Post/Author/DateTime	Post
lord zog 01-23-05, 09:34 AM	Can natural lycanthropes still possess dragonmarks if their base creature is of a mark-bearing race?
pseudonym 01-23-05, 09:45 AM	Can natural lycanthropes still possess dragonmarks if their base creature is of a mark-bearing race? Sure, I'd allow it. They gain the shapechanger subtype, but keep whatever racial subtype they previously had, so if they had one previously to contracting lycanthropy, I don't see why they couldn't still use it. Given the nature of the Marks, I'd say that they still visibly had their mark even in their animal and hybrid form, probably a noticably discolored patch of fur. I wouldn't let them use the mark in their alternate forms, however, until they gain mastery of their affliction.
nyysjan 01-23-05, 04:36 PM	no unless specifically stated in the rules concerning the dragonmark in question and no rules state such a fact so no lycanthrope can't posses a dragonmark altough i would make an exception in case of someone being afflicted with lycanthropy unless it's ruled that having a common cold removes a dragonmark :P
Kid SixXx 01-24-05, 09:06 AM	unless it's ruled that having a common cold removes a dragonmark :P Since the common cold is a normal disease, and not a supernatural one that compels you to kill, I'd have to rule that lycanthrope would indeed impede with the use of a dragonmark. :cool: Shifters are decendants of lycanthropes and do not get dragonmarks at all, so I'd have to say that nothing should allow the afflicted to use dragonmarks they might have had when they were uninfected, or allow the so-called natural lycanthropes to manifest a dragonmark.
motorfirebox 01-24-05, 01:54 PM	it's worth pointing out that lycanthropes retain the base type of their original race; only their subtype changes. i don't know if a subtype change is enough to negate dragonmark abilities or not.
Kid SixXx 01-24-05, 03:20 PM	it's worth pointing out that lycanthropes retain the base type of their original race; only their subtype changes. i don't know if a subtype change is enough to negate dragonmark abilities or not. True enough. Arguably the added sub-type could be cause to rule that the dragonmark goes dormant since the afflicted humanoid technically no longer meets the pre-reqs for possession of a dragonmark, but ultimately that is a DM's call. Since the Shifters provide an approximate precedent example as to what happens when lycanthropes and humanoids mix (ie. Shifters have no dragonmarks at all), I'd have to lean on the side of "no dragonmarks" for anyone that contracted lycanthrope by any means, or at least not allow the use of dragonmarks by dragonmarked individuals that are afflicted.
Streamweaver 01-24-05, 03:24 PM	All I can really comment on is how I view this as a DM and rule how it works on my game. For my own game I rule natural lycanthropes have effectively become another race. So much like Kalashtar they cannot manifest a Dragonmark, even if their base type would otherwise be appropriate. For those infected with Lycanthropy I have no problem with them still having and using a dragonmark while in their normal form but the mark would not carry over into their wear-form. No muss, no fuss.
nyysjan 01-24-05, 03:30 PM	heu wouldn't it be fun if all dragonmarks would stop working the one who has it is sick i mean one common flu could halt all Khorvaire for days if not weeks "i'm terribly sorry sir but the information channels have been striken with a virus"
Chiba_Monkey 01-24-05, 03:31 PM	If a 1/2 dragon can have one, then it stands to reason that any template does not prohibit the possesion of a dragonmark, and as long as said creature remains alive they can use the dragonmark. So you're lycanthrope can have one, but if she becomes a vampire, it's useless.
nyysjan 01-24-05, 03:38 PM	half orc can also have a dragonmark so it has nothing to do with templates but about race and blood and it may be possible that all half dragons can have a dragonmark of their other half but no other templates are capable of it
KMFDM 01-24-05, 04:04 PM	Well 1st of all half-orc is not a template and in Eberron it is considered a very different race just like the Half-Elves. One interesting thing to note is Orcs do not have marks, but Half-Orcs do. Also Erandis d'Vol lost her use of her Mark when she became a lich, so under that persumption I would have to disagree. But it all lies in the 'Eye of the DM'.
nyysjan 01-24-05, 04:21 PM	i know that half orc is not a template but it is a half- something meaning that sometimes half races and races can both have a dragonmark half-orc/human or human
Kid SixXx 01-24-05, 04:26 PM	half orc can also have a dragonmark Indeed. Of the goblinoid / semi goblinoid races go, only Half-Orcs can receive dragomarks. Race or cross-breeding has nothing to do with whom gets what: it's all a matter of what is covered by the draconic prophecy and what is not. As far as the lycanthrope question goes, Lycanthrope is more than a common ailment. Hopefully we can agree on this and dispense with the common disease tangent. I suppose that the simple answer to the original question is that lycanthropes cannot use dragonmarks as they are apparently not covered in the draconic prophecies as beings who are able to use them, which pretty much follows the d'Vol rule (ie. undead no longer meet dragonmark pre-reqs and cannot use dragonmarks.) Well 1st of all half-orc is not a template and in Eberron it is considered a very different race just like the Half-Elves. One interesting thing to note is Orcs do not have marks, but Half-Orcs do. Also Erandis d'Vol lost her use of her Mark when she became a lich, so under that persumption I would have to disagree. But it all lies in the 'Eye of the DM'. I don't think that d'Vol is a technical exception to the rule, as I'd like to think that a half-dragon with a dragonmark would pretty much fit into the scheme of Eberron's draconic prophecies. In the mechanical sense, like any other undead creature, d'Vol no longer has the pre-reqs needed for use of a dragonmark, so her's has gone dormant. Since the details surrounding the Mark of Death have been left permanently vague (like the origin of the Mournlands), using the MoD as a guide as to who can get a dragonmark and who can't is probably a bad idea, as the MoD is probably designed to be the exception to the rule. Just my thoughts.
BlackMoria 01-24-05, 05:33 PM	Two snippets of information make a very strong case that a lycanthrope cannot benefit from a dragonmark. In the Ask Keith Baker Part 2 thread, around page 28, a question of Human Hertiage caused a debate of what qualifies as allowing a dragonmark to be functional for various conditions. While lycanthropy was not specifically addressed, the answer is (paraphrased from Keith) that dragonmarks don't follow normal rules and that the subtype more important than type when adjudicating such questions. Therefore, a lycanthrope, as subtype (shapeshifter) would lose his ability to manifest any dragonmark powers. The second snippet is more indirect but still relative to the discussion. In a long discussion on the lycanthrope purge by the Church of the Silver Flame, Keith (again, I am paraphrasing) has stated that the principle reason for the crusade against the lycanthropes was the effect of what lycanthropy did to others. In short, lycanthropy alters a person at all levels...physical, mental and spiritual. The church of the Silver Flame view lycanthropes as dire threats because an infected person, in essence, is no longer human and the soul or spirit is corrupted. Now this information is provide from Keith himself. In light of that, I think Keith's response to this question would be that a person with a legitimate dragonmark who became a lycanthrope after the fact is no longer, at any level (physical, mental, spiritual), a person of that race. That person is now a lycanthrope....end of discussion. Of course, Keith may see this and weigh in on this but based on his past answers, I am confident that lycanthropy and dragonmarks are totally incompatible.