Introducing madness or insanity etc. will most likely mean more bean counting. I don't like bean counting, but I feel it is unavoidable here. Here is the simplest system I could think of.
Each time your mind is not in your control, that is when you gain the Charmed, Frightened, or Incapacitated condition, you gain 1 Madness Point.
Once your Madness Points equal your lowest mental score, your strongest mental ability will defend you. Make a saving throw using your strongest mental ability against a DC or your lowest mental ability score.
Intense Madness If you fail the saving throw during combat, you are Stunned for 1d10 minutes. Lesser Restoration cures this. Lingering Madness If you fail the saving throw in more social interaction or exploration situations, you have Disadvantage on specific Skill or Ability checks for 1d10 x 10 hours. Lesser Restoration cures this. Indefinite Madness Sometimes madness is forced upon you. When you are resurrected or have visited the Abyss, you gain afflictions such as a rotting crow following you or your dreams always involve destruction or burning. Greater restoration may cure this.
A couple things. The inability to subtract Madness Points may be a weak point, however I feel using your strongest mental ability against your weakest will almost surely always be good. The idea isn't to inflict this condition on the player, it is to create tension that it may happen. Additionally, I thought this may encourage players to min-max mental stats. I feel this would just mean Charmed, Frightened, or Incapacitated conditions targeting weaker mental scores would be easier to succumb to. Admittedly, as a DM you'd probably have to shoehorn, inevitably, a way to Frighten a player with vast amounts of Intelligence...which feels kinda weak. But, I mean to say min-maxing won't avoid anything, necessarily -- the player will succeed more Madness Saving Throws, but will also make more of them.
I dislike bean counters. But, the player would need to record it.
And yes. For my campaign, madness is irreversible. It resets to 0 after you make the DC check. I feel many conditions are reversible in DnD, so maybe a LR does. Having the player roll their strongest mental stat against their weakest is an attempt to help them *not* get the condition.
It is the threat that makes it scary. I don’t actually want to disable them in a fight. Maybe my method needs ample playtesting.
I dislike bean counters. But, the player would need to record it.
And yes. For my campaign, madness is irreversible. It resets to 0 after you make the DC check. I feel many conditions are reversible in DnD, so maybe a LR does. Having the player roll their strongest mental stat against their weakest is an attempt to help them *not* get the condition.
It is the threat that makes it scary. I don’t actually want to disable them in a fight. Maybe my method needs ample playtesting.
Just make it a low DC rather than penalize a player for not using a mental dump stat. What even is the logic for that?
That is a good point. Here is a hypothetical. Gned (obviously a gnome) has 8 Int, 10 Cha, and 14 Wis. His Madness counter is an 8. Whereas Gnell (his sister) has 10 across the board. Her Madness meter is 25% larger than Gned’s. However, when she eventually does make the save, her max stat is lower and gets less of a bonus.
In summary, Gned will have to make the save more frequently, but is more likely to succeed. Gnell will make the save less frequently and be more likely to fail.
I dislike bean counters. But, the player would need to record it.
And yes. For my campaign, madness is irreversible. It resets to 0 after you make the DC check. I feel many conditions are reversible in DnD, so maybe a LR does. Having the player roll their strongest mental stat against their weakest is an attempt to help them *not* get the condition.
It is the threat that makes it scary. I don’t actually want to disable them in a fight. Maybe my method needs ample playtesting.
Just make it a low DC rather than penalize a player for not using a mental dump stat. What even is the logic for that?
You could do and that would work. But, players like choices and I like flavour.
You can choose a dump stat, but it has consequences. Also, I think the flavour really suits. To stay sane you have to pit your mind against itself. Outside that, I got nothing.
That is a good point. Here is a hypothetical. Gned (obviously a gnome) has 8 Int, 10 Cha, and 14 Wis. His Madness counter is an 8. Whereas Gnell (his sister) has 10 across the board. Her Madness meter is 25% larger than Gned’s. However, when she eventually does make the save, her max stat is lower and gets less of a bonus.
