| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen this mentioned before and from what I can tell it refers to six magic items regarded as 'must haves'. Is that right? If so can someone tell me what they are?
Weapon
Armor
Cloak of Resistance
Stat-enhancing Item (Belt of Giant's Strength, Headband of Vast Int)
Ring of Protection
Amulet of Natural Armor
These are items that the system assumes you have at a certain degree of enhancement to determine how challenging monsters are for physical combatants.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
....
gnaaah, forum ate my post... so, ninja'd
Everybody in standard D&D gets certain items as matter of course. These are colloquially called the "big six" and they are
Item of Resistance (usually a cloak)
Primary State Booster (belt, headband, gloves, etc)
Primary Defense (armor or bracers)
Booster Book (this gives an innate stat bonus)
Ring of Protection
Amulet of Natural Armor
Ruyan.
For reals? Is this just "accepted" or is it written somewhere? I've never doled out these items as a matter of course.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For reals? Is this just "accepted" or is it written somewhere? I've never doled out these items as a matter of course.
Yep, for reals. The game assumes you will have them. If a DM runs a moderate to difficult game people may die without them.
PS:If you misspelled real by accident then ignore my attempt at humor.
You don't need most of them nearly so much as many people seem to suppose.
Some games function much better without, in my experience.
The need idea assumes the DM does not pull punches. My last post was pointing in that direction.
I have never seen a game be better without them, and if it was I don't think they(the big six) were a factor.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The need idea assumes the DM does not pull punches. My last post was pointing in that direction.
I have never seen a game be better without them, and if it was I don't think they(the big six) were a factor.
The game I'm planning to run is going to be low-magic item. If I'm lucky enough to have it last into the levels where items like these will make a difference and it's true that the actual design of the system requires them (which I find highly dubious), then I'll just have to come up with a way to give the players the same effective bonuses via other means.
I think it's absolutely ridiculous that by nature of encounter design, players are at a severe disadvantage without a plethora of specific magic items. Completely takes away the fascination of receiving something special when you're waiting to fill that missing "big six" slot every session.
The need idea assumes the DM does not pull punches. My last post was pointing in that direction.
I have never seen a game be better without them, and if it was I don't think they(the big six) were a factor.The game I'm planning to run is going to be low-magic item. If I'm lucky enough to have it last into the levels where items like these will make a difference and it's true that the actual design of the system requires them (which I find highly dubious), then I'll just have to come up with a way to give the players the same effective bonuses via other means.
I think it's absolutely ridiculous that by nature of encounter design, players are at a severe disadvantage without a plethora of specific magic items. Completely takes away the fascination of receiving something special when you're waiting to fill that missing "big six" slot every session.
There are two recent threads on low-magic campaigns. They discuss potential pitfalls in such games. People got rather heated at points, but there is good info in there.
CR appropriate encounters will be much more difficult if you don't have a reliable way of boosting defenses (AC and Saves) and offense (weapons, stat boosters).
If you can't bypass DR or your Save DC on offensive spells is too low the monster can absorb to many party resources. If your AC isn't high enough you end up taking too much HP damage and if your saves are too low (and most classes are too low) you can be KOed by spells and spell-like effects.
Considering that the average CR equivalent encounter should be 2-3 rounds in length removing the core 6 from active play both extends combats and tends to unbalance play because the noncasters are even more dependent on casters. Even with several buff only casters a group generally struggles because group buffs come so late in play. If spell buffs were more efficient and longer lasting the necessity of having permanent items would be reduced.
For reals? Is this just "accepted" or is it written somewhere? I've never doled out these items as a matter of course.
The game does not assume you have all of them nor that they are at a certain level. The game more or less assumes that your non-BAB attack bonuses and your defenses are generally getting better as you advance. Exactly how the PC does that is flexible. Aggressively buying up the Big 6 makes life easier than not doing so, but failing to be aggressive won't utterly sink the PCs.
