If a player wants to invest in an item creation feats I am 100% fine with that, but to use it they will have to take time off that I would otherwise be giving to them to do with as they please and the players always get a real feel of the tradeoff they are making when the other 3 PC's are off working contacts in the neighborhood or cleaning up the sewers as a favor for the local tanners guild.
Indeed.
PC 1 will have a magic item and PC 2, 3, and 4 will have extra rat tails to barter for a few more gold they can buy... uhh... potions? with.
You might want to look into the E6 or E8 rule set (google is your friend). To summarize it basically caps out leveling at 6 and every 5000xp past that you get another feat. The big advantage of this is that it prevents game breaking magic from showing up, yet still lets everyone shine. It also severely limits the type of magic weapons present in the game world and keeps the players honest: You no longer have to worry about a level 15 fighter or mage solo'ing an army and there's added incentive to be nice to the locals. (An angry mob of villagers is still scary whether you're fresh to level 6 or if you're +15 feats in.)
If you do allow players to buy magic items maybe make them be commissioned and made by seeking out the master blacksmith that knows how to cast spells and have them take in game time to make. Also make them pay first. Heck there could be some adventures along the way.
Having a magic sword sitting around is likely to get stolen if someone figures out what it is.
Your local village should not have ye old magic shop.
I know the OP mentioned he wanted to limit house rules but I strongly recommend reconsidering that. I give this suggestion in every thread that pops up like this. Use heroic distinctions. It replaces 5 of the 'big six'. Doing so means that you no longer NEED magic items. Add to that the removal of +x magic items and keep the flavorful and interesting ones. So you dont need a magic sword and the dm doesnt have to give them. The abilities are about what the character can do and not what his or her gear can.
Personally I like the christmas tree effect, but if you want it gone, that is one of the best ways I know of to do it without having to worry about every monster and enemy you use against your party.
At some point, magic is so ubiquitous that it is no longer fantastic.
In a world where magic is virtually everywhere, an enhancement bonus may as well be "Quality Rating".
The way to break the malaise is to let the world be magic, and introduce bigger magic, occasionally, being careful not to overplay it.
At some point, magic is so ubiquitous that it is no longer fantastic.
In a world where magic is virtually everywhere, an enhancement bonus may as well be "Quality Rating".
The way to break the malaise is to let the world be magic, and introduce bigger magic, occasionally, being careful not to overplay it.
I think the problem is that many DMs can't reconcile that magic is both fantastic and the PCs are living in that fantastical world.
Your average moron on the street is level 1 Commoner Joe the Cobbler. Maybe he's level 2 from punching rats for 10 years.
The person visiting his shop is level 13 Wizard Zerkul the Powerful. His daily adventure could buy and sell Joe's shop.
The PCs are assumed to be able to acquire magical items because that is how the game is balanced. Some one has to sell them. Maybe it's all the other former rich, powerful adventurers. They have to retire doing something if they don't die in the field.
From the title it should be clear: I HAAAAAAATE the Christmas Tree effect.Don't play D&D. Seriously. Every edition has it, each one more than the last. So if you don't like it play another game, because in this one magic items are just a tool of the trade and nothing more.
The primary issue I have with it isn’t even one of campaign flavor (although that's a close 2nd) –it’s the impact on players’ mindset: I have to have a magic sword or I’m not effective in combat. I have to have AC boosters to be an effective character. I have to have a stat-booster to compensate for a dump stat or to give my fighter the strength of a giant. etc.,etc. Player’s begin to define their characters by their gear --- that’s my turn-off.The players are right to think all of these things. Equipment dependent characters are indeed defined by their equipment.
In video games like Dragon Age or Warcraft, those items are just as present (or moreso) as they are in your typical Pathfinder game. Yet because they’re scripted stories to a large degree, they’re moved to the background. Even in a high-magic setting like Harry Potter’s, they’re tools – not extensions of the character.Since when?
The whole reason to play Dragon Age or WoW is to acquire gear. Not simply to get a tool of the trade so you can move on to the rest of the game, but because item acquisition is the whole game.
Harry Potter is a low magic, low powered world. At best, it goes up to level 6.
Now if you try and play D&D with limitations on the acquisition of magic items, what you are really telling them is that playing a full spellcaster is their only option. But they're kids, so they aren't likely to notice this and are likely to notice when their awesome Fighter McFightyness gets owned over and over due to bad numbers. Same for Sneaky McSneakypants.
