Far as I can tell, the bonuses don't apply until you wear them for 24 hours. Or something like that...
|
It would mean for something was modified by uses/day or the like. For example, after wearing an Int boosting headband for 24 hours you'd get more skill points (which are actually preset by the headband) or wearing a Con boosting belt you'd get more rage points after 24 hours.
Things like that, I believe.
Beta p. 388
Ability Score Bonuses:
Some spells and abilities increase your ability scores. Ability score increases whose duration is 1 day or less give only temporary bonuses. For every two points of increase to a single ability, apply a +1 bonus to the skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.
bonus on Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls,
and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength). The
bonus also applies to your combat maneuver bonus, both
to perform manuevers and to resist them.
Dexterity: Increases to your Dexterity score give you
a bonus on Dexterity-based skill checks, ranged attack
rolls, initiative checks, and Ref lex saving throws. The
bonus also applies to your Armor Class.
Constitution: Increases to your Constitution score give
you a bonus on your Fortitude saving throws. In addition,
multiply your total Hit Dice by this bonus and add that
amount to your current and total hit points. When the
bonus ends, remove this total from your current and total
hit points.
Intelligence: Increases to your Intelligence score give
you a bonus on Intelligence-based skill checks. This bonus
also applies to any spell DCs based on Intelligence.
Wisdom: Increases to your Wisdom score give you a
bonus on Wisdom-based skill checks and Will saving
throws. This bonus also applies to any spell DCs based
on Wisdom.
Charisma: Increases to your Charisma score give you a
bonus on Charisma-based skill checks. This bonus also
applies to any spell DCs based on Charisma.
It doesn't actually refer to "permanent" bonuses, only that they're no longer temporary, and in fact it notes that they might be removed.
The rule is to help prevent abuse by passing items around.
Speaking of stat increasers, WHY are they suddenly all in the same slot, so you have to get a double belt or a triple belt (and no "+4 STR, +2 dex", either) to boost more than one stat?
I'm going to ask the same thing I've asked of a few other changes: How does this improve gameplay? What is the design goal?
|
Speaking of stat increasers, WHY are they suddenly all in the same slot, so you have to get a double belt or a triple belt (and no "+4 STR, +2 dex", either) to boost more than one stat?
I'm going to ask the same thing I've asked of a few other changes: How does this improve gameplay? What is the design goal?
IIRC, there was a note about it in A3, basically saying it was done to make room for other items the players may want, without sacrificing the bonuses.
IIRC, there was a note about it in A3, basically saying it was done to make room for other items the players may want, without sacrificing the bonuses.Speaking of stat increasers, WHY are they suddenly all in the same slot, so you have to get a double belt or a triple belt (and no "+4 STR, +2 dex", either) to boost more than one stat?
I'm going to ask the same thing I've asked of a few other changes: How does this improve gameplay? What is the design goal?
Then it fails. Stat boosters are in the top three desireable items out there. But as is, I *can't* have the items I want (say, +6 STR, +4 CON, +2 DEX)--I have to get +4/+4/+4 or something. I noticed this when building a character. It's very inconvenient, and it means I *can't* take the items I'd want, rather than giving me more freedom. It's limited.
The Magic Item Compendium addresses the problem you mentioned in a vastly better way. Take a look.
|
|
IIRC, there was a note about it in A3, basically saying it was done to make room for other items the players may want, without sacrificing the bonuses.Speaking of stat increasers, WHY are they suddenly all in the same slot, so you have to get a double belt or a triple belt (and no "+4 STR, +2 dex", either) to boost more than one stat?
I'm going to ask the same thing I've asked of a few other changes: How does this improve gameplay? What is the design goal?
Then it fails. Stat boosters are in the top three desireable items out there. But as is, I *can't* have the items I want (say, +6 STR, +4 CON, +2 DEX)--I have to get +4/+4/+4 or something. I noticed this when building a character. It's very inconvenient, and it means I *can't* take the items I'd want, rather than giving me more freedom. It's limited.
The Magic Item Compendium addresses the problem you mentioned in a vastly better way. Take a look.
