I challenge you to come up with a list of SRD items that are unbalanced at the levels I'm proposing (considering that 95% of items in published adventures are SRD, its my metric).Ok. First a couple of questions.
What exactly does the 4 less caster level requirement mean?
1.There have been many arguments that the caster level written for the magic item isn't actually a prereq, unless it says so under prereqs. Is that what you're using or is it solely items that actually state the caster level in the prereq, like amulets of natural armor?
2.Also as far as casting spells, do you subtract 4 from your caster level to determine what spells you can cast into items? So I would need to be 9th level to cast a 3rd level spell into an item?
Take the caster level of the item. If you aren't four levels higher than that, then you can't make it. It has a max caster level of "your caster level-4".
Also, it is you unmodified caster level. No tossing on items or spells to boost your caster level.
And regardless of how you answer those, I can think of one broken item off the top of my head. Wand of Cure Light wounds.Basically parties where your cleric takes craft wand become super powerful compared to parties of that don't. One has infinite healing, and the other does not. And that's a huge difference in power. Your cleric is effectively obligated to take craft wand, because you can't buy wands of CLW.
If people can't buy Wands of CLW, and they don't want to make them, the DM can just toss them into treasure hordes (or potions)... or have adventures with only a few encounters a day... or the party can be a stealth party that attacks from surprise.... At the end of the day a Wand of CLW only let you do more encounters in a day, not be better at beating encounters.
Heck, now that Pathfinder is making Turning a pile of healing, I expect the Wand of CLW to become obsolete.
Maybe they pray to the Bear God or anoint their weapons in monster blood or take tokens from monsters so they can get a blink dog tail that casts dimension door(name the DnD story here).The story is "The Paladin's Sword", which was not a bad story, but the third book went a bit strange for me.
But Anyway...
This is a difficult thing to go on with- on one hand, magic item creation costing xp balances it slightly. On the other hand, that can still be abused. So you have forty scrolls of Magic Missile (CL 1st). Who cares?
OK, you just took Leadership. Now the bad guy cares, since you have 10 1st-level wizard followers. Each of those casts magic missile from a scroll for four rounds concurrently, and you have a guaranteed forty hits, for 80-200 hp of damage altogether. Even a mid-level red dragon is going to be stinging after that kind of punishment. Yeah, sure, the dragon could eat your apprentices, but then it's have to ignore you and your 10d6 Cone of Cold (double damage, since it's vulnerable). Ouch.
Ok, lets do all the things wrong with this example:
1. A 1st level Evoker with even one bonus 1st level spell from a high Int can cast three magic missiles a day without using scrolls. A Sorcerer with even one bonus spell can do it four times. This is a bad example.
2. Any dragon that gives you four rounds of uninterrupted spellcasting on him is dead, regardless of whether you have apprentices casting spells. Ten Wiz1s are immaterial at that point.
3. You average dragon has big enough saves that he'll make his Reflex save. Even with double damage, you are looking at 35 damage. Considering that he can breath once and probably kill all your apprentices and still hit you, I don't really see your apprentices getting more than one round of spells.
Seconded!If it's OGC, could you give us a run down on just how the AH book handles magic item creation?Artificer's Handbook by Mystic Eye Games has all the magic item creation rules I'll ever need.
It's also 100% OGC, so they can dump the entirety of it into the Pathfinder book if they wanted to.
Certainly.
Firstly, the book offers alternative methods for limitations, aside from XP:
time & money - very realistic, but not necessarily practical.
requiring rare components (my preference) - realistic
instability limitation - basically, the more items you create, the more unstable they become.
discrete levels - an arbitrary number of items can be created (with a number of variants)
Secondly, the core of the item creation rules is called the Spell Slot creation system.
From the book: "In order to create an item, the creator imbues it with power by casting a spell “into” the item a number of times. The number of times, known as slots, the spell must be cast into the item is based
on the desired abilities of the item. This is where the term Spell Slot is derived. The number of spell slots a caster has determines the amount of power they can put into an item. The caster can cast lower-level spells using higher-level spell slots, just like normal. A side effect of this system is that a 5th level wizard with a 16 Intelligence is
slightly better at creating items than another 5th level wizard with a 14 Intelligence, because they have more spell slots available."
"The amount of time it takes to create an item using the Spell Slot system is based on the caster level and the spell level for the given effect, using the following formula:
(# Spell Slots) x (Caster level + Spell level) = hours."
From there, it's mostly tables that indicate how many spell slots are required. The number of spell slots is based on the kind of item, and how it is activated. For example, a scroll (single-use, spell-completion) is 1 spell slot. More complex items require more spell slots. Furthermore, Artificer's Handbook assumes ammunition (50 +2 arrows) are created the same way as a 50 charge wand, but are use-activated, and not spell-completion activated.
For example "use-per" items, such as things that give you (3 uses per day) are created with the following rules:
2 spell slots for Use-per Spell-Completion (e.g. reusable scroll)
3 spell slots for Use-per Spell-Trigger (e.g. wand)
4 spell slots Use-per Command-Word (e.g. rod)
5 spell slots Use-per Use-Activation (e.g. multiple sip potion)
+1 1 use per year
+2 1 use per month
+3 1 use per week
+4 1 use per day
+5 2 uses per day +1 cumulative for each additional charge
So, to create a magical trap, that has 10 uses per day (use-activated by stepping on a platform) is 5 (use-activated) + 5 (2 uses per day) + 5 more = 15 total spell slots.
