| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen a lot of discussion on players being all but required to stick to the Big Six magic items at high levels of play, unable to branch out into the more exotic array of items out there. In my experience, this has always been the case.
In case you don't know what I mean by Big Six:
Magic Weapons, Magic Armor, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Natural Armor, Stat-boost items, Bracers of Armor
Virtually all magic items looted that are not one of the Big Six, are immediately sold to fund the improvement or purchase of Big Six items. Lots of suggestions have been proffered, but the necessity is built right into the game.
I talked it over with my players and we've all agreed to try the following THREE house-rules in an effort to un-trivialize other magic items. I'll try and keep this brief so I don't lose people to boredom half-way through.
The following rules only apply to the Big Six, plus the Amulet of Mighty Fists, which is really just like a Weapon.
Rule 1: Static Cost vs. Power
There are no more +1 or +2 items, there are just magic items. Furthermore, the value is locked at the most basic version of each of the above items. For example, there are no +1 Longswords, there are only Magic Longswords. A Magic Longsword is worth 2315 gold, never more. The character using the item does get a plus to attack and damage, but it depends. This sounds weird, I know, but please read on.
Rule 2: Power is tied to Level
As a character's level increases, so do the powers of his Big Six items. If a 3rd level character wields a Magic Longsword, he'd get +1 to attack and damage. If he keeps using the same sword all the way to 20th, it would be a +5 to attack and damage.
Basically, there is a table for each of the Big Six items, giving a plus based on the character's level. I could list the tables I've worked up so far, but I figure most people might prefer to write their own. Essentially, the "plus" is loosely tied to what level Wizard would be required to create an item of that "plus" under the old rules, then modified as necessary.
Rule 3: Modularity
Each item above is modular in some fashion. This is the most complicated part to explain. All those weapon and armor abilities that are worth a "+1" or "+2", etc. are instead treated sort of like Augment Crystals. They don't have to be crystals, but the idea remains the same. A +1 ability like Flaming costs 6000 gold and is purchased separately from the weapon. If you loot a Flaming Dagger. You can remove the Flaming portion, add it to your weapon, then sell the magic dagger. You can add a total of 5 "plusses" worth of abilities to your weapon, or possibly you may want to rule that you can only add a number of "plusses" equal to your current weapon bonus. Armor works similarly to Weapons.
Rings of Protection can be stuck onto other rings. They are the one exception to the rule that says "Only 2 rings per character." Like weapons and armor, the bonus changes depending on character level.
Amulets of Natural Armor become Chains of Natural Armor. You can remove the amulet from it's chain and hang it onto this chain, instead.
The Cloak of Resistance becomes a Clasp of Resistance, any cloak can be held on with this clasp so you can have your Save bonuses and wear your Cloak of Arachnia, too.
Stat-boost items and Amulets of Mighty Fists are probably not modular except where the mix with other modular items. For example, you could hang either a Periapt of Wisdom OR your Amulet of Mighty Fists from your Chain of Natural Armor.
Similar to the Ring of Protection, the Armor Bonus could be enchanted onto other bracers, or added like an Augment crystal. Like the others, the bonus changes by level.
So what is this supposed to accomplish?
First of all, these rules remove the necessity to constantly pour resources into upgrading items. There is only so much upgrading you can do and it's less expensive than before. A character could acquire a set of Big Six items in the early levels, then possibly never bother to acquire anything else and still be able to keep up with rising Challenge Ratings.
Also, the modular nature of these items allow the players to actually use the items they come across, rather than sell them off because they don't want to give up bonuses to wear them.
Won't this just escalate power creep?
Only if the DM wants it too. Item power levels are tied to character level. The DM controls that table. It doesn't matter how much money or stuff the PC has, items can't have their bonuses upgraded any further. Things like AC bonuses can be directly controlled in a very fair way.
Won't this dramatically increase the amount of treasure the PCs have?
Not necessarily. Treasure is more useful and the PCs do spend less of it on upgrades. However, at the same time, items are worth less. If some villain is carrying a +5 Dagger, though that used to be worth 50302 gold, if the PCs loot it under these rules, it's only a Magic Dagger worth 2302 gold.
I'm running an AP and it calls for a monster with a +4 Vorpal Halberd. What's that mean in terms of all these rules?
Have the monster wield it like it's a +4 Vorpal Halberd. When the PCs loot it, it's just a Magic Halberd with a Vorpal Augment. That Vorpal Augment can be removed and added to one of their weapons (so long as they don't have any other abilities on the weapon, Vorpal is a +5), or sold (it's worth 70000 gold), then if no one wants a magic Halberd, they can sell it for whatever they can get for one. It's worth 2310 gold, regardless of the fact that it was +4 in the monster's claws.
