Now, I understand the problem with the ability boosters; namely, that they occupied slots that players wanted to use for other things (trust me, I've felt the pain: I played a True Necromancer, so I had a +Int, +Wis and +Cha taking up slots). However, I do not like the belt/headband idea; the aforementioned character wouldn't even have the choice of wearing all three. Same goes with a fighter who wants a Str and Con bonus.
I have a suggestion to fix this. Essentially, adopt a system similar to the one at the end of the Magic Item Compendium, where you can add certain oft-used abilities, like AC bonuses, resistances and ability bonuses to items already in certain slots. Maybe make them more specific than the ones in the MIC, so Int can only be on the Head, and Wis only on the throat, Deflection only on the shoulders, etc. If you really have objections to such stacking, make it more expensive to add such bonuses, like 1.5x the normal price.
Just my 2 cp of suggestions.
|
Maybe I'm not understanding some nuance of what idea your proposing, but it sounds a great deal like what Jason put on page 115 where putting additional abilities on other items costs 50% more. Also, if you want to put it on a part of your body that does not match its current affinity, it would be an additional 50% cost.
Maybe I'm not understanding some nuance of what idea your proposing, but it sounds a great deal like what Jason put on page 115 where putting additional abilities on other items costs 50% more. Also, if you want to put it on a part of your body that does not match its current affinity, it would be an additional 50% cost.
Sort of. It's mainly the idea of the Wizard going, "I want an Int boost, but I also want a Hat of Disguise..." Then, you basically say, for 5,800 gp, you get a Hat of Disquise that gives you a +2 bonus to Int. Same goes with every other score.
You are only allowed to do this "free" enchanting (where you literally add the prices together) for ability score bonuses, deflection bonuses to AC, armour bonuses to AC, natural armour bonuses to AC, resistance bonuses to saves, and energy resistance, like in the MIC. In addition, they can only be put on certain body slots; Int on Head, Wis on Throat, etc. Otherwise, they cost 1.5x.
Hasn't adding multiple abilities to an item always been an option?
Right, but this suggestion makes it so that adding abilities to items doesn't cost as much if the added abilities are oft-used ones.
I'm a strong supporter of the MIC way of doing things... and likely that's the route my group will go (based upon how discussions went last night).
I'd like to see stat-boosting items go back to being the exception, rather than the rule. Remember, back in 1e, how cool it was if you found a girdle of giant strength? Now everyone has one, and gauntlets of dexterity and an amulet of health, too. I can't think of a single character over 7th level in our current campaign who DOESN'T have at least 1 stat-boosting item, and the higher-level characters routinely have 2-6 of them. And that just seems silly.
Then again, I can't think of a way to avoid it, short of arbitrarily barring them... maybe the prices could be dramatically increased, to maybe 2,500 gp x bonus squared?
I'd like to see stat-boosting items go back to being the exception, rather than the rule. Remember, back in 1e, how cool it was if you found a girdle of giant strength? Now everyone has one, and gauntlets of dexterity and an amulet of health, too. I can't think of a single character over 7th level in our current campaign who DOESN'T have at least 1 stat-boosting item, and the higher-level characters routinely have 2-6 of them. And that just seems silly.
Then again, I can't think of a way to avoid it, short of arbitrarily barring them... maybe the prices could be dramatically increased, to maybe 2,500 gp x bonus squared?
I don't know about 1e, as I didn't play that version... but in 3.5, it seems the game requires stat boosts at higher levels if you want to survive. Getting rid of those items seems like a great way to cause your party to have closer calls and TPKs more often.
In all this discussion, I haven't seen much on the concern of maintaining game balance. The game is (in theory) balanced for higher level characters having certain magical items. Alter the items available, you're altering game balance... which means backwards compatibility suffers.
I'd like to see stat-boosting items go back to being the exception, rather than the rule. Remember, back in 1e, how cool it was if you found a girdle of giant strength? Now everyone has one, and gauntlets of dexterity and an amulet of health, too. I can't think of a single character over 7th level in our current campaign who DOESN'T have at least 1 stat-boosting item, and the higher-level characters routinely have 2-6 of them. And that just seems silly.