If the "spell" is a 3rd level fireball, creating such a thing would require 15 3rd level spell slots. Such a thing could be created by a 10th level sorcerer with a charisma of at least 12 utilizing all his 4th and 5th level spell slots to cast 3rd level spells. (A spellcaster can always use a higher level spell slot to cast a lower level spell if they want to - a rule crucial to the spell slot system).
The cost formula is as follows:
10gp ( spell level x caster level -1) * # of spell slots, squared
Or, in this case:
10(3 x 5 (the minimum for fireball) - 1) * 15^2
equals
1gp(14) * 225 = creation cost
140gp * 225 = 31,500gp
The number of hours:
(# Spell Slots) x (Caster level + Spell level) = hours."
15 * (5+3) = 120 hours (or 15 8-hour work days).
Trying to squeeze in a longer work day introduces instability. There's an entire chapter on instability. Basically, it might not work as expected (it might work better than expected), or it might end up cursed, etc.
There. That's it. The heart of the Spell Slot item creation system. It's all just tables to derive the number of spell slots required, and a couple of pretty simple formulas.
Once you make a few items, it's easy.
Furthermore, creating the following items is easy (and produces a very accurate cost - no more guessing).
+1 shield of Argos which casts CLW/3 day and when paired up with the Armor of Argos, allows the wearer to cast CSW 1/day
Jade skull which casts speak with dead 3x/day, confers constant protection from good to the wielder, and has 10 charges of 'unholy word'.
Using this system, I can mathematically determine accurate costs for any items like those.
|
So I took it upon myself to buy the Artificer's Handbook, and at first glance I really liked the variant magic item creation rules. It's based on the idea that you temporarily imbue the item with your spell slots and are without them for the duration of the crafting. However, the system is complicated to the point of needed the flowchart/sheet provided in the back for every item and also the costs for item creation is WAY below what they are now.
So sadly, I have given that up in favor of an idea someone half-heartedly suggested on the Unearthed Arcana/House Rules board over at WotC. Here is my solution, its not perfect, but I'm content for the time being.
By taking bits and pieces from slain monsters, a magic user can gain components to substitute the xp normally needed to craft magic items.
Use the following formula: CR x 10 = XP garnered
Limitations: You can not gather components from the following creatures; humanoids, animals, vermin, or incorporeal. Summoned creatures leave no body and cannot be used to gather materials. Spoilable components last for a maximum days equal to the creature's CR. As a rule of thumb, components weight is equal to 1/2 the XP gained in pounds.
So I took it upon myself to buy the Artificer's Handbook, and at first glance I really liked the variant magic item creation rules. It's based on the idea that you temporarily imbue the item with your spell slots and are without them for the duration of the crafting. However, the system is complicated to the point of needed the flowchart/sheet provided in the back for every item and also the costs for item creation is WAY below what they are now.
The rules are complicated because magic items are complicated. Believe me, we wanted a simpler system, but we couldn't swing it and still provide rules for all the weird items out there. We also felt like there was way too much "guesswork" in the way items were costed in RAW.
We felt justified by the complexity because most likely, magic item creation is something that happens outside the game. Item creation - the specifics of what it is is, etc, should all be handled between the crafter and the GM outside the game.
On the cost:
Many of the costs are, on average, lower. A few are higher. In 3.0, we costed out a "chaos diamond" at WAY more than what the 3.0 DMG had defined. (see pg. 101 for sample price comparisons) In 3.5, someone apparently figured out their mistake, and the cost of a Chaos Diamond went from 93,000gp to 160,000gp (closer to AH's cost).
See also chapter 1 where it discusses the absurdity of carrying around 100,000gp in order to create a rod of power (3.0 cost). 100,000 gold coins weigh a ton. We felt like the slightly lower cost were at least a start to the ridiculous escalating economy that is the D&D economics model.
Lastly, if you think the costs are too low - modify the costing formula - 10gp(SL + CL -1) *SS^2 to something like 15gp or even 20gp.
|
|
Hey, I wasnt trying to knock the product, just voicing my opinion of it. But as to the pricing, one of the example items is a +3 weapon with a special critical hit ability involving chickens (I wont detail the specifics to stir up interest in the product for ya) but the price listed for it was a measley 8,700gp, where by core even a basic +3 weapon is at least 18,000. I just didnt feel that the new method was going to come close enough to be balanced with book listed prices.
Hey, I wasnt trying to knock the product, just voicing my opinion of it. But as to the pricing, one of the example items is a +3 weapon with a special critical hit ability involving chickens (I wont detail the specifics to stir up interest in the product for ya) but the price listed for it was a measley 8,700gp, where by core even a basic +3 weapon is at least 18,000. I just didnt feel that the new method was going to come close enough to be balanced with book listed prices.
Sadly, that entry is wrong.
There's a lot of errata. Most of the examples as written ended up being calculated incorrectly. A few others I had concerns about and decided they needed to be done slightly differently (amulets of natural armor cost the same as rings of protection, but I felt like that wasn't accurate since amulets of natural armor are more valuable, so the errata reflects that as well) - stuff like that.
Email me and I'll send you the errata. It was never formally published since MEG basically went defunct.
curtis.bennett
gmail.
Here's the corrected entry for the Maul of the Chicken.
pg. 26: The formula of the Maul of the Chicken is wrong. The SS: entry should read as follows: SS: Five 4th level slots (caster level 8) and four 4th level slots (caster level 7) (+5 slots for bonus item (greater magic weapon), +5 slots unlimited-use permanent spell (polymorph other), -2 slots (works on critical), +1 for additional spell; Market Price: 17,400gp, Creation Cost: 8,700gp (4,350gp x 2 for weapon cost).
