TLDR: How do I represent a phobia in game mechanics?
One of my players character have had several nasty run ins with boars as of late (playing the Dragon of Icespire peak).
The first time was when they encountered an Anchorite of Talos in boar shape, just observing them. I had them all roll to see if they spotted it, and his character was the only one who succeeded. We played it up as a pretty creepy encounter where his Halfling sorcerer asked if anyone else saw it, how it just sits there, glaring. And how the rest of the group hardly cared of it. He almost felt singled out of the group by this creepy boar. And then it was gone...
Later they went to the Woodland manse, where there's several boars around the gardens. As soon as as they entered the clearing every single board just stopped what it was doing and looked up at the group. Both the party´s druid and ranger thought nothing of it, just wild beasts being cautious. But the player of the Halfling sorcerer played it as if his character thought they were really creepy and he was loathe to agitate them by attacking them. In the building they found several images on the walls depicting boars, drawn in blood, chasing or killing humanoids, freaking out the character more and more... And when they later exited the manse, pretty beat up from an all out battle with an Achorite, several orcs and lots of blights, they were attacked by the boars and he sees three of them changing into Anchorites.
The way he's been playing his character has been plenty of fun for all of us, and now I'd like to give him a sort of phobia against boars (swinophobia?) and later on, maybe give him some sort of favoured enemy: boars. But how should we represent the phobia in game? He already plays the part, but I'm thinking of adding something like this:
Phobia. the character's been afflicted by a strong, illogical fear of something. Whenever the character confronts his or her phobia the player must make a Wisdom saving throw, DC 12 or suffer one level of exhaustion. If the character is surprised by his phobia, then the test is made at a disadvantage. If the save fails by 5 or more the character is also frightened. If the test is passed then nothing happens (except for the immense feeling of discomfort the character suffers). the spell Calm emotions can suppress the phobia for the duration. Depending on the phobia, it can be removed altogether by either a spell of Lesser or Greater restoration at the GM's discretion.
I've taken some cues from the rules for madness, the antipathy spell and just things I made up. My reasoning is that a character suffering from a fear of spiders, doesn't need to run for the hills just because he discovers a spider climbing wall at the towns square. But maybe if a giant spider suddenly pops out from its burrow, right next of him in a dimly lit dungeon?
Purely roleplaying things shouldn't have much in the way of mechanical effects associated with them. Your players are happy, that specific player is happy, you are happy, nothing needs to be changed. You may award Inspiration if you wish. Nothing further needs to be done. Inspiration was specifically designed to reward good roleplaying and the best way to handle it is to let the players handle awarding it.
Your Phobia rules are *brutal* Exhaustion is a very harsh mechanic. The first level is nothing, it can be gotten rid of with a Long Rest. Beyond that it starts to stack up and when it hits 3 levels it is outright deadly. Making the saves at disadvantage to avoid Exhaustion is going to kill people in a hurry. Lesser Restoration is pretty easy to get. It's a 2nd level spell and a Cleric can get it at 3rd level, so it hardly seems worth the effort when such a punishing condition can be gotten rid of so easily. Make it a Curse. At least then they will have to wait for the Cleric to be 5th level.
My advice is to avoid imposing mechanical effects, outside of Inspiration, at all to roleplaying of any kind. Playing D&D is all about making choices. You roll dice to see what happens once you have made your choices. It's about having "agency" for the players. If you keep telling them what they have to do instead of choosing what they want to do, you run the risk of them handing over their character, sitting back, and watching the game go by. It's the functional equivalent of watching a movie or reading a book, only far less entertaining.
I don't think you should invent mechanics for something that should be RPed.
Some RPGs have phobia mechanics. Savage Worlds does... if you roll an 18-19 on the Fear chart after failing a Fear-based Spirit check, you get a Minor Phobia, which has mechanical disadvantages as described. However, this phobia is coded as a "Minor Hindrance," which is a mechanical system already baked into Savage Worlds, and the player could, with experience, buy that hindrance off if they don't want to keep it, and so on. My point is, the Savage Worlds system has an entire set of mechanics for phobias which D&D does not have.
There is no mechanical system under which players can "gain hindrances" or "buy them off," nor any system for adjudicating such. You're making something up that you think sounds cool but, unlike Savage Worlds, has not been play-tested, so you have no way of knowing how punishing or fun it may be.