Then again, I can't think of a way to avoid it, short of arbitrarily barring them... maybe the prices could be dramatically increased, to maybe 2,500 gp x bonus squared?
Agreed. It really does seem to have become the "norm" for people to routinely have multiple stat modifying items.
Upping the priceing would help curb that, and make people think more about what stats they need boosted.
It really does seem to have become the "norm" for people to routinely have multiple stat modifying items.
We should try an experiment... create 2 parties of high level (16-20) using standard starting wealth, same ability scores, same class levels. Use pathfinder classes as written now. 4 characters (Fighter, Cleric, Wizard, Rogue). For 1 set, use the rules from Alpha 2 to equip them (2 stat boosting objects, increased cost for adding boosts, etc.) For the second set use the 3.5 rules (i.e. Magic Item Compendium rules).
Put them up against a couple different monsters you'd expect as kind of a last fight of an adventure scenario. See how they compare. Basically, tests should be run to see if multiple stat boosting gear is *required* by the game... or simply *desired* by the players.
Of course, if we go to the trouble of doing this, may as well test out the 3 buff spell limit while we're at it.
I'd like to see stat-boosting items go back to being the exception, rather than the rule. Remember, back in 1e, how cool it was if you found a girdle of giant strength? Now everyone has one, and gauntlets of dexterity and an amulet of health, too. I can't think of a single character over 7th level in our current campaign who DOESN'T have at least 1 stat-boosting item, and the higher-level characters routinely have 2-6 of them. And that just seems silly.
Then again, I can't think of a way to avoid it, short of arbitrarily barring them... maybe the prices could be dramatically increased, to maybe 2,500 gp x bonus squared?
Yeah, and I've seen way too many Cloaks of Resistance to see anything "magical" about them anymore. But without the boost, trying to make a Saving Throw in an off-category just sucks.
A more frequent increase in Ability Boosts and Saving Throws, would go along way towards making the PCs more "self-sufficient".
This would assume that stat-boosting and saving-throw boosting items would be scarce and not as powerful.
However, I doubt it this would fit backward compatibility, so it seems relegated to house-rule or optional-rule status.
But I'm with you, brother.
Yeah, and I've seen way too many Cloaks of Resistance to see anything "magical" about them anymore. But without the boost, trying to make a Saving Throw in an off-category just sucks.
Yeah, every adventurer in the world is assumed to have a cloak of resistance and a ring of protection, as well as stat-boosting items. I really, really wonder why 3.0 was designed around this paradigm. I would have started with the base assumption of fewer items, and worked the "required" boosts into the class system... but that's just me. Maybe I should be playing Iron Heroes or something.
Yeah, every adventurer in the world is assumed to have a cloak of resistance and a ring of protection, as well as stat-boosting items. I really, really wonder why 3.0 was designed around this paradigm. I would have started with the base assumption of fewer items, and worked the "required" boosts into the class system... but that's just me. Maybe I should be playing Iron Heroes or something.
I don't think 3.0 really was designed around that idea. I think it became the norm when the power level of some of the higher CR monsters was increased when 3.5 came out.
The original 3.0 campaings I ran did not have the push for stat boosters. The players focused more on the items that gave them combat options or additional powers. Of course this was also largely the fact that the ability boosting spells last 1 hour/caster level under 3.0, allowing a wizard to do some long term buffs at mid to high levels.
I don't think 3.0 really was designed around that idea. I think it became the norm when the power level of some of the higher CR monsters was increased when 3.5 came out.
I think that's probably true to a large extent, but looking at my old 3.0 DMG shows that almost all of the NPC examples have cloaks of resistance and rings of protection, at the very least -- which implies they were assumed to be possessed by the majority of characters. You're right about the insanely long-duration stat-boost spell durations in 3.0; we nerfed them before 3.5 came out, because otherwise no one had 2nd level spells -- just stat boosts.
I'm not a big fan of the ability boosters in 3.5. I think the changes in Alpha 2 are a step in the right direction, but may end up hurting certain character concepts which require boosts in multiple physical or mental stats to keep up with the high level math. I'd rather see the ability boosts as an inherent part of leveling up, than something found in a treasure trove.
