| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 23 Apr 2009 : 17:17:28
My question about werewolves is this:
How is the curse of Lycanthropy Actually transferred? is it by the actual bite or by the saliva that enters the wound after the person is bitten?
It doesn't matter which type of Lycasnthrope it is (Infected or Natural), I'm wondering how the actual curse is passed from person to person. |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| kysus |
Posted - 27 Apr 2009 : 06:02:21
My take on it would be saliva but also keeping with jorkens thoughts on it too by not having bodily fluids would be to just have it transferred as saliva. I actually see it more as a bacteria in the werewolves saliva that transfers the disease kinda how the komodo dragons saliva causes septicemia with bacteria to kill its victims but with a more fanatasy twist like instead turning them in to creatures like itself. And seeing as there are already know diseases like chloera, pertussis, and bubonic plague that are caused by bacteria i see this working much better without the hassel of having to count all bodily fluid or going the route of a curse, but just my take on the subject. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 25 Apr 2009 : 00:42:50
Its makes LOTS of sense.
Rats are much more resistant to disease then most other animals (except, perhaps, bats), so it makes tons of sense if they carry a much more virulent form of Lycanthropy (to overcome their own naturally superior immune system).
Also, I would probably say that other forms of infection (then saliva/bite) are rare and highly improbable (but not impossible). I'd leave the option open, though, for the occassional 'evil DM' plothook.
Also, another reason why I prefer Vampires to be 'Curse' and Lycanthropy to be 'Viral' is that in D&D, 'same' doesn't stack, so a curse/curse or a viral/viral situation would be unfeasable (usually). IMG, I have created the highly unlikely combination of Vampire Werewolves - but a victim needs to be infected with both before either transformation is triggered for the first time (yes... a highly unlikely and improbable scenario.. unless it is done on purpose). |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 24 Apr 2009 : 02:03:25
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
As I recall, wererats can pass it on by drooling on their swords...
Me, I'd say that the transmission of bodily fluids was the important bit. It's the most logical approach.
As for why not just drooling on a sword... Perhaps the virus (for lack of a better word) simply isn't hardy enough to survive prolonged contact with air. Or maybe only wererats are virulent enough to infect with just a cut -- other lycanthropes need more of their salive to enter the body to cause the infection.
Thank you wooly, that makes sense. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Apr 2009 : 01:26:57
quote:
Originally posted by BlackDragonKarameikos
But I'm looking for information concerning on if the lycanthropy is strictly passed on through the bite of the creature or is it passed on due to the bodily fluid((i.e. saliva) that gets mixed in with the bite.
If it is strictly passed on due to saliva that gets mixed in with the bite then would it not be possible for a were-creature to take and coat a weapon (e.g a sword) with its own saliva and transfer the disease or curse that way? A lot of poisons are done this way so why couldn't this curse be transmitted the same way?
As stated in the Van Richten's guides (which is 2nd Ed. btw) the curse can be passed on by any type of bodily fluids (i.e. blood, saliva, etc.)
As I recall, wererats can pass it on by drooling on their swords...
Me, I'd say that the transmission of bodily fluids was the important bit. It's the most logical approach.
As for why not just drooling on a sword... Perhaps the virus (for lack of a better word) simply isn't hardy enough to survive prolonged contact with air. Or maybe only wererats are virulent enough to infect with just a cut -- other lycanthropes need more of their salive to enter the body to cause the infection. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 24 Apr 2009 : 00:35:55
When running a game in any setting, you use what you like... from anywhere... and toss-out the rest.
That's always been the case, but it seems to be the mantra for 4e.
Anyhow, I reference the 2e Monstrous Manual more then any other monster source - it really was the most comprehensive ever produced (by any company). Plus it had a lot of cool Diterlizzi art.  |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 23 Apr 2009 : 23:49:34
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
quote:
Originally posted by BlackDragonKarameikos
My question about werewolves is this:
How is the curse of Lycanthropy Actually transferred? is it by the actual bite or by the saliva that enters the wound after the person is bitten?
It doesn't matter which type of Lycasnthrope it is (Infected or Natural), I'm wondering how the actual curse is passed from person to person.