It is possible to have items with different bonuses, you just have to do the math yourself whereas they've done the simple math already.
Then it fails. Stat boosters are in the top three desireable items out there. But as is, I *can't* have the items I want (say, +6 STR, +4 CON, +2 DEX)--I have to get +4/+4/+4 or something.
Yes, you can. It's just slightly more expensive because you have to apply the +50% "uncustomary slot" penalty to the cost.
This seems like a clear case of supply and demand -- if demand is so high for these items, then the price is probably too low.
Then it fails. Stat boosters are in the top three desireable items out there.
Can you explain to me how it improves gameplay for stat boosters to be one of the top three desirable items out there? I see that as a problem with 3.5 that I'd like Pathfinder to address.
(And what other posters have said - you can go for different bonuses and different slots, but the balance is different than 3.5.)
Yes, you can. It's just slightly more expensive because you have to apply the +50% "uncustomary slot" penalty to the cost.
This seems like a clear case of supply and demand -- if demand is so high for these items, then the price is probably too low.
The rules for custom items are better left alone; they break down easily. What's more, making players pay extra for their secondary, less important item, makes no sense.
Fundamentally, charging players for reslotting basic stat-boosters just makes secondary stat-boosters more expensive for no good reason. They'll buy'em anyway. This means that they'll have less money for other items, not more."The price is probably too low" for what? Monsters and challenges tend to assume players will have stat-boosters if they can afford them. Pathfinder already has a 15-point, equivalent-to-the-Elite-Array point-buy. Lacking stat boosters would disadvantage characters in terms of monsters and challenges. Stat boosting items are a staple of 3.5; making them harder to acquire serves no purpose. They'll still be just as desireable--players will just get them later. On top of that, this disadvantages melee characters more than spellcasters, since casters have a single prime, important mental stat, while melee characters tend to raise STR or DEX and CON (and the STR guys will want a little DEX boost, while the DEX guys will want some STR). Meanwhile, the wizard buys a +6 INT and +2 CON/DEX item and is *just* fine.
Can you explain to me how it improves gameplay for stat boosters to be one of the top three desirable items out there? I see that as a problem with 3.5 that I'd like Pathfinder to address.
(And what other posters have said - you can go for different bonuses and different slots, but the balance is different than 3.5.)
Stat boosters, AC boosters, and save boosters are so desireable because of the nature of 3.5. It's a result, not a feature. Defenses and primary stats are the meat of the system, and you're going to use that Ring of Protection +2 or +2 armor every single time someone swings at you. You're going to use your Sphere of Wacky Effect #3 much less often.
4E solved the problem of stat-boosting items by removing them, giving characters stat boosts on a regular basis (primary and secondary stat will both get +8ish by the end of the game, and all others will get +2; you can fiddle with this, since it comes in "+1 to two stats" at 4, 8, 14, 18, 24, and 28, and "+1 to all stats" at 10 and 20) and not calculating for magic stat-boosters because they don't exist in the game. This is a nice solution, but it's probably too extreme a solution for Pathfinder.
The MIC solves the problem of stat-boosting, AC-boosting, and save-boosting items being so desireable by simply letting players add those things to other items [i]at no extra cost. I highly recommend that Pathfinder do the same or similar, since otherwise, players will almost never choose minor or situational items over the staple stat/AC/save boosters.
As is, Pathfinder messed with the system for no really good reason, and the result disadvantages players rather than helping them--on top of that, it cuts down on freedom of choice by making the things they'd pick anyway harder to get.
Ideally, I'd like to see Pathfinder cut down on the vast amount of magic items characters accumulate by the time they're high level (items that often give the characters drastically new and important capabilities, like a 60' fly speed, or immunity to something) but it's hard to do that while retaining compatibility. Fundamentally, either you assume players will have magic items to face monsters and challenges, in which case they're dependent on having as many as you assume, or you assume they won't, in which case if they do have them they're at a big advantage.
But, really--if we *know* that players are going to all buy a +6 stat booster by level X, a +X to save item, a +X AC item, etc, why not just give them inherent "awesome"-typed bonuses to those things as they level up and reduce their Wealth-By-Level accordingly? That way, no one needs to go through the motions of buying their Belt of +6 to Stats.