I've been working out the math on an ability-progression system that could replace the ability boosters without affecting the overall power-level of the character at any particular level. I hope to use it as a house rule in my campaigns. Obviously, it will be necessary to also reduce the average wealth by level by an equal amount to that saved by getting the stats for free when leveling up.
My problem comes with determining what the average amount of ability-boosts from items is at certain levels. Currently, I'm using the following baseline:
3.5 ruleset
-----------
4th lvl: +1 total/+1 max to any one stat (+1 from levels)
6th lvl: +3 total/+3 max to any one stat (1 +2 item, +1 from levels)
8th lvl: +6 total/+4 max to any one stat (2 +2 items, +2 from levels)
12th lvl: +9 total/+7 max to any one stat (1 +4 item and 1 +2 item, +3 from levels)
16th lvl: +14 total/+10 max to any one stat (1 +6 item and 1 +4 item, +4 from levels)
20th lvl: +17 total/+11 max to any one stat (2 +6 items, +5 from levels)
To those DMs that regularly run games up to 20th level, does this look like a fair average for your typical PC? Most of my 3.5 experience has come from playing and judging Living Greyhawk, where stat-boosting items were relatively common due to the ease of gaining access to them. Most home games I've run have ended between 8th and 12th level, so I don't have a lot of data on the higher level toons.
I've toyed around with awarding 2 ability points every other level which must be applied to different abilities. It tends to overpower the lower levels, which don't need any more boosts beyond those already made in the PRPG. 20th level characters come out a bit ahead of their current 3.5 counterparts if the 3.5 character uses two slots of magical items, and a bit behind if the 3.5 character has boosters in 3 slots. Here's the breakdown on that advancement, shown at the same levels as above:
4th lvl: +4 total/+2 max to any one stat.
6th lvl: +6 total/+3 max to any one stat.
8th lvl: +8 total/+4 max to any one stat.
12th lvl: +12 total/+6 max to any one stat.
16th lvl: +16 total/+8 max to any one stat.
20th lvl: +20 total/+10 max to any one stat.
So, I'm torn. I really don't want to boost the low levels any more, but also don't want to get too complex with the scaling on the system. I also like the point-per-level gain of this system. Its symmetry appeals to me.
Maybe it's not as big an issue as I'm making it. We've been starting with 28 or 32 point buys to add some survivability at the low levels. If I switch to a 25 point buy or elite array, that should solve the low-level power creep.
|
The notion of 'body slots' and particularly of specific items only being effective in particular slots is just silly, IMO.
A Strength item could be leggings, boots, arm bands, bracers, rings, a mantle or cloak, a breastplate, gloves, a belt, a pendant that hangs over your heart or even a freaking hat, for all I care. It's a spell. Put on an item.
If Bob the Sorcerer wants a mask of +2 Charisma, it's only *more* thematic than a 'vest of Charisma,' so I've got no issues with it.
Nor do I see any concerns about putting multiple spells on a single item. If my Longsword can be +1 Flaming Burst and Holy, then there's no reason why my Mask of +2 Charisma can't also be a Mask of Disguise and have the effects of Eyes of Darkvision, at no greater cost than making the three items in question.
Entirely too many of these item slot 'rules' are arbitrary and kinda pointless, IMO. The DMG could use a lot less of this sort of stuff and a lot more silly charts like in the 1e DMG (Different herbs! A bunch of mystical associations for gemstones! Noble titles! 12 names for shades of the color purple! Cartoons involving +2 backscratchers!).
On Sunday my group ran a level 20 one night game... party of 4 v. a Red Dragon. Starting wealth of a level 20 character is 760,000 gp. And we used the Alpha 2 rules for stat boosts but not the alternate rule on 3 buffs.
My rogue had 5 ability buffs (+6 to Str, dex, Con, Int, and Wis). Looking back on it, I could have dropped the bonus to Int. But, as it worked out, I spent more than the MIC rules, but wasn't really restricted in my use of stat boosting gear. So, I didn't feel as though this change made any significant impact for the Rogue.