The Big 6 are the Big 6 because they are highly useful and relatively easy to get as a character equipping strategy, not because they are a necessary addition to the character. Compare a ring of protection +5, offering a substantial deflection bonus to AC in every fight in which the PC participates (which will be many), to a ring of shooting stars, an item for the same price with some interesting but limited powers. Which will you choose to get? The vast majority of the players will choose the ring of protection +5. And that's the secret of the Big 6. Their raw utility in making PC life easier and relative cheapness make them too good to pass up even if they aren't absolutely necessary or directly calculated into the challenges faced by the PCs (like they pretty much are in 4e).
In 1e/2e, the Big # (I'd say 3-4 because there were no amulets of natural amror and rings/cloaks of protection did double duty and not everyone benefited as much from stat boosters) was much less of a problem because PCs couldn't get the items as easily. They still wanted them but because magic shops weren't encouraged and item creation was difficult, they couldn't realistically pursue getting them all as a rational strategy. You certainly couldn't just sell your ring of shooting stars the DM left in a hoard to pick up a stat booster to the same degree. You got what you got and made the best of it more often.
The vast majority of the players will choose the ring of protection +5.
I guess that's my fundamental problem. I don't plan to allow my characters to "choose" what magic items they get or can purchase. The ubiquitous video game magic item vendor/Diagon Alley premise just doesn't fit in with what I envision.
Now—with that being said—some might say I deserve a "you should be playing 2E" comment, but I really like Pathfinder and the tons of support material available from Paizo, 3rd party publishers and the entire 3.5 back catalog. With some suggestions in other threads and my own ideas, I'm confident I can do away with the Big 6 in a more meaningful way to the characters.
With some suggestions in other threads and my own ideas, I'm confident I can do away with the Big 6 in a more meaningful way to the characters.
You definitely can -- you just need to be aware that the game (encounter CRs, published adventures, etc.) are written assuming the players acquire them roughly as they become available/reasonable by wealth-by-level.
The game needs a baseline for treasure, and the GM needs to understand what it is and what its implications are -- but having understood, s/he certainly can deviate from it.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It won't hurt to not have the big six if you simply adjust the power level of the challenges you throw their way. I'd suggest that you just play as normal, but be prepared to fudge a bit either way as you find the right balance.
Lots of the posters here seem to think that characters become automatically entitled to certain things as the level up. I disagree. The players are entitled to whatever the GM and the players agree upon and think will make the campaign the most fun. Sometimes that means that they get +8 brilliant energy adamantium lightsabres of badassery at first level. Sometimes that means the crowning achievement of a campaign is to find the great artifact that is the only magical item in the campaign world...a sword +1.
The vast majority of the players will choose the ring of protection +5.I guess that's my fundamental problem. I don't plan to allow my characters to "choose" what magic items they get or can purchase. The ubiquitous video game magic item vendor/Diagon Alley premise just doesn't fit in with what I envision.
Now—with that being said—some might say I deserve a "you should be playing 2E" comment, but I really like Pathfinder and the tons of support material available from Paizo, 3rd party publishers and the entire 3.5 back catalog. With some suggestions in other threads and my own ideas, I'm confident I can do away with the Big 6 in a more meaningful way to the characters.
It might take some searching but there was a poster who came up with a way to give the bonuses to the characters as they leveled up. The magic item system assumes adventurers are common. Now if adventurers are rare in your world then I would get a wish list from the players, and dole(found in dungeons, given as gifts for completing quest) things out at the appropriate time. That way the magic items are still rare, but the players are not weakened.
PS:The players might just use casters who are not hurt nearly as much as the melee types are in a low magic game.
Now—with that being said—some might say I deserve a "you should be playing 2E" comment[...]
But it's not really that different in 2E -- if you design an encounter to challenge a fighter with 15 Strength, then the fighter with a Girdle of Stone Giant Strength is going to blow through it without breaking a sweat, for instance.
The players are entitled to whatever the GM and the players agree upon and think will make the campaign the most fun. Sometimes that means that they get +8 brilliant energy adamantium lightsabres of badassery at first level. Sometimes that means the crowning achievement of a campaign is to find the great artifact that is the only magical item in the campaign world...a sword +1.