So, a little less than 18,000gp for a +3 item. Like I said, the lower costs tend to be a reflection of the fact that we believed the D&D economy was WAY out of control. It's tweakable; I'm not married to it.
Once upon a time, I posted the errata on ENWorld. Here's the link.
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=105797
By taking bits and pieces from slain monsters, a magic user can gain components to substitute the xp normally needed to craft magic items.Use the following formula: CR x 10 = XP garnered
Limitations: You can not gather components from the following creatures; humanoids, animals, vermin, or incorporeal. Summoned creatures leave no body and cannot be used to gather materials. Spoilable components last for a maximum days equal to the creature's CR. As a rule of thumb, components weight is equal to 1/2 the XP gained in pounds.
I've never really liked the idea of "PCs as butcher-heroes".
Seriously.
-------------
The AH seems far too complicated. I made it to Calculus, but I hate math.
Its better to abstract item creation as much as possible, and to get beyond the Diablo-style magic mart. I mean, back in the day you were expected to get a Crystal ball before 4th level, and you could get a Staff of Power or an intelligent sword at 4th level.
It was only 3.X where people started to crave cheap once per day items because they were told they should have weak stuff at low-level.
|
|
Sadly, that entry is wrong.
There's a lot of errata. Most of the examples as written ended up being calculated incorrectly. A few others I had concerns about and decided they needed to be done slightly differently (amulets of natural armor cost the same as rings of protection, but I felt like that wasn't accurate since amulets of natural armor are more valuable, so the errata reflects that as well) - stuff like that.
Email me and I'll send you the errata. It was never formally published since MEG basically went defunct.
curtis.bennett
gmail.Here's the corrected entry for the Maul of the Chicken.
pg. 26: The formula of the Maul of the Chicken is wrong. The SS: entry should read as follows: SS: Five 4th level slots (caster level 8) and four 4th level slots (caster level 7) (+5 slots for bonus item (greater magic weapon), +5 slots unlimited-use permanent spell (polymorph other), -2 slots (works on critical), +1 for additional spell; Market Price: 17,400gp, Creation Cost: 8,700gp (4,350gp x 2 for weapon cost).So, a little less than 18,000gp for a +3 item. Like I said, the lower costs tend to be a reflection of the fact that we believed the D&D economy was WAY out of control. It's tweakable; I'm not married to it.
Now, with tweaks like that, do you know what PC gold progression you would suggest? Something based on a formula would be really nice.
And I emailed you for that errata, but you can nevermind as I got it from that link. Thats what I get for not reading all posts before replying.
I've never really liked the idea of "PCs as butcher-heroes".
Seriously.
PCs are already going about killing and looting for xp & treasure, is it that much more of a leap to toss in item creation components too?
So long as we're having a rational, intelligent adult conversation about item creation, let me wax philosophical a bit. Obviously, having penned a 96 page book on the subject, means I've spent a great deal of time on the topic of magic item creation.
To the above point about "the over-abundance" of magic items, I agree. One of the major goals of AH was to highlight some of the ridiculousness of the costs of magic items. The first chapter spends a fair amount of time talking about how much volume 100,000 gold coins consumes and how much it weighs (a ton).
I believe far too many players simply erase 15,000 gold pieces from their character, subtract a little XP, and then voila! - end up with a robe of blending (or whatever).
I don't believe the AH system is perfect. Far from it. Some of it is wonky (I can say that in retrospect), and some of the feats and PrCs are entirely unnecessary. That said, I love the flexibility of the system, and the realism. I also like that you can't actually create a wand of fireballs at 5th level, so it tends to make magic items a bit more out of reach. Some of the magic items in the DMG with our system are actually impossible to make by anyone but the highest level sorcerers because of the extreme number of spell slots they require. Which is why we introduced "ritual creation" into the mix so you have to work with a partner to create excessively powerful items, which makes the most powerful items exceedingly rare.
Personally, I prefer a more "magic rare" kind of system, which is why we also introduced a lot of rules variants to cover "low/med/high" magic kinds of settings. It's full of variants.
With some time, I could probably sit down and write up a very simplified, yet fully functional version of the system. I may just do that. I can post it here for all to see.
PCs are already going about killing and looting for xp & treasure, is it that much more of a leap to toss in item creation components too?I've never really liked the idea of "PCs as butcher-heroes".
Seriously.
Yup. Heck, I'm still uncomfortable with the idea that every monster is supposed to have treasure. Adventure designers love to put treasure in offal piles, latrines, the guts of monsters, or piles of corpses. In my last campaign we made the "putting on a rubber glove" motion to tell our DM that we were checking inside the monster for loot (we were playing a WotC published adventure, so this did in fact net us more loot).
With some time, I could probably sit down and write up a very simplified, yet fully functional version of the system. I may just do that. I can post it here for all to see.
If it involves me playing Logistics and Dragons where I have to pull out a calculator and/or an Excel sheet, you can count me out.
Where are you getting the idea that items are going to be infinite?
Items will take time to make. I haven't nailed down the number, but it doesn't actually mean that the PCs will have the ability to make all the items they potentially can make, or make them in infinite amounts. Time spent not adventuring is time spent not getting better items or XP.
The DM can just start the adventure. If you spend too long making items you city gets overrun by orcs. Someone attacks you. Something you care about gets destroyed. Whatever. This is DnD, and conflict happens all the time.
Time is the only resource that an adventurer should care about. The best adventures I've ever played have always had a time component, and if your DM says "OK, we're going to advance the campaign ten years so you can make all the items you want," then there is no way to balance any item creation system since by the SRD you can just sell spells or tax your subjects or use trade routes via teleports or gates for mad loot that can buy you magic items. Money doesn't limit items, and XP doesn't either since once you decided to blow a level you can make all the items you ever wanted.