I wrote way more than I thought I would. I'd like to hear thoughts on this, though it's probably too radical a change for most people.
Disclaimer: I'm posting this as a house-rule suggestion. It's probably too radical to consider as a genuine suggestion for Pathfinder RPG.
If this really, really bothers you, and I know it bothers me:
House rule each of these six powers (probably excepting Ability buffs), spread the bonus over 20 levels, and make it a part of level progression for all characters.
Then simply disintegrate all benefits for the PCs from these items, and leave the NPCs and Adventures in tact.
In fact, I'm going to do this, effective now.
If this really, really bothers you, and I know it bothers me:
House rule each of these six powers (probably excepting Ability buffs), spread the bonus over 20 levels, and make it a part of level progression for all characters.
Then simply disintegrate all benefits for the PCs from these items, and leave the NPCs and Adventures in tact.
In fact, I'm going to do this, effective now.
I actually considered that. I'm not quite ready to give the PCs de facto Vow of Poverty. The house rules I suggest all but do what you are saying, but I still want to have the option open for characters to somehow miss those bonuses, even if it's only in extremely unlikely circumstances.
Also, I'm especially attached to my Modular Weapon and Armor augmentations. I think it will making looting a lot more fun for my players.
|
I like the ideas you have here. They are very creative, and I like the modular aspect. pretty cool stuff. I might have to try that sometime although I must say I do love throwing various weapons into a game with different properties, and seeing which ones are going to be kept. I also have been disappointed making up a cool item that no one wants to use because they aren't proficient, or don't want to give up a weapon they have focused on ect.
double post
I actually considered that. I'm not quite ready to give the PCs de facto Vow of Poverty. The house rules I suggest all but do what you are saying, but I still want to have the option open for characters to somehow miss those bonuses, even if it's only in extremely unlikely circumstances.Also, I'm especially attached to my Modular Weapon and Armor augmentations. I think it will making looting a lot more fun for my players.
I like your modular rule too. I hope it's not insulting to say it reminds me rather of Materia from a certain fantasy (I heard it's the final one).
For the "lite" version, though, I was thinking all characters get 1/4 their level as a "Hero" bonus to attacks, damage, and saves. They get this bonus x3 to AC, irrespective of armor worn (Bracers, Breastplate, or birthday suit). 1st= 0/0, 4th=1/3, 8th=2/6, 12th=3/9, 16th=4/12. 20th=5/15.
My temptation is to say that Hero bonus stacks with everything, as this would bring many low level spells back into circulation. Since they cost spell slots and actions, is that so imbalanced?
As for a vow of poverty, a Keen Scimitar is still pretty keen, and a dwarven thrower lacks none of it's former charm. A cloak of the manta ray is certainly much more stylish than ever.
Leave the NPC stat blocks as they are, any Enhancement, Resistance, Deflection, or Natural Armor bonus from equipment is just their version of the Hero bonus, and those items are non-magical (or replaced with cooler magic effects).
I like your ideas, but it does end with some things being rather peculiar.
Money becomes relatively hard to come by, since magic weapons without "specials" are worth practically nothing.
Fighter types come out smelling like a rose. that 200k weapon you've been drooling over? costs 101,000 gold. That 100k piece of armor? Price just got halved. Not only that, but you can mix and match your pieces relatively cheaply. (which isn't bad- it's just a side effect of your system).
The question I have though is- how does this system translate over into other items? If my wizard wants a Staff of Power, which cost 200k, does he get one at a reduced cost? Can that plain q-staff he lopped off a tree himself at 1st level rise as he levels up to eventually be the grandiose Staff of Power? I can imagine that the answer is no, but If the answer is no then wizards and clerics who want staves and such are suddenly at a very distinct disadvantage when it comes to buying things. A warrior can pick up any magic sword and it'll be a good one, bought and sold cheaply, leaving the wizard no effective way to garner the cash necessary to get someof the higher cost items he/she may wish to possess.
There needs to be some form of price equalization for the higher end Very expensive gear that isn't a melee weapon or suit of armor.
-S
I like your ideas, but it does end with some things being rather peculiar.
Money becomes relatively hard to come by, since magic weapons without "specials" are worth practically nothing.
Fighter types come out smelling like a rose. that 200k weapon you've been drooling over? costs 101,000 gold. That 100k piece of armor? Price just got halved. Not only that, but you can mix and match your pieces relatively cheaply. (which isn't bad- it's just a side effect of your system).