Mistah Green, respectfully, you and are on different planets.
3.x had numerous OGL games that provided viable mechanics for de-emphasizing the x-mas tree effect. I don't recall any of them saying "Go play RPG x". The fact that it was addressed in numerous supplements by various publishers would suggest that I'm not alone in wanting to diminish the reliance on magic items.
As for D&D, every edition did not have it. At least not to the degree 3.x and now Pathfinder do. Recently, I pulled out some of my old AD&D modules including the Slave Lords mega-module. The Slave Lords
themselves had nothing approaching anything close to the amount of magical gear that 3.x/PF character of equal level would have.
Also, I don't play Dragon Age to acquire gear, I'm playing it for the story & rpg elements - same as Pathfinder. Gear is part of that but it's not the focus.
Finally, if Harry Potter meets your definition of a low magic, low powered world then I guess Conan is a 1st-level warrior with 10 hp. I'd hate to see what you consider High Fantasy if Harry Potter = low magic to you.
I really appreciate the reply but from what I can see we're looking for completely different things from our RPGs. If it works for you, enjoy! However, it would not work for me.
The most spectacular things they do is fly around (not on their own power), heal non fatal wounds, and act positively terrified of a save or die, which only enemies can use.
What?
Dominate Person is a 5th level spell.Power Word: Stun is 8th level
Power Word: Kill is 9th level.
I've only found the "My character is his Gear" to happen when a Character is one dimensional with no background or concept behind them. With not background the magic items start to define the character as there is nothing else. It's Bob the fighter with his +5 sword awesomeness. Where it could be Turvin the Mercenary Guild Captain who just happens to have a magic long sword but that doesn't matter as this is man you want riding with your caravan of goods through the orc infested mountains.
To be fair, 4e doesn't have the christmas tree effect if you use the inherent bonuses subrule.
I'd say, make up something similar to that.
If you want your players to not be defined by their equipment then stop defining them by their equipment.
Look at the gear they have, then look at the skills/feats/class abilities they possess. Now set up the adventures around those skills/feats/class abilities so those things provide the answers. Ring of the Ram is the only ring that will push a guy into a pit, but bullrush can be used by anyone (preferably the fighter). The same can be said for liberal uses of the knowledge skill. Unless you gave someone a magic item that poops out answers every 4 minutes (you did didn't you) this shouldn't be an issue.
Remember, you gave them that gear for the most part. Yes, you did it with the best intentions. Now you have to own up to that and tailor adventures so that the items don't matter. Nothing helps a player value their character more than finding the answers on their sheet. Under the sections that are rarely erased.
From the title it should be clear: I HAAAAAAATE the Christmas Tree effect. I recognize it’s part of the game’s heritage and I like a cool magic item as much as the next guy. People love to hold up the One Ring, Sting, Elric’s Sword, and other examples from fiction as justification for their availability. Yet most of the time, magic items don’t work in-game like their fictional counterparts.
The primary issue I have with it isn’t even one of campaign flavor (although that's a close 2nd) –it’s the impact on players’ mindset: I have to have a magic sword or I’m not effective in combat. I have to have AC boosters to be an effective character. I have to have a stat-booster to compensate for a dump stat or to give my fighter the strength of a giant. etc.,etc. Player’s begin to define their characters by their gear --- that’s my turn-off.
In video games like Dragon Age or Warcraft, those items are just as present (or moreso) as they are in your typical Pathfinder game. Yet because they’re scripted stories to a large degree, they’re moved to the background. Even in a high-magic setting like Harry Potter’s, they’re tools – not extensions of the character.
However, in Pathfinder (& earlier D&D incarnations), they’re front-and-center in many of the players’ minds. As the GM Guide states, you’re trading atmosphere for convenience. I want atmosphere over convenience.
So while it’s easy enough to houserule or import OGL variants to minimize the magic item dependence, I find myself with an atypical scenario: My kids are now playing Pathfinder.
As a result, I’m trying to keep to RAW & keep house- and optional-rules to a minimum. They’re really taking to it and having a ball. I want to provide the wonder of magic items yet avoid having them feel that their characters are defined by them. I’m trying to use the guidelines presented in the GM Guide but honestly, it’s been so long since I’ve opened the Pandora’s Box of commonplace magic that I thought I’d look...
Yes, yes, a million times yes!