Second, most of your examples are equivalent to having a competent mage around. Use one of the versions of planar binding and get a half-fiend summoning ooze to spam summons. Cast overland flight on the party or catch griffins for everyone and now everyone flies. Cast greater magic weapon so your +1 sword with all the elemental damages is a +4. A Ring of Invisibility is a free +20 Hide for everyone when they pass it around (assuming the Rogue hasn't already picked up a +10 Hide item, which he does because its essential rogue equipment). Any plot that can be ruined by a Helm of Telepathy can be ruined by a 3rd level Wizard or Sorcerer who knows detect thoughts. Cubes of Force or Cloaks of displacement are about as good as the large number of battlefield control spells available at low levels such as web, grease, or glitterdust. I can go on.
Basically, there isn't anything in the actual play of encounters of DnD that I can't replicate with a competent mage.
Third, lots of things don't ever get used in DnD. I've never seen someone make a scroll or wand. Ever. Even in games where people can't buy items, no one makes charged items. Since we want people to use these things, we can add in a rule: if you are worried by people overusing staves, then just make them expensive in terms of time.
Items will take time to make. I haven't nailed down the number, but it doesn't actually mean that the PCs will have the ability to make all the items they potentially can make, or make them in infinite amounts. Time spent not adventuring is time spent not getting better items or XP.
The DM can just start the adventure. If you spend too long making items you city gets overrun by orcs. Someone attacks you. Something you care about gets destroyed. Whatever. This is DnD, and conflict happens all the time.
See, this is the part I don't get. You're not proposing a method of making magic items other than DM fiat; the players get to spend exactly as much downtime crafting magic items as the DM allows them. Why not just let the DM give the party the magic items to begin with and move on, skipping the crafting downtime altogether?
It especially boggles my mind that in your first post you imply in one sentence that exchanging money for magic items "rarely" works and that time is the only resource that players really value, and then four sentences later you suggest allowing players to use money to speed up crafting times. Then we end up back at square one -- exchanging money for magic items.
See, this is the part I don't get. You're not proposing a method of making magic items other than DM fiat; the players get to spend exactly as much downtime crafting magic items as the DM allows them. Why not just let the DM give the party the magic items to begin with and move on, skipping the crafting downtime altogether?Items will take time to make. I haven't nailed down the number, but it doesn't actually mean that the PCs will have the ability to make all the items they potentially can make, or make them in infinite amounts. Time spent not adventuring is time spent not getting better items or XP.
The DM can just start the adventure. If you spend too long making items you city gets overrun by orcs. Someone attacks you. Something you care about gets destroyed. Whatever. This is DnD, and conflict happens all the time.
Right. Ultimately, the whole game is DM fiat.
The point of making your own items instead of just finding them is that you get to choose your theme. I mean, if you want to be a fire wizard, then you choose fire spells. You also want an robe of fire resistance, a flame dagger, a wand of fireballs, and a ruby that summons a fire elemental. Eventually, you want a Ring of Fire Elemental Control.
If the DM just gave these to you as part of your campaign, it wouldn't feel like you'd earned it. The adventurer experience is very organic, so often people are wearing the Snake Armor they got from the snake king, the ice sword from some mercenary they killed, and a fire helmet from a dead skeletal warrior. If your DM just gave you all your themed items, one every few adventures, it wouldn't mean anything. People only want things they've won or made. Being handed character-specific equipment makes it feel like...well... a handout.
Magic items are, by their very nature, something that needs to be controlled by the DM. There is no system ever created that bypasses this rule.
It especially boggles my mind that in your first post you imply in one sentence that exchanging money for magic items "rarely" works and that time is the only resource that players really value, and then four sentences later you suggest allowing players to use money to speed up crafting times. Then we end up back at square one -- exchanging money for magic items.
Again, the numbers haven't been worked out yet, but the essence of letting people speed up magical creations is that it anchors you in the campaign world. Maybe you also incur favors that need to be paid back, or the influx of gold into the economy brings down thieves. In terms of story hooks, the sky is the limit.
In the end, I never imagined it to be a substantial savings in time. I was thinking that at the max it would half the time needed and would steadily increase your debt the more time savings you needed.
Essentially, its just a little flexibility in the rules. If you have three weeks of known downtime before the next adventure, and thats only enough time for 2.5 scrolls, you could spend some money and make three scrolls. Basically, its a way to not screw players for not logistically planning out their item creation.
Right. Ultimately, the whole game is DM fiat.
Agreed. I just don't ultimately see the large difference between the current (implied) D&D methodology:
--> "Magic items cost money, so the DM has to artificially manipulate the characters' supply of money."Versus your proposed methodology:
--> "Magic items cost free time, so the DM has to artificially manipulate the characters' supply of free time."
Personally, I dislike having extended downtime in my game (it's a play-by-email game -- the pace is slow enough as it is), so I allow magic items to be made much more quickly than the Core rules state. I don't see the point of paying adventurers to sit around not adventuring.
Right. Ultimately, the whole game is DM fiat.Agreed. I just don't ultimately see the large difference between the current (implied) D&D methodology:
--> "Magic items cost money, so the DM has to artificially manipulate the characters' supply of money."Versus your proposed methodology:
--> "Magic items cost free time, so the DM has to artificially manipulate the characters' supply of free time."Personally, I dislike having extended downtime in my game (it's a play-by-email game -- the pace is slow enough as it is), so I allow magic items to be made much more quickly than the Core rules state. I don't see the point of paying adventurers to sit around not adventuring.
