Just a brief rant about some of the new magic items in DMGII, and how they have affected my AoW game so far. Specifically, I'm speaking of surge weapons, notably stunning surge. For those of you not familiar, these are weapon upgrades that can be purchased for 2000 gp each (NOT +1 weapon equivalent), and can be used as a swift action AFTER you hit, up to a number of times per day equal to CHA modifier. The paladin in our group has a +1 holy surge/electrical surge/stunning surge weapon...total cost...8000 gp. He can use each ability 5 times per day (CHA 20. With stunning surge, after he hits, his target must make a REFLEX(!) save with a DC 10+half level+ CHA mod...in this case...19.
Here's an example of how it has affected our game...Champion's Belt...Fighting Bozal Zahol. The priest got off exactly one offensive spell before the palading stuck him (anti-life shell had been dispelled). With his whopping +3 Ref save, he of course failed his save, stunned for four rounds...battle over.
Next example...Froghemoth. Paladin goes before Froghemoth...stab...+7 Ref save...fails...stunned for four rounds...combat over with major baddie never even striking a blow.
Opinions?
|
You're not required to let players have ANYTHING you feel is over-powered....my own group gets a little peeved when I tell them stuff like 'He's summoning something not on the Summon Moster III list" "Hey, the book says it's a mosnter from the spell's listing"....I let that slide once but no more...if the DM says something is altered or won't allow something, don't let them whine or try to tell you its in the book, so they can get it. Just because theyc an afford 2,000 gp for the benift, you can look at them and say "Hah! I laugh at your munchkin power-gaming!"
Joseph, Joseph, Joseph...
You have made two cardinal errors. The first error was allowing your paladin to screw with the magic item and wealth rules to get a powerful sword for little expenditure, the second error was not changing the saving throw of the weapon once you noticed the possible devastation it would cause.
Really, regardless of how much your PC whinges you should change the Reflex save to a Fortitude save (it ultimately makes much more sense and is what I did when I introduced the DMG II items into my campaign). As for magic items take a leaf out of my book. I am a massive pain in the PCs butts when it comes to magic items, and often a weapon as good as the one you described would simply not be on the market, or would have a waiting list 10 miles long (think the X-box 360)!
To be serious, even the designers at WoTC can make magic items that are a little too good, and magic items are sometimes created that have unforseen game effects (usually for the worse). If a PC is extremely happy about getting a certain magic item you should start to sweat. The weapon your PC paladin chose was chosen specifically with metagaming in mind. He or she wanted to cause you a headache, and he or she succeeded.
I'm very careful about allowing weird magic items into my game. I basically allow PC's to buy magic weapons up to a +2 enhancement. Potions and scrolls are okay, as are armor and bracers up to +2.
Anything more they want is virtually impossible to find. I just don't see wizards spending the XP to make items like that.
Plus remember that a +1 magic sword still only has a hardness of 12 and 15 hit points. I'm sure as a good DM you can come up with something that can do 27 pts of damage with a sonic or acid attack...repeatedly until that paladin blows his saving throw. He'll get tired of spending 8000gp on that sword over and over again someday.
To be honest...I haven't even read half of the magic item section of DMG I, much less ANY of DMG II...I just don't plan to use or allow most of that stuff. If the players complain or try to go to some wizard to get something cool made...well, this guy just says NO.
They don't really need all that s!~! to play in 3.5. The spells duplicate whatever "powers" they need to defeat creatures with DR's--magic weapon, holy weapon, whatever...
The game is complicated enough as it is. I feel for your trouble....time for that paladin to encounter a black dragon.
Just as an example--"Winged Boots" cost 16,000gp and cost the poor shmuck making them 640 XP (that's pretty hefty penalty for this item). Let's call it half inch leather and give these boots Hardness of 2 and 2 hit points. (Table 9-9 PH). Assuming a 5th level caster (minimum) made these boots, they would have a saving throw of +4 for each saving throw category, or those of the wearer, whichever was higher.
Why would anyone spend 16,000 gp and 640 xp on an item with 2 hp and 2 hardness--just about any spell effect that causes any energy damage will destroy it?
Same thing goes for magic weapons and armor--once characters start fighting more powerful and higher level enemies with fireballs, cones of cold, acid orbs, etc....they are going to be buying new magic items after every gaming session.
That's why most magic items in 3.5 D&D are just plain silly to me. No one could afford to keep buying them over and over. Spend that 16,000 gp on a bunch of potions of fly and you'll be better off. If I'm missing something in the rules that contradicts my analysis--please enlighten me.
PS: My players are so paranoid now that they cast Resist Energy at the drop of a hat....any hat....they'd rather go to -9 hit points than risk losing their precious 8000gp +2 pigsticker....he he he he he
With his whopping +3 Ref save, he of course failed his save, stunned for four rounds...battle over.
stunned for four rounds...combat over with major baddie never even striking a blow.Opinions?
Well Joseph I have a few things to say.