I have just recently started preparing a game thats completely original but since most of my past experiences GMing D&D have failed horribly, i decided that i HAVE to get this one right, seeing how it's Pathfinder and i have much respect for this game.
I had told the party that i was going to try and make the game realistic in a sense that no one just shouts in a bar "IM LOOKING FOR ADVENTURERS TO KILL GOBLINS!" Oh look, the people sitting at the table are the first ones to volunteer. I dont like that. so instead i rolled up a way for the players to meet but they are both motivated by fate to complete their quest, and due to their personal backgrounds and character personalities they also want to succeed.
I told them that the only money they would make would be from professions and whatever they "Greyhawk," seeing how they will loot everything in sight. I also told them that i wouldnt be putting magic items in the game in a sense that "i want a +3 Greatsword," oh look, you conveniently find a +3 Greatsword in the chest. NO! but i had also told them i had the magic item problem under control and that they need not worry bout such trivial things. But NOOOOOOOO! once they heard "not many magic items," they immediately, and i mean like 3 out of 6 people, started talking about taking all the craft feats so that they could have the gear anyways. SIGH. They kept this up for about 3 weeks and i kept reminding them that "i had it under control," but they just didnt listen, so i eventually had to spoil a surprise for them otherwise they would have taken feats that later on down the line they wouldnt need. What i implemented was something similar to heroic paths from Midnight.
at 3rd level and every three levels thereafter, apply the following to the character:
+5 hit points
+1 to any weapon they use (when they get +2, +3, etc, they can swith the +'s out for magical abilities, for example, a +2 could be a +1 flaming to any weapon they happen to pick up. this only stacks with other magic weapons if the magic weapon is a bonded item)
+1 destiny (dodge) bonus to AC which they have even if naked.
had i not told them specifically what this does, especially about the weapons, they would be pissed and say "well now i have a worthless feat since you didnt tell us we were gonna get this. thats a bad call as a gm."
Should i also tell them the answers to all the riddles and puzzles in the game then? Shoot, let me just tell them what they WOULD HAVE dun in the game and the surprise unexpected ending and just move on to the next game. its like they want to make a character and the first thing they do is open up to the magic item section and make a character based off what they want.
One of the players also said that a build in 4e was pointless unless the character had THIS SPECIFIC GEAR! im sure the makers would have said that if thats how they built the class, but makers of games arent in the same mindset of "base the character around the gear." this has always been a BIG problem in at least 75% of my roleplaying group and isnt likely to change anytime soon. maybe my game will make them think outside of the magic item box for a change. Welcome to what World of Warcraft has done to the world of roleplaying.
Welcome to what World of Warcraft has done to the world of roleplaying.Warcraft didn't invent Monty Haul.
lol no i was referring to the "i need gear or i cant be effective" mindset, and i am not saying that WOW CREATED it, it has just infected people's minds that HAVENT been effected yet. This was only a problem with maybe 1 or 2 of our players before WOW, NOW its 75% of my gaming group.
<snip>
Thieves' World, Conan, and Game of Thrones were hardly failures. My players and I have enjoyed many a session with those games. None of those games believed they were going to supplant D&D. Not. A. Single. One. :)
The only reason I'm not porting mechanics over from those games is I'm teaching Pathfinder to my children and am attempting to go with PF RAW as much as possible so that I can teach them that system prior rather than system + ton of house rules.
Your "unharmed by weapons" comment I presume is to show that magic items have always been a part of the game -- a point I don't refute. However, the quantity, and in particular the stat-boosting items, proliferated under 3.x and is continuing under PF. A comparison of a Slave Lord from AD&D (character level 9-13 on average) vs. an equivalent-level PF NPC from just about any AP will show a huge increase in magic items.
Unless the Potterverse uses the D&D/PF spell system, trying to equate spells from PF to spells in Harry Potter books is a wasted exercise. For the most part, it's a wasted exercise even in the gaming fiction put out by TSR & later WotC.
Also, spell level is irrelevant to the point. Magic use and magic items are ubiquitous - they're effectively replacements to technology in many cases. That's high magic/high fantasy by definition.
Welcome to what World of Warcraft has done to the world of roleplaying.Warcraft didn't invent Monty Haul.
True. However, removing/restricting magic items was easier under earlier editions. Now "level appropriate gear" is wired into the system. If I saw characters defined by their gear in 1e, that "gateway drug" is much more available now.
|
True. However, removing/restricting magic items was easier under earlier editions. Now "level appropriate gear" is wired into the system. If I saw characters defined by their gear in 1e, that "gateway drug" is much more available now.