Making people pay money for magic items means that people "Greyhawk." Its an old term from Living Greyhawk where you gather everything salable from an enemy. You steal rugs, furniture, sell monster eggs, cut open things to look for swallowed treasures, extract organs that can be sold, and in general are a giant jerk when it comes to money.
In general, it means that as an adventurer you never buy an extra horse, you never bribe a man when you could kill him, you never give to charity, never buy a house or lands or pay for armies, and you ALWAYS accept the coppers destitute dirt farmers give you.
It also means that dragon hoards are now small enough to fit into a cupboard and the DM must do all kinds of crazy things to prevent people from getting wealth that makes no sense. (For example, show me a plan to prevent the scheme of buying something low in one place and selling it high in another, and I'll show you something stupid.)
Equating money to magical power is bad on first principles. It barely works in a game like Diablo. I don't know what the 3.0 designers were thinking of when they did it.
What this plan does is change something that is hard to control (money) with something that is easy to control (time), as well as returning the fun to finding and spending treasure.
Making people pay money for magic items means that people "Greyhawk." Its an old term from Living Greyhawk where you gather everything salable from an enemy. You steal rugs, furniture, sell monster eggs, cut open things to look for swallowed treasures, extract organs that can be sold, and in general are a giant jerk when it comes to money.
Right -- that's where the "artificial manipulation" comes in. I tell my players up front
--> "I'll try to keep you at the equipment-by-level guidelines. That means that you don't have to steal rugs, furniture, monster eggs, etc. in order to make money; it'll just be a waste of time because you'll find less treasure later to compensate."I don't find that any more artificial than telling my players:
--> "You can take all the time you want to create treasure (i.e. magic items), but if you go over the equipment-by-level guidelines I'll start throwing plot devices at you."
You're entitled to feel differently, naturally.
Making people pay money for magic items means that people "Greyhawk." Its an old term from Living Greyhawk where you gather everything salable from an enemy. You steal rugs, furniture, sell monster eggs, cut open things to look for swallowed treasures, extract organs that can be sold, and in general are a giant jerk when it comes to money.
Right -- that's where the "artificial manipulation" comes in. I tell my players up front
--> "I'll try to keep you at the equipment-by-level guidelines. That means that you don't have to steal rugs, furniture, monster eggs, etc. in order to make money; it'll just be a waste of time because you'll find less treasure later to compensate."I don't find that any more artificial than telling my players:
--> "You can take all the time you want to create treasure (i.e. magic items), but if you go over the equipment-by-level guidelines I'll start throwing plot devices at you."You're entitled to feel differently, naturally.
But artificially controlling wealth still makes having wealth not be fun.
I mean, when is the last time you heard of a fighter putting a ruby in his sword? Or buying an inn? Or refusing the reward the town put together for defeating the villain?
Controlling magical wealth is easy. Forcing people to obey wealth guidelines is impossible.
Time is the only resource that an adventurer should care about. The best adventures I've ever played have always had a time component, and if your DM says "OK, we're going to advance the campaign ten years so you can make all the items you want," then there is no way to balance any item creation system since by the SRD you can just sell spells or tax your subjects or use trade routes via teleports or gates for mad loot that can buy you magic items.
Sure you can. Just set the system system by level instead of by time or by money. You can make 3 items each level for every item creation feat you have. So if you have 10 years or you have 2 weeks, you only can craft 3 items max before you've got to go out and do something to gain some XP.
I think there is a need for a magic item store so that PCs don't become overly dependent on the item crafter (and don't have to have on in the first place). The problem is tying magic item stores to the gold standard. It should be a simple barter system.
Magic Marts don't work. They alway beg the question: "and why don't we just rob the magic mart?" Or even "and why doesn't the archlich not rob the magic mart?"
They make no sense.
Per level limits are just as bad. They just mean that you'll never make a scroll, potion, or wand. Also, you'll never make items for others because your supply is so limited.
Yes, but the examples you give are particularly inefficient.
Why do they have to be efficient? After 7th or 8th level, a mage has more slots than they can use in a day. Considering that combats tend to last three rounds and three combats a day are the standard, we are looking at nine spells a day that a mage needs. Anything after that is gravy. Thats not even counting spells like polymorph or magic jar that last the whole combat and can mean that you only use one spell per combat. Buffing other people with extra slots is efficient.
Lots of mages wouldn't even think its a waste of slots; the buffing spellcaster is a big part of DnD. The tactical control mage is even more so.
And on the matter of slots: numbers of slots don't mean anything. The Warlock is built on the proposition that you can just use unlimited slotted effects per day and at the end of the day it doesn't make you a better adventurer.
Cold attacks only do +50% damage to [Fire] subtype critters. Also, even a Young Adult Red Dragon is virtually immune to CL1 Magic Missiles, because MM still allows spell resistance. Leadership also grants cohorts of NPC levels, which trade in 2:1 for real levels - so you need a Leadership score of 24 to get 10 1st level Wizards (you get 11, BTW). And finally, Dragons are quite notorious for their ability to get rid of large numbers of low level characters all at once.
-Frank
I'd prefer not to get wildly off topic talking about mage tactics. In any case, you get a significant power boost by having lots of free slots and having invisibility rings for everyone is better than trading around a single ring. And that's my point.
I'm sorry, but this is heart of the argument.
You seem to be under the illusion that magic items are more power. They aren't. Compared with what a competent mage of the same level can do, a pile of SRD items don't do anything he's not already doing. At best, they save the mage a little logistical planning.
I've already outlined which items are power: stat boosters and things that use spells beyond your level.
