RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Necessity and ubiquity of munchkin magic items (Belt of Strength +3 etc.);
Out of everything on the list, this is the only one that really bothered me. I hate it that attribute-boosting items are more or less required, and that cloaks of resistance and rings of protection are default assumptions for all PCs and NPCs. I'd rather remove all "magic shoppes,".... Alas, such a move would break the back-compatibility that PFRPG strives for, so it is not to be.
Kirth, with respect, I've never understood DM's who feel that they must include magic shops --or Swashbucklers, or Legacy items, or psionics-- into their home campaigns.
If you don't like magic shops, don't have them. If you don't like stat-boost items, don't give them to players. If a PC wizard wants to manufacture items that are rare and highly sought, require a side-trek to obtain rare magical-critter-body-parts. If the party isn't circumspect about wearing stat-bling doobises, have the local thieves try to steal them.
Really, there's nothing in the rules that says that PC's need stat-boost items. If you're worried that your party of 7th-Level characters would be a little weaker without the stat-boosters, then run them through adventures set for 6th-Level characters.
(My solution, by the way, was simply to reprice boost-items in my campaign: +2 boosters cost 8,000 gp; +4, 64,000 gp; and +6, 216,000 gp. The +2 stat boosting Ioun Stones cost 16,000 gp, but grant a Morale modifier, so they stack with most other boosts, which are enhancement bonuses; Ioun Stones are a long-simmering plot point in my campaign.)
|
Really, there's nothing in the rules that says that PC's need stat-boost items. If you're worried that your party of 7th-Level characters would be a little weaker without the stat-boosters, then run them through adventures set for 6th-Level characters.
(My solution, by the way, was simply to reprice boost-items in my campaign: +2 boosters cost 8,000 gp; +4, 64,000 gp; and +6, 216,000 gp. The +2 stat boosting Ioun Stones cost 16,000 gp, but grant a Morale modifier, so they stack with most other boosts, which are enhancement bonuses; Ioun Stones are a long-simmering plot point in my campaign.)
Your points are valid - but you must recognize that 3.5 is hinged upon a balancing system of numbers for wealth by level etc. All is taken into perfect math equations balance for the purpose of ECLs.
If you mess with one - or don't have access to it, or increase cost, etc, then you're potentially throwing off the curve when pitted against appropriate ECL encounters.
I'm not saying you cant do this, or even shouldn't - just pointing out that DMs who feel this way, and who make it nigh-impossible to craft/buy/find certain magic items, that the game can be unbalanced and too difficult with all things being equal.
3rd edition was the first step towards making D&D more akin to a computer/video game RPG - by establishing a system and a given for the ability to easily buy and craft magic items.
I'm not necessarily opposed to the "make such things rare" mentality, but I think it needs to be enforced in moderation - or change the ECL of the adventure or risk making something not work well.
The math in XP, CR, ECL, Wealth, everything is on a specified balancing mechanic - not unlike the eco-system. Remove the predators in the area, and the herbavores become too populated, and the flowers, shrubs and saplings disappear, hurting the foliage, which makes the river banks weak and change shape, the bugs have no where to hide since the plants and flowers are gone, which removes the frogs, and then the fish begin to disappear....
Robert
|
|
I'm surprisingly indifferent to group mechanics, but that's because some of the best campaigns I've ever played in or run have had a total of two PCs (sort of simulating the Lethal Weapon type "buddy" feel). Still, your ideas are ususally (actually, almost always) good; I look forward to seeing the things you've come up with.
No, thats not surprising. I'll admit, I thought about that fact and figured it wouldn't be ideal for 2 player groups (unless theres a couple of NPCs), but as I said initially, I am redesigning it for my group and table of players. We usually have 5-6 players - sometimes 7.
Of the 5 players: we have 1 since 94 (my best friend), 1 since 95 (my wife), 1 joined in 97 and a fourth in 98. So as you can see, they aren't going anywhere, and I can safely say that I know them and their tendencies and likes/dislikes well. So creating this for them is pretty easy - and worth it - since I have a small turn-over ratio I'm confident that they'll stick around to enjoy it and make it a viable system for their group.
The last one or two slots are usually filled by 1 military guy from the air force base out here, who come in and out as they move off with other orders (we're on our 4th one of those in the past year and a half), and then usually 1 of about 3 in our area that take turns while the other two have availability and/or commitment issues.
Robert
Your points are valid - but you must recognize that 3.5 is hinged upon a balancing system of numbers for wealth by level etc. All is taken into perfect math equations balance for the purpose of ECLs.
If you mess with one - or don't have access to it, or increase cost, etc, then you're potentially throwing off the curve when pitted against appropriate ECL encounters.
Some people put WAY too much emphasis on the supposed perfect math balance of 3e. I've been running Shackled City with a group that has relatively few stat bumping items and protective magic and they've been doing fine without them.
The main effect that they were going for and reasonably achieved was figuring out about the first point that a character could credibly have those sorts of items and when they could be expected to have magic weapons of a particular bonus.Everything else is pretty much exaggeration.
|
I'm surprisingly indifferent to group mechanics, but that's because some of the best campaigns I've ever played in or run have had a total of two PCs (sort of simulating the Lethal Weapon type "buddy" feel). Still, your ideas are ususally (actually, almost always) good; I look forward to seeing the things you've come up with.