The question I have though is- how does this system translate over into other items? If my wizard wants a Staff of Power, which cost 200k, does he get one at a reduced cost? Can that plain q-staff he lopped off a tree himself at 1st level rise as he levels up to eventually be the grandiose Staff of Power? I can imagine that the answer is no, but If the answer is no then wizards and clerics who want staves and such are suddenly at a very distinct disadvantage when it comes to buying things. A warrior can pick up any magic sword and it'll be a good one, bought and sold cheaply, leaving the wizard no effective way to garner the cash necessary to get someof the higher cost items he/she may wish to possess.
There needs to be some form of price equalization for the higher end Very expensive gear that isn't a melee weapon or suit of armor.
-S
Suits me well enough, since I never cared for Ye olde Magic Weapon Shoppe anyway. The idea of an archmage buying a staff instead of finding or creating it makes me a little nauseous. I understand I am in a minority with that statement.
|
I really like the modular idea behind these magic items. They sort of remind me of the lightsaber crystals found in the Knights of the Old Republic video games. This is actually a pretty fantastic suggestion.
If I were to do it, I might require a significant amount of time required to change the augments, so that you couldn't just pull out a flaming augment and stick in a frost augment when it turns out you're fighting a Fire Giant. Perhaps it would require a day-long ritual performed by a Wizard with the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat and a small cost of 1000gp per level of the augment (ie: 1000gp for flaming, 2000gp for flaming burst, 5000gp for vorpal, as examples)?
Again, awesome house-rule, that I may use!
Great, so let him craft it. For 100k that is now /extremely difficult/ for him to find because magic weapons and armor are now obscenely cheap.
Which was my point- rather than the issue of "magic shops".
Where does the wizard get the money to craft that staff? Or wands? Or rods?
Weapons are by far the most common, most expensive item that exists. Reducing their cost inthe manner suggested isn't a bad idea but it has a ripple effect all across the "equipment board".
If you use this system- and it is a good system, imo- you need to make up the cash difference somewhere OR Make some of the really high end items that this system doesn't adjust, cheaper or easier to craft somehow. The shop needs to sell 'em cheaper or the feats need to make them for 1/4 cost or *something* otherwise the items that were once prized and looked forward to become absolutely impossible to acquire.
-S
|
In case you don't know what I mean by Big Six:
Magic Weapons, Magic Armor, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Natural Armor, Stat-boost items, Bracers of Armor
(quibble)Bracers of Armor should be lumped in with Magic Armor, and you're missing Cloak of Resistance.(/quibble)
That aside, it's an interesting idea. I'm not sure that the modularity is a "flavor" that I like, and I think that redesigning the character wealth guidelines is well beyond the amount of work I'm interested in doing. Like everyone said above, there's definitely going to be ripple effects from completely devaluing magic arms and armor.
I'd be real curious to see how it's working out for you in 6 months, though. Definitely come back and share how it's going!
I really like the modular idea behind these magic items. They sort of remind me of the lightsaber crystals found in the Knights of the Old Republic video games. This is actually a pretty fantastic suggestion.
If I were to do it, I might require a significant amount of time required to change the augments, so that you couldn't just pull out a flaming augment and stick in a frost augment when it turns out you're fighting a Fire Giant. Perhaps it would require a day-long ritual performed by a Wizard with the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat and a small cost of 1000gp per level of the augment (ie: 1000gp for flaming, 2000gp for flaming burst, 5000gp for vorpal, as examples)?
Again, awesome house-rule, that I may use!
Thank you very much!
The system I'm going to use for Augment costs, in case you're curious:
I agree that some kind of time commitment should be required so that Augments are not changed in the middle of battle. I was thinking 10 minutes...not so long as to be a colossal pain, but impossible in combat.
Weapon Augments
+1 Augments cost 6000 gold each
+2 Augments cost 16000 gold each
+3 Augments cost 30000 gold each
+4 Augments cost 48000 gold each
+5 Augments cost 70000 gold each
Armor Augments
+1 Augments cost 3000 gold each
+2 Augments cost 8000 gold each
+3 Augments cost 15000 gold each
+4 Augments cost 24000 gold each
+5 Augments cost 35000 gold each
Weapon and Armor augments that don't use the "plus" but rather a fixed price are unchanged.