It only took 14 posts to get here. The 13 previous posts are all polite and informative, then this... Does it really have to be this black and white? Really?
|
|
It only took 14 posts to get here. The 13 previous posts are all polite and informative, then this... Does it really have to be this black and white? Really?
Er, it was not meant to be impolite. I was just stating that some groups will want really high-powered campaigns, and some might prefer a more gritty "realistic" campaign. Most probably fall somewhere in between those two extremes. Hell, sometimes a person themselves can vary from campaign to campaign. I'm actually good with either. If you managed to take offense at my post for some reason, I'm sorry, but I don't really see how that's my fault.
It only took 14 posts to get here. The 13 previous posts are all polite and informative, then this... Does it really have to be this black and white? Really?Er, it was not meant to be impolite. I was just stating that some groups will want really high-powered campaigns, and some might prefer a more gritty "realistic" campaign.
You described a really high-powered campaign as "[starting with] +8 brilliant energy adamantium lightsabres of badassery at first level."
That's what offended me. I have simply never seen anyone saying that's where they wanted to be at 1st level. The thread isn't even about 1st level, it's about detailing the Big Six magical items, and why they are important.
As to the topic - the Big Six provide the best bang for the buck, so players will seek to get them. They won't always succeed and they're not necessarily tanked if they don't collect 'em all.
I think there's some confusion over the purpose of talking about the "big six" and/or wealth by level. They're not shopping lists for PCs as much as they are tools for module writers to use to balance encounters.
Here's the reasoning:
- Modules that challenge the "average" party (without being over-challenging) presumably sell the best.
- Magical treasure generally makes a party more powerful.
- Therefore, in order to challenge an average party, the module designer needs to make an assumption about how much and what types of magical treasure the average party might have.
So far, so good, and that's where "wealth by level" and "big six" come from. The problem arises when my party's power level diverges from the average. Then it's up to my GM to step in and make a challenging adventure; it's unreasonable to expect a publisher to create different modules for low-power, medium-power and high-power parties of the same level, for instance.
Just my two cents.
It won't hurt to not have the big six if you simply adjust the power level of the challenges you throw their way. I'd suggest that you just play as normal, but be prepared to fudge a bit either way as you find the right balance.
Lots of the posters here seem to think that characters become automatically entitled to certain things as the level up. I disagree. The players are entitled to whatever the GM and the players agree upon and think will make the campaign the most fun. Sometimes that means that they get +8 brilliant energy adamantium lightsabres of badassery at first level. Sometimes that means the crowning achievement of a campaign is to find the great artifact that is the only magical item in the campaign world...a sword +1.
Bolded for emphasis. Are the "big 6" needed for every game/ every player? No, not a bit, but make sure everyone sitting down knows how much of the christmas tree will be lit up and that, if needed, adjustments (the bonus for daring do thing is awesome) can and will be made.
edits bad spelling
You described a really high-powered campaign as "[starting with] +8 brilliant energy adamantium lightsabres of badassery at first level."
That's what offended me. I have simply never seen anyone saying that's where they wanted to be at 1st level. The thread isn't even about 1st level, it's about detailing the Big Six magical items, and why they are important.
How is what he said about starting with the lightsabres at 1st level in any way offensive? I'm completely mystified.
[How is what he said about starting with the lightsabres at 1st level in any way offensive? I'm completely mystified.
Yeah. Luke got one right away.
How is what he said about starting with the lightsabres at 1st level in any way offensive? I'm completely mystified.You described a really high-powered campaign as "[starting with] +8 brilliant energy adamantium lightsabres of badassery at first level."
That's what offended me. I have simply never seen anyone saying that's where they wanted to be at 1st level. The thread isn't even about 1st level, it's about detailing the Big Six magical items, and why they are important.
I have no desire to derail the thread, but you asked.
Anyone who advocated for starting play with +8 Lightsabers would be loudly shouted down as a Munchkin with a quickness. Yet, anyone who suggests the game be limited to a single +1 magic sword is heralded as someone who wants to take the game back, from... ready for it? The Munchkins.
It's annoying, and it's not what the OP was asking about.
