Magic Items... do I have this straight?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 204 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

If I have... say a gloves of +2 dex and a necklace that gives a +2 dex they don't stack to give a +4 dex total?
So when I get that item of +5 --insert random ability here---, the character can just hang it up adventuring as having the best of their major stat that they'll ever get?


Saddiztic wrote:

If I have... say a gloves of +2 dex and a necklace that gives a +2 dex they don't stack to give a +4 dex total?

So when I get that item of +5 --insert random ability here---, the character can just hang it up adventuring as having the best of their major stat that they'll ever get?

Yep, you've got it. No stacking.

But there are +6 items. And don't forget about epic versions; I think those went up to +10 or maybe even +12 (I'm not interested enough to dig up my ELH to find out).

And then there are 5 other ability scores.

Plus, there's all that gold and platinum and jewelry. And fame.

Still plenty of reasons not to hang it up adventuring, so I don't think finding one single top-end item automatically ushers in the retirement police.


Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.


Note that bonuses of the same type don't stack. If your gloves give a +2 enhancement bonus and the necklace were to give a +2 sacred bonus, they'd stack. If you get to read a manual of quickness in action +5, that's an inherent bonus and also stacks.

Please also remember that video games run on a different paradigm than PnP games. I'd love to have the stats of my FFX characters (255 in everything but luck? yes please!), but this system that is Pathfinder is built on a different set of mechanics. How much would 2 points matter in a game of Everquest when added to one stat vs. Pathfinder?

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.

Nixing stacking makes item choices more important for a limited slot, limited item system. A fighter with 1 item of Str keeps the system in balance easier than having to account for warriors with a 50 STR score at level 20. If stacking existed, at certain levels stacking would be required in order to have a hope of success rather than allowing room for different builds of varying power levels.


Lathiira wrote:
How much would 2 points matter in a game of Everquest when added to one stat vs. Pathfinder?

Umm about the same, at the level you are actually worried about +2 items stacking. Not much in either one, when +2 actually become poo gear.

Which apparently is right after you get a +2 item in this.


Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.

I am not quite sure I understand this comment.

I have played EQ1 and EQ2 pretty much continuously since EQ1 was first released. I love those games.

But I don't see any flaws with the D&D build model significant enough to understand your comment.

Remember that EQ is built on an open-ended model. They let you keep gaining levels and gaining abilities and gaining bigger numbers in everything you do. In return, the monsters you fight get bigger numbers too. It's so strange to kick the snot out of level 5 orcs, and then later, when you're level 80, you find level 85 orcs that look and sound the same but are able to kick the snot out of you. Even more strange is when it's a snake, or a fish, something that doesn't have class levels and isn't any bigger (hey, I expect a ship the size of a castle to be a tough fight, but not one the size of my hand, especially when I have 80 levels of abilities and magic items).

D&D has no such infinite model.

Everything is built around a d20. If you let people get +6 necklace, +6 gloves, +6 ring, etc., all stacking up, pretty soon everyone will have such huge plusses that the d20 won't even matter at all. And you'll have to build bigger and bigger monsters to challenge them.

Allowing stuff to stack would break the entire backbone of the D&D/Pathfinder game system. So, instead, they expect you to put different stuff in each slot, stuff that doesn't affect the same ability scores or numbers on your character sheet. Lots of smaller, different bonuses instead of lots of identical stacking bonuses. It makes you more versatile and it doesn't break the system.

To me, both systems are equally viable, but for PnP systems, I like to keep the numbers simpler and smaller since not everyone sitting at the table has a Pentium processor in their head to crunch numbers the way your Everquest characters do.


riatin wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.
Nixing stacking makes item choices more important for a limited slot, limited item system. A fighter with 1 item of Str keeps the system in balance easier than having to account for warriors with a 50 STR score at level 20. If stacking existed, at certain levels stacking would be required in order to have a hope of success rather than allowing room for different builds of varying power levels.