First off you are the DM and technically what you say goes you are god in your world, to hell with what the PCs think. But keep in mind you don't want to let all that power go to your head. Secondly change the item around a bit. I can see letting the Paladin having the holy surge and electrical surge but stunning surge? A paladin hitting an opponent that is vulnerable doesn't seem very honorable or Paladin like. When I played a Paladin i made him so damn honorable it was disgusting, he wouldn't even use a ranged weapon for it was too dishonorable, but that was him and that was then, now when i see a paladin use a ranged weapon I still cringe and feel sick, it just doesn't seem right.So i would say strip some of that weapon down some, say he starts to have nightmares where his god is turning his back on him or something, and if it gets down to it, curse the sword or something. OUr DM gave us a magic bandeleer that could hold 5 spells, it worked out that we could hold 5 wish spells at the ready. I admit that we abused it and we got our due though, for a while nothing could stop our mage until the DM made the item cursed, in the end we were actually destroying the weave of magic in the universe everytime we used the damn thing!
Lesson learned.
Hope that gives you some ideas on how to deal with your paladin, whom I have to say doesn't seem too paladin like, if i were you i would make him have to make an atonement for hitting and killing a defenseless opponent
later
Having read through the descriptions for the various Surge weapon abilities in the DMG II, I have to say... eh?
"This ability is usable a number of times per day equal to the wielder's Constitution/Charisma bonus."
So what happens when the weapon changes ownership?
Also the whole Reflex save thing (based off the wielder's Charisma) is a load of bunk as well.
I wouldn't allow these weapon qualities in my game. Not unless the player could submit a heavily modified, sane version.
I don't get how people can say "Oh, XYZ is too powerful! My party has 40 of them and it's ruining everything!" DMs need to read ahead and think about possibilities before they hand out magic items.
I also don't understand how people can say "That's such an overpowered thing; don't allow it." There is not and has not been a single thing in the game that a clever DM can't handle. Anything the players do the NPCs can do too; it's a self-balancing equation. If the PCs have gone stun-happy, have some bad guys with comparable magic items. Or heck, if the PCs are going for touch attacks try an archery ambush-- very very few NPCs with better than a 12 intelligence would want to go toe to toe with even weaker foes. Now, some encounters will be very easy for a party, and some will be very hard. That's the nature of the game.
Years ago I was DMing a FR campaign in 2E, and a member of the party maxed out everything he could for archery. Specialization, Complete Book options, you name it. In a single round at distance he could do a heap of damage, 5d8 if all his shots hit. So on occassion, he'd just flat out murder the monsters when he saw them coming. On another occassion, I had a near TPK (2 in 6 survived) when some much, much weaker monsters set up an ambush-- spiders and ettercaps in the Spiderhaunt Woods. That character was next to worthless entangled in a web.
I had another PC with a very powerful ability that was of limited uses per day. The solution? Well, it worked great the three times he could use it... the fourth encounter made that character realize how much he was using it as a crutch.
There's really nothing in this game that needs to be nerfed if you look at its strengths and weaknesses and plan accordingly.
I'm very careful about allowing weird magic items into my game. I basically allow PC's to buy magic weapons up to a +2 enhancement. Potions and scrolls are okay, as are armor and bracers up to +2.
Anything more they want is virtually impossible to find. I just don't see wizards spending the XP to make items like that.
Plus remember that a +1 magic sword still only has a hardness of 12 and 15 hit points. I'm sure as a good DM you can come up with something that can do 27 pts of damage with a sonic or acid attack...repeatedly until that paladin blows his saving throw. He'll get tired of spending 8000gp on that sword over and over again someday.
Actually, considering that the player has to roll a natural 1 on his saving throw to get his magic items making saving throws, this is probably not the best method for getting rid of magic items. When it comes to controlling magic items prevention is much better and easier than the cure.
|
First, in order for a magic item to take spell damage, you have to roll a 1 on your save, and then only one item (determined randomly, see the DMG) gets a second save against the spell effect. And on top of that, items usually take half (or less) damage from energy types.
As to the main topic on this thread, I see two problems.
One is an "If it's printed, I can use it" view of the players in your game. If it is not in the three core books (PHB, DMG, MM1), it is optional. Period. If you as the DM think that a prestige class or magic item or feat or whatever is too powerful, does not fit your campaign, etc, don't allow it in your campaign.
Your second (and bigger) problem is simple party strength. I don't know what race your paladin is, or what level of play you are used to, but the game is designed around a 25 point-build. Thats what the monsters use. Thats what the game designers and adventure writers have to use. I switched to point build a while back because it balances things out a bit and puts each player on a level playing field with the other players. Admittedly, I use a 32 point-build. I run hard campaigns, and I like to see PC's really churn out good characters. In point-buy, an ability score of 18 costs 16 points. With 25 points to spend (or even 32), you can see how rare a character with an 18 would be. Ability scores in my games (before racial bonuses) usually cap out between 14 and 16. So your paladin found another way to exploit his obscenely high 20 Charisma: is the problem the magic item, which would only be good for a round or two in normal level play, or your paladin's (and I assume the rest of the group's) ability scores?
my two coppers, for what they are worth...
-Ryn
"First off you are the DM and technically what you say goes you are god in your world, to hell with what the PCs think. But keep in mind you don't want to let all that power go to your head."
Yes, you are, and HELL YES you do!. you, as the DM, are in control of the game. let that power go to your head and control your friggin game! if they have gotten their hands on a magic item you don't like, take it away. easy. just tell them it no longer works. have them go through a Mordenkainen's Disjunction portal, and all of their magic items go sour. curse it so that he takes the damage instead. YOU ARE THE DM! CONTROL YOUR GAME LIKE A DM SHOULD!
there are no cheesy magic items, just cheesy players who want the best and the brightest weapons to slay everything. it started with the Videogameization of DND and is starting to lead to the game's downfall. take back your game, take the item, and don't listen to any guff the player gives you about it. if he does, tell him where the door is and don't let it hit him in the ass on the way out. you are in control as the dm. use that power and control. it's you versus them! and the rules of the game favor you. don't let your players push you around, man.