I am getting a little scared with how much I agree with you Kirth!
I have had the same experience. Two campaigns I played with my little brother involved a dynamic duo of characters - slightly higher level than the adventure called for as balance. Buddy stories all the way!
The first was my brothers dwarf fighter and my aasimar sorcerer (a gruff, drunken dragonslayer, with a wise, diplomatic force-mage).
The second was my brothers kobold rogue and my dwarf barbarian (a paranoid, manipulative kelptomaniac, with a good-hearted but gullible simpleton).
Our character interactions were priceless. I have found my favorite number of PCs is probably around 3 (not too many to clog up the action/roleplaying spotlight, but enough to deal with any problem).
|
|
Some people put WAY too much emphasis on the supposed perfect math balance of 3e. I've been running Shackled City with a group that has relatively few stat bumping items and protective magic and they've been doing fine without them.
The main effect that they were going for and reasonably achieved was figuring out about the first point that a character could credibly have those sorts of items and when they could be expected to have magic weapons of a particular bonus.
Everything else is pretty much exaggeration.
Agreed. My current campaign has 1/2 treasure and 1/2 gp limits in towns, along with 1/2 XP. The characters are often far below the wealth/level guidelines, but can survive encounters with intelligence and caution - it just means they take longer breaks between adventures.
Kirth, with respect... If you don't like magic shops, don't have them. If you don't like stat-boost items, don't give them to players.
Chris, probably I was being unclear. I don't begrudge other people their use, and I've come up with ways around them for my group. But that required fairly aggressive houseruling on my part to avoid having to convert the excellent Dungeon APs we were running... because the 3e default assumption is that ALL characters (PCs and NPCs) of "X" or "Y" level will have a cloak of resistance, an amulet of natural armor, a ring of protection, and one or more stat-boost items. Violating that assumption is work-heavy for a DM running prewritten adventures; you've got to either de-item the villains (and adjust their stats accordingly), or "eyeball" the level equivalence and scale it, preferrably without throwing off the assumed progression of the AP, etc.
So, yes, I've dealt with it myself. But it involved a not-inconsiderable amount of work on my part, and continues to do so. I'd prefer it if other people who feel similarly (and there seem to be a fair number of them -- as shown by the inclusion in the list, and by the existence of threads like this one) had an easier time of it, and didn't have to re-invent the wheel.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
The 3e default assumption is that ALL characters (PCs and NPCs) of "X" or "Y" level will have a cloak of resistance, an amulet of natural armor, a ring of protection, and one or more stat-boost items. Violating that assumption is work-heavy for a DM running prewritten adventures.
Hi, Kirth. I'm not sure this is true: for example, there are a lot of other magical cloaks and amulets, so the default assumption can't be that everybody's wearing cloaks of resistance and amulets of natural armor. And when I look at, say, "Red Hand of Doom", I don't see very many NPC's with any of those items.
I think it may well be a default assumption of certain play styles, but not the game mechanics themselves.
I'm not sure this is true: for example, there are a lot of other magical cloaks and amulets, so the default assumption can't be that everybody's wearing cloaks of resistance and amulets of natural armor. And when I look at, say, "Red Hand of Doom", I don't see very many NPC's with any of those items. I think it may well be a default assumption of certain play styles, but not the game mechanics themselves.
Certainly, I spoke in more absolute terms than were accurate. However, I do note that RHoD was co-authored by Mr Jacobs himself, who posted a few lines ago about trying to cut down on the "defaults." When I look at the NPCS in the Dungeon Masters Guide, or at many of the NPCs in Dungeon adventures, on the other hand, I see an awful lot of the same items come up time and again. As noted by others, people who opt for "variant" items to fill those slots are far more interesting, but typically fall behind in the projected power curve -- a losing proposition if you're playing in, say, the Age of Worms. Indeed, didn't you mention that you'd repriced some of those items to match their obvious usefulness? (A logical and elegant solution, by the way.)
But here's one thing I like: most Pathfinder characters get some bonuses that their 3.5e counterparts lacked... so maybe Pathfinder characters without those items will approximate 3.5e characters with them, and we can go back to keeping, say, a deck of illusion instead of immediately trying to trade it in for a wand of cure light wounds... and still be able to play in adventures written for "appropriate" level parties. And with Mr Jacobs at the helm of Pathfinder, a subsequent power creep might not be inevitable. Instead of "these characters will be too powerful!" maybe we can turn it into a situation of "these characters can take weird items, and still not die in droves when playing at their level in prewritten APs!" That would be pretty cool, from my standpoint.
So, provisionally, I can add this issue to the list that someone posted early on: "Pathfinder -- fixed!"
I've not even read the alpha PF rules yet (its still DL-ing) but Iwould like to add my E0.00/£0.02/$0.02 or 2cp on this
--Infinite summoning (A summons B summons C summons...)
I thought that a summoned creature couldnt summon stuff. e.g. you summon a succubus, it in turn cannot use its summon skills as it was a summoned creature?
and I'm quite sure I didnt make it up.. i thoguth I read it somewhere.
Anyway time to read this thing and see whats causing WotC to freak out.
</\/\I= Spyral Blade =I/\/\>