You also seem to be under the illusion that items will be infinite. They won't. The DM has strict control over how many get made.
You also don't seem to have the capacity to learn from experience:
-Infinite slots have been tried and found not broken: Warlock.
-Magic marts have been tried and found stupid: DnD 3.0.
-per level caps on item creation have been tried and found stupid and unworkable: Artificer.
At the end of the day, you keep saying the same things over and over. My suggestion is to playtest it. It works. Item creation feats may benefit the whole party, but so does casting web or taking Power Attack to be a good fighter. Its a team game, and everyone does their part. I'm sure there are selfish and stupid mage players out there who don't buff their party and would keep any items they make for themselves, but we can't judge the mechanic by the standard of "what would an idiot do?"
Ps. Any argument that spellcasters laugh at fighters is preaching to the converted. Show me a version of DnD where this has not been true.
But artificially controlling wealth still makes having wealth not be fun.
* Magic items are wealth.
* You're allowing players to exchange free time for magic items.* You're artificially controlling free time.
Therefore you're artificially controlling wealth. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)
Ok, since I just have neither the time nor the nerves to read through all those posts, I'll just post my current idea about the topic:
Instead of messing around with XP costs, material costs, etc.
We could just allow characters with the appropriate creation feats and the needed requirements listed effectivly "buy" the magic items for the listed price.
I was never a fan of this diablo-like magic item market, so magic items were always rare and special in my games. A magic sword +1 was never a sword +1. It had a history and such.
(Example: The fightress killed a hobgoblin zombie and got his magic sword. The next night while sleeping next to it, she dreamed about an ancient battle where hobgoblins fought against high elves and the former elven owner was slain by the very same hobgoblin who took it after killing the elf. After that the dream went nightmare into seeing the weapon killing elves over and over again. Letting her awake in midnight)
But artificially controlling wealth still makes having wealth not be fun.* Magic items are wealth.
* You're allowing players to exchange free time for magic items.
* You're artificially controlling free time.Therefore you're artificially controlling wealth. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.)
Magic items are NOT Wealth, therefore we are not controlling wealth.
Money and salable goods are wealth. Wealth can be exchanged for goods and services in a society. (You can't buy bread with a +1 dagger.)
This system encourages the accumulation of wealth (gold, jewels, silks, etc) while discouraging Greyhawking for magic items (sell carpets of dungeon, cut open all monsters for swallowed coins, etc).
Magic items are NOT Wealth, therefore we are not controlling wealth.Money and salable goods are wealth. Wealth can be exchanged for goods and services in a society. (You can't buy bread with a +1 dagger.)
So if a king offered one of your players a magic sword in exchange for slaying a dragon that's threatening his kingdom, he'd be forced to say "No thanks -- magic items cannot be exchanged for services in a society"? That sounds incredibly bizarre to me, but it's your campaign...
So if a king offered one of your players a magic sword in exchange for slaying a dragon that's threatening his kingdom, he'd be forced to say "No thanks -- magic items cannot be exchanged for services in a society"? That sounds incredibly bizarre to me, but it's your campaign...
Magic items are NOT Wealth, therefore we are not controlling wealth.Money and salable goods are wealth. Wealth can be exchanged for goods and services in a society. (You can't buy bread with a +1 dagger.)
He can do whatever he wants. He can even accept heartfelt thanks, a title, or a women. Or he can even tell the king, "hey, I need gold because I want to sleep in an inn tonight."
The trick is that trying to sell that magic sword to buy a manor isn't going to happen. People need homes. They don't need magic swords.
Imagine trying to convince someone that a dagger +4 is a magic item, and not a regular dagger. They don't have divinations. Even if they did, they don't know if you are using illusions to fool their divinations and trick them into handing over a cartload of gold.
Its a very modern idea that anything can be sold and bought. It also happens to be wrong. Lots of things in modern society can't be exchanged for money.
He can do whatever he wants. He can even accept heartfelt thanks, a title, or a women. Or he can even tell the king, "hey, I need gold because I want to sleep in an inn tonight."
The trick is that trying to sell that magic sword to buy a manor isn't going to happen. People need homes. They don't need magic swords.
In that case, if an NPC gets his hands on a powerful magic sword, then a PC should be able to get his hands on that "worthless" sword by exchanging a "valuable" house for it, right? (Since NPCs in general need houses, not magic swords.)
Just to be clear -- I absolutely agree with the following premises:
* PCs should be limited in the power of their magical equipment; other possessions like apare horses, bribe money, manor houses, charitable donations and so forth are totally unrelated to that power limit.
* The idea of "magic shops" is kind of dumb.
What I don't agree with are the following premises:
* Even if person A values money over magic items and person B values magic items over money, person B should never be able to buy a magic item from person A with money.
* Adding a new rule to the DMG will fix everything. :)
But artificially controlling wealth still makes having wealth not be fun.
Since time is money (almost literally with your item creation rules), controlling time is controlling wealth. Either way it's an artificial limitation.
I don't see the functional difference between:
"I won't let you accumulate more wealth than the guidelines allow"
and
"I won't let you have enough downtime to accumulate more wealth than the guidelines allow"
As for why people don't rob the Mage-Mart, allow me to cite the Economicon
In that case, if an NPC gets his hands on a powerful magic sword, then a PC should be able to get his hands on that "worthless" sword by exchanging a "valuable" house for it, right? (Since NPCs in general need houses, not magic swords.)
Nope. The adventurer can buy it for whatever value he likes.... a handful of silver...the threat to kill the NPC... whatever. Assuming anything in DnD (or life) has a fixed value is a fallacy.