Found the rule, p. 214 of the DMG. Wish they had put in on p.166-167 of the PH. I thought that was one of the concepts of 3rd edition--put ALL the rules in the same spot. Oh, well.
However, it does mention that the item can be specifically targeted. PC's who carry powerful magic items are targets for thieves. Once the organized bad guys find out that Paladin XYZ is carrying an uber-powerful pigsticker, I could totally see someone starting to target that weapon specifically to get rid of it.
Goes back to the bad guys not being static--they learn, they gather intelligence, the party has thieves watching them in town (I would imagine especially in a place like the AoW campaign--which I haven't read yet).
But yes, prevention is the best cure for cheesy magic items.
I still don't see any wizard willingly spending 640 hard earned XP just to create boots of flying to sell to some schmuck PC. 8000gp profit is nice, but you don't get XP for gold any more.
I appreciate everyone's input. We do use a 32 point buy for abilities, but this paladin has purchased a charisma enhancing item. But, I also scale all written adventures to compensate for party strength.
My solution to this magic item is as follows: change save to Fort; make the paladin declare if he is going to surge BEFORE he actually hits, and change stunning duration to 1 round.
|
|
Thank you F2K. I was looking through the PH as well.
Now, for a truly cheesy magic item, once upon a time the old cantrip spell could do a summon popcorn effect on top of the other useful goodies of cantrip. The magic-user PC would do this when he was effectively "on empty" spell-point-wise. When South Park hit the air waves, it morphed into a summon cheesy-poofs™ effect. The specific use of cantrip had become our group's analogy for "I got nothing!", so much so that wands were created and passed around.
Cheesy humour, cheesy magic item. Literally.
I second/third/fourth/whatever the general sentiment: DM's word is final and before caving into any well-spoken debate on why an item should be allowed, the DM needs to take the time to read/consider/bounce-off-peers-on-an-online-message-board before giving your "final answer". This is a case of asking for permission is easier than saying sorry later.
In my campaign, magic weapons and armor, rings and bracers, etc that provide an enhancement greater than +2 cannot be bought off the shelf at any magic shop and are generally never found on run of the mill NPC's or in monster hoards.
The below listed spell allows PC's to pay the XP penalty themselves for any magic item they want to have commissioned (most choose not to do it at that point--if they won't do it, why in the world would the wizard that's going to make the item for them unless he's just super hard up for cash?)
This spell also allows me to give powerful magic items to key NPC's without making it too easy for the PC's to just pick up the item and start using it right away.
Name: Crafting Life Essence School: Enchantment Descriptor: None Secondary Descriptor: None
Level: Sor/Wiz 4 Components: VS CT: 10 minutes Range: Touch Effect: n/a Duration: Permanent Saving Throw: Wil negates if target is unwilling
Spell Resistance: None Material
Component: Item being created Focus: None
Description: Cast upon completion of the crafting of any magic item that costs XP, this spell transfers the XP cost to the person touched and not the item creator. The item then functions normally, but only for the person whose life essence is tied to the item. Removing this restriction requires a limited wish spell and a successful Spellcraft check (DC= 10+item creator's level + creator's INT bonus
Note that items created with this spell still cost as much as listed in the DMG. This makes magic items a little more personal and makes players a little more appreciative of a super powerful item that they PAID for, literally.
Here's how I've handled some over-powered items over the years: non-permanent enchantment.
After a certain amount of time (1 week, 1 month, etc.) has passed, the magic within an item seeps out into the weave, losing some or all magical properties. To balance it out, not all items do this (set percentage chance for all) but if an item has been munchkined, well, then it just so happens to roll that percentage.
Although I like the comments of terrainmonkey (actually I laughed outloud upon reading his post) I have a much simpler and less harsh way of dealing with magic in my campaign. I let the players know up front that any item is subject to change at any time. For example, one of my players got a hold of the book Complete Paladins or something like that. Anyway, it was a 3.0 version book and we're running the AoW in 3.5. He wants to get a special sword that they talk about in the book. I say okay, we'll give it a try and see if it works out or not. Well after a month or two of game play the sword has become this +3 death machine. I just told him that it was way to powerful and that he'd have to give it up, which he did. He's now after a weapon of legacy, which I think is a good idea. I have another player that wants to try out the Vow of Poverty from the Book of Exalted Deeds. Again, we'll try it out and see what happens - but he knows going in that I might say no if it unbalances the game. After all, I don't know what's going to happen,and this lets me test the item, feat, whatever, but not really piss off the players by taking it away later. They know they might lose it at any time, and they're okay with that. Besides, we're all supposed to be mature adults. It's working so far.
the book of exhalted deeds is okay, since most clerics have to be beefed up anyway and some of the classes inside have potential. the vow of poverty thing is a little over the top, however. very few players can do it correctly and sustain the role playing of it. the beneifts outweigh the disadvantages in my opinion, so see how it goes. if the player in question is one that normally likes a lot of treasure, then keep a wary eye on his character sheet. he may be "borrowing" a few things here and there and keeping them longer than he can.
about my earlier rant-- i may have sounded harsh, but that is because i have been playing this game for a long time and when i first started you had to give your left nut just to get a +1 friggin sword. so when i hear people talking about buying magic items like a magic wal mart store, i kind of get a little nutty. the essence of my argument holds true, though a little over the top for sarcasm's sake.
anywy, thanks for the kind words, i'm glad some people on these boards have a little of a sense of humor about this kind of thing
|
|
I don't get how people can say "Oh, XYZ is too powerful! My party has 40 of them and it's ruining everything!" DMs need to read ahead and think about possibilities before they hand out magic items.