Balance??

So you are telling me a character going through ten adventures without acquiring anything useful, while watching everyone else deck out characters, because they can't use anything that drops that is relevant to their class because the item doesn't stack is balance?
yeah I guess if we were playing ping-pong and not roleplay that would be balance.


Actually +2 to a stat is quite nice at any level in Pathfinder. For example, +2 strength or dex is roughly equivalent to an item that says "+5% chance to hit" in an MMO.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Saddiztic wrote:
riatin wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.
Nixing stacking makes item choices more important for a limited slot, limited item system. A fighter with 1 item of Str keeps the system in balance easier than having to account for warriors with a 50 STR score at level 20. If stacking existed, at certain levels stacking would be required in order to have a hope of success rather than allowing room for different builds of varying power levels.

Balance??

So you are telling me a character going through ten adventures without acquiring anything useful, while watching everyone else deck out characters, because they can't use anything that drops that is relevant to their class is balance?
yeah I guess if we were playing ping-pong and not roleplay that would be balance.

We're talking about stacking here, not 'can't use anything that drops'. I'm pretty certain at this point you're just trolling anyhow.


Saddiztic wrote:
riatin wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.
Nixing stacking makes item choices more important for a limited slot, limited item system. A fighter with 1 item of Str keeps the system in balance easier than having to account for warriors with a 50 STR score at level 20. If stacking existed, at certain levels stacking would be required in order to have a hope of success rather than allowing room for different builds of varying power levels.

Balance??

So you are telling me a character going through ten adventures without acquiring anything useful, while watching everyone else deck out characters, because they can't use anything that drops that is relevant to their class is balance?
yeah I guess if we were playing ping-pong and not roleplay that would be balance.

For starters, roleplaying and balance are entirely unrelated. Roleplaying is basically acting, getting into a role, it has virtually nothing to do with the mechanics of the roleplaying environment, and there doesn't even need to be any mechanics in order to roleplay if desired.

That said, could you please elaborate and tell us what class you feel is... what's the word you are probably thinking... shat on by the item system, when you feel everybody else would be getting useful gear.


Saddiztic wrote:
riatin wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.
Nixing stacking makes item choices more important for a limited slot, limited item system. A fighter with 1 item of Str keeps the system in balance easier than having to account for warriors with a 50 STR score at level 20. If stacking existed, at certain levels stacking would be required in order to have a hope of success rather than allowing room for different builds of varying power levels.

Balance??

So you are telling me a character going through ten adventures without acquiring anything useful, while watching everyone else deck out characters, because they can't use anything that drops that is relevant to their class is balance?
yeah I guess if we were playing ping-pong and not roleplay that would be balance.

What?

Are you just trolling now?

If you truly went through 10 adventures without acquiring anything useful, then you really need to talk to your DM - especially if everyone else is getting "decked out" in useful magic items.

It's the DM's job to maintain the balance.

Heck, that's a huge benefit over Everquest. You can kill lots of mobs, clear out lots of instances, spend hours, days, weeks in the same dungeons, all without getting a single useful new item. And if you do, you might have to /random against anyone else who wants it, or spend your guild DKP to claim it while hoping nobody else wants to spend more DKP for it.

In short, in EQ/EQII you have no guarantee that you'll ever find an upgrade item. The better gear you have, the harder it is to find an upgrade, then win that upgrade if you do find it.

D&D shouldn't have that problem. Your DM should be throwing out some treasure specifically useful for your character - if he's not, then it's time for that talk I mentioned...


call it what you will.
the point is, its kind of a silly rule.
if there are +10 and +12 items as you mentioned, then stacking some items wouldn't alter game mechanics as stated.

I mentioned the thing about the adventure, to display a point about what the rule actually does to treasure.
I'm sorry for not making my implied points out to be more clear.

<<<It's the DM's job to maintain the balance.>>>
actually according to this rule, it appears it is the rules' job to maintain balance as mentioned earlier.