My Wizard had 4 ability boosting items (+6 to Int, Wis, Con, and Dex)... and, again, the only difference is it cost a bit more than the MIC would cost. The two item rule really had no impact upon my choice of equipment.
I did use the no exp cost for crafting rule, and loaded up on crafting feats... so my Wizard equipped himself at half price. Which was nice.
I also used Wish on myself, which dropped my charisma to 7. Made for some really great saves on those spell like abilities.
My problem comes with determining what the average amount of ability-boosts from items is at certain levels.
As a starting point, I'd use the wealth by level guideline and divvy it up by maybe 50% weapons and armor (or wands and staves, or whatever), 25% cloak/ring/stat boosters, and 25% other. Dunno. I like your idea; I might have to look at some of the numbers myself, given the chance...
Something else I was wondering about... with 2 stat boosting items, what happens if you are hit with mage's disjunction?
You have 2 saves, one for all your physical boosts, one for all your mental boosts. Failure on one or the other, and you're likely pretty bad off.
But, if you can have those gloves of dex, the belt of giant strength, the amulet of con, the headband of int... that's 4 saves... 4 chances to not lose an ability boost... and for each failure you're hurt, but not hurt as bad as a loss of all physical or all mental boosts would hurt.
Btw - I don't think it's out of the question to have all 6 abilities boosted by +6 with equipment by level 20 (216,000 gold, with 760,000 gold to spend... using the MIC rules, or ~200,000 with a belt of magnificence (if I remember the price right) from Miniatures handbook, or ~290,000 gold using the Alpha 2 rules and 2 items).
Something else I was wondering about... with 2 stat boosting items, what happens if you are hit with mage's disjunction?
Well, it temporarily sucks a lot, but notice they've nerfed disjunction so that it's not permanent (er, "instantaneous." Whatever).
The original 3.0 campaings I ran did not have the push for stat boosters. The players focused more on the items that gave them combat options or additional powers. Of course this was also largely the fact that the ability boosting spells last 1 hour/caster level under 3.0, allowing a wizard to do some long term buffs at mid to high levels.
Ditto - we've been using 3.0 since it's release and, too, we've never suffered from this 'item ability boosting obsession' that seems to run through 3.5. Again, the more popular items have always been those ones that do exciting things that the players can't do themselves. Also, we were never sure what all the fuss was about the Bull Strength etc. spells being too powerful at 1hr/lvl. We've used it and it's never been broken, although I freely admit that the closest we've ever come to 'power gaming' was discussing the potential in a Pal/Sor multiclass character. ;)
The notion of 'body slots' and particularly of specific items only being effective in particular slots is just silly, IMO.
A Strength item could be leggings, boots, arm bands, bracers, rings, a mantle or cloak, a breastplate, gloves, a belt, a pendant that hangs over your heart or even a freaking hat, for all I care. It's a spell. Put on an item.(SNIP) Nor do I see any concerns about putting multiple spells on a single item. If my Longsword can be +1 Flaming Burst and Holy, then there's no reason why my Mask of +2 Charisma can't also be a Mask of Disguise and have the effects of Eyes of Darkvision,
(SNIP)Entirely too many of these item slot 'rules' are arbitrary and kinda pointless, IMO. The DMG could use a lot less of this sort of stuff and a lot more silly charts like in the 1e DMG (Different herbs! A bunch of mystical associations for gemstones! Noble titles!(SNIP)
Emphasis mine
YES! No need for me to type my feelings now - all said for me, thanks to Set. /nods to Set sagely/
Peace,
tfad
I'm with you on the body slot thing as well. As a side effect of my general disdain of the "christmas tree" game design assumption, I also dislike being unable to combine effects in a single item except by wildly increasing the costs. To my mind, having a sword that also functions as a ring of invisibility is a bigger risk than having a sword AND a ring, because if somebody sunders your sword, you're out the equivalent of 2 items.
Something else I was wondering about... with 2 stat boosting items, what happens if you are hit with mage's disjunction?Well, it temporarily sucks a lot, but notice they've nerfed disjunction so that it's not permanent (er, "instantaneous." Whatever).
