Talk:Cassandra's Curse (3.5e Trait)

DM's Note

This was actually inspired by a Greek myth with a protagonist by the same name. She was granted the ability to see the future by Apollo, but when she told him that she did not love him, he cursed her, causing all words to leave her mouth twisted so that none would believe her.

Problem

In my campaign someone took this trait because they are spoiler addicts, but for a while at the beginning, he said things like: I wouldn't go in there(trap), I don't trust this person(possessed), or why would a wizard not be using a better wand?(trapped, cursed, poisoned) so now the party will listen to any advise that he gives, so he doesn't even have to say directly.

It doesn't actually make a very good trait. It requires everyone one involved to be 100% committed to the roleplay, or it's going to get exploited. Marasmusine (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2014 (MST)

That's how it is a "trait"- e.g. that the roleplay becomes to extensive that it is overbearing. If it did not work too well than maybe we should add {{needsbalance}}. --Green Dragon (talk) 04:57, 28 February 2014 (MST)

All traits have a mechanical benefit and drawback, that must be related. It can lead to roleplaying, but isn't the roleplaying effect itself. Broken down, what we have here is: Benefit - the DM gives this player information. Drawback - the player can't give that information to the other players. The exploit - the player can act on this information, which gives the game away: "I'm not going down that passageway." The proposed fix - The other players do not believe this player. Now the trait picked by one player is forcing the behaviour of the other players. I'm not saying that a gaming group can't do this, but it doesn't fit within the Traits framework. Marasmusine (talk) 05:29, 28 February 2014 (MST)