Stat loss - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Stat loss

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
aidan_blackthorn
Mar 21, 2009 19:25:22 What is your opinion of a DM inflicting a permanent loss of 1 point in any stat (Intelligence in this instance) as a result of a Remove Affliction ritual. This is obviously a houserule, and in fact, I can think of nothing in the 4e rules that permanently (or even temporarily) lowers a stat.
#2
baneofelves
Mar 21, 2009 19:28:56 sounds like your dm is pulling crap out of his ass. there are no stat-boosting or nerfing abilities/items that I can think of in 4E. I'd ask him WHY he is doing this.
#3
Neutronium_Dragon
Mar 21, 2009 20:06:29 In short, it's something that will break the fundamental math of the game.
#4
kamikazegerbil
Mar 21, 2009 20:12:27 Permanent stat loss in 4e isn't there because there's less sources as stat increase. As far as I'm aware you only get them as you level now.

In 3.x there were spells and magic items galore that increased stats and could be used to cover for something like this when it mattered. However in 4e all these items and spells instead affect or your rolls or grant temp HP etc. So that permanent ability loss is harder to recover from.

Might be an idea to have a polite word with your DM. Reading over the ritual I can see their thematic reasoning for this (though whether it's needed since the ritual can aready potentially end in the characters death if you screw up) and it may not have occured to them that stat loss is much harsher in this edition (easy enough in these relatively early days).

Of course it depends on the reasoning for picking the stat too. I can't see why this would always affect Intelligence (I can understand mental stat loss for removing mental effects and physical ones damaging physical stats) but it matters as a Wizard would suffer for this, while a barbarian wouldn't care much. So it's either harsh or pointless imo.

Maybe I have too little information, but I can't help seeing this as an unessarcary houserule that penalizes the players further after having shelled out alot for the ritual and risked the subjects death.
#5
pigknight
Mar 21, 2009 21:38:20 A reverse of my usual suggestion: Slap him across the back of the head.
#6
salla
Mar 21, 2009 21:42:03
What is your opinion of a DM inflicting a permanent loss of 1 point in any stat (Intelligence in this instance) as a result of a Remove Affliction ritual. This is obviously a houserule, and in fact, I can think of nothing in the 4e rules that permanently (or even temporarily) lowers a stat.

One word: Bull****.
#7
sophos00
Mar 22, 2009 14:51:10 Unless he's also modifying the system/game/adventure to include non-standard stat increases or stat restoration, your DM is way off base and this type of house rule will eventually make the game potentially impossible if he's playing everything else by the book.
#8
daidojitaidoru
Mar 22, 2009 15:04:50 If you want to kill someone just kill them, don't make them so weak they'll die over and over again. Stat loss was removed from the game for a reason and bringing it back is a terrible idea.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 aidan_blackthorn Mar 21, 2009 19:25:22	What is your opinion of a DM inflicting a permanent loss of 1 point in any stat (Intelligence in this instance) as a result of a Remove Affliction ritual. This is obviously a houserule, and in fact, I can think of nothing in the 4e rules that permanently (or even temporarily) lowers a stat.
#2 baneofelves Mar 21, 2009 19:28:56	sounds like your dm is pulling crap out of his ass. there are no stat-boosting or nerfing abilities/items that I can think of in 4E. I'd ask him WHY he is doing this.
#3 Neutronium_Dragon Mar 21, 2009 20:06:29	In short, it's something that will break the fundamental math of the game.
#4 kamikazegerbil Mar 21, 2009 20:12:27	Permanent stat loss in 4e isn't there because there's less sources as stat increase. As far as I'm aware you only get them as you level now. In 3.x there were spells and magic items galore that increased stats and could be used to cover for something like this when it mattered. However in 4e all these items and spells instead affect or your rolls or grant temp HP etc. So that permanent ability loss is harder to recover from. Might be an idea to have a polite word with your DM. Reading over the ritual I can see their thematic reasoning for this (though whether it's needed since the ritual can aready potentially end in the characters death if you screw up) and it may not have occured to them that stat loss is much harsher in this edition (easy enough in these relatively early days). Of course it depends on the reasoning for picking the stat too. I can't see why this would always affect Intelligence (I can understand mental stat loss for removing mental effects and physical ones damaging physical stats) but it matters as a Wizard would suffer for this, while a barbarian wouldn't care much. So it's either harsh or pointless imo. Maybe I have too little information, but I can't help seeing this as an unessarcary houserule that penalizes the players further after having shelled out alot for the ritual and risked the subjects death.
#5 pigknight Mar 21, 2009 21:38:20	A reverse of my usual suggestion: Slap him across the back of the head.
#6 salla Mar 21, 2009 21:42:03	What is your opinion of a DM inflicting a permanent loss of 1 point in any stat (Intelligence in this instance) as a result of a Remove Affliction ritual. This is obviously a houserule, and in fact, I can think of nothing in the 4e rules that permanently (or even temporarily) lowers a stat. One word: Bull****.
#7 sophos00 Mar 22, 2009 14:51:10	Unless he's also modifying the system/game/adventure to include non-standard stat increases or stat restoration, your DM is way off base and this type of house rule will eventually make the game potentially impossible if he's playing everything else by the book.
#8 daidojitaidoru Mar 22, 2009 15:04:50	If you want to kill someone just kill them, don't make them so weak they'll die over and over again. Stat loss was removed from the game for a reason and bringing it back is a terrible idea.