If I character is RPing a fear of spiders, or boars, or the dark, then as a DM, I think it is both fair and reasonable that you may require certain rolls to be made at disadvantage. For example, if a were*boar* wizard were to cast a fear spell on the guy with the boar-phobia, sure, give him disadvantage on that one particular saving throw. Maybe getting into melee with a boar would entail disadvantage on to-hit rolls, although I'd give some sort of saving throw to avoid it, and if he makes it once, he's able to shake off the fear for the next 24 hours, which follows the mechanic of many fear-type saving throws in monsters' stat blocks. But I would not impose exhaustion or any of that, and I wouldn't make it a permanent mechanic. I would just call for disadvantage if the situation seems to merit it based on the RP - which is what DMs do on a regular basis as part of the gameplay.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Just let them roleplay it. If you’re going to impose a negative mechanical effect for a roleplay decision, then you risk conditioning your players not to roleplay, because they’re afraid they’ll get some sort of penalty. At the very least, talk to the player about whether they want to take on a penalty, and if they do, I’d suggest Disadvantage like BioWiz said. But don’t spring it on them.
If the player likes his boar antipathy schtick let them run with it. I see no need for the DM to mechanically bind a particular player. As mentioned above your besetting a PC with a disadvantage, at best a mechanical challenge, because of the way they role played mindful of game continuity. "So if we play well like that," other players may speculate, "the DM is going slap us with a permanent condition trigger above and beyond the RAW?" That's a no dice prospect, so to speak.
If you enjoy this play, reward it by drawing focus to it. Make more encounters where the player gets to perform so. Other players will see that as actually rewarding good play.
I mean think about it. Notable hero with a phobia is Indiana Jones' snake thing. Did his phobia really compromise his ability to act like a hero when confronted with his phobia? This is one of those situations I would say "let them play without a mechanical intervention."
I had a player once that had two battles that took place on stair cases and was rolling horribly. I could have enshrined this behavior in game by imposing some sort of "challenged on staircases" disadvantage till the end of time to honor the fun memories and gallows humor everyone had in those battles, the player was a good sport about it too in the battles. But I didn't do it. I let it to the players to commemorate it or make it a thing if they wanted to. And that worked. The player always RP'd some reluctance to even dash up stairs. When the players were making defenses "We put the paladin ... somewhere that doesn't involve stairs" as a nod to an ongoing in game joke. Some times for the good of the game is best kept by the DM doing nothing. Letting it play out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
If you want to add a mechanic in then a wisdom saving throw based on a DC that seems appropriate.
Liam O'Brien does this really well in campaign 2 of critical roll, due to his past when he kills someone/something with fire he takes a wisdom saving throw, if he fails it he goes catatonic and struggles to act until he has calmed down.
You could have the character fearful of boars if it fails that saving throw. How they react could then be situation dependant.
If you want to add a mechanic in then a wisdom saving throw based on a DC that seems appropriate.
Liam O'Brien does this really well in campaign 2 of critical roll, due to his past when he kills someone/something with fire he takes a wisdom saving throw, if he fails it he goes catatonic and struggles to act until he has calmed down.
You could have the character fearful of boars if it fails that saving throw. How they react could then be situation dependant.
Yes, but Liam chose to take on that mechanic. If Matt (the DM) had pushed him to take it, I don't think he'd be very happy. Always let the player decide.
It's also not really necessary. He could just have *chosen* when to RP going catatonic. I guess the random element introduces a little suspense into the situation, but if a player is just going to impose this on him- or herself, as a GM, I would probably suggest, "You could just RP it."
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
If you want to add a mechanic in then a wisdom saving throw based on a DC that seems appropriate.
Liam O'Brien does this really well in campaign 2 of critical roll, due to his past when he kills someone/something with fire he takes a wisdom saving throw, if he fails it he goes catatonic and struggles to act until he has calmed down.
You could have the character fearful of boars if it fails that saving throw. How they react could then be situation dependant.
Yes, but Liam chose to take on that mechanic. If Matt (the DM) had pushed him to take it, I don't think he'd be very happy. Always let the player decide.
I mean that is a given I am coming into this question on the basis the player wants to have this extra aspect of their character.
It's also not really necessary. He could just have *chosen* when to RP going catatonic. I guess the random element introduces a little suspense into the situation, but if a player is just going to impose this on him- or herself, as a GM, I would probably suggest, "You could just RP it."