Saddiztic wrote:
if there are +10 and +12 items as you mentioned, then stacking some items wouldn't alter game mechanics as stated.

Yes, actually, it would.

For one thing, any item with a stat bonus above +6 is an Epic item, meaning it's intended only for characters above level 20. (Also, not supported in the Pathfinder rules, as Pathfinder is going to re-do the Epic Level rules)

For another, if they stacked, you could have potentially +100 or more to all stats. The game isn't designed for that kind of stats. The strongest monsters in the book don't have strength even half that high, and we're talking mythological beings like Titans and 10,000 year old Great Wyrm dragons here.


DM_Blake wrote:


But there are +6 items. And don't forget about epic versions; I think those went up to +10 or maybe even +12 (I'm not interested enough to dig up my ELH to find out).

+Infinity. Of course, that would cost infinity² * 10,000gp.

There were some "hard-coded" limits (like "no dodge bonuses from magic items" and "inherent cannot go beyond +5"), but beyond that, you could basically get whatever you could afford.

And for the record (to pass my time while I manifest ignore fire): I had characters with +6 items before their teens (i.e. level 12 and below). I didn't retire that character.

There's so much more to do in the game than getting items.


What class are you playing that the *only* thing you need is enhancers for a single ability score? I recently ran a game where the group conquered a city essentially made of gold, and they'd EACH spent a little over a MILLION gold before they felt they were topping out item-wise. That group consisting of 2 fighters, a ranger, and a cleric/wizard/mystic theurge, which pretty much covers any and all class gear requirements.

If you feel like you need a single bonus type to stack, look at other bonuses a different way: You can only get up to +6 Strength, true, but as far as attack and damage rolls are concerned, a +5 weapon is essentially the same as +10 Strength, a luck stone (granting a +1 bonus) is similar to another +2, an item that enlarges you grants another +2 Strength, and so on. Just with the items I've listed, that's (almost) the same as a bunch of Strength items that total up to a +20 Strength bonus. You still stack up items in D&D, just like in EQ or WoW or something along those lines, you just do it differently.


Saddiztic wrote:
Wow never thought i would see the day when Sony(Everquest) does Character building better than pencil and paper.

If your idea of the be all end all of a game is to get teh ubber loot... then yes go play an MMO. Getting the best loot is not the be all end all purpose of a PnP RPG.

I play both MMO's and PnP. They have different goals and different purposes and both are fun in their own way.

Sovereign Court

I hear forth edition can really wet your whistle if all your looking at is items that give you pluses to combat and the like. In Dungeons and Dragons or the Pathfinder RPG, as well as many other pen and paper games actually, the magic items that exist are quite varied and interesting.

Wands that duplicate spells, magical cloaks of invisibility, flying carpets, etc. No reason to think about the few items that do something as boring as give you a bonus to an attribute when there are so many other items out there! :)


Morgen wrote:

I hear forth edition can really wet your whistle if all your looking at is items that give you pluses to combat and the like. In Dungeons and Dragons or the Pathfinder RPG, as well as many other pen and paper games actually, the magic items that exist are quite varied and interesting.

Wands that duplicate spells, magical cloaks of invisibility, flying carpets, etc. No reason to think about the few items that do something as boring as give you a bonus to an attribute when there are so many other items out there! :)

I wouldn't really call trying to wear a cloak that adds 2 to INT and an ioun stone that adds 2 to INT all that boring for a under 10th level wizard.

No real point to gaining other stats if your class doesn't really use it much.


Tell me that the next time you're hit with a disintegrate and fail the save by 1.


Saddiztic wrote:
Morgen wrote:

I hear forth edition can really wet your whistle if all your looking at is items that give you pluses to combat and the like. In Dungeons and Dragons or the Pathfinder RPG, as well as many other pen and paper games actually, the magic items that exist are quite varied and interesting.

