|
Back in my Forgotten Realms days, early on I read something, somewhere about magic items resizing to match the wearer. This meant magic rings, boots, gloves, headbands, cloaks, robes, belts, vests, monacles, eyeglasses, and whatever could go pretty much from pixie to storm giant size when donned.
We played pretty fast and loose and didn't stop too long to give it much thought, it even carried over to my Eberron and homebrew campaigns.
Now we've been in Golarion since Rise of the Runelords, and the other day someone finally suggested it was getting kinda cheesy. I mean, I can still see rings resizing. Maybe even boots and gloves, but cloaks and robes?
Anyway my group is going to share some thoughts on this over the week's email. I know, do whatever works. But I'd still like an idea of what others think. The group just got a run for their money by a halfling bandit gang and now they have 2 or 3 items no one can wear!
:-)
Point of the post: in your Golarion campaign do you rule that magic items resize to fit the wearer? Do you have any special guidelines? Thanks!
In the game I'm running, I've allowed Wondrous Items to resize. Granted, so far the most things have changed is from Small to Medium so it isn't much of a stretch. They were also fighting mostly goblins so I thought it would make just as much sense for the items to have been sized for Medium creatures but they were wearing them anyway :D
I don't allow armor and weapons to change size categories, that is a bit much of a stretch. Things will alter to make the armor comfortable and conform to the user, but it won't change from Small to Medium or anything...
I would say for the most part use best judgement, if a person were to wear the item and only minor changes would need to be made for it to fit properly, go with it. A cape for instance is just a piece of cloth, I could see small characters just pinning up the excess length to make it fit better (or just have a trail after them depending on their preference)...
|
I do just about anything but armor and weapons. Mainly because there are rules for armor and weapons of different sizes. Other items I'm more lenient with, I say that they'll adjust one size category. No Halflings wearing a Storm Giant's boots.
I also run Eberron and haven't had any complaints using that system. I also allow armor to be made one category smaller by an artificer for a fee (usually 25% the cost) but that only goes one way.
Yes, but there's a period of attenuation before it completely becomes a different size. I have a group of gnomes for my RotRL game, so to restrict them from a sizable portion of the loot would suck if I didn't do something like this.
As things are magic armor/ weapons is pretty hard to find for size small characters, extending that is going to seriously penalizing gnomes and halflings down the road. If you could figure out a way to do it which didn't have a disproportionate effect then maybe. Limiting magic item access is a sure way to eliminate people willing to play those races.
I generally rule that the "resizing" enchantment is like the "and it glows!" enchantment, a freebie that a creator can add to an item or leave out for no additional cost. Ditto with a number of the item properties from the DMG II and a largish house rules list I have to go with them.
The way I do it is to allow a pick from the list of trivial enchantments to be learned by anyone who gains an item creation feat. Every time you get a new item creation feat, you can learn another, but every item gets only one freebie: this ring resizes, that sword glows, this other cloak flaps in an invisible breeze, and that staff over there can toggle appearance from looking like a pimped-out jewel-encrusted wizard's staff to an old worn stick that looks like something grandpa would use to poke sheep.
Adding another perk means getting a secondary enchantment added on by a craftsman who knows that particular one. The more magical an item, the more perks it can have.
I generally rule that the "resizing" enchantment is like the "and it glows!" enchantment, a freebie that a creator can add to an item or leave out for no additional cost. Ditto with a number of the item properties from the DMG II and a largish house rules list I have to go with them.
The way I do it is to allow a pick from the list of trivial enchantments to be learned by anyone who gains an item creation feat. Every time you get a new item creation feat, you can learn another, but every item gets only one freebie: this ring resizes, that sword glows, this other cloak flaps in an invisible breeze, and that staff over there can toggle appearance from looking like a pimped-out jewel-encrusted wizard's staff to an old worn stick that looks like something grandpa would use to poke sheep.
Adding another perk means getting a secondary enchantment added on by a craftsman who knows that particular one. The more magical an item, the more perks it can have.
what about that staff that transforms into a pendant on command as a free action?
|
I'm fine with allowing magical clothing to, if not magically resize, be adjustable, so that a medium-sized robe can be worn as an open vest for a large wearer or a wrap-around layered outfit, hiked up a bit, for a small wearer.