Your out minutes/level... so yeah, it doesn't cost as much to replace (unless you roll a natural 1 and your headband of Int, Wis & Charisma explodes)... but still, 17 minutes without 3 ability boosts? As opposed to 17 minutes without 1 ability boost?
Your out minutes/level... so yeah, it doesn't cost as much to replace (unless you roll a natural 1 and your headband of Int, Wis & Charisma explodes)... but still, 17 minutes without 3 ability boosts? As opposed to 17 minutes without 1 ability boost?
Yes, they've traded less likelihood of surviving the one encounter for greater likelihood of surviving the next 170 encounters while you try and replace all your gear. I'm in favor of that; the spell has a larger effect on that encounter, and a much smaller effect on all subsequent encounters.
|
I took an idea from the Conan d20 and have individual stat boosts of +1 @ 4th, 8th, 12th, 15th, and 20th levels, and boost ALL stats by 1 at 5th, 10th, and 20th. I use a 28-point semi-random point buy (the Three Dragon Ante reading) for character creation.
I then DRASTICALLY reduced the amount of stat-boosting items my players receive. I am running two 7th level parties, one with 5 PCs and one with 6. They have three stat boosting items total between them. Maybe four, if I'm slipping.
I have seen no evidence of increasing danger or character death by using this model.
Your out minutes/level... so yeah, it doesn't cost as much to replace (unless you roll a natural 1 and your headband of Int, Wis & Charisma explodes)... but still, 17 minutes without 3 ability boosts? As opposed to 17 minutes without 1 ability boost?Yes, they've traded less likelihood of surviving the one encounter for greater likelihood of surviving the next 170 encounters while you try and replace all your gear. I'm in favor of that; the spell has a larger effect on that encounter, and a much smaller effect on all subsequent encounters.
I'm fine with the change to disjunction... but I wonder if the combining of ability boosts is going to have unforeseen consequences at higher levels when hit with that spell. That was the point I was making.
I took an idea from the Conan d20 and have individual stat boosts of +1 @ 4th, 8th, 12th, 15th, and 20th levels, and boost ALL stats by 1 at 5th, 10th, and 20th. I use a 28-point semi-random point buy (the Three Dragon Ante reading) for character creation.
I then DRASTICALLY reduced the amount of stat-boosting items my players receive. I am running two 7th level parties, one with 5 PCs and one with 6. They have three stat boosting items total between them. Maybe four, if I'm slipping.
I have seen no evidence of increasing danger or character death by using this model.
Cool! Then do you also reduce treasure accrodingly? If so, by how much?
I'd like to see stat-boosting items go back to being the exception, rather than the rule. Remember, back in 1e, how cool it was if you found a girdle of giant strength? Now everyone has one, and gauntlets of dexterity and an amulet of health, too. I can't think of a single character over 7th level in our current campaign who DOESN'T have at least 1 stat-boosting item, and the higher-level characters routinely have 2-6 of them. And that just seems silly.
Then again, I can't think of a way to avoid it, short of arbitrarily barring them... maybe the prices could be dramatically increased, to maybe 2,500 gp x bonus squared?
I have been wishing the prices on ability-boosting items could be increased to something on that order for ages. It seems I am in the minority, and most probably that has everything to do with the fact that players have been spoiled for the last 8 years with having such items and only old-schoolers like you and me are likely to have such predilections. Magic items used to be cool and have nifty effects. Now they just boost your stats. That has always seemed kind of boring to me, let alone too powerful and requiring too much math for a tabletop. Part of what makes D&D unique from a game like WoW is that you can think of interesting and unusual uses for the helm of telepathy or the immovable rod. Trying to make D&D compete with MMOs that quite frankly have a much easier time of handling all the math needed to add on tons of bonuses seems like a lost cause. Ability boosters and anything else that adds bonuses to existing stats (like rings of protection, etc.) should be rare and things like gloves of storing and medallions of thought should be more prominent. I already seek to pry out as many of the stat-boosters from my game as possible, and it would be nice to have an old-school system that helped me out a little bit.