That is sorta true... The easiest way to balance out a game that you plan on running as low magic (The best term to describe what you seem to be looking for, not perfect but who is...) is to simply bump the stat point buy up a notch. If you play on 15 normally, 20 should be enough to suffice the power they would conceivably "lose out on" at later levels by allowing them to distribute more stats. If you do 20, slap another 5 on there and call it epic fantasy.
Another challenge to that is that no character is assumed to have +X Stat Boost Item by Y level. That is nowhere in any of the books and while the players might think they are "entitled" to it, that doesn't need to be the case. The system you might be referencing is the estimated PC wealth table, but nobody said PC's are supposed to be rewarded in any specific way like magic items. Heck, throw low treasure at them for a few encounters and then reward them for killing the big bad with a deed to an old run-down castle! I know MY players would eat that UP!
I told them that the only money they would make would be from professions and whatever they "Greyhawk," seeing how they will loot everything in sight. I also told them that i wouldnt be putting magic items in the game in a sense that "i want a +3 Greatsword," oh look, you conveniently find a +3 Greatsword in the chest. NO! but i had also told them i had the magic item problem under control and that they need not worry bout such trivial things. But NOOOOOOOO! once they heard "not many magic items," they immediately, and i mean like 3 out of 6 people, started talking about taking all the craft feats so that they could have the gear anyways. SIGH. They kept this up for about 3 weeks and i kept reminding them that "i had it under control," but they just didnt listen, so i eventually had to spoil a surprise for them otherwise they would have taken feats that later on down the line they wouldnt need. What i implemented was something similar to heroic paths from Midnight.
This is another example of a DM placing too much control over a game. I suppose people level up when you tell them too as opposed to gain Xp? Is it such a hassle to stay aware of the items your players have?
Do any of you stop to wonder why players will take item creation feats? It's called control. They want control over how their character performs. It isn't your character and it isn't even really your game. You share that experience with those players. I would not want to play in a game where everyone got the same bonus' every 3 levels.
If I did I'd play 4th Ed.
Does this static bonus apply to NPC's as well? Are there 6th level commoners running around with +1 keen scythes? It would really help with threshing I suppose. The whole thing is more gamist than saying a sword is +2 or a cloak of charisma is of the +4 variety. If you can't see things from the player's perspectives then you certainly can't expect them to see things from your perspective.
As an aside. Offering a level appropriation towards gear was the best idea ever. My experiences with 2nd Ed was very magic item heavy. Most characters were very much defined by their items, even in the stories!
Remember Drizzt? Yeah, he was a skilled swordsman without Twinkle or Icingdeath, but the game didn't have feats at the time so it was really difficult to translate onto paper. My early games of 3rd Ed consisted of players being impressed that they didn't need magic items to do cool stuff. They had feats! The magic items were just there to grant bonus' and not overshadow the character.
Now! Now GM's are complaining that players think they need items, now GM's want items that summon the awe of past editions! Did we even play the same game? I've seen 2nd Ed characters with PAGES of magic items. One player had a cart that he towed stuff around in, and this was before you could make your own items! Once you could make your own items, and he saw that it cost you Xp, he lost all interest in that nonsense.
"sigh", I'm really just ranting now. Hyper frustrated by this vicious circle with no end. The solutions are right in front of all of you and you choose not to see it. Whatever. Good night.
I told them that the only money they would make would be from professions and whatever they "Greyhawk," seeing how they will loot everything in sight. I also told them that i wouldnt be putting magic items in the game in a sense that "i want a +3 Greatsword," oh look, you conveniently find a +3 Greatsword in the chest. NO! but i had also told them i had the magic item problem under control and that they need not worry bout such trivial things. But NOOOOOOOO! once they heard "not many magic items," they immediately, and i mean like 3 out of 6 people, started talking about taking all the craft feats so that they could have the gear anyways. SIGH. They kept this up for about 3 weeks and i kept reminding them that "i had it under control," but they just didnt listen, so i eventually had to spoil a surprise for them otherwise they would have taken feats that later on down the line they wouldnt need. What i implemented was something similar to heroic paths from Midnight.This is another example of a DM placing too much control over a game. I suppose people level up when you tell them too as opposed to gain Xp? Is it such a hassle to stay aware of the items your players have?