[How is what he said about starting with the lightsabres at 1st level in any way offensive? I'm completely mystified.Yeah. Luke got one right away.
But was it of the +8 variety, and did it, in fact, carry the Badassery modifier?
I have no desire to derail the thread, but you asked.Anyone who advocated for starting play with +8 Lightsabers would be loudly shouted down as a Munchkin with a quickness. Yet, anyone who suggests the game be limited to a single +1 magic sword is heralded as someone who wants to take the game back, from... ready for it? The Munchkins.
It's annoying, and it's not what the OP was asking about.
It's not exactly off topic. Are the Big 6 "must haves"? For Kthulhu, the "must haves" are what the GM and players agree make a good campaign. I don't see a problem with his post at all.
It's not exactly off topic. Are the Big 6 "must haves"? For Kthulhu, the "must haves" are what the GM and players agree make a good campaign. I don't see a problem with his post at all.
I have no desire to derail the thread, but you asked.Anyone who advocated for starting play with +8 Lightsabers would be loudly shouted down as a Munchkin with a quickness. Yet, anyone who suggests the game be limited to a single +1 magic sword is heralded as someone who wants to take the game back, from... ready for it? The Munchkins.
It's annoying, and it's not what the OP was asking about.
Well, it's about to be derailed, Bill. Regardless of what you may think, I did find it offensive.
Assuming you are correct in regards to Kthulhu's game, then he's altering the expectations of the core game. The core game assumes that the characters will have access to some, or all, of the Big Six magical items. None of this is to say, BTW, that Kthulhu is somehow playing the game in error.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
These are items that the system assumes you have at a certain degree of enhancement to determine how challenging monsters are for physical combatants.
Count me in the group that had never heard of this before. I've been playing on and off since the mid80's. None of my groups ever used this as a general point for play. Most of us would figure out a weapon and armor of some kind. Then we'd work to get a ring or amulet. Someone might get a cloak if they needed to boost a save. But I can't remember any of us working towards all 6.
Different play, I guess.
These are items that the system assumes you have at a certain degree of enhancement to determine how challenging monsters are for physical combatants.Count me in the group that had never heard of this before. I've been playing on and off since the mid80's. None of my groups ever used this as a general point for play. Most of us would figure out a weapon and armor of some kind. Then we'd work to get a ring or amulet. Someone might get a cloak if they needed to boost a save. But I can't remember any of us working towards all 6.
Different play, I guess.
In Paizo's Second Darkness AP, the Big Six weren't so much sought after, as they were rammed down our throats.
Count me in the group that had never heard of this before. I've been playing on and off since the mid80's. None of my groups ever used this as a general point for play. Most of us would figure out a weapon and armor of some kind. Then we'd work to get a ring or amulet. Someone might get a cloak if they needed to boost a save. But I can't remember any of us working towards all 6.
Different play, I guess.
When I was playing AD&D, fighter-type characters would definitely look for (or lust after :-) a magical weapon and armor and a pair of Gauntlets of Ogre Power or a Girdle of Giant Strength. A Ring/Cloak of Protection was nice to have, but usually went to unarmored characters first (since it didn't stack with magic armor for AC). So that's 5 of the "big six" right there; Amulets of Natural Armor didn't exist in those days.
The term "big six" is pretty recent, though.
When I was playing AD&D, fighter-type characters would definite look for a magical weapon and armor and a pair of Gauntlets of Ogre Power or a Girdle of Giant Strength. A Ring/Cloak of Protection was nice to have, but usually went to unarmored characters first (since it didn't stack with magic armor for AC). So that's 5 of the "big six" right there; Amulets of Natural Armor didn't exist in those days.
The term "big six" is pretty recent, though.
My groups were somewhat similar, but maybe I just played in some pretty egalitarian groups too. Stuff went where it was best used to help fill in some gaps (better AC for nonarmored and so on). But most of my PCs never had all 3. Maybe 3. 4 was extra ordinary.
In Paizo's Second Darkness AP, the Big Six weren't so much sought after, as they were rammed down our throats.
Like the need for or written in as part of the AP?