Considering magic items more powerful than you are real power, anyone weak that has a magic item will get it taken from them by the same rationale that we use to take away military grade arms from private owners.
But artificially controlling wealth still makes having wealth not be fun.Since time is money (almost literally with your item creation rules), controlling time is controlling wealth. Either way it's an artificial limitation.
I don't see the functional difference between:
"I won't let you accumulate more wealth than the guidelines allow"
and
"I won't let you have enough downtime to accumulate more wealth than the guidelines allow"As for why people don't rob the Mage-Mart, allow me to cite the Economicon
The difference is that the guidelines:
1. Let you get things beyond your power. A ninth level scroll can be bought by a fourth level character.2. The system as it stands means that dragons have hoards that fit into a closet, and all party wealth goes to magic items....which means you never do anything fun with it.
-Magic marts have been tried and found stupid: DnD 3.0.
Well no. The gold economy was found stupid. Not the concept of trading magic items.
Actually trading is rather necessary if you're a fighter type.
I'd argue that it isn't. Considering that most DMs accept that a fighter is super-weak, they give him an artifact sword.
At the end of the day, you keep saying the same things over and over. My suggestion is to playtest it.
In your playtest, have you ever compared a party with magic item creation feats versus a party without? I'm seriously expecting the power gap to be huge there. If it wasn't huge, then I'd like some explanation why.
1. Casters don't take magic item creation feats
2. Casters don't share with the group.
3. Time is very limited such that you've only got a week between quests.
4. Time gap is huge such that you've got a year between quests.
1. Yes. It was a "low magic" campaign in where didn't have a lot of items. It didn't affect our game or the kinds of monsters we could beat. I was a Sorcerer.
2. Yes. See above. Our DM made sure that we didn't have a lot of downtime.
3. Yes. We didn't make a lot of items.
4. Yes. We each got a few choice items, because the DM knew I'd share.
There was no noticable increase in power, though I did then cast
less utility spells from that point on.
You're taking the most equipment dependent class and making them unable to procure their own equipment. That's a horrible idea. In fact, your power level is based off someone else taking a feat. I fail to see how that can be...
The DM can still give out equipment. Considering that you won't be able to sell DM-given equipment for gold, other party members won't have an argument for why they should get a share of it.
I'd argue that it isn't. Considering that most DMs accept that a fighter is super-weak, they give him an artifact sword.
Problem is that an artifact sword won't fix things. A high level fighter needs the following. (and probably more, but this is the stuff Ic an list off the top of my head)
The artifact sword is the easiest solution. You can just make a powerful sword that dimension doors and grants a luck bonus and improved Dex, and some artifact armor that grants Strength and Con, and natural armor, and then hand out rings of protection to everyone.
Make sure the Wizard gets a scroll of overland flight so he knows the spells, or give people the option of buying griffins, and you are good to go.
1. Yes. It was a "low magic" campaign in where didn't have a lot of items. It didn't affect our game or the kinds of monsters we could beat. I was a Sorcerer.
Yeah, I'm not surprised that sorcerers do well, after all they need pretty much nothing to fuel their offense.
What about fighter types?
They did fine. We didn't fight or encounter "massive attack bonus" monsters like giants, so it wasn't a problem that the fighter didn't have a collection of +AC items.
What? So you're arguing the fighter is going to take like 100% of the loot? I don't know what groups you've been playing in, but that's just not going to fly in any of the groups I play in. If you find a ring of protection, that's like a free grab For anyone.
The DM can still give out equipment. Considering that you won't be able to sell DM-given equipment for gold, other party members won't have an argument for why they should get a share of it.
But once everyone has a Ring of Protection, then the fighter gets one.
If Wands and a magic dagger show up with a pair of haste boots, then of course the fighter gets the haste boots, the rogue gets the dagger, and the spellcasters split the wands(or maybe a mage takes the dagger and rogue take a wand to use with UMD....it doesn't matter). The rest of the characters may want the haste boots, but the only way to split up the treasure so that the fighter gets anything he can use is if he gets the haste boots.
I understand that people don't think rationally about magic items. I mean, in my last campaign I played from 3rd level to 8th level and didn't take a single magic item until my 8th level (and it was the fourth protection ring we had found). It made more sense to give the protection rings and natural armor amulets to the Fighter/Scout, Rogue, and Monk before I got it. I didn't do anything lame like ask them to sell the mithral breastplate +1 for cash, which the DM tried to convince us to do because he didn't understand what was going on (or why our fighting characters seemed to never take much damage)
The artifact sword is the easiest solution. You can just make a powerful sword that dimension doors and grants a luck bonus and improved Dex, and some artifact armor that grants Strength and Con, and natural armor, and then hand out rings of protection to everyone.
And that's just not a solution most DMs are going to take unless it's written into the core rules somewhere.
If your entire fix is contingent on "DM may treat you like his girlfriend and give you all the awesome magic items," I'd say that's not a fix at all.
If a DM is not willing to address a problem in his campaign, then there isn't crap anyone can do.
Pick up an issue of Dungeon or Pathfinder. Nonstandard magic items are in every issue.
I understand that people don't think rationally about magic items. I mean, in my last campaign I played from 3rd level to 8th level and didn't take a single magic item until my 8th level (and it was the fourth protection ring we had found). It made more sense to give the protection rings and natural armor amulets to the Fighter/Scout, Rogue, and Monk before I got it. I didn't do anything lame like ask them to sell the mithral breastplate +1 for cash, which the DM tried to convince us to do because he didn't understand what was going on (or why our fighting characters seemed to never take much damage)A lot of people really would just sell some items to split the gold with everyone and let them buy what they wanted.