Wands that duplicate spells, magical cloaks of invisibility, flying carpets, etc. No reason to think about the few items that do something as boring as give you a bonus to an attribute when there are so many other items out there! :)

I wouldn't really call trying to wear a cloak that adds 2 to INT and an ioun stone that adds 2 to INT all that boring for a under 10th level wizard.

No real point to gaining other stats if your class doesn't really use it much.

There are millions of items for wizards. Pearls of power, scrolls, wands, wondrous items that increase dex or con or deflection bonus or natural armor or saving throws, or any number of items that generate cool effects that you'd rather not have to prepare a spell for.

If your playing a wizard, you've got tons and tons of different things to shore up, places to become better. Just get creative, try to see an item for what it can do for you, rather than raw numbers.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Saddiztic wrote:

So you are telling me a character going through ten adventures without acquiring anything useful, while watching everyone else deck out characters, because they can't use anything that drops that is relevant to their class because the item doesn't stack is balance?

yeah I guess if we were playing ping-pong and not roleplay that would be balance.

And this is why I utterly loathe the usage of the term "roleplaying" to describe mainstream computer games.

Gaining levels and powering up is the least important aspect of roleplay.

Furthermore, the GM decides what "drops." If you get nothing useful, it's his fault, not the rules.

Furthermore, very very few things are truly useless.

Furthermore, it's a team game.

Please don't take any of this as a personal attack... my temper's a little short on this subject, but I'm trying to give some honest pointers. You have expectations based on a completely different genre, and I think that once you get used to playing this one, you'll understand why the fighter should be very happy when the cleric finds a wand of cure light wounds; and why the Necklace of Fireballs is for you, not the wizard; and just how awesome feather token, tree really is.

And why you should always, always, always carry rope.


tejón wrote:
And why you should always, always, always carry rope.

And a towel.

DON'T forget the towel!

Silver Crusade

DM_Blake wrote:
tejón wrote:
And why you should always, always, always carry rope.

And a towel.

DON'T forget the towel!

And remember...

DON'T PANIC!


Zurai wrote:
Tell me that the next time you're hit with a disintegrate and fail the save by 1.

You can always find any situation to make anything sound great.

oh that stagnate water is worthless.... tell me that next time you are stranded in a desert.
See how that works?

The point is, having things nonstackable, forces you to balance your character instead of shape its power the way you want. For the sake of "ease" it is sacrificing originality of a PC.


Saddiztic wrote:
Zurai wrote:
Tell me that the next time you're hit with a disintegrate and fail the save by 1.

You can always find any situation to make anything sound great.

oh that stagnate water is worthless.... tell me that next time you are stranded in a desert.
See how that works?

You act as if that were an uncommon situation. Fine. Let me rephrase to the baseline:

"Tell me that the next time you're hit with a save-or-die / save-or-suck and fail the save by 1".

There are no irrelevant stats in D&D. All six stats are important (although I will admit that most DMs don't play in a manner that makes Charisma important to most classes).

As for "sacrificing originality of the character", b+&*%#~@. What's original about having a massively strong/agile/tough/smart/wise/sexy character? Nothing. And, better yet, you can still have a massively strong/agile/tough/smart/wise/sexy character without having to stack Enhancement bonuses.


tejón wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:

Furthermore, it's a team game.

Please don't take any of this as a personal attack... my temper's a little short on this subject, but I'm trying to give some honest pointers. You have expectations based on a completely different genre, and I think that once you get used to playing this one, you'll understand why the fighter should be very happy when the cleric finds a wand of cure light wounds; and why the Necklace of Fireballs is for you, not the wizard; and just how awesome feather token, tree really is.

And why you should always, always, always carry rope.

I understand why a fighter would be happy about a cleric getting a wand of cure light wounds.