In Paizo's Second Darkness AP, the Big Six weren't so much sought after, as they were rammed down our throats.Like the need for or written in as part of the AP?
Both.
While we did sell a fair bit of loot for more customized items, there were belts and headbands and rings and amulets galore. Second Darkness was absolutely a treasure-rich environment.
As for baddies and boss-fights, yeah, we needed all the magical help we could get.
Conversely, the Kingmaker AP is pretty much the opposite of Second Darkness in every way.
It's not exactly off topic. Are the Big 6 "must haves"? For Kthulhu, the "must haves" are what the GM and players agree make a good campaign. I don't see a problem with his post at all.
The problem is essentially that changing the basic assumptions of play throws other aspects of play into relative imbalance.
I DMed a lot of 1e-2e back in the day and while I typically felt that it was worthwhile to have a decent number of magical items (especially weapons) in play by certain level thresholds mainly because I would have increased flexibility in encounter design. Encounters vs creatures with immunity to normal weapons were problematic for instance.
However there wasn't really a tool in 1e-2e like CR. You could make lots of weak encounters (indeed it was almost encouraged) or you could gauge your party's strengths and weaknesses and use monsters that you thought would fit.
3e developed a pretty buggy aid for DMs in the form of the CR/EL system. Basically the promise is that if you use level appropriate encounters you can avoid encounters that are too easy or the dreaded TPK.
If you go to a system where the PCs have less magic items or those magic items don't cover the basic offensive and defensive building blocks you throw that encounter math into doubt.
Not that it can't be done mind you but CR+3 solo creatures can become very very lethal. The same sort of balancing act needs to be done with heavily optimized or oversized parties.
Some people can handle the power level fluctuations easily, unfortunately many people seem to disregard their existence.
It turns out that if you're looking for an argument, you'll find one.
*sigh*
I think the bottom-line is there are no actual rules saying you need to have "x" number of enhancements by a certain level to achieve success for a given CR. If for a majority of groups that is the reality, then having access to common magic-items seems to be the easiest way to achieve this.
That about sums up this thread (minus the subjective offensiveness of some posts).
But for this GM, I plan on distributing those "necessary" enhancements elsewhere and leaving the magic-item slots open for more fun stuff (C'mon..."anything of protection +5" is boring!).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the bottom-line is there are no actual rules saying you need to have "x" number of enhancements by a certain level to achieve success for a given CR.
I'm not so sure that's totally true. Consider the monster creation guidelines in the Pathfinder Bestiary. They state, for instance, that a CR 12 creature should have an AC of around 27 and about 160 hit points.
If your level 12 rogue has access to no magic items at all, he may well have difficulty hitting AC 27 or killing a creature with 160 hit points even if he does hit. So, like it or not, embedded in those guidelines (and in the Bestiary's monster stats themselves) are some assumptions about what magic items a level 12 PC should have.
I think the bottom-line is there are no actual rules saying you need to have "x" number of enhancements by a certain level to achieve success for a given CR.I'm not so sure that's totally true. Consider the monster creation guidelines in the Pathfinder Bestiary. They state, for instance, that a CR 12 creature should have an AC of around 27 and about 160 hit points.
If your level 12 rogue has access to no magic items at all, he may well have difficulty hitting AC 27 or killing a creature with 160 hit points even if he does hit. So, like it or not, embedded in those guidelines (and in the Bestiary's monster stats themselves) are some assumptions about what magic items a level 12 PC should have.
+1 on this.
There isn't a rule saying you need to have X, but monsters/CRs/adventures are written as though you would have roughly X. Sometimes this is relatively obvious if you look ("hm, my low magic item character needs to roll 18s to hit this CR-appropriate monster and needs to hit it 20 times to kill it, whereas it hits him on a 5 and kills him in 3 hits.") and sometimes it's more subtle (e.g., a landbound melee monster that's really mean because it's assumed you have fly or some other way of purely outmaneuvering it byt hat level).
Which, again, doesn't mean that you have to give your players X, but that if you don't, it's incumbent on you to adjust accordingly, one way or another.