I think your main problem is that you happen to be a bit biased based on your own experiences and tactics. Just because your groups play such that the fighter types get more treasure and custom magic items doesn't mean that every group is going to play that way. Hell, that's not even playing the way the rules assume you'll play, which is an even split of gold and resources.
You're playing in a non-standard manner, and thus while your magic item fix may work for you, I don't think it's a good system to implement for everyone.
I think you may have forgotten what the solution was:
-magic items can't be bought or sold.
-People get to make items they want (caster and non-casters) as long as they are substantially weaker, and only expend time.
-DMs cover the slack with found treasure to even out the characters.
The problems it fixes are:
-Greyhawking.
-XP Difference engines.
-monetary treasure not fun for players
-people not making charged items, ever.
-people going Logistics and Dragons on the campaign to gain wealth to buy items so that the DM has to ruin their fun by stealing their wealth.
-found treasure always being sold
-people not getting value out of item creation feats
-The Fifteen Minute Adventuring Day.
-player infighting over money
The problems it creates:
-DMs have to watch a player's free time if he seems about to go overboard with magic item creation.
-DMs have to create adventures that distribute treasure to make up for character weaknesses
The problems it creates:
-DMs have to watch a player's free time if he seems about to go overboard with magic item creation.
-DMs have to create adventures that distribute treasure to make up for character weaknesses
Even if I thought these were the only problems, they would be deal-breakers for me with respect to any system trying to correct problems with item creation.
Charged items: Actually charged items will still get made, because they're cheaper (and thus take less time to make).
Right. We want people to make charged items, which is something they don't do under the current system.
value out of item creation feats: I don't think that was ever true. Item creation feats were very powerful in their original incarnation to the point that I'd never worry about someone not getting value out of them. It seems yours are so valuable they're must takes, unless you really trust your DM to cover the bases.
Thats just something we have to fundamentally disagree about, because I don't understand what you are talking about.
Why is it powerful? Back it up with examples, because from my position it looks like you haven't thought it through.
Infighting Over money: Actually there's a lot more infighting over magic items under your system. Money at least can be split, but now there's no way to split the +4 custom artifact sword of awesome! And since it's better than anything any of the other guys can craft, it's going to lead to a lot of infighting.
How? People have to take some of items. They can't say "well, we'll sell it or else you have to sell your other items to pay us off." Its that kind of thing that really burns people.
You roll off if several players can't agree. It takes two seconds, rather than having to pull our a spreadsheet.
Or you make it like a Elfblade where the sword picks the players. Or do any number of things.
And if some really wants more items, they can just make them.
As an aside, this thing where you don't want people to play a cooperative storytelling game is beyond me. Its kind of what DnD is all about.
15 minute adventuring day: Doesn't do anything to solve it. The whole balance point of your creation system is that you can't create items of high level spell, since you're 4 levels behind. So while you get infinite scrolls of magic missile at 5th level, you don't have infinite fireballs. So casters still can do rest/recover to get back their fireballs. The 15 minute adventuring day is still there.
The Fifteen minute adventuring day exists because after you've run our of the top half of your spells, you are basically a low-level character. It also exists because once you are out of healing spells, the fighters can't fight anymore.
Fix those two problems, and you can adventure all day. Spellcasters don't have to blow their top slots as long as they know that can still contribute to combat. Heck, if you can just cast glitterdust the rest of the day as much as you want you can contribute. They can save thier big spells for important combats because they know they'll need them.
And if you players still want to blow their best spells every combat an then rest, you can just make adventures time-dependent to encourage them to hurry up. Under this system, you can actualll do that with a clear conscience because people will still have the power to continue adventuring.
Even if I thought these were the only problems, they would be deal-breakers for me with respect to any system trying to correct problems with item creation.The problems it creates:
-DMs have to watch a player's free time if he seems about to go overboard with magic item creation.
-DMs have to create adventures that distribute treasure to make up for character weaknesses
If you want a game that doesn't have a DM in control, then you should play computer games. This is DnD, and DMs have to make choices about what players can do.
If you want a game that doesn't have a DM in control
Enough with the straw man, K. If you would look at the other posts on this board and my other suggestions, you'd see I in no way want to have no DM in control.
But we're talking rules design, and any rules proposal that effectively says "This has holes, but I rely on the DM to fill in the gaps I can't figure out" is bad design.
This is DnD, and DMs have to make choices about what players can do.
Then why bother with rules at all? Let's just all play make-believe with the magical DM telling everybody what happens. Yay! Straw men are fun.
The current system relies on the DM to arbitrarily keep people at the wealth guidelines. You do too, but you do so by adding the extra inconvenience of having the DM do it by manipulating free time instead of the more direct way of manipulating actual wealth levels.
Since your proposal seems to be less convenient than the current system, it doesn't pass muster with me. And it has nothign to do with whether DMs get to make decisions.
The current system relies on the DM to arbitrarily keep people at the wealth guidelines. You do too, but you do so by adding the extra inconvenience of having the DM do it by manipulating free time instead of the more direct way of manipulating actual wealth levels.
I won't comment on the insulting parts of your post, because I'm older than eight.
However, this part is straight up wrong. DMs already control free time AND money, because in DnD free time is money. Cast a few Fabricate spells, cast a few spells for hire, breed your griffins and sell the eggs, ....hell, just use Pick Pocket (or Larceny in Pathfinder)....the possibilities are endless.
Time can easily be turned into money.
And then the money turns into magic items.
So I'm just simplifying things while adding fun to the game.