Now why wouldn't everyone understand why a fighter wouldn'tbe upset about a cleric not being able to wear a +3 Wis amulet and a +3 wis breast plate or something at the same time?
Ive been told that it ruins game mechanics but then told there are higher bonus items. How is it going to ruin game mechanics when you can get the same bonuses later, all you have to do is wait until you are high enough level to be "entitled" to it?
A +4 or +6 bonus to a INT doesn't make a big difference in the grand scheme of things. It isn't going to make the D20 self destruct, it isn't going to change game mechanics. All it does it make spellcraft checks easier and gives a wizard a few ore spells they can cast.


Saddiztic wrote:

Now why wouldn't everyone understand why a fighter wouldn'tbe upset about a cleric not being able to wear a +3 Wis amulet and a +3 wis breast plate or something at the same time?

Ive been told that it ruins game mechanics but then told there are higher bonus items. How is it going to ruin game mechanics when you can get the same bonuses later, all you have to do is wait until you are high enough level to be "entitled" to it?
A +4 or +6 bonus to a INT doesn't make a big difference in the grand scheme of things. It isn't going to make the D20 self destruct, it isn't going to change game mechanics. All it does it make spellcraft checks easier and gives a wizard a few ore spells they can cast.

So what you're saying is that enhancement bonuses should be stackable up to a +6?


Zurai wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Zurai wrote:


There are no irrelevant stats in D&D. All six stats are important (although I will admit that most DMs don't play in a manner that makes Charisma important to most classes).

As for "sacrificing originality of the character", b&#&*!&!. What's original about having a massively strong/agile/tough/smart/wise/sexy character? Nothing. And, better yet, you can still have a massively strong/agile/tough/smart/wise/sexy character without having to stack Enhancement bonuses.

I never really meant to say irrelevant stats.

but play test 2 wizards in a duel.
Give one an 18 INT and the other a 25 INT
go ahead and spread the difference up between other stats, and tell me which one would win in a duel.

The whole point is, with stackable bonuses, you can opt to take so many more paths toward character build. Balancing the stats and the powers really should be the responsibility of the player, not the rules.
Otherwise it reduces that specific part of the system to doing nothing but looking for an upgrade while discarding anything but the upgrade, and waiting for the message "sorry Mario but our Princess is in another Castle".


Honestly, Wizards and other casters are the biggest reason the enhancement bonus caps exist.

I have three words for you, spell difficulty class. If a Wizard could soup up his DC as high as he wanted, the game would no longer have any challenge.

D&D isn't about winning bro, it's about having an adventure with your friends, and overcoming difficulties.

If you blow through it, what's the point?


stonechild wrote:

So what you're saying is that enhancement bonuses should be stackable up to a +6?

Really, that would depend on the system of attributes. in a well balanced well played campaign it really wouldn't matter because the player would top out at some point, but by the time they really reached that high of attributes, they are epic level characters or higher depending on the GM style.

that was just an example. If the GM is handing out that much magic to get low level characters +6 in attributes, it doesn't matter whether the items stack or not, the campaign is going to be severely unbalanced, because they'll have the best they can get by level 15 lol.


Saddiztic wrote:
Ive been told that it ruins game mechanics but then told there are higher bonus items. How is it going to ruin game mechanics when you can get the same bonuses later, all you have to do is wait until you are high enough level to be "entitled" to it?

Heh. Here you've trapped yourself.

The answer is, "For exactly the same reason that MMOs, including Everquest, do exactly the same thing."

I'll use WoW as an example simply because I'm more familiar with the mechanics of WoW, but the facts port over all the same:

Let's take your average level 80 raid geared Death Knight. Like, say, my own character, Zural. He's got +946 strength and +2379 stamina from his gear. Why can't a level 1 character have gear that gives him +946 strength and +2379 stamina? Because the game isn't balanced for it. That level of gear would trivialize every single quest in the game below about level 40. You could easily solo level 20 instances as level 1 characters with those kind of stats.