In case you're wondering, I didn't pull these numbers out of the air. Basically, these prices are locked in such a way that a +1 Weapon with ONE augment costs the same under the old system and the new system. I.e. +1 Vorpal Longsword is worth 72315 under either system.
|
|
That aside, it's an interesting idea. I'm not sure that the modularity is a "flavor" that I like, and I think that redesigning the character wealth guidelines is well beyond the amount of work I'm interested in doing. Like everyone said above, there's definitely going to be ripple effects from completely devaluing magic arms and armor.
Yeah, I can definitely see the flavour problems with this mechanic, especially seeing how in this relatively short thread, there have already been two references to how similar this system is to a similar video game system. It seems a little "high-magic" as well. I could definitely see this more in a high-fantasy setting like Eberron more than I would see it in a setting like Greyhawk, for example.
Also, I agree with your quibbles. Cloak of Resistance is very much an important one of these items.
Great, so let him craft it. For 100k that is now /extremely difficult/ for him to find because magic weapons and armor are now obscenely cheap.
Which was my point- rather than the issue of "magic shops".Where does the wizard get the money to craft that staff? Or wands? Or rods?
Weapons are by far the most common, most expensive item that exists. Reducing their cost inthe manner suggested isn't a bad idea but it has a ripple effect all across the "equipment board".
If you use this system- and it is a good system, imo- you need to make up the cash difference somewhere OR Make some of the really high end items that this system doesn't adjust, cheaper or easier to craft somehow. The shop needs to sell 'em cheaper or the feats need to make them for 1/4 cost or *something* otherwise the items that were once prized and looked forward to become absolutely impossible to acquire.
-S
Thank you for the compliment!
I see your concern. I have not started using this yet, but I have been paying attention to how the treasure would look under this system in my current campaign. I'm running Rise of the Runelords, right now. I would say the vast majority of treasure in the campaign is unaffected. Coins, gems, art and all other magic items outside the Big Six are unaffected by these rules. A substantial portion of items in the Big Six are also unaffected because they are already +1 items.
Prior to level 15, I would guesstimate about a %10 reduction in treasure value, which is probably more than made up for by making Big Six items effectively cheaper. After level 15, it will probably start to be a steeper decline, but your critical Big Six items are in good shape, even if you have no other treasure.
There's no doubt this needs some playtesting to be SURE things will work, though.
In case you don't know what I mean by Big Six:
Magic Weapons, Magic Armor, Ring of Protection, Amulet of Natural Armor, Stat-boost items, Bracers of Armor
(quibble)Bracers of Armor should be lumped in with Magic Armor, and you're missing Cloak of Resistance.(/quibble)
That aside, it's an interesting idea. I'm not sure that the modularity is a "flavor" that I like, and I think that redesigning the character wealth guidelines is well beyond the amount of work I'm interested in doing. Like everyone said above, there's definitely going to be ripple effects from completely devaluing magic arms and armor.
I'd be real curious to see how it's working out for you in 6 months, though. Definitely come back and share how it's going!
Oops, I did leave it off the list there, but in my defense, I do mention it later. :)
If this works the way I imagine, no redesign of wealth guidelines should be necessary. Every adventure would be run the same way.
Thanks for reading!
|
|
In case you're wondering, I didn't pull these numbers out of the air. Basically, these prices are locked in such a way that a +1 Weapon with ONE augment costs the same under the old system and the new system. I.e. +1 Vorpal Longsword is worth 72315 under either system.
Seems like a pretty good pricing scheme! Now the questions remains, how many augments can you put in a weapon? Is there a limit? Is the limit dependant on the weapon? Can some weapons have more slots than others? And if so, does it cost more to do a second augment?
I might suggest that a +50% cost be applied to the second augment applied to a weapon or suit of armour. This would be a way to try to reconcile the differing costs of having, for example, a flaming, frost sword in the old system to this new system. In 3.5, a flaming, frost weapon costs 18,000gp + base weapon cost, while in this system, it only costs 14,000gp + base weapon cost. That's a pretty significant saving, especially considering the advantage that these augments have of being semi-interchangeable.
Perhaps the cost should only be applied to the cost of the augment ritual? Not too sure on this one...
|
|
In case you're wondering, I didn't pull these numbers out of the air. Basically, these prices are locked in such a way that a +1 Weapon with ONE augment costs the same under the old system and the new system. I.e. +1 Vorpal Longsword is worth 72315 under either system.
Except that, since you're limiting affixes to the enhancement bonus, they're not getting a +1 Vorpal Longsword, they're getting a +5 Vorpal Longsword, which would run 200,315 in 3.5 rules.