Armor and weapons are the only items that mechanically have a size in the game, so they're the only ones I worry about declaring a size for, and, even in that case, I'd allow for a relatively cheap resizing enchantment of some sort to be either cast as a one-time thing on the item, or permanantly placed on the item so that it resized up to one size class in either direction.
Ever since 1st edition, we've also allowed Polymorph Any Object to change a magic weapon or armor into another size (or type of weapon of same basic nature) regardless of any rules forbidden the polymorphing of magic items. A sword of sharpness +3 transformed into a mace would just become a mace +3, losing the sharpness quality (permanantly, even if you polymorphed it back later, so think long and hard about that one!), but we generally allowed it to make up for the many times a Fighter found a hundred +X longswords in modules for every +X item that he was actually specialized / weapon mastered in using.
It just seemed mean to make every bit of magical treasure worth its sell value and unusable to the characters by making them oddly sized or not usefully shaped. This sort of thing allowed the players to shell out some money to get the items re-sized, or re-shaped, to be usable by them, instead of having to sell them at 1/2 price and then buy the same darn thing, just in a different size.
what about that staff that transforms into a pendant on command as a free action?
Or a pendant that instantly transforms into a staff?
I'd say that's more the province of Shrink Item and Permanency, though if incorporated into an item as part of other enchantments, I don't see why the Command Word would have to be limited to the original caster. After all, Figurines of Wondrous Power work the same way and aren't limited to the original caster, and a Bronze Griffon would be a lot less convenient if it were stuck as a life-size bronze statue.
As for having it be a free action, I'd only do that if a command word is a free action, which I don't think it is.
Then again, I've always felt that Shrink Item and Permanency are overcosted for what they do. One staff that shrinks into a chopstick for +7500 GP when you can get an Efficient Quiver for 1800 GP and it holds up to six staves?
So yeah, given the number of Wondrous Items that have that perk already, I'd have no trouble with someone picking it up as an artisan trick. I'd probably break out the "clothlike consistency" from Shrink Item as a separate one, however, so if someone wants to make a robe of useful items with magic items, they'd want both, unless everything embroidered on their robe is actual size to begin with.
The action to use the toggle function on any item, however, should be take longer than a free action.
Depends on the power level and/or intent of the item in question. Like Lilith, it takes time to acclimate to a new user.
* I'll allow an item to resize one size category for each +1 it has.
* Weapons must be intelligent to resize.
* Armour must be +5 (or greater) to resize. Equivalent +'s don't count.
+5 platemail resizes five categories.
+5 Heavily Fortified Platemail resizes five categories.
* Items that are intended to "work" with the wielder resize. Metamagic rods do not resize, but a Rod of Splendor does. +2 Leather armour doesn't resize, but +2 Silent Moves or Shadow leather would because it is in the nature of the magic imbued in the item to "cooperate" with the user. A metamagic rod will function regardless of the relative size of the wielder whereas its pretty difficult to be quiet when the armour is two sizes too big.
Other items that don't have +'s, well that depends.
Minor rings & staffs do not resize.
Medium rings & staffs resize one category.
Major rings & staffs resize to whomever (a black pudding can "wear" a major ring; don't ask how, they just do!).
Wands never resize.
Only major rods resize (again, unless their properties dictate otherwise).
Wondrous items usually do (again, along the minor-medium-major scale)
what about that staff that transforms into a pendant on command as a free action?Or a pendant that instantly transforms into a staff?
I'd say that's more the province of Shrink Item and Permanency, though if incorporated into an item as part of other enchantments, I don't see why the Command Word would have to be limited to the original caster. After all, Figurines of Wondrous Power work the same way and aren't limited to the original caster, and a Bronze Griffon would be a lot less convenient if it were stuck as a life-size bronze statue.
As for having it be a free action, I'd only do that if a command word is a free action, which I don't think it is.