I also don't understand how people can say "That's such an overpowered thing; don't allow it." There is not and has not been a single thing in the game that a clever DM can't handle. Anything the players do the NPCs can do too; it's a self-balancing equation.
I totally disagree with all of that, save the read ahead part. There ARE unbalancing items. An example, the absorbing shield. WTF? is this basically a Sphere of annhialtion you tote around in shield form? "Teleport me behind the bad guy (AGAIN) and I'll diintrigate him with a touch." Another is the Gem of Seeing..."I look down the hallway for ten seconds of my 30 mins...any traps? Oh yeah, I do that at EVERY corridore, then we rest" Bear in mind, if your FORCED to constantly come up with ways to keep an item from ruining every major encounter, trap or event, the item is probably unbalanced. Yes, a clever DM can handle any item...but SHOULD he be forced to constantly adapt for that item? And if you have to make things hard for the character to counter his artifact and make the scenario at least somewhat challenging, it's unfair to him and the other players. There nothing WRONG with giving out crap that can make a player challenge the gods in power, if you're a mind to do so and thats the game you want, but a DM should not be forced to adapt all his adventures becasue he was short-sighted or did not realize an item was too powerful for continious use in the game. "What's that? He's surrounded by ANOTHER anti-magic shell? WTF? Why do I even keep this shield?" Remember the vorpal weapons and swords of sharpness?...ack...
As a number of people have pointed out there are several powerful items in the game that are rather unbalancing. the flip side of this is that most of these items also cost the same as a small keep or armada of warships. If a PC is walking around buying absorbing shields and gems of seeing the DM has obviously lost his mind or is running an epic level campaign, and his PCs are walking around the city of Sigil.
Magic items of this calibre should never be bought from shops or be given to pregenerated characters. They should be found in the lairs of powerful dragons, or being used by nasty bad guys against the PCs. In fact, if you follow the magic item price guids found in the DMG for encounters an absorbing shield would be the sort of treasure you would get from killing around 6 beholders at once!
|
about my earlier rant-- i may have sounded harsh, but that is because i have been playing this game for a long time and when i first started you had to give your left nut just to get a +1 friggin sword. so when i hear people talking about buying magic items like a magic wal mart store, i kind of get a little nutty.
The game has changed. REPEAT: This is not 1st edition or even 2nd edition any more. The challenge ratings of monsters appropriate to character level has assumed a certain amount of equipment. The rules for the 3.0 and 3.5 game provide guidelines for not only for how much equipment a PC should have but also how a PC can acquire said equipment. For example, there is a section in the City of Splendors dedicated to where you can buy stuff, what the monetary limits are, and how much it is going to cost (compared to market value).
I am in Joseph's gaming group. As a group, we recognized that the enchantment in question was problematic. Joseph was asking for advice on how to mitigate the weapon's potency...he was not asking on how to alienate his players which would seem to be the main intent of most of you. We play in a large group with 8 players, and our median age is about 30 years. We are all experienced gamers. We don't need a DM that is going to lord over the group, because for the most part, we police our own and maintain game balance.
I would HATE to game with many of you.
it started with the Videogameization of DND and is starting to lead to the game's downfall.
Have to differ with you there, man.
Allow me to quote from Gods, Demi-gods, and Heroes, 1976.
"This volume is something else, also: our last attempt to reach the "Monty Hall" DM's. Perhaps now some of the 'giveaway' campaigns will look as foolish as they truly are. This is our last attempt to delineate the absurdity of 40+ level characters. When Odin, the All-Father has only(?) 300 hit points, who can take a 44th level Lord seriously?"
The above quote *predates* 1st edition. There have always been goofy players and DMs.
In my opinion, 3rd edition is actually part of the solution, not part of the problem, because it at least attempts to define how much wealth and power a character should have at any given level.
Well, I'm sorry you would hate to game with many of us, Joachim, but the main reason I limit the availability of magic items in my campaign is because they make the game very complex.
The NPC's in my campaign fall under the same rules as the PC's as far as magic is concerned.
As far as the game being designed for PC's having to have a certain amount of magic just to survive encounters, I totally disagree with that. With proper planning and spell selection, any high level bad guy can be potentially overcome without a bunch of magic gadgets. It just means the PC's can't rush into fights blindly. Tactics are a great equalizer. It's what makes the game fun for me as a DM--I think I've got the party by the short and curlies and they pull an innovative tactic out of their hats and manage to soundly trounce my bad guys....or on the flipside, a platoon of low level bad guys gets the drop on some of them and makes the party run away.
It also helps me keep the game challenging longer. Eventually the DM has to draw a fine line between what is challenging enough to be entertaining and what is a certain TPK.
I just think magic hats, magic boots, magic rings, magic belts, magic cloaks, magic girdles, magic nose studs....are just cheesy in themselves. A couple of potions, a fine magic sword--that's the stuff of fantasy as far as I'm concerned--not the walking magic Walmart most higher level PC's in 3.5 seem to be.