Fundamentally, charging players for reslotting basic stat-boosters just makes secondary stat-boosters more expensive for no good reason. They'll buy'em anyway. This means that they'll have less money for other items, not more.
"The price is probably too low" for what?
There's no mystical significance to the fact that +2 bonuses to two physical stats costs 8K in 3.5 and 10K in Pathfinder. There's no possible way to argue whether a magic item is too cheap or too expensive other than looking at individual characters. If 90% of PCs have a whole mess of stat boosters, but no +5 swords, then either stat boosters are too cheap or +5 swords are too expensive or (most likely) both.
Monsters and challenges tend to assume players will have stat-boosters if they can afford them.
Bushwah. I believe monsters and challenges are generally eyeballed and/or playtested by the creator and then assigned a number at semi-random. Do you really think that a +2 or +4 in one particular stat makes a difference in EL calculations? That's really stretching it, I think.
On top of that, this disadvantages melee characters more than spellcasters, since casters have a single prime, important mental stat, while melee characters tend to raise STR or DEX and CON (and the STR guys will want a little DEX boost, while the DEX guys will want some STR).
I agree with this part, though.
I like the new system in that it removes the "stat boost competing with wondrous items" problem.
It used to be that no sorcerer would have a Cloak of Resistance because they needed the Cloak of Charisma much more. Druids and clerics always had the stat boost neck item in favor of other useful neck slot items. Warrior-types always filled their belt slot with a boost item, even though other items could benefit them.
Now in PF, these items don't compete with other wondrous items at all. I love that.
The disadvantage is that if you purchase odd combos of stat boosts (STR+6 and DEX+2, for example), there are no items to handle it. I agree that the new rules are not as flexible as the old, but they still can do the same things. Ioun stones and non-affiliated slot items fill these roles nicely. If your DM sees fit to do some math, it's pretty easy to create a belt that gives different bonuses to different stats, and it just takes a bit of calculating to get the price hammered out.
I think that the PF system fixes a lot more problems that it creates. The fix is to a major problem in magic item slots, while the problem created is easily avoided.
-Scott
|
They'll buy'em anyway. This means that they'll have less money for other items, not more.
why?
why should players be buying magic itemsthat something i disliked from 3.5... the utterly NEED of magical items and its abuse... suddenly finding a magic item is not exiting anymore because everyone has one like it... or 2 or 3... or bought a pair just for in case...
why should the fun of the game depend on items?
if Pathfinder makes them cost more but leaves them, ok... good for the ones who use that...
i myself when i am told "ok DM i am going to the magic shop to buy my bracers of defense" i would just say "good luck finding IT"
i leave this for players to create, to find... or to QUEST for...
Truth:
Not needing to buy magic items to increase stats and AC means you can buy those other magic items that you've grown to forget or have always wanted to buy, but couldn't because you'd fall behind your party members.
LogicNinja, I am pretty sure I know why you 'want' to buy stat increasing items, but in reality all you want is just a powerful character. We both know this isn't a bad thing to want.
Give your players inherent increases to their ability scores (More than 3.5, more like 4e) and the need for magic item trees will lessen.
The Pathfinder Design Team did this for two reasons:
1) To make it more difficult for characters to boost their stats to god-like levels. This seems to be the same reason why Wish can be used to grant an Inherent bonus to a statistic, but only at the detriment of another statistic.
2) To encourage characters to consider using some of the more interesting magic items that often times are abandoned in favor of stat-boosting items.
Ironically enough, the new magical item system is going to discourage anyone from using two of my favorite magical items (Hat of Disguise, Belt Of Dwarvenkind). I think it would probably be best to offer both the new and the old stat-boosting items to allow GMs and players to have greater control of what items they wish to use in what body slots.
And I'm not sure how I feel about the goal of limiting character stat boosts just yet. I have mostly played in Low and Medium Magic campaigns and have rarely had access to an abundance of such items. I'll have to see how things pan out during the Beta Playtest.