My groups were somewhat similar, but maybe I just played in some pretty egalitarian groups too. Stuff went where it was best used to help fill in some gaps (better AC for nonarmored and so on). But most of my PCs never had all 3. Maybe 3. 4 was extra ordinary.
Sure. I can only think of one AD&D campaign where my PC had magic armor + weapon + strength booster (and maybe a magic ring? I don't remember). But on the other hand, I never played above level 7 or 8, and it doesn't seem ridiculous (to me) to imagine that a level 17 character (say) might have all of those things. So the idea of "wealth by level" isn't completely new, IMO.
Sure. I can only think of one AD&D campaign where my PC had magic armor + weapon + strength booster (and maybe a magic ring? I don't remember). But on the other hand, I never played above level 7 or 8, and it doesn't seem ridiculous (to me) to imagine that a level 17 character (say) might have all of those things. So the idea of "wealth by level" isn't completely new, IMO.
I had a campaign that hit 15 or so and the PCs still didn't have that kinda loot. They had lots of other stuff, but no one had the big six. *shrug*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not so sure that's totally true. Consider the monster creation guidelines in the Pathfinder Bestiary. They state, for instance, that a CR 12 creature should have an AC of around 27 and about 160 hit points.If your level 12 rogue has access to no magic items at all, he may well have difficulty hitting AC 27 or killing a creature with 160 hit points even if he does hit. So, like it or not, embedded in those guidelines (and in the Bestiary's monster stats themselves) are some assumptions about what magic items a level 12 PC should have.
Actually, it is pretty much true. PF, like 3e, doesn't really assume that an optimum chance to hit exists like 4e does. So there's no hard and fast rule about how much of a bonus a PC should have.
Take that rogue example. He's got a BAB of +9. Suppose he started with a Dex 16 and managed to add +2 via level ups which nets him a bonus of +4. Already, his combat bonus (assuming ranged weapons or weapon finesse) is +13. He needs a 14 or better to hit the AC 27 creature. That's not horrible at 35%. If PF had an optimal chance to hit for a rogue, we'd have a fixed number of bonuses to buy up with magic or other benefits to achieve it. But we don't have that. The game prefers to be a bit fuzzy along those lines and I appreciate that. I prefer it, in fact.
Now let's add tactics. To get his sneak attack (+6d6 is nothing to sneeze at), he'll probably need to flank or snipe from hiding. That will give him a +2 (or better) right there. Now he needs just a 12 or better (45%). A measly 300 gp investment in a masterwork weapon gets him to 50%, considering he's got a WBL of 108,000 gp, he could certainly afford that and he's probably invested in a bit more, but it's not like he absolutely has to do so. It just makes life easier.
So, no, not a lot of stuff needs to be bought or assumed as far as magical Big 6 gear to enable the rogue to have a reasonable chance of hitting a level-appropriate target. He wouldn't want to face it alone, I suspect, but who would?
I think the overall point and idea is:
It doesn't matter if you, the DM, give access to "the big six" or whatever.
What matters is that you are -aware- that the CR of monsters and of published encounters is established using those as a guideline. Therefore, if you are low-balling treasure or high-balling treasure you need to /be aware/ that the CR will either be too high or too low. You therefore, as DM, need to compensate either when you write your own adventure or when you alter a published one.
Or, at least be aware that the encounters you set will either be /extremely/ difficult or yawn-festingly easy for the party (as befitting lesser or greater than expected power for the given CR).
Less or more is all largely a matter of taste as long as the DM in question understands the complete ramifications of the changes- and that includes knowing that PC's are expected to get their WBL and that the "big 6" is part of that.. and adjusting the campaign accordingly.
-S
So, no, not a lot of stuff needs to be bought or assumed as far as magical Big 6 gear to enable the rogue to have a reasonable chance of hitting a level-appropriate target. He wouldn't want to face it alone, I suspect, but who would?
Well, keep in mind that CR = character level is about what a character should be able to (perhaps barely in a fairly difficult fight) handle alone. As part of a team, it's reasonable for that rogue to face up to CR 15 encounters, such as an AC 39 black dragon -- a monster he can't hit at all without a nat-20. (And that, to add insult to injury, can cast blur and largely negate sneak attacks.)