Same thing in D&D. If you could have +12 to a single stat from magic items at level 1, you'd be far, far beyond the intended and designed-for power of a level 1 character. For example, as a wizard, you'd have one to two extra 1st level spells (increasing your total number of spells by up to 40% for a typical level 1 wizard), you'd have 6 more skills trained, you'd increase your chance to succeed at Intelligence-based skill checks by 30 percentage points, you'd decrease your targets' chance to resist your spells by 30 percentage points, and you'd make concentration checks 30 percentage points easier.

The entire mathematical structure of the game is balanced around player characters being between the general boundaries of 6 to 30 in their stats, and for those 30-stat characters to be incredibly powerful and in the autumns of their careers.


But bigger attributes isn't 'the best' it's just one small aspect of the best. Feat development, spell progression, other item acquisition, ROLEPLAYING, and heck, stabbing creatures in the face and taking their stuff all in the name of adventuring, are things you have to look forward to.

(Also, +6 items typically don't show up until somewhere around level 12-14ish)


Saddiztic wrote:


Really, that would depend on the system of attributes. in a well balanced well played campaign it really wouldn't matter because the player would top out at some point, but by the time they really reached that high of attributes, they are epic level characters or higher depending on the GM style.

What do you mean by top out? What do you consider "that high of attributes"?


kyrt-ryder wrote:

Honestly, Wizards and other casters are the biggest reason the enhancement bonus caps exist.

I have three words for you, spell difficulty class. If a Wizard could soup up his DC as high as he wanted, the game would no longer have any challenge.

D&D isn't about winning bro, it's about having an adventure with your friends, and overcoming difficulties.

If you blow through it, what's the point?

you aren't going to blow through every obstacle no matter how you build your character. a one trick pony spell caster with one high attribute, might be able to lay waste to a town, obliterate undead hordes etc, but when the leader with the ring of spell turning, and high magic resistance comes charging at them, then what?

This may sound like a handicap, but it really adds a whole new level of emersion into roleplay environment.
sorry to jab at EQ, but its really the only thing the game has going for it.
Why would you exclude that if you really want your players to roleplay their character, rather than just opening dungeons doors and killing things and moving on to the next room until its time to go home and go to bed?


stonechild wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:


Really, that would depend on the system of attributes. in a well balanced well played campaign it really wouldn't matter because the player would top out at some point, but by the time they really reached that high of attributes, they are epic level characters or higher depending on the GM style.
What do you mean by top out? What do you consider "that high of attributes"?

Depends on the system.

In 2nd edition D&D it was 25 attribute scores.
25 strength was considered about as high as possible.

In a balanced campaign, players would not usually hit that high of attribute scores in anything until higher levels.
When they did start hitting those kind of numbers, their adventures where going planar. They were epic or beyond type characters, so it didn't really matter if they stacked bonuses or only used one item.

Off the top of my head I think PF is 45, if I remember right.
Now most players won't even hit 25 until they start gaining some levels on them in a balanced campaign, even if items do stack, but it would allow the players greater freedom to drive a character any direction they see fit, instead of being rule restricted to a certain mold or template.


Saddiztic wrote:
you aren't going to blow through every obstacle no matter how you build your character. a one trick pony spell caster with one high attribute, might be able to lay waste to a town, obliterate undead hordes etc, but when the leader with the ring of spell turning, and high magic resistance comes charging at them, then what?

Time stop + gate x[rounds in time stop].


kyrt-ryder wrote:

Bu.

(Also, +6 items typically don't show up until somewhere around level 12-14ish)

I realize this.

but prior to that at lower levels you are restricting players from using 2 or 3 +1 items to get the +3 attribute bonus. What that is really doing is forcing them down a path of character development defined by rules, not by their roleplay style or the story they want to write for their character, and higher attribute bonuses at higher levels have the same effect just at the higher levels.


Saddiztic wrote:


I realize this.
but prior to that at lower levels you are restricting players from using 2 or 3 +1 items to get the +3 attribute bonus.

How are you getting a single +1 item, let alone two or three of them?