Is your question with respect to a particular edition? As you may know, the 4E Monster Manual indicates that lycanthropy is hereditary. This implies a few contradictions, given that in the 4E FR Players Guide, in the entry for Selūne, makes reference to curing lycanthropy, and both the FRPG and the FR Campaign Guide refer to lycanthropy as an affliction. If you're not playing 4E rules or Realms, this is, of course, irrelevant; but if your are, you may be interested in the discussion that I opened on this topic at the WOTC boards: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1163071
I'm playing by 3.5 Ed rules and am playing in the Forgotten Realms, but I like to use different rules from 2nd and 3.5 Ed. Makes the games a bit more fun  .
But I'm looking for information concerning on if the lycanthropy is strictly passed on through the bite of the creature or is it passed on due to the bodily fluid((i.e. saliva) that gets mixed in with the bite.
If it is strictly passed on due to saliva that gets mixed in with the bite then would it not be possible for a were-creature to take and coat a weapon (e.g a sword) with its own saliva and transfer the disease or curse that way? A lot of poisons are done this way so why couldn't this curse be transmitted the same way?
As stated in the Van Richten's guides (which is 2nd Ed. btw) the curse can be passed on by any type of bodily fluids (i.e. blood, saliva, etc.)
|
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 23 Apr 2009 : 22:56:26
quote:
Originally posted by BlackDragonKarameikos
My question about werewolves is this:
How is the curse of Lycanthropy Actually transferred? is it by the actual bite or by the saliva that enters the wound after the person is bitten?
It doesn't matter which type of Lycasnthrope it is (Infected or Natural), I'm wondering how the actual curse is passed from person to person.
Is your question with respect to a particular edition? As you may know, the 4E Monster Manual indicates that lycanthropy is hereditary. This implies a few contradictions, given that in the 4E FR Players Guide, in the entry for Selūne, makes reference to curing lycanthropy, and both the FRPG and the FR Campaign Guide refer to lycanthropy as an affliction. If you're not playing 4E rules or Realms, this is, of course, irrelevant; but if your are, you may be interested in the discussion that I opened on this topic at the WOTC boards: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1163071 |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 23 Apr 2009 : 21:08:36
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
I don't see why evolving cant be part of the curse. If it were a disease it would be of such a magical nature that it wouldn't matter much anyway.
I would personally say bite, it just makes the attack more sinister and I don't have to think about how the saliva could be collected by players or just mixed in the characters drink etc. Plus, if it got transferred by bodily fluids it would open a whole new area of were-dangers taking away from the role of the bloody killer. And to me were-creatures are tied to killing and blood thirst, making biting more natural than the more sensual(and sexual)nature of the creature if it is tied to the fluids.
But come to think of it the saliva/bodily fluid version could make for an interesting relative of the common weres.
I will have to take a look at the Van Richtens guide later and see if there is any information there.
Thanks for reminding me of the Van Richten's guides Jorkens. I do have those and will look at them myself. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 23 Apr 2009 : 20:13:46
I don't see why evolving cant be part of the curse. If it were a disease it would be of such a magical nature that it wouldn't matter much anyway.
I would personally say bite, it just makes the attack more sinister and I don't have to think about how the saliva could be collected by players or just mixed in the characters drink etc. Plus, if it got transferred by bodily fluids it would open a whole new area of were-dangers taking away from the role of the bloody killer. And to me were-creatures are tied to killing and blood thirst, making biting more natural than the more sensual(and sexual)nature of the creature if it is tied to the fluids.
But come to think of it the saliva/bodily fluid version could make for an interesting relative of the common weres.
I will have to take a look at the Van Richtens guide later and see if there is any information there. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 23 Apr 2009 : 17:49:59
Its really up to the DM - I've seen it run as a curse (bite), and I've seen it run as a disease (saliva), and both have been used in various D&D campaign worlds (although I'm no even sure which would be 'official' for FR).
Personally, I run it as a disease (saliva/body fluids transferred), for two reasons -
1) It makes Shifters more plausable (curses don't 'evolve'), and
2) Vampires have the 'Curse thing' covered - I don't care for redundancy. |
|
|