Dire can you link where you found that stuff about CR you just mentioned?
Dire can you link where you found that stuff about CR you just mentioned?
From encounter design...
Easy - APL –1
Average - APL
Challenging - APL +1
Hard - APL +2
Epic - APL +3
It is not unreasonable for a party of 4 to encounter a fight that is 2-3 levels above them every now and then. These are usually the "boss" fights that happen every few sessions.
For reals? Is this just "accepted" or is it written somewhere? I've never doled out these items as a matter of course.
Not it's not written anywhere because it's not for real. All the big six are magic item that are highly desirable. The game does assume you will have certain amount of wealth and that the wealth should boost your character power so that they can take on CR appropriate encounters.
So what the big six do is maximizes the bonus while minimizing the expense. There are other ways to get the bonuses but they usually cost more and work in an entirely different manner. Like instead of going for the AC boosting items you go for Cloak of Displacement. So instead you have lower AC but 50% miss chance. This is way more costly compared to +5 bonus to AC from an ring and amulet. So assuming a base 50% chance to hit then having 50% miss chance is much the same as having 25% chance to just hit you. Only the cloak method is 24,000 GP more.
Thanks for getting that up, Charender.
The point I think I was getting at and probably could have stated more clearly is: as characters fall "behind the curve" on the big items, easy/average encounters become harder, but remain doable, but encounters that would push a "normal" party pretty much utterly destroy them.
Which is something a GM can completely work around, but should be aware of.
Thanks for getting that up, Charender.
The point I think I was getting at and probably could have stated more clearly is: as characters fall "behind the curve" on the big items, easy/average encounters become harder, but remain doable, but encounters that would push a "normal" party pretty much utterly destroy them.
Which is something a GM can completely work around, but should be aware of.
Fair enough I am back on the train with you now Dire. :)
stuff
A combat character hitting, at best, 50% of the time is pretty awful.
Let's say that CR 12 creature is an adult green dragon. Well, first off, he's flying. But hey let's be nice and assume that the rogue has a potion of fly. Heck so does everyone, weee!Without appropriate AC, which requires enchanted armor, amulet of natural armor, and/or ring of protection to varying degrees he will not last long. Otherwise that rogue has a +4 dex and a chain shirt at best and is auto-hit for the dragon. The rogue flies up, provoking an AoO, eats 33 points of damage or a third of his life. Then on the dragon's full attack he dies unless it fumbles all its attacks. He probably won't even get up there though because he will fail the DC 20 fear save 2/3 of the time.
That dragon has a +16-+21 to hit. Optimally, a rogue would want a 30-ish AC at this level. +4 mithril shirt, +4 belt of dex, +3 ring of protection, +3 natural armor and you're there. Even with 1 under par on each item, you're down 4 AC or 20% chance to hit.
Now I'm with people who don't want to just dole out magic items like candy, really I am. Personally I wish the system had accounted for these things through level advancement (class-based defense bonus, for example) but they haven't. I think 4e had a shining opportunity to do this, and added half level to everything ostensibly to mitigate this effect...but then encounter challenges curve far away from that number that the big 6 are necessities once again.
I would encourage people to come up with an alternate strategy to increase those things which are necessary for adventurer survival, by level, in a way that doesn't break with your idea of a fantasy world. Until this is created, however, your options are 1)fudge dice to keep your players from being 1-shot 2)give your players what they need to survive or 3)only present them with APL-1 or -2 encounters at mid-high levels as those will still be outrageously lethal without appropriate gear.
|
|
Item of Resistance (usually a cloak)
Primary State Booster (belt, headband, gloves, etc)
Primary Defense (armor or bracers)
Booster Book (this gives an innate stat bonus)
Ring of Protection
Amulet of Natural Armor
Weapon
Armor
Cloak of Resistance
Stat-enhancing Item (Belt of Giant's Strength, Headband of Vast Int)
Ring of Protection
Amulet of Natural Armor
Apparently the "big six" are so utterly mandatory that people who agree that they are mandatory can't even come to a full agreement on what the six items are.