Saddiztic wrote:


Depends on the system.
In 2nd edition D&D it was 25 attribute scores.
25 strength was considered about as high as possible.

In a balanced campaign, players would not usually hit that high of attribute scores in anything until higher levels.
When they did start hitting those kind of numbers, their adventures where going planar. They were epic or beyond type characters.

Off the top of my head I think PF is 45, if I remember right.
Now most players won't even hit 25 until they start gaining some levels on them in a balanced campaign, even if items do stack, but it would allow the players greater freedom to drive a character any direction they see fit, instead of being rule restricted to a certain mold or template.

Fair enough. I can only speak from experience, but unless a character is made at a higher level and thus has a bunch of starting gold. I've never seen anyone with an item higher than +4.

And as far as "going planar", back in 2nd ed that's where I started most of my campaigns :)

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16

Just like to point out that another reason like bonuses don't stack is that a bunch of little bonuses costs less than a single big bonus. A +2 item is 4,000 gp. A +6 item is 36,000 gp. If you could stack bonuses, why would you ever buy a +4 or +6 item? Just buy another +2 item keyed to an unused slot.

Gold piece prices are a way to keep items that are too strong out of players' hands until they're at the appropriate level.

Also, in PF (not D&D 3.5), ability boosters are supposed to be kept to the belt (physical) and headband (mental) slots. Which kind of makes this whole discussion irrelevant.


Zurai wrote:


Time stop + gate x[rounds in time stop].

Oh right because every 15th level INT strong caster has time stop and gate. Thanks I forgot.


Vigil wrote:

Just like to point out that another reason like bonuses don't stack is that a bunch of little bonuses costs less than a single big bonus. A +2 item is 4,000 gp. A +6 item is 36,000 gp. If you could stack bonuses, why would you ever buy a +4 or +6 item? Just buy another +2 item keyed to an unused slot.

Gold piece prices are a way to keep items that are too strong out of players' hands until they're at the appropriate level.

Also, in PF (not D&D 3.5), ability boosters are supposed to be kept to the belt (physical) and headband (mental) slots. Which kind of makes this whole discussion irrelevant.

Being able to stack them actually gives a reason for the +4 item to be worth more than just twice the cost of 2 +2 items.

Why??
Because of several reasons, but the main one is because you can put one +4 item in one slot and have another slot open for other items.
So now instead of using two slots to only get a +4 you are using those two slots to gain a +6 or higher.

Look at this way if you have only 6 slots and you fill all of them with +1 items, you have a +6. But what if you could put most of those bonuses into one slot and still have the others to put items in?


Saddiztic wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Bu.

(Also, +6 items typically don't show up until somewhere around level 12-14ish)

I realize this.

but prior to that at lower levels you are restricting players from using 2 or 3 +1 items to get the +3 attribute bonus. What that is really doing is forcing them down a path of character development defined by rules, not by their roleplay style or the story they want to write for their character, and higher attribute bonuses at higher levels have the same effect just at the higher levels.

Well three +1 items would only cost 3,000 gp whereas a +3 item is 9,000 gp. So if you do that, then the cost for subsequent enhancement items have to have their formula redone. Otherwise why buy the +3 item? I suppose to free up slots. But even then you can double the cost of the +1 items, allowing them to have no slot and it'd still save you 3,000 gp.


stonechild wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Bu.

(Also, +6 items typically don't show up until somewhere around level 12-14ish)

I realize this.

but prior to that at lower levels you are restricting players from using 2 or 3 +1 items to get the +3 attribute bonus. What that is really doing is forcing them down a path of character development defined by rules, not by their roleplay style or the story they want to write for their character, and higher attribute bonuses at higher levels have the same effect just at the higher levels.
Well three +1 items would only cost 3,000 gp whereas a +3 item is 9,000 gp. So if you do that, then the cost for subsequent enhancement items have to have their formula redone. Otherwise why buy the +3 item? I suppose to free up slots. But even then you can double the cost of the +1 items, allowing them to have no slot and it'd still save you 3,000 gp.