Joachim, if your idea of fun in gaming is having your character stacked with magic items (appropriate as per the DMG of course), going into encounters with the assurance that your character will receive level appropriate rewards as per the DMG and that the CR of encounters can all be reasonably overcome...well then, you probably wouldn't enjoy many people's games. I refuse to let my campaign become a mathematical formula. 3.5 accountants need not apply.
I totally disagree with all of that, save the read ahead part. There ARE unbalancing items. An example, the absorbing shield. WTF? is this basically a Sphere of annhialtion you tote around in shield form? "Teleport me behind the bad guy (AGAIN) and I'll diintrigate him with a touch." Another is the Gem of Seeing..."I look down the hallway for ten seconds of my 30 mins...any traps? Oh yeah, I do that at EVERY corridore, then we rest" Bear in mind, if your FORCED to constantly come up with ways to keep an item from ruining every major encounter, trap or event, the item is probably unbalanced. Yes, a clever DM can handle any item...but SHOULD he be forced to constantly adapt for that item? And if you have to make things hard for the character to counter his artifact and make the scenario at least somewhat challenging, it's unfair to him and the other players. There nothing WRONG with giving out crap that can make a player challenge the gods in power, if you're a mind to do so and thats the game you want, but a DM should not be forced to adapt all his adventures becasue he was short-sighted or did not realize an item was too powerful for continious use in the game. "What's that? He's surrounded by ANOTHER anti-magic shell? WTF? Why do I even keep this shield?" Remember the vorpal weapons and swords of sharpness?...ack...
1) At a high enough level for Absorbing Shield to have been given out, ANY magic user worth his salt SHOULD have measures against such a device-- like Contingency, for example. Or, might just cast Disintegrate on the wielder. Or have lackeys with arrows and orders to hit any person who looks like they're casting a spell-- no big bad with any brains would be alone. It also works only once every TWO DAYS, so you can certainly plan around it.
2) "Then we rest"?!? Who can rest in a dungeon or cave structure? Sleeping in the Underdark is a good way to get eaten. Harry your players so they don't get a chance to recoup.
3) Vorpal weapons were only a problem for underling types. Run of the mill NPCs are often easy prey, but if your PCs are high enough level to HAVE a vorpal weapon, then their adversaries should certainly be prepared for such a weapon. If your party is 15th level, then the big bad is probably several levels higher, and should have access to comparable items and should at least as crafty and clever as the players. An 18th level wizard should NEVER end up close enough to a party for melee damage to become relevant, and any 18th level wizard should have golems, which make the vorpal aspect less spectacular.
As far as the game being designed for PC's having to have a certain amount of magic just to survive encounters, I totally disagree with that. With proper planning and spell selection, any high level bad guy can be potentially overcome
I just HAD to point this out.
And BTW, the whole reason 3.5 is as well balanced as it is is the result of it being handled like a mathematical formula. 2E was a disgrace of unbalanced abilities-- look at the XP tables alone.
Sorry to get into this debate late. . . I was in a Turkey coma this weekend.
Anyway, I just reread the tables and the ability descriptions, and I'm thinking of these +2,000gp abilities more like magical "special materials," like mithral or adamantium, than a bunch of abilties that can be stacked onto a single weapon.
By this rationale, having more than one +2,000gp ability would be like having a weapon that is made of silver, mithral and cold iron, all at the same time. The text description of each ability seems to back this up, as it includes a flavorful "look and feel" for each type of weapon.
Anyway, even if the rules don't specifically state this, it still feels right to me. Am I incorrect with this interpretation?
*edit* BTW - notice how I capitalized "Turkey" in the above post? That was not a mistake. It's a sign of deference similar to the kind a servant gives to his master.
I don't have a problem using the "guidelines" presented by 3.5 to ensure encounters are balanced--that was a welcome addition to the rules. I just get annoyed by people who feel that their characters are "entitled" to a certain amount of magic or that anything in the DMG is potentially available to them.
I dont beleive that Joachim was saying he wouldnt want to play in a balanced game. I believe that he was saying he wouldnt want to be in games with the DMs who are I AM GOD YOU WILL OBEY kinda DMs. I think what he was trying to say was that they are all adults and can handle themselves accordingly. Maybe Im wrong but thats the way I took his post.
|
|
::casts summon cheesy-poofs™::
This thread is starting to read like my divorce proceedings — an oxymoron of adults "policing" themselves. Oi.
Boil this whole discussion down to one thing: game balance.
RPGs have always struggled with this. It manifests in various ways, from combat vs. roleplaying to the level of investment in character creation.
The worst thing to happen to any RPG is time. When an RPG is first released it is expected to be as balanced as can be. With time though, players begin to tweak the rules to fit their taste. The RPG designers create more material to keep the cash flow moving. All this additional material attempts to mimic the original balance of the game. Invariably something just doesn't fit and invariably finds its way into the game to the surprise of those that play the game.
It comes down to the players of the game (DM, players, spouses, children) to regulate the game to fit their idea of game balance. Everyone has their own concept of the best way to go about this. One concept is no better than the other; it's more a case of the general level of familiarity ("it's in the book, it trumps your suggestions that I hate") that skews the objectivity.
The D&D rules are nothing more than a toolbox. Each edition of the game had it's own set of tools with many of the same tools being found in every toolbox (edition). 3.xE definitely has a full toolbox but it's no better than the 2E toolbox or Basic D&D toolbox. Just as tools don't build a house, tools don't play a game. People build houses and people play games.