To me the question then becomes, when to RP it, what makes the player to catatonic now vs not going catatonic last time so as a dm I would actually suggest to the player that we come up with some base roll for this.
I have done the exact same thing in a cyberpunk game I am playing in, in combat situations my character has a chance to switch off and go into auto pilot which means he will kill instead of maim and, if suprised, might attack a friend who thinking they are a foe. So the Gm and I have come up with some rough rules around when I need to roll to keep control and, what the players can do to try and snap me out of it. For me rolling for this is far better then me trying to decide if I should tank this combat situation because of RP.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi everyone!
TLDR: How do I represent a phobia in game mechanics?
One of my players character have had several nasty run ins with boars as of late (playing the Dragon of Icespire peak).
The first time was when they encountered an Anchorite of Talos in boar shape, just observing them. I had them all roll to see if they spotted it, and his character was the only one who succeeded. We played it up as a pretty creepy encounter where his Halfling sorcerer asked if anyone else saw it, how it just sits there, glaring. And how the rest of the group hardly cared of it. He almost felt singled out of the group by this creepy boar. And then it was gone...
Later they went to the Woodland manse, where there's several boars around the gardens. As soon as as they entered the clearing every single board just stopped what it was doing and looked up at the group. Both the party´s druid and ranger thought nothing of it, just wild beasts being cautious. But the player of the Halfling sorcerer played it as if his character thought they were really creepy and he was loathe to agitate them by attacking them. In the building they found several images on the walls depicting boars, drawn in blood, chasing or killing humanoids, freaking out the character more and more... And when they later exited the manse, pretty beat up from an all out battle with an Achorite, several orcs and lots of blights, they were attacked by the boars and he sees three of them changing into Anchorites.
The way he's been playing his character has been plenty of fun for all of us, and now I'd like to give him a sort of phobia against boars (swinophobia?) and later on, maybe give him some sort of favoured enemy: boars. But how should we represent the phobia in game? He already plays the part, but I'm thinking of adding something like this:
Phobia.
the character's been afflicted by a strong, illogical fear of something. Whenever the character confronts his or her phobia the player must make a Wisdom saving throw, DC 12 or suffer one level of exhaustion. If the character is surprised by his phobia, then the test is made at a disadvantage. If the save fails by 5 or more the character is also frightened. If the test is passed then nothing happens (except for the immense feeling of discomfort the character suffers). the spell Calm emotions can suppress the phobia for the duration. Depending on the phobia, it can be removed altogether by either a spell of Lesser or Greater restoration at the GM's discretion.
I've taken some cues from the rules for madness, the antipathy spell and just things I made up. My reasoning is that a character suffering from a fear of spiders, doesn't need to run for the hills just because he discovers a spider climbing wall at the towns square. But maybe if a giant spider suddenly pops out from its burrow, right next of him in a dimly lit dungeon?
What's your thought?
Purely roleplaying things shouldn't have much in the way of mechanical effects associated with them. Your players are happy, that specific player is happy, you are happy, nothing needs to be changed. You may award Inspiration if you wish. Nothing further needs to be done. Inspiration was specifically designed to reward good roleplaying and the best way to handle it is to let the players handle awarding it.
Your Phobia rules are *brutal* Exhaustion is a very harsh mechanic. The first level is nothing, it can be gotten rid of with a Long Rest. Beyond that it starts to stack up and when it hits 3 levels it is outright deadly. Making the saves at disadvantage to avoid Exhaustion is going to kill people in a hurry. Lesser Restoration is pretty easy to get. It's a 2nd level spell and a Cleric can get it at 3rd level, so it hardly seems worth the effort when such a punishing condition can be gotten rid of so easily. Make it a Curse. At least then they will have to wait for the Cleric to be 5th level.
My advice is to avoid imposing mechanical effects, outside of Inspiration, at all to roleplaying of any kind. Playing D&D is all about making choices. You roll dice to see what happens once you have made your choices. It's about having "agency" for the players. If you keep telling them what they have to do instead of choosing what they want to do, you run the risk of them handing over their character, sitting back, and watching the game go by. It's the functional equivalent of watching a movie or reading a book, only far less entertaining.
<Insert clever signature here>
I don't think you should invent mechanics for something that should be RPed.