Additionally, you're valuing single, powerful affixes considerably higher than multiple "weak" ones. A +5 Flaming, Undead Bane, Keen, Ghost Touch, Spell-Storing Longsword costs 32,315...less than half of your Vorpal Longsword, and roughly 1/6 of it's value under 3.5 rules.
Seems like a pretty good pricing scheme! Now the questions remains, how many augments can you put in a weapon? Is there a limit? Is the limit dependant on the weapon? Can some weapons have more slots than others? And if so, does it cost more to do a second augment?
I might suggest that a +50% cost be applied to the second augment applied to a weapon or suit of armour. This would be a way to try to reconcile the differing costs of having, for example, a flaming, frost sword in the old system to this new system. In 3.5, a flaming, frost weapon costs 18,000gp + base weapon cost, while in this system, it only costs 14,000gp + base weapon cost. That's a pretty significant saving, especially considering the advantage that these augments have of being semi-interchangeable.
Perhaps the cost should only be applied to the cost of the augment ritual? Not too sure on this one...
You can put 5 "plusses" worth of augments on a weapon. Any more than that and it would have to be an epic item and require a different set of epic rules. While this means it's now impossible to put together a +1 Flaming Shocking Holy Vorpal Longsword, whereas before you could, I see this as a good thing. However, I'm considering adding the rule that you can only add a number of augments to a weapon or armor equal to the current "plus."
Under these rules, the cost of an Augment is fixed. Attaching one to a weapon costs nothing and anyone can do it, though it should be time consuming. If we increase the cost of successive augments, we should probably stick with the old rules since they work something like that already.
I really appreciate you helping me brainstorm this! :)
Yeah, I can definitely see the flavour problems with this mechanic, especially seeing how in this relatively short thread, there have already been two references to how similar this system is to a similar video game system. It seems a little "high-magic" as well. I could definitely see this more in a high-fantasy setting like Eberron more than I would see it in a setting like Greyhawk, for example.
Also, I agree with your quibbles. Cloak of Resistance is very much an important one of these items.
Okay, I admit it. I'm a Final Fantasy fan. Given half a chance, I'd have my players changing their clothes to get different Job/Classes. Arguably, this system draws a few parallels between items in both FF7 and FF10. However, I've been tossing this around in my head almost since 3rd edition came out. They've designed a modular magic item system already, I'm just expanding it a little.
Used correctly, it should be no more "High Magic" than the current Pathfinder adventure paths, so wouldn't require any more work to tune down than it would to tune down the current magic item rules.
Except that, since you're limiting affixes to the enhancement bonus, they're not getting a +1 Vorpal Longsword, they're getting a +5 Vorpal Longsword, which would run 200,315 in 3.5 rules.
Additionally, you're valuing single, powerful affixes considerably higher than multiple "weak" ones. A +5 Flaming, Undead Bane, Keen, Ghost Touch, Spell-Storing Longsword costs 32,315...less than half of your Vorpal Longsword, and roughly 1/6 of it's value under 3.5 rules.
Everything you're saying here is quite true, but I assure you it's very intentional. In my opinion, adding Flame, Shock, Frost, Keen and Bane to a weapon SHOULD be about half the value of adding just Vorpal. I realize that not everyone would agree with that assessment.
I suppose if these rules intrigued you, but you found just that part distasteful, you could rule that all Weapon Augments are worth 6000 per plus so that five individual "plusses" would be worth the same as just Vorpal. Or, if that devalues treasure too much, you could rule the other way and Weapon Augments are 14000 per plus for the same result, although that would result in a large increase in the value of treasure.
I appreciate your insights on this. :)
Count me out on this one.
I can see where you're headed with it, but I still prefer a +5 sword to be intrinsically better than a +1 sword. Also, this system, as you point out, doesn't remove the "big six" dependency; it only changes the pricing.
If it works for you as a houserule, that's cool. I'd just prefer that it not be the default rule, that's all.
Personally, I'm partial to the Magic Item Compendium approach, that lets you combine "utilitarian" bonuses like saving throw bonuses with more interesting magic items such as a Cape of the Mountebank. That way a PC can both have their cake and eat it, with the aid of either a PC item-crafter or a suitably powerful NPC (say, a legendary blacksmith). Maybe it could work the other way around, too, with those interesting item properties from otherwise unusable items being imbued into their already-present indispensables.
This still means PCs will amass magic items they won't want to use, which could perhaps be resolved with being able to use them as raw materials for crafting (maybe you can extract raw enchantment from them), which limits the "magic items in the world economy" dilemma.