Personally, there's a lot of tools in that 3.xE toolbox that are pretty nifty but I just don't need. Sure, I'll consult the tool to make sure my "gut feeling" is reasonable, but more often than not, I'll go with my gut feeling. My gut feeling wont match someone else's but it makes it no less wrong. The satisfaction of my players with the game will tell me if I'm right or wrong. As such, the only advice I ever offer is advice that has been used and is accepted to make a better game. I'm sure most people that respond on these boards do the same. Thanks!
I dont beleive that Joachim was saying he wouldnt want to play in a balanced game. I believe that he was saying he wouldnt want to be in games with the DMs who are I AM GOD YOU WILL OBEY kinda DMs. I think what he was trying to say was that they are all adults and can handle themselves accordingly. Maybe Im wrong but thats the way I took his post.
Exactly. Joachim and I have been gaming together for over eight years, and with many of the same players that we currently have in our group. All-in-all we would probably be best described a power gamers, but that is the kind of game we enjoy and the kind that works for our group. Over time, from 2nd ed on, we have encountered these sorts of problems with game mechanics (3.0 polymorph other, for example. A character with a weak build could be polymorphed semi-permanently into a troll; Shape Change is another example). I usually try not to censor my players. If they want to try something, I'm willing to give them some latitude, but if, over time, I and the group see that a certain item or ability is becoming unbalanced, we alter it or nerf it completely. Another recent example is the BoED spell Celestial Brilliance...duration one DAY per level?? With this you just walk around doing constant damage to evil outsiders and undead, not to mention NOTHING can hide in shadows around you. We drastically cut the duration to one ten minutes per level.
So, the point of this thread is to discuss these things, and ask how others have dealt with them. I appreciate all of your suggestions, but it is not my style to become a "because I say so" DM. My group wants logical, mature rulings, and I try to give them that. The game is not a DM vs Players interaction. My job as DM is to provide them with an enjoyable gaming experience that challenges them, even pushes them to their limits, but after all, the players are SUPPOSED to win.
I guess it's good that your player doesn't mind the sudden change in the sword's powers. That's always the best thing to do when an item gets too overpowered, but if I did that in my group, it would lead to a big argument...it's good for your gaming group that your players and you are on the same page when it comes to that stuff.
I apologize for offending anyone by moving on to argue the various merits of magic items vs. tactics, etc. I do enjoy a spirited debate with intelligent fellow humans. No one has the "perfect" game...mine is very far from it, to be sure.
|
|
For the record, I am not the paladin PC's player. I am however:
1) The individual who pointed the Sudden Stunning Surge ability out to the paladin's player.
and
2) The individual who most vehemently sided with Joseph when he started having reservations about the enchantment's power vs. price.
I am not trying to start a flame war by saying this, but at the higher levels (say, 12+), campaigns that are low on the magic items are going to have substantial PC survivability issues, especially in the martial classes (fighters, rangers, paladins, etc.). Without magic XYZ's, these classes are going to suffer mightily due to the relative inflexibility that their classes offer. I know that you can make a billion different types of fighter, but they are limited by the fact that they pretty much do one thing: roll to hit and then roll their damage. They don't have the rule-breaking abilities that are granted by spells (which, lets face it, are the general effect that spells have). At these higher levels, without magical equipment to supplement their martial abilities, these characters are going to be left in the dust by the now-ascendent spellcasters...and the ascent of these spellcasters will be extremely exaggerated if magical equipment is lacking.
The Bad-guy CRs, as written, assume that a party of four that is at the CR level (and equipped appropriately) will use approximately 1/4 of their daily resources (i.e. spells) to defeat the challenge. If, as a DM, you are comfortable with PCs wanting to rest after almost every encounter, then that is acceptable, because that is your game.
Again, these comments are limited pretty much to combat, which is what D&D is about. Case in point: There is an approimate 10 page section in the PHB on Character Background, while the remaining 200+ pages are reserved for abilities, equipment, and combat. My comments do not take into account character development, the fact that your fighter may have made himself king of Greyhawk by his actions, or other character RP'ing.
I just think magic hats, magic boots, magic rings, magic belts, magic cloaks, magic girdles, magic nose studs....are just cheesy in themselves. A couple of potions, a fine magic sword--that's the stuff of fantasy as far as I'm concerned--not the walking magic Walmart most higher level PC's in 3.5 seem to be.
I really agree with you there. The last long campaign I played in I played a monk the only real magic item that helped him combat that he had was a pair of hand wraps for his hands to increase his chances of hitting and even then i think they were only like +3. But we also had guys in our games that had magic items coming out their ass, but that was their choice, i like to have magic items as much as the next guy but there comes a point when the character doesn't do any work at all and it is all the items doing the work. THen you lose your character and it becomes a slave to the magic items.
Anyways I prefer to have my character challenged, if the DM gives my guy a +5 sword of firey burst or something I will not turn it away but there better be one hell of a fight coming up to validate me having it, other than that it doesn't make sense. if you all know what I mean and I hope you do.later
I really love these debates. Its good to know that someone always has a point of view and likes to argue it vehemently. Of course, talking about magic items, I was once in a campaign where the players were complaining that the DM was giving out too many good magic items. We were 5th level characters with rings of regeneration, vorpal swords, and staffs of power. I actually killed myself off in that one.
|
|
I really love these debates. Its good to know that someone always has a point of view and likes to argue it vehemently.