Then again, I've always felt that Shrink Item and Permanency are overcosted for what they do. One staff that shrinks into a chopstick for +7500 GP when you can get an Efficient Quiver for 1800 GP and it holds up to six staves?
So yeah, given the number of Wondrous Items that have that perk already, I'd have no trouble with someone picking it up as an artisan trick. I'd probably break out the "clothlike consistency" from Shrink Item as a separate one, however, so if someone wants to make a robe of useful items with magic items, they'd want both, unless everything embroidered on their robe is actual size to begin with.
The action to use the toggle function on any item, however, should be take longer than a free action.
what, a 7500 gold piece tax to the mahou shoujou? for a staff that can transform into a pendant and back. all it gets is that it is lighter weight. but staves are already weightless. why should the individual playing "Sakura Kinomoto" be taxed for "Fluff"? swift action might work. but free action is a lot less taxing. the 7500 gold is too high a price for a player playing a "Magical Girl"
|
|
Then again, I've always felt that Shrink Item and Permanency are overcosted for what they do. One staff that shrinks into a chopstick for +7500 GP when you can get an Efficient Quiver for 1800 GP and it holds up to six staves?
There are plenty of posts cluttering up D&D fora about the item creation costs being broken in one direction (use activated Ring of True Strike, for instance), but I think it's equally valid to note the times when the costs are broken in the other direction (such as your ridiculously overpriced example above).
That's the kind of situation where the DM just has to say, 'Oh hell, this magic item isn't even as useful as a masterwork crossbow. I'm gonna charge you 250 gp. Take it and get the hell out of my magick shoppe.'
Yeah, I think so too. A swift action for toggling any item seems reasonable, as that's about what I'd see it as taking.
About my only reticence about allowing it as a crafting perk is that it makes Permanency somewhat useless, but then again, 7500 GP is fine for a utility spell where you need to go steal the black altar in the middle of the night and don't want to worry about it exploding out of wherever you've stashed it for smuggling.
So, yeah, I'd allow it as a crafting perk, but I still think activating any magic item should still be a swift action at minimum.
|
|
Depends on the power level and/or intent of the item in question. Like Lilith, it takes time to acclimate to a new user.
Some great guidelines here and some super ideas. I agree the wonder of items should allow many of the to eventually work with the user. Using magic item classifications as a basis for guidelines really works well. Thanks all!
|
|
I allow all items to be resized. I find it penalizes folks too much to not allow them to use the loot they find. but if you have a problem with resizing items in your game, may I suggest letting them take the item to an appropriate craftsman (an armorsmith for a suit of armor for example) and pay a small fee to have the item reworked to fit them?
love,
malkav
In one of the ROTR threads, someone was discussing the problems of all the Giant and Ogre treasure in the game and suggested supplying a Wand of Item Size Change as one of the items the characters could buy.
I don't remember the particulars, but in my game, I'm allowing it:
:1 charge / size difference to change an item's size.
:Will NOT work with Artifacts
:The wand starts with 20 charges and can be recharged with Enlarge or Shrink
So, if the Gnome wants to wield the +1 Ogre Hook, he would need to use 2 charges ( Large> Medium> Small)
In one of the ROTR threads, someone was discussing the problems of all the Giant and Ogre treasure in the game and suggested supplying a Wand of Item Size Change as one of the items the characters could buy. (Thanks to whomever came up with the idea)
I don't remember the particulars, but It's a great idea to steal. In my game, I'm allowing it:
:1 charge / size difference to change an item's size.
:Will NOT work with Artifacts
:The wand starts with 20 charges and can be recharged with Enlarge or Shrink
So, if the Gnome wants to wield the +1 Ogre Hook, he would need to use 2 charges ( Large> Medium> Small)
There are plenty of posts cluttering up D&D fora about the item creation costs being broken in one direction (use activated Ring of True Strike, for instance)
I always treated such a thing as at least equivalent to providing a +10 weapon bonus (+20 to hit vs. +10 hit and +10 damage) as the lower end of the potential cost of a Ring of True Strike. Though, +20 hit is really worth somewhat more than +10 hit/+10 damage, since it's potential damage bonus can be a hell of a lot more as attack damage scales.
|
|
I thought magical equipment has automatically resized since 3rd edition? That's how we've been running the game; it's penalizing enough that your medium-sized fighter can't put on the goblin warchief's masterwork armor, or that the small PCs won't benefit from the magical tower shield looted from the BBEG. So, no 'Small Ring of Protection' or anything like it in my campaigns...