Why buy the +3 item?

because you still have the 2 +2 items in the other slots to give an effective bonus of +5, which gives a reason for the value to be higher than just multiples of the bonus multiplied by the +1 GP value.


Saddiztic wrote:
Zurai wrote:


Time stop + gate x[rounds in time stop].

Oh right because every 15th level INT strong caster has time stop and gate. Thanks I forgot.

You didn't say anything about levels. Since you were talking about laying waste to towns and obliterating hordes, I naturally assumed that you were talking about a nearly-max level character.

Fine, a 15th level caster with super-maximized intelligence because of stacking items has effectively infinite 8th level spells. What does he do against the guy charging at him with a ring of spell turning and high magic resistance? He casts a series of prismatic walls in between him and the lunatic. With his arbitrarily-high DC*, all the lunatic has to do is fail one or two SR checks (and he has to make 7 of them per wall) and he'll be toast.

* - Without the stacking rules, a 15th-level Wizard could have +120 intelligence from items, or +240 if he crafted them himself, which is likely. +240 Int gives +120 to all of his spell Difficulty Classes, meaning the only way to save against his spells is to roll a natural 20. He's also, for the record, got +29-30 spells of all levels.


Saddiztic wrote:
Zurai wrote:


Time stop + gate x[rounds in time stop].

Oh right because every 15th level INT strong caster has time stop and gate. Thanks I forgot.

That is far from being the only way to own an encounter. It is just one of the easiest. The point is that by having things that are not level appropriate the games loses its challenge. The ring of counterspelling is not the answer to a caster. It only counters a single spell, and assay spell resistance makes SR almost worthless. There are also spells that are not affect by SR at all.


Zurai wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Zurai wrote:


Time stop + gate x[rounds in time stop].

Oh right because every 15th level INT strong caster has time stop and gate. Thanks I forgot.

You didn't say anything about levels. Since you were talking about laying waste to towns and obliterating hordes, I naturally assumed that you were talking about a nearly-max level character.

Fine, a 15th level caster with super-maximized intelligence because of stacking items has effectively infinite 8th level spells. What does he do against the guy charging at him with a ring of spell turning and high magic resistance? He casts a series of prismatic walls in between him and the lunatic. With his arbitrarily-high DC, all the lunatic has to do is fail one or two SR checks (and he has to make 7 of them per wall) and he'll be toast.

right. this goes right back to what I said earlier about you can pick and choose any scenario, but a 15th level wizard with a 22 INT and fireball memborized can lay waste to a lot of things.


Saddiztic wrote:
right. this goes right back to what I said earlier about you can pick and choose any scenario, but a 15th level wizard with a 22 INT and fireball memborized can lay waste to a lot of things.

You're the one who chose the scenario, dude.


wraithstrike wrote:
Saddiztic wrote:
Zurai wrote:


Time stop + gate x[rounds in time stop].

Oh right because every 15th level INT strong caster has time stop and gate. Thanks I forgot.
That is far from being the only way to own an encounter. It is just one of the easiest. The point is that by having things that are not level appropriate the games loses its challenge. The ring of counterspelling is not the answer to a caster. It only counters a single spell, and assay spell resistance makes SR almost worthless. There are also spells that are not affect by SR at all.

having things that aren't level appropriate is the responsibility of the game master correct?

Right and i was referring to a warrior being in direct conflict with the wizard.
you can slice and dice the idea all you want but characters are suppose to have their own strengths and weakness determined by how they choose to build their character not how the rules tell them to.
There are also ways to take down a wizard like that if you know the threat you are facing. They all have their weaknesses and allowing them to stack only allows them to choose for themselves whether they want to leave a big ol gaping hole in one area to be exploited, for the sake of boosting another area.

1 to 50 of 204 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Magic Items... do I have this straight? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.