Do any of you stop to wonder why players will take item creation feats? It's called control. They want control over how their character performs. It isn't your character and it isn't even really your game. You share that experience with those players. I would not want to play in a game where everyone got the same bonus' every 3 levels.
If I did I'd play 4th Ed.
Does this static bonus apply to NPC's as well? Are there 6th level commoners running around with +1 keen scythes? It would really help with threshing I suppose. The whole thing is more gamist than saying a sword is +2 or a cloak of charisma is of the +4 variety. If you can't see things from the player's perspectives then you certainly can't expect them to see things from your perspective.
As an aside. Offering a level...
No! They are getting this because of a special effect that they get at the beginning of the game. secondly, its not about control. i told them that this game, unlike other games people have ran, is about the story and the players part in it, NOT being able to break your character, which, if you knew my group, is how most of our games go, with everyone trying to outshine the others. secondly, i dont just tell them when to level up. i have put in encounters and they get the proper experience for overcoming the obstacle. lastly its not about magic items being in the game, nor is it about someone having the access to magic items at all. if you truely read my post, which you didnt, this is about players picking out magic items, then picking out the class they go to, then their race, NOT what type of character they want to play or that persons background. if your games have lots of magic items, good for you, but if i took all those items away, you all would probably quit playing, even if it was a legit reason why you lost everything (robbers, falling into a pit because of players being dumb, ive seen that before) and my [players would literally sit there depressed for the rest of the campaign. with THIS attitude (basing character effectiveness and purpose off of gear), you might as well go play fourth ed. to get down to the point
This is what i agree with: pick a character and class youd like to play, then roll up a story for them, give them a personality. THEN everything else can fall into place.
This is what im seeing and what i think is wrong: OOOOOOO a +5 vorpal sword. i think ill play a fighter.
Weapons of Legacy is a terrible system. If you should ever find one, the best thing to do is sell it, or failing this drop it. It actually makes you worse for having it.A lot of people hate the systems, but Magic of Incarnum and *Weapons of Legacy provide lots of ways to have powerful magic abilities without the "Christmas Tree Effect". Those 2 books would take some handling and house-ruling to work in your game, but they do loads toward reducing the want and need of characters carrying potentially hundreds of items.
For example, my new character in a game we are playing is a Totemist, and using an item of Legacy(a mask, sort of like a Predator). Aside from maybe armor, and a couple of small items(bag of holding, etc), my character has no needs for magically "bling"; I can Meldshape my own weapons, and the abilities my Hunter's Mask grants me are far superior to anything I w0uld be wearing at this level normally, as well as provide multiple ,magic effects that would take a handful of items to do otherwise(Invisibility at will, Darkvision, Cure Wounds on self, +10 Movement, etc). Between adventures, I find myself not eagerly looking to go shopping quite so much as, just looking forward to new abilites my Meldshapes and Legacy item grant me.
*By the way, the biggest misnomer of this book is the Legacy Feats; you DO NOT have to take extra feats to wield a Weapon of Legacy, you get the feats for free as a bonus once you complete the needed ritual for that level.
I disagree. In the game I'm currently playing, each player has the option to create an item of Legacy, and it interests me heavily. Since I wrote that post that character has passed on, so my new character is an Abjurant Champion with a sword that grants crazy bonuses to skill checks and overall martial ability. I've written up about 8 different items of Legacy for different campaigns and characters and I'm having an absolute blast. Go piss on someone else's parade.
It's an optional system. Unless your DM is forcing you to use one, you can choose not to use it. I'm willing to bet 90%+ of the people bashing the WoL system have never even used it in-game. Ignorance is bliss, after all.
In short: Those players were right to quickly find a way to bypass you. The weaksauce system you offered in no way changes that. Low magic means pull out the casters with craft feats, and nothing else. Don't like it, don't say it.
I do agree with this, however. What I'm hearing a lot of in this thread are DM's who aren't communicating with their players, or they are simply facilitating a need for items and can't be bothered to keep track of their player's power levels.
It's simple. Before you begin running a game, think about the kind of game you want to run, and talk to your players about it. If you make it apparent in the beginning of the game that magic items are rare, then they won't be so shocked and can plan accordingly. If you run this kind of game, think about removing the item creation feats, so players aren't looking for ways to bypass you. Just tell them that "the secrets of creating such powerful magic items were lost long ago". Maybe even make it the reward for completing an adventure; they learn the ancient secrets of imbuing items with magic.