In summary, Gned will have to make the save more frequently, but is more likely to succeed. Gnell will make the save less frequently and be more likely to fail.
Here is another hypothetical: Bobby is very stupid, with an intelligence of 3 and wisdom of 3. He is very charismatic however, and he has a charisma of 14. Because of his stupidity, Bobby will never go mad.
That is a good point. Here is a hypothetical. Gned (obviously a gnome) has 8 Int, 10 Cha, and 14 Wis. His Madness counter is an 8. Whereas Gnell (his sister) has 10 across the board. Her Madness meter is 25% larger than Gned’s. However, when she eventually does make the save, her max stat is lower and gets less of a bonus.
In summary, Gned will have to make the save more frequently, but is more likely to succeed. Gnell will make the save less frequently and be more likely to fail.
Here is another hypothetical: Bobby is very stupid, with an intelligence of 3 and wisdom of 3. He is very charismatic however, and he has a charisma of 14. Because of his stupidity, Bobby will never go mad.
Then, may Bobby live the life we will never have.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Introducing madness or insanity etc. will most likely mean more bean counting. I don't like bean counting, but I feel it is unavoidable here. Here is the simplest system I could think of.
Intense Madness If you fail the saving throw during combat, you are Stunned for 1d10 minutes. Lesser Restoration cures this.
Lingering Madness If you fail the saving throw in more social interaction or exploration situations, you have Disadvantage on specific Skill or Ability checks for 1d10 x 10 hours. Lesser Restoration cures this.
Indefinite Madness Sometimes madness is forced upon you. When you are resurrected or have visited the Abyss, you gain afflictions such as a rotting crow following you or your dreams always involve destruction or burning. Greater restoration may cure this.
A couple things. The inability to subtract Madness Points may be a weak point, however I feel using your strongest mental ability against your weakest will almost surely always be good. The idea isn't to inflict this condition on the player, it is to create tension that it may happen. Additionally, I thought this may encourage players to min-max mental stats. I feel this would just mean Charmed, Frightened, or Incapacitated conditions targeting weaker mental scores would be easier to succumb to. Admittedly, as a DM you'd probably have to shoehorn, inevitably, a way to Frighten a player with vast amounts of Intelligence...which feels kinda weak. But, I mean to say min-maxing won't avoid anything, necessarily -- the player will succeed more Madness Saving Throws, but will also make more of them.
Thoughts?
I kinda like it.
how do you propose to book keep it? does the counter carry over encounters, SR, LR?
The DC is based on the weakest stat? Isn't that just rewarding people for taking int/wis as a dump stat?
Thank you. ^_^
I dislike bean counters. But, the player would need to record it.
And yes. For my campaign, madness is irreversible. It resets to 0 after you make the DC check. I feel many conditions are reversible in DnD, so maybe a LR does. Having the player roll their strongest mental stat against their weakest is an attempt to help them *not* get the condition.
It is the threat that makes it scary. I don’t actually want to disable them in a fight. Maybe my method needs ample playtesting.
Just make it a low DC rather than penalize a player for not using a mental dump stat. What even is the logic for that?
That is a good point. Here is a hypothetical. Gned (obviously a gnome) has 8 Int, 10 Cha, and 14 Wis. His Madness counter is an 8. Whereas Gnell (his sister) has 10 across the board. Her Madness meter is 25% larger than Gned’s. However, when she eventually does make the save, her max stat is lower and gets less of a bonus.
In summary, Gned will have to make the save more frequently, but is more likely to succeed. Gnell will make the save less frequently and be more likely to fail.
You could do and that would work. But, players like choices and I like flavour.
You can choose a dump stat, but it has consequences. Also, I think the flavour really suits. To stay sane you have to pit your mind against itself. Outside that, I got nothing.
Here is another hypothetical: Bobby is very stupid, with an intelligence of 3 and wisdom of 3. He is very charismatic however, and he has a charisma of 14. Because of his stupidity, Bobby will never go mad.
Then, may Bobby live the life we will never have.