AD&D had a table (in 'Arms & Equipment Guide', I think) for rolling randomly to see if you could actually use the equipment you found (for example, I think halflings had a base 25% chance to "fit into" medium-sized armor).
AD&D had a table (in 'Arms & Equipment Guide', I think) for rolling randomly to see if you could actually use the equipment you found (for example, I think halflings had a base 25% chance to "fit into" medium-sized armor).
Can't say much about 1ed, but the 2ed AD&D PHB had a % chance that a suit of armor made for your own race and size may not fit you (actually, the % was for the object to fit, not the other way around).
In a way, it makes sense. I'm a short-ish small-frame guy. My friend is the size of a football player. There's no way that an armor tailored for him could fit me adequately, even if we are both medium humanoids with the human subtype...
If we are to wave this reality out of the game for simplicity sake, I can't see why magical items would not:
1) magically re-size to the user
2) happened to be of the right size for the user, like the rest of non-magical loot.
As for weapons and armors going from one size category to another, I prefer in-game interventions myself.
'findel
|
|
I just hit the reincarnation barrier on size.
And would LOVE it if the pathfinder guys would clarify whether weapons and armor resize.
my human paladin came back as a gnome paladin.
we house ruled that armor could be adjusted, straps and stuff, to fit to a small character for 1/5th the value of the item.
but with my shield, my weapons , i lost close to 15k worth of stuff ( a medium +1 adamantine longsword ) ... that i can't use anymore.
i'm a two weapon fighter, with three of my feats devoted to sword - and - shield fighting, so i cant just keep the weapon as a greatsword all the time, i need a small sword and small shield to fight with.
beyond the cost of the reincarnation, the amiguity in the wording is costing me 7,500, in selling my current gear for half price, and buying a small version of the same gear back.
its an inconvenience to not have a magic weapon or armor resize to the user when the average difference in price is less than 100gp.
the cost of a small or medium longsword is still the same
the cost of a small or medium suit of armor is the same price.
so why create a barrier ? its magic. most of this equipment already glows.
with the rise of the runelords stuff, i undestand there's less ambiguity, because this large equipment was created for ogres.
I have been playing rpg's for a over 25 years now and I do not think I have ever seen a system where magical armor and weapons re-sized based on the size of the wearer/wielder unless that item specifically said in it's description that it did. From my experience, it is usually magic items such as rings, boots, cloaks and similar stuff that as a general rule will shrink or grow to fit a wearer anywhere from gnome to ogre in size.
I have nothing particularly useful to contribute to this discussion, except to say that I always wanted PCs to find a "staff" that detected as magical, which ended up being a giant's wand. It would still function as a wand, its just freaking huge (for a wand).
Nothing to see here . . . moving on . . .
I allow all items to be resized. I find it penalizes folks too much to not allow them to use the loot they find. but if you have a problem with resizing items in your game, may I suggest letting them take the item to an appropriate craftsman (an armorsmith for a suit of armor for example) and pay a small fee to have the item reworked to fit them?
That is a very good idea.
I too also allow all (or at least most) items to be resized for the purposes of easing loot distribution.
Items that can't resize are the exception rather than the rule--for example, a special crown that can only be worn by giants did not resize itself for its human captors. Unusual items to be worn by non-humanoid creatures would not also change shape (although it's conceivable that barding for a warhorse could magically resize itself for that of a pony).
In my Rise of the Runelords campaign, there is a lot of loot that is ill-sized for players. We get around it because we have a homebrew class that can transfer magic from one item to another, it is a solution that has worked very well for us. So, strictly speaking, we don't allow items to resize, nor is there a commercial solution (having a crafter resize it) but there is a need and we filled it.
Definitely individual GMs will have their own desired approach.