I run two very different DnD campaigns, and I have had no trouble with items in either. One is a Ravenloft campaign where magic is present, but items are rare. I suppress the "need" for items by placing a heavier emphasis on story. This only works if the players want to play that kind of game. We only have combat encounters maybe once every 3 or 4 sessions; the rest of the time is spent travelling, story-telling, investigating, etc. You can't just say "This campaign is focused on story and drama" and run 3 combats a night. You're just feeding the want for more items.
The other game I run on occasion is a high-level Elder Evils end of the world scenario, where I just let the players run wild with items. If they can afford it, they can find it. So far I've had no trouble challenging them. I went into this game ready to throw unearthly challenges at my players, so it's up to them to prepare themselves accordingly.
In short, lose the "DM vs. Player" mentality. If the players want something different from the game you're running, maybe they want a different game.
I have used it. The abilities you gain are so limited and the penalties so severe you're best off trashing it even if you can't replace it with a magic item that doesn't cripple you.
I then looked around and found a WoL system that isn't a total waste of space. It required a complete rewrite of the entire system. And even then it's only good if the player getting a legacy item is fully optimizing it. If they're just making some fluff item it's still weaksauce.
To each their own. I don't see what's so crippling about an item that lets a non-divine magic user heal themselves, grants free Evasion, free Uncanny Dodge, grant lots of skill bonuses, at-will spell effects, hell even Wishes at a later point. Everything I just described can all potentially be on ONE item. It's not for everyone, some player's don't like the trade-offs, but really, even going the simplest route you can have a +10 weapon or armor by around 13th-15th level, for barely the cash equivalent of a +4 and some HP loss. Good luck buying one with coin.
Admittedly, the pre-made ones are pretty useless. Unless you're making your own from scratch using the tables in the back of the book, finding a pre-made one is kind of a waste. I mostly just use those as sort of guidelines when writing up rituals.
True. However, removing/restricting magic items was easier under earlier editions. Now "level appropriate gear" is wired into the system. If I saw characters defined by their gear in 1e, that "gateway drug" is much more available now.
The "hardwiring" is less of a change than you think. In 1e, you absolutely needed a magic weapon to fight certain enemies. To be an effective character at levels in which those creatures started to be more common enemies, you needed level-appropriate gear. 3.5 actually relaxed that requirement.
...so i eventually had to spoil a surprise for them otherwise they would have taken feats that later on down the line they wouldnt need. What i implemented was something similar to heroic paths from Midnight.
at 3rd level and every three levels thereafter...
THIS^^ is exactly what I'm referring to about communicating with the players ahead of time. IMO, this should NOT have been "a surprise", this is a complete rework of the game system your players are using. Any time you are using something that changes the way the game is played by such an amount, this NEEDS to be discussed and agreed upon at the beginning of the game. No wonder your players try to take item creation feats and go around you; this wasn't the game they agreed to play.
Had you brought up this Midnight path variant ahead of time, your players might've had an easier time making characters appropriate to that style, rather than shoehorning them into it.
The "hardwiring" is less of a change than you think. In 1e, you absolutely needed a magic weapon to fight certain enemies. To be an effective character at levels in which those creatures started to be more common enemies, you needed level-appropriate gear. 3.5 actually relaxed that requirement.
True. However, removing/restricting magic items was easier under earlier editions. Now "level appropriate gear" is wired into the system. If I saw characters defined by their gear in 1e, that "gateway drug" is much more available now.
No, 3.5 appeared to relax this requirement. While it doesn't explicitly tell you that some enemies are only harmed by magic items of a minimum quality, and you can in fact deal damage with any weapon even if it does less damage to do enough damage there is a minimum magic item requirement. And because it isn't spelled out explicitly, it tricks people into thinking they don't need x, y, and z just to be playable.
As for weapons of legacy, the healing abilities are incredibly weak, as are the spells with a DC unless you are already a Charisma based character. Evasion comes on items that don't cripple you, Uncanny Dodge is a weak and common feature, skill bonuses come on items that don't cripple you, Wishes come on items that don't cripple you.
When I said WoL were totally worthless, I did mean custom ones. It's a given the premades are even worse. And when I said that even after the revamp they were still worthless unless perfectly optimized I meant exactly this. Even taking the unique abilities in no way justifies large penalties to HP, saves, CL, spell slots, etc.