As long as the "you" statements are left out.
I can empathize with the frustration some people have related about players using the mechanics of the game to demand more magic items and justify why there should be an Arcana City in every town over a certain population base. My games have traditionally been magic low, probably because of a bad experience the previous two posters have mentioned. Too many magic goodies and the game devolves into "my magic item is bigger than your magic item" game. Ugh. As such, I design the adversaries to have comparably "low magic" as well.
I hear the argument about games 12th level and higher needing the magic items or the spell casters dominate the game. I'm hoping my Age of Worms game lasts long enough to reach that level. The last game that made it that high was in the era of 1E and 250,000 XP for next level. So I'm running the game pretty much as written. In fact, I've thrown in some character-background based magic items that have the game relatively magic-rich compared to past campaigns. Here's hoping my "faith" in the 3.xE mechanics doesn't bite me in the butt like Joseph's situation that started this whole topic.
So Joseph, from all this prattle, what is the kernel of wisdom you'll take back to your game to resolve the matter? I'm sensing you're going with your initial gut feeling?
One thing that this brought up was the idea that players who want the best gear for their characters are somehow not good roleplayers, or are being munchkins.
Imagine, for a moment, that you ARE your character. Would you be happy with a regular sword, or would you want one that oozed acid and could slice through a dragon's neck? Would you be content with leather armor, or might you rather have magical full plate?
I'm of the opinion that anyone whose character isn't ALWAYS going to seek to have an edge in what would be, for them, life or death situations, is lying to themselves.
Ask any soldier if they'd rather have a .22 pistol to go into battle with or an AK-47, and I'll be they take the assault rifle. Give them the option between a regular AK-47 and a magical one that never jams or runs out of ammo, and I'm pretty sure you know what they'd take.
Real people are munchkins. That's why armor existed. "Wow, you mean since I'm rich I can wear this thing and be incredibly difficult to kill? Count me in!"
Let me start with an apology for any typoes, which I personally hate. I'm trying to write with a currently wounded finger. Always make sure the item you're absently fidling with isn't a pair of scissors.
My players used to, when starting a replacement character for example, use the starting gp values on pg.135 of the DMG to spec themselves as well as they could. One incident sticks in my minds that sums up the whole experience. There were many more like it.
At around, I think, 7th level or so, a character died. The replacement was a fighter with a +3 adamantine scimitar. That's it. Everything else was non-magical. No potions. Masterwork armor. Nothing but that sword. Of course, the target of the fighter died. Almost nothing could resist it. I was angered, since that item selection wasn't what any character who had to play to 7th level would have chosen. But, I didn't wan't to get people angry, and as I said, this was fairly common, so I let it slip. This incident was common, and so were the results.
The fighter got slaughtered. His immediate target was in deep doo-doo, but he could do little outside of attack that one thing. He was almost useless everywhere else, and was in trouble a lot, then died. Eventually, my players realized that buying one HUGE magic item was no where as good as having an array of lesser ones. Now, they are very reasonable in their item selection.
I find that the best way to deal with unrealistic behavior is realism. Players blowing every social encounter, and you don't want them to? Have them get in trouble for it, trouble they can't get out of (jail time for insulting a noble, a hefty fine, rejection by a whole town, etc.). There's a reason people don't get away with these things in real life, so they shouldn't in the game, either.
For example: I was just running through Fiend's Embrace, and a player wanted to poke Krudin the barbarian. The others at the table told him, "No, you don't, this guy's been out in this enchanted swamp for years, he can probably hand all our butts to us." If they hand't, I would have let him get the barbarian angry, and he would have attacked them. He wasn't as tough as they thought, so they probably would have killed him. How does this teach them a lesson? They way I had it set up, Krudin was the only one who knew the way to Blackstone Keep. Kill him and the adventure's over, with no nice cash rewards, XP, or found items. Congratulations. And they would have learned not to poke barbarians and never would have again without good reason. Luckily we didn't have to go there, but I'm confident that's how things would have gone.
Players kill everything without a challenge? Throw a bunch of weak stuff at them and see how long they stay interested. Not very.
This is extremely effective. The players actually learn from personal experience, rather than DM arbitration, and the misbehavior almost always quickly extinguishes itself. Plus, you let the players try it, so you don't hurt their feelings so much. Munchkins will out.
BTW, my players and I balked at the surge weapons and just changed them to a +1 enchancement. Problem solved. Sorry for the long post.
So Joseph, from all this prattle, what is the kernel of wisdom you'll take back to your game to resolve the matter? I'm sensing you're going with your initial gut feeling?
Wow! I never expected this thread to create such a surge of interest and emotion. Our ultimate solution to this particular situation was to change the save to Fort based, and make the duration of the stunning only 1 round. Everyone seems to be happy with that. As I said earlier, our players tend to be power-gamers, but mainly in the way they build their characters...ie...feat choices, prestige paths, etc. The vast majority of magic items chosen by the players usually are buff types...ac enhancers, ability enhancers, that sort of thing. Very few mega-magic items. I'm lucky to play with a mature group who really do police themselves. We all recognize when something is skewed to drastically in one direction or another, and then, as a group, we come up with a way to fix it. I never have to play the "I'm the DM" trump card, and frankly I'm glad. I wouldn't like it because I am too logical a thinker to not come up with a better reason than that, and my players would revolt if I became a demogogue. The thing is, I don't have time to create my own adventures/campaign setting, so I have to rely on published material, and I don't have time to drastically alter what is already written. Truthfully, the adventure path so, as written, would slaughter the average 4 character party of the appropriate level. Even Erik has said he is running a group of six to eight PC's thru it. My group consists of eight, and we've had three deaths so far (we just finished Champion's Belt), so even a Power Gamer can meet his match.