Some RPGs have phobia mechanics. Savage Worlds does... if you roll an 18-19 on the Fear chart after failing a Fear-based Spirit check, you get a Minor Phobia, which has mechanical disadvantages as described. However, this phobia is coded as a "Minor Hindrance," which is a mechanical system already baked into Savage Worlds, and the player could, with experience, buy that hindrance off if they don't want to keep it, and so on. My point is, the Savage Worlds system has an entire set of mechanics for phobias which D&D does not have.
There is no mechanical system under which players can "gain hindrances" or "buy them off," nor any system for adjudicating such. You're making something up that you think sounds cool but, unlike Savage Worlds, has not been play-tested, so you have no way of knowing how punishing or fun it may be.
If I character is RPing a fear of spiders, or boars, or the dark, then as a DM, I think it is both fair and reasonable that you may require certain rolls to be made at disadvantage. For example, if a were*boar* wizard were to cast a fear spell on the guy with the boar-phobia, sure, give him disadvantage on that one particular saving throw. Maybe getting into melee with a boar would entail disadvantage on to-hit rolls, although I'd give some sort of saving throw to avoid it, and if he makes it once, he's able to shake off the fear for the next 24 hours, which follows the mechanic of many fear-type saving throws in monsters' stat blocks. But I would not impose exhaustion or any of that, and I wouldn't make it a permanent mechanic. I would just call for disadvantage if the situation seems to merit it based on the RP - which is what DMs do on a regular basis as part of the gameplay.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Just let them roleplay it. If you’re going to impose a negative mechanical effect for a roleplay decision, then you risk conditioning your players not to roleplay, because they’re afraid they’ll get some sort of penalty. At the very least, talk to the player about whether they want to take on a penalty, and if they do, I’d suggest Disadvantage like BioWiz said. But don’t spring it on them.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
If the player likes his boar antipathy schtick let them run with it. I see no need for the DM to mechanically bind a particular player. As mentioned above your besetting a PC with a disadvantage, at best a mechanical challenge, because of the way they role played mindful of game continuity. "So if we play well like that," other players may speculate, "the DM is going slap us with a permanent condition trigger above and beyond the RAW?" That's a no dice prospect, so to speak.
If you enjoy this play, reward it by drawing focus to it. Make more encounters where the player gets to perform so. Other players will see that as actually rewarding good play.
I mean think about it. Notable hero with a phobia is Indiana Jones' snake thing. Did his phobia really compromise his ability to act like a hero when confronted with his phobia? This is one of those situations I would say "let them play without a mechanical intervention."
I had a player once that had two battles that took place on stair cases and was rolling horribly. I could have enshrined this behavior in game by imposing some sort of "challenged on staircases" disadvantage till the end of time to honor the fun memories and gallows humor everyone had in those battles, the player was a good sport about it too in the battles. But I didn't do it. I let it to the players to commemorate it or make it a thing if they wanted to. And that worked. The player always RP'd some reluctance to even dash up stairs. When the players were making defenses "We put the paladin ... somewhere that doesn't involve stairs" as a nod to an ongoing in game joke. Some times for the good of the game is best kept by the DM doing nothing. Letting it play out.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
If you want to add a mechanic in then a wisdom saving throw based on a DC that seems appropriate.
Liam O'Brien does this really well in campaign 2 of critical roll, due to his past when he kills someone/something with fire he takes a wisdom saving throw, if he fails it he goes catatonic and struggles to act until he has calmed down.
You could have the character fearful of boars if it fails that saving throw. How they react could then be situation dependant.
Yes, but Liam chose to take on that mechanic. If Matt (the DM) had pushed him to take it, I don't think he'd be very happy. Always let the player decide.
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
It's also not really necessary. He could just have *chosen* when to RP going catatonic. I guess the random element introduces a little suspense into the situation, but if a player is just going to impose this on him- or herself, as a GM, I would probably suggest, "You could just RP it."
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I mean that is a given I am coming into this question on the basis the player wants to have this extra aspect of their character.
To me the question then becomes, when to RP it, what makes the player to catatonic now vs not going catatonic last time so as a dm I would actually suggest to the player that we come up with some base roll for this.
I have done the exact same thing in a cyberpunk game I am playing in, in combat situations my character has a chance to switch off and go into auto pilot which means he will kill instead of maim and, if suprised, might attack a friend who thinking they are a foe. So the Gm and I have come up with some rough rules around when I need to roll to keep control and, what the players can do to try and snap me out of it. For me rolling for this is far better then me trying to decide if I should tank this combat situation because of RP.