Worthless to you maybe. What are you trying to convince me of? You replied to my earlier statement about how I'm enjoying the system to tell me I'm having "bad/wrong fun". I counter with others ways I find merit in the system and how I still find it fun in my games, and you just come in with more "bad/wrong fun".
Repeated for emphasis:
As for weapons of legacy, the healing abilities are incredibly weak, as are the spells with a DC unless you are already a Charisma based character. Evasion comes on items that don't cripple you, Uncanny Dodge is a weak and common feature, skill bonuses come on items that don't cripple you, Wishes come on items that don't cripple you.
Yes, items. I'm talking about ONE item that does what 10 items do together. One item ANY CLASS can use, no multiclassing or feats required. This thread is about reducing the "christmas tree effect", and I suggested a system which combines the abilities of a whole arsenal into one item. Also, many of the spell effects have NO DC. Scorching Ray at will? Yes please.
If you don't like it, don't use it. Get off my cloud.
Ever stop to think maybe you missed something? Maybe you just made a bad WoL and got stuck? Or is your entire point here to tell other people to stop having fun? Is it possible for you to make a post without crapping all over someone else's?
No! They are getting this because of a special effect that they get at the beginning of the game. secondly, its not about control. i told them that this game, unlike other games people have ran, is about the story and the players part in it, NOT being able to break your character, which, if you knew my group, is how most of our games go, with everyone trying to outshine the others. secondly, i dont just tell them when to level up. i have put in encounters and they get the proper experience for overcoming the obstacle. lastly its not about magic items being in the game, nor is it about someone having the access to magic items at all. if you truely read my post, which you didnt, this is about players picking out magic items, then picking out the class they go to, then their race, NOT what type of character they want to play or that persons background. if your games have lots of magic items, good for you, but if i took all those items away, you all would probably quit playing, even if it was a legit reason why you lost everything (robbers, falling into a pit because of players being dumb, ive seen that before) and my [players would literally sit there depressed for the rest of the campaign. with THIS attitude (basing character effectiveness and purpose off of gear), you might as well go play fourth ed. to get down to the point
This is what i agree with: pick a character and class youd like to play, then roll up a story for them, give them a personality. THEN everything else can fall into place.
This is what im seeing and what i think is wrong: OOOOOOO a +5 vorpal sword. i think ill play a fighter.
I wonder if you are trying to force your desired playing style on your group, which I dont think is ever a good idea. If think players are considering their gear too important it is time to start talking to them about what kind of game everyone wants to play, rather then force the game YOU want on them via houserules. And if you then decide as a group on a style of play and houserule it thats great, but if the first response to your houserule is seeking to bypass it that says to me this isnt the style of play your group is looking for.
I am a little tired of the attitude that some posters have that there is a right and wrong way to play. There is nothing wrong with players or dms who like cool magic items, and implying as much is special kinds of ignorant. We have a very flexible game system here and it can be adjusted to meet just about any group's needs. But the important thing is to decide what the whole group wants and not just the dm. The dm is like the host of a party, certainly they decide on things like wine selection and the menu, but one does not invite a bunch of vegetarians to a steak dinner either. The best and only solution to this kind of situation is to openly discuss the kind of game you are looking for with the group and come to a compromise. Maybe that means inherent bonuses with a few flavor magic items. Maybe that means 'realistic' with 'toned down' enemies. Maybe it means a game with more risk and less combat. But the important part is that everyone who is playing has some input (with the dm as final arbiter).
|
Something I'm considering for an upcoming game...
There are rules for magic item creation that allow you to make an item "slotless". I think you do this by doubling the price. So, you could award magic items without actually having them be items. Have them be boons granted by powerful patrons or certain rituals, or just have them be part of leveling up.
Since I plan on building a lot of my own adventures and encounters, it's easy enough to simply not give the party physical loot, and instead give them an equal amount of "intangible" loot.
I mainly plan on doing this for things that add numerical bonuses, like rings of protection, cloaks of resistance, and stat-boosting items. It also helps that I'm going to be running a slightly lower-magic game (no wizards or clerics) and I don't plan on going past level 10.
Something I'm considering for an upcoming game...
There are rules for magic item creation that allow you to make an item "slotless". I think you do this by doubling the price. So, you could award magic items without actually having them be items. Have them be boons granted by powerful patrons or certain rituals, or just have them be part of leveling up.
