Cursed Weapons

Awong124

I've always wondered about cursed weapons, and how you can only unequip them with a remove curse spell. In practical terms (ie. not in video game mechanics), why wouldn't you be cursed just by picking up the weapon? What's the practical difference between picking it up and equipping it? For example, lets say there's a cursed sword on the ground. If you go and pick it up, you're not going to pick it up by the blade. You'd pick it up by the hilt. Wouldn't that already constitute as equipping it? Why is it in the game you only get cursed when you put it in the weapon slot and not when you pick it up?

Pibaro

It may be similar to heroin.
You can have some drug in your pocket, but if you don't use it you won't get addicted.

Awong124

That's why I am specifically asking about cursed weapons, and not other cursed equipment. With a cloak or a belt, you'd actually have to put it on. But with a weapon, I don't see the practical difference between picking it up and using it.

Pibaro

You have to wield in combat to .... be corrupted by the weapon.
If you try the weapon once you won't use any other one ever.

Schneidend

The effects of weapons typically only function when you wield them, regardless of whether those effects are good or bad. Wielding requires a certain grip. The magic may also be able to detect the wielder's intent to use the item. After all, what's more devastating, a curse that strikes when the wielder is in no danger or when danger arises?

Awong124

Those are decent plausible suggestions. But they just sound like trying to justify poor implementation of game logic. Though I'm not bashing the game mechanics in any way, because honestly I don't see a better way of doing it. It just doesn't seem very logical if you look at it from a practical point of view.

What about when there's no enemies around and you just place the weapon in the weapon slot? You're cursed right away, even though there's no intent to wield it in combat. And to someone not proficient in using a weapon, holding it is holding it. If I'm going to pick up a sword, I'm going to pick it up the same way as I'm going to use it. I'm not going to be intentionally dangling it by two fingers.

Schneidend

Like I said, it senses your intent to use it, your thought that "I'll use this to kill somebody good later." Picking it up and thinking "ooh, shiny" doesn't trigger it. I was asserting before that the enchanter intentionally designed the hypothetical cursed weapon this way.

Also, the Cursed Sword of Berserking doesn't even do anything special until you're about to fight, so that's part of it I guess.

nano

You can pick up anything but that doesn't mean you can put it in your weapon slot.

If you want to be realistic about it maybe it speaks to you when you unsheathe it. Or it's triggered by a contingency, that works too.

BG curses are pretty mild. If I was an enchanter I'd be leaving petrifying items all over the place. Explosive potions colored to look like healing potions. Armor with contengencied Imprisonments. Imitation Carsomyrs with opposite alignment effects. As an assassin/mage sometimes I feel like my real talents are being wasted...

Zarakinthish

The answer is that it works that way because it was one of the best ways they had of implementing the rules as written from 2nd edition AD&D. As Schneidend mentioned, the cursed sword of berserking doesn't really do anything until a fight, and this is in line with the rules. The exact words from the 2nd edition Dungeon Master Guide for the cursed sword of berserking are as follows:

Sword, Cursed Berserking: This performs by every test, save that of the heat of battle, as a +2 magical sword of some sort. However, in actual battle its wielder will go berserk, attacking the nearest creature and continuing to fight until dead or until no living thing remains within 60 feet. The sword has a +2 bonus and otherwise acts as a cursed sword +1. The possessor of a cursed berserking sword can be rid of it only if it is exorcised via a remove curse spell or wish.

Since it mentions it, here is what it says about the cursed sword +1:

This performs in all respects as a +1 weapon, but when its wielder is faced by an enemy, the sword will weld itself to the character's hand and force him to fight until the enemy or the wielder is slain. Thereafter, the possessor can loose, but never rid himself of, the cursed sword. No matter what is done, it will appear in his hand whenever an opponent is faced. The character can be freed of the weapon only by a remove curse spell.

So in summary, it take the heat of battle to activate the curse on a weapon, but because it would have been much more complicated to have you be able to take the weapon in and out of an equip slot before it is used in battle, Bioware decided to simply have it stick in an equip slot due to that usually meaning you intend to use it in battle.

Wayniac

Awong124 said:

If I'm going to pick up a sword, I'm going to pick it up the same way as I'm going to use it. I'm not going to be intentionally dangling it by two fingers.

I bet you would intentionally dangle it by two fingers if it meant there was a chance your gender would change, or it made you go berserk, or it turned your fingers into tiny sausages with toothpicks in the end of them!

So from this point forward, I have no choice but to assume every character is daintily picking up swords by two fingers until they decide they want to equip them.

The thing I find the most interesting are the mechanics of how rings work. Apparently, everyone in all of the Sword Coast has the same size fingers, and that's nothing short of a miracle to be honest with you. And why can they only wear one on each hand? For that matter, why can they only wear one on each finger? If I were a mage, I'd have Evermemory on every single finger... twice. Even as a level 1 mage, that still allows me just over one million castings of magic missile without resting. That's not even counting toe rings!

karnor00

For rings, they are limited to 2 for game balance reasons. Otherwise people like you would try wearing 20 rings per hand! This rule comes from P&P, where people like you were anticipated The DMG says:

"No more than two magical rings can be worn by a character at the same time. If more are worn, none will function. No more than one magical ring can be worn on the same hand. A second ring worn on one hand causes both to be useless. Rings must be worn on the fingers. Rings on toes, in ear lobes, etc, do not function as magical rings"

Schneidend

Magical rings interfere with one another. They also probably resize themselves to suit the wearer.

Wayniac

Schneidend said:

Magical rings interfere with one another. They also probably resize themselves to suit the wearer.

That can't be it. Just plain old silver rings fit in everyone's ring slot. I've tried it. I'm sticking with the idea that everyone on the Sword Coast has the same size fingers.

"She has man hands!"

Awong124

Wayniac said:

Schneidend said:

Magical rings interfere with one another. They also probably resize themselves to suit the wearer.

That can't be it. Just plain old silver rings fit in everyone's ring slot. I've tried it. I'm sticking with the idea that everyone on the Sword Coast has the same size fingers.

"She has man hands!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSL4cmFW_GU