I just wanted to say I play In Joe's Group and I am glad. Because if I had to play with some of the people that Posted in this thread then I would never play D&D. I just cannot believe the way people just come up with the easy solution of saying it does not exist or you cannot have that. The game is supposed to be enjoyed by both the players and the DM if there are items that make you a better character you should have the chance to use them if it turns out to be overpowered then figure a way to use it and not make it overpowered. You should never just take it away if you are a good DM then you can find away to work it. Well that is my rant I will stop rambling.
My first post here. I've been reading a lot of discussion online between this playing group and DM over on Enworld forums. In fact that is where I saw the link here about this discussion.
They seem like a mature group who know how they like game. I wish my gaming group were half as mature. I've done my best to engender the "let's try it and see if it works" mentality with my group and they just can't seem to get it. They would rather suffer with a character they've decided doesn't work than say "so" and try something else.
If some were more accepting of different gaming styles, and actually cared to look into what their players wanted, or better yet sought out players with similar tastes in their game style, and there would be far more happy gamers.
Not here to necessarily defend them, they have it on their own. Only to give another perspective and begin sporadic posting here.
GW
Ika, an item NEVER makes a character better.
An item modifies your rolls. It adds or subtracts numbers to the equations that are combat or skill attempts. And let's face it, roleplaying includes rolling and math - we need to use those cool dice.
A player makes a character better.
The player develops the history, personality, fears, and goals of a character. These are what make a character "better" not the plusses or minuses.
I know different people play different ways and weapons does not make you a better Role-player. But knowing who my mother and father was and that they where murdered and I was left on the street does not give me any pluses to kill said monster.
I know everyone does not play this way but if there is a cool weapon we would like to try it out or prestige class our DM lets us try it out and then rules on it.
Thats all I was saying instead of saying this is my game I am taking it back like someone posted above it is not the DM's game it is the groups game and should be treated as such not be a dictatorship.
Anyway this has been fixed in our game and I like the fix makes it more inline with the Stunning fist feat which is as it should be seeing as they do almost the same thing anyway.
I know different people play different ways and weapons does not make you a better Role-player. But knowing who my mother and father was and that they where murdered and I was left on the street does not give me any pluses to kill said monster.
Murdered parents? How... Bruce Wayne. heh heh heh
All kidding aside I realize that the math is a part of D&D. But what upsets a lot of players is that the focus becomes too much math-oriented and not enough character-oriented.
Using your example of murdered parents: perhaps this knowledge is what drives you into a frenzy in battle (barbarian rage), or it challenged you to study the murderers and their tactics (ranger bonus), or drove you to join the order (paladin class). All of these things can give you bonuses to hit in certain cases but it makes for a better character AND it helps with the math.
In fact, a lot of the best roleplaying is that great balance between the character and the math. The best roleplaying EXPLAINS the math.
Back to the original question... you saw something broken, and you fixed it. Glad your group could agree to a solution that made everyone happy.
Because if I had to play with some of the people that Posted in this thread then I would never play D&D. I just cannot believe the way people just come up with the easy solution of saying it does not exist or you cannot have that.
I think the reason this thread got so much action is because it has touched upon the core of the ultimate D&D style debate--Monty Haul vs. Reasonable, Metagaming vs. Role Playing
Epic Fantasy Role playing campaign vs. table-top videogame
As long as you're having fun. I was going to post a sarcastic reply, but I think that even if you played in my campaign, I would try to figure out a way that you as a player would have fun in my dictatorial, conservative, game. You might find that effective tactics used to defeat your opponents are more satisfying than knowing you used a cool magic item to do it.
|
|
Again, with the offhand remark about tactics...its as though you are saying (without saying) that our tactics must be poor and we rely too much on our equipment. I would have to respectfully disagree. Our tactics are brutally, BRUTALLY efficient, as are the tactics of our DM.
I know, I know, that's not what you meant, I just wanted to bust your butt a little.
In all seriousness, Joe and I have taken place in the RPGA D&D Open at GenCon Indy the past 2 years. The Open is THE big tournament for power gamers, and its NO roleplaying - all tactics, kill or be killed. Out of 125 teams in 2004, the team that Joe and I were on placed first. Out of 130 teams in 2005, we placed second by the narrowest of margins. We were even highlighted in an article on the RPGA website as we came the closest to becoming the first team in the 20+ year history of the Open to repeat as champions.
Yeah, I changed my original post because I came across a little too harsh. Ironically, I would probably very much enjoy playing with you guys, even if you guys wouldn't enjoy me DMing for you. There's enough variety in D&D style to attract all kinds of players, which is a good thing.
I would probably not mind making powerful magic items more widely available in my campaign if they weren't such a headache to DM. I'd rather have my party face an encounter a couple of CR's lower without so much magic than try to figure out what I needed to do to challenge the magic walking 1st Armored Division.
Congrats on the GenCon success--I personally would never enjoy a "competitive" D&D game with such measurable quantities of "winning." To me that's just the antithesis of what I enjoy about the game.
...or am I just afraid???