Since I plan on building a lot of my own adventures and encounters, it's easy enough to simply not give the party physical loot, and instead give them an equal amount of "intangible" loot.
I mainly plan on doing this for things that add numerical bonuses, like rings of protection, cloaks of resistance, and stat-boosting items. It also helps that I'm going to be running a slightly lower-magic game (no wizards or clerics) and I don't plan on going past level 10.
If you are insterested in ideas for exact numerical ways to implement this the thread linked in my post a ways up has alot of ideas for how to do it. Just skip past the argument at the beggining. I do think inherent internal bonuses is a great way to limit the christmas tree effect. The focus shifts to what the characters can do instead of what gear they have.
|
|
If you are insterested in ideas for exact numerical ways to implement this the thread linked in my post a ways up has alot of ideas for how to do it. Just skip past the argument at the beggining. I do think inherent internal bonuses is a great way to limit the christmas tree effect. The focus shifts to what the characters can do instead of what gear they have.Something I'm considering for an upcoming game...
There are rules for magic item creation that allow you to make an item "slotless". I think you do this by doubling the price. So, you could award magic items without actually having them be items. Have them be boons granted by powerful patrons or certain rituals, or just have them be part of leveling up.
Thanks for pointing that out. I admit I didn't read the entire thread before posting, so I skimmed past your link.
I was seeking advice on how to mimimize the player trap of equating their characters with their gear. Nothing more.
If you dont use the level based bonues someone mentioned, you should use a different system.
The reasons lie with the spells. Those scale in power qudratic or even more with spell level (meaning 81 lev 1 spells are not as useful as 1 lev 9). With level 9 spells you can destroy entire armies or similar powerful effects.
If the wizard of the party in the long run gets that powerful for pure fairness, the fighter has to be powerful in similar way.
But take away items, what is left of a lev 20 fighter.
Dam 2d6+24, Bab +16/+11/+6/+1, AC 25, flat foot 24, 195 hp(using combat expertise and power attack).
If such a guy challenges the army, they laugh about him, surrond him and the lev 1 warriors attack with effective +6, having a 15% hit chance for 2d6+3 dam. Meaning after just about 130 lousy losers (CR 14), he is dead.
On the other hand the wizard can make himself invisible all day and send the summoned monsters till they are dead or just blast them with some fireballs.And the lev 20 fighter without items has a will save of +8 at best, so any lev 3 wizard with blindness or other nice spells has a decent chance to render him useless.
So either level bonuses or only low level playing(there you dont notice the power difference so much) or different system, where the wizards dont get city leveling spells.
I've played low magic games in the past. Wizards seem to do the worst in those games. Fighter do well enough. Clerics do really well. The problem with Wizards is they die. They become glass cannons and really rely on the fighter and rogue to keep alive. In low magic wizards lack the magic items that keep them alive. I'm not saying Wizards die they just struggle a lot more than Fighter. The Cleric is fine though with all there self buff with some last hours per level.
You could give everyone the effects of the Vow of Poverty Feat from the Book of Exhaled Deeds from WotC, without the required restrictions. Its is designed to let a PC keep up with other PCs who have full gear.
Pewpewpew is the obvious response to anyone claiming Evocation is worthwhile.
Haha okay. Glad you cleared that up. I was only using that as an example.
So are you going to contribute anything worthwhile or just sit back and troll all day?
Pewpewpew is the obvious response to anyone claiming Evocation is worthwhile.
I've proven time and time again that evocation (or more specifically, blasting spells) can be truly effective when used correctly and/or in the right situation.
In general, its about as useful as save or dies or battlefield control spells, just in different situations and different ways.
Ideally, you have all three types of spells.
This is another example of a DM placing too much control over a game. I suppose people level up when you tell them too as opposed to gain Xp? Is it such a hassle to stay aware of the items your players have?
Oh jeez! I'm in a v3.5 dragonlance game right now where we can't hope to level up until we reach certain points in the storyline. We never earn XP and it is never tracked. I can't count the number of times where we would conclude an encounter and before I could stop myself say "how much XP did we get?" only to be met with a bunch of groans from everybody at the table as I once again remember that we don't get XP.
It's even worse that the adventure does NOT take into account character death or item creation. There's no way to track any of it since there is no XP to begin with. What's worse, we've encountered more than one monster with energy drain. One hero is four levels down with absolutely NO way of ever getting them back!
I cannot put into words how annoying it is!