring time-travelling nonsense

>recently dead (as in mins)

Only Revify has that short of a time limit, and even then that's measured in rounds instead. That sort of short term combat revival is fine.

Most true ressurection spells work on people who have been dead for a few days, or months if you do it right.

Granted, money is a concern, but the basic level of it is worth about half the price of a magic sword, and a fraction of the price of full plate. While it is stated to not work off of old age, that also means that nobility has very little to fear from assassins or dying in combat. He'll, my some measures a commoner might be able to afford it if they have enough savings. Sell off a few of the farm elementals and family heirlooms to get your dead wife who died in an accident back? Feasible, though perhaps a bit threatening to your livelihood.

It's not like the cleric is just coaxing a souls back into it's body. They are calling to their God and asking a favor. If they asked for every would back their God would quickly stop listening to them.

A diamond worth at least 10,000 gold

For anyone no matter class or worth

So you're complaining that with your homerules raising dead is super easy? are you mentally handicapped?

Now THIS is shitposting.

>5k
>10k

5e has it at 500 with the basic ressurection spell.

>what a horrible night to have a curse

I'm pretty sure OP is saying it'll only prevent him from moving if he's trying to remove the curse on the armor itself.

Raise dead is 5k
Resurrection is 10k

3.5 rules

500 does seem low though.

>3.5 rules

I was going of 5e since OP posted a pic of a page from it.

3.5 gets into whole other loops of illogical nonsense with spells though.

Well just in the sense of resurrection spells I feel that 3.5 has a better grasp than 5 from what I've just heard

>Who the fuck is we? Reddit? Go back there then.
What did he mean by this?

>Revivify
>Can't restore missing body parts
>Only works on people who died in less than 1 min
>500gp
Maybe a little cheap, but the time requirement is harsh enough

It will literally only work on parties with clerics, it has no other use

Raise Dead is 500 gold in 5e. Revivify is also cheaper just 300.

Neither restores missing limbs.

>Oh shit we were talking about curses

Yeah nothing wrong with making curses into plot devices

>house rules
The fuck? I don't play D&D. Games with resurrection are fucking trash. Learn to use your fucking brain, man. Math exists for a reason.

So let's assume a king would be worth reviving 4k in diamonds. Because a hero is worth more than a king.
A noble is worth less than a king, but different nobles have different values, 3 to 3.9k to bring back a noble. A priest or someone from the clergy should be then worth around 2k to 3k, Depending on how high in the hierarchy we work on. The noble and the clergy values should be interchangeable depending in the setting & how the kingdom's hierarchy works, if they value religion above the nobles then they go on top, etc.

Now the merchants, if the clergy or noble range in the 2k and above, then the merchants are worth 2k or less. The best and most valuable merchants would be worth 2k, the shitty ones would be worth what? 1.5k, 1k?

Whatever the case, then comes the plebeian class, professors, librarians, barkeepers, are all worth more than a farm field slave. Therefore they get to be above the 1k mark.

Which means to revive a lame ass peasant it would be worth literally less than 1k.

And now comes the question. How much money does the king, president, dictator, emperor makes? And what is stopping him from constantly bringing back his peasants so he can have a more prosperous kingdom? And not only prosperous, but also stronger and more numerous than everyone else around him?

1k for a king is nothing, and he would quickly get richer with so much more spare manpower he would get and would leap him leagues above his neighbors abusing the retarded system's setting rules such as Resurrection.

/thread

Kill yourselves, retards.

...

Unless you kill the thing that gives the curse and you go
>Oh no you killed the only one strong enough to remove the curse forever :^)

>This arbitrary system that I just created makes resurrection illogical so i win the thread

Are you literally retarded?

Make a better one, go ahead I will wait.

btw
>arbitrary system
Yeah, like the cost of resurrection in the rulebook.

I agree with your stance on resurrection, but for 3.5 the gold cost doesnt change based on the importance of the individual. It's 5000 flat.

Still might be worth it in the case of a great king who was assassinated, but out of reach from the common man

>Arbitrary system

Th

This whole concept of assigning different lives value based on how much money they earn is an arbitrary system of your own creation

>I thought of a shitty system, think of something else or mine becomes the standard! Quick!

Nevermind, you are very obviously literally retarded

>Make a better one
The one in the PHB is better, you managed to make something worse than 3.5 did, fell proud

Literally wrong. The value of a person is valued based on the society of the setting.

The clergy will always be above a shitty peasant, it doesn't matter how much money the king gives the clergy, a pastor of god has more value than a nobody. And kings used to be descendants of god, so they also have more value than a pastor of god.

Don't be retarded.

>For ever life you saved you earn 1 years back up your total life span

>you managed to make something worse than 3.5 did,
No way, because what I make doesn't have Resurrection has a feature :^)

Magic doesn't care. Bringing someone back from the dead is 5000 gold. No exceptions. Whatever magical force is bringing you back sees all souls as equal.

...

OH THE ITS MAGIC I AINT GOTTA EXPLAIN SHIT ARGUMENT

Hahahaha, could you be any more of a fucking moron?

Magic has to be consistent with the setting. Otherwise your 'world' (if it could even be called that, and this point it just sounds like a fucking anime) would be a nonsensical trash. Much like D&D

Don't reply to him

>Magic has to be consistent!

It is consistent. It costs a consistent 5000 gold to bring someone back from the dead.

You're the on tryibg to argue that it should vary based on some arbitrary value of the person in spite of what the rules say, and then complaining that making it cost less makes ressurection suck.

I hold no love for 3.5, but you don't need to change the rules to prove that it's awful. It does that on its own.

I will reply to you even if you don't reply to me

No, you fucking moron. Magic comes from the gods, unless you are playing a homebrew game then at that case you are already dumb enough to fall for the homebrew meme.

Followers of god have a more natural value than non followers. You are trying to argue that gods believe in communism and think of everyone the same. It doesn't work like that pal, no gods in the rulebook is written like that. Heretics are worth less than followers, and if magic comes from the gods then those that follow them should cost less than those that don't.

You tried to bait me into an "arbitrary system" while using the same fucking argument yourself.

The difference is, I'm a rational man with logic as a background. You are following a rulebook like if it was made by God himself. The fucking retards that made DnD are no better than you or me. They definitely are as uneducated as yourself.

Wow. You're a special kind of stupid.

It's now a magic do I do t need to explain" defense, it's an "actual systems define it to work in this way" defence. You are literally just coming up with shit. It's creative I'll admit, but fuck you it doesn't get to be equal with actual published shit