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!
My DM is currently doing the same thing. He tracks the XP for us, then when we level, he (cheesy, I know) plays the victory .mp3 from Final Fantasy...
I removed some posts that became excessively antagonistic.
When it has become clear that the person you are debating with is not going to be convinced, the best thing to do is walk away. Go ahead and let them get the last word and save yourself the stress. The worst case is that someone is wrong on the Internet.
This advice usually applies to both/all sides of such an argument.
.
..
...
....
.....
HAIL CITIZENS OF OUR GLORIOUS NATION!
Citizens are reminded that not every action requires or deserves a reaction. Have we already forgotten the Night Of The Long Burn?
Remember: The enemy needs you! Are you aware?
In unrelated news:
Joyous day! There will be another reading of our humble all-powerful leader's latest book 'Smiling Under the Heel of Happiness'. Do not fail to sieze the chance to attend this obligatory volountary celebration of excellence! Trusted citizens will find themselves today at Public Joy Garden 8204L by 17:30.
Thank you for your strength.
BE GOOD - BE HAPPY - BEHAVE
//
OT: Have you tried talking to your players? Perhaps you could take a break and let one of them GM for a while and try and effect change from within the player ranks.
|
I cannot put into words how annoying it is!
Would any changes lessen or even remove your annoyance? Like options for restoring those negative levels, or a craft point limit on items per level? I'm thinking my players might sympathize with you since I am running SCAP xpless. Every now and then I kind of feel pestered about the next level and when it is coming up.
I've always felt that magic items should have drawbacks to their usage, and these drawbacks shouldn't be ones that mere money can solve.
Like a sword that makes you better in combat, but haunts your dreams, and eventually erodes your ability to care about other creatures. Eventually, you stop hearing them and just see a flashing number over their head - the number of XPs they're worth.
This is fine, until you stop being able to communicate with your party members...
*innocent whistle*
Late to the party, but my 2 cents:
One option is to allow people to make characters with very generous ability scores, but then have very few magic items (so people's abilities are naturally high).
Otherwise, it basically comes down to redesigning challenges to suit the party (the GM's ever present and hardest challenge).
While some people just expect magic items out of habit, I find most players (myself included) start jonesing for specific items out of a perceived weakness or need.
For example, if the last five Will saving throws I fail, I'm going to think likely the easiest solution is bumping up my Wisdom and/or Will saves. If I spend three combats not hitting anything with a character I intended to be melee oriented, I might start thinking I need a weapon with an enhancement bonus or better strength/dexterity.
It should go without saying (but if I don't say it, someone will take this out of intention and context and nitpick) that of course these particular scenarios might be resolved to an extent by improvement in character build, party tactics, etc. etc. etc. and INDEED--one important thing to do if you plan on running a low magic item game (or ANY game for that matter) is to make sure your party addresses these issues.
What I'm getting at is that if you feel you've thoroughly exhausted your options and planned out your tactics to the nines and still feel ineffective, gear is what folks often start clamoring for.
And indeed, if you look at a high CR monster--say a dragon or a demon--you will notice the saving throws versus their abilities, to hit bonuses, saves, etc. are all to a point that pretty much assumes that a party fighting them will be equipped with stat boosted gear (there's an analysis thread by Kolokotroni from awhile back that shows this). You put a "naked" party of four level 15 characters--make them as optimized as you can, 20 point buy or good results from 4d6 drop lowest--versus a CR 15 dragon, and statistically, that CR 15 dragon is more likely to be able to squash that party flat before they are able to land a significant blow (be it by magic or weapon). (This is not to say it can't be done, just saying that it is effectively not really a CR 15 fight--without gear, a much higher CR.)
Sooo... if you want to take away the crutches, you need to be able to ensure the PCs can stand up on their own (say at least has a 40% of hitting and not being hit more or less, with variation of course depending on the different challenges etc. etc. etc.). This means use of lower CR monsters (and often, large numbers of lower CR monsters rather than a single or pair of high CR monsters). It is of course easier in a low level campaign when you're likely to have few magic items to begin with.
maybe i should clarify my earlier post since ive been basically called controlling and dumb by almost every post after mine. i HAVE told the players about these bonuses and they think they are a very good idea, and i AM starting them off with 25 point buy. so its not like they are lacking. my players think that the the bonuses are fair. but we have totally derailed this thread. i believe the basic point of the OP was the christmas tree effect and the fact that people base their characters off of gear and not off of storyline. this is supposed to be a ROLEPLAYING GAME, not a video game.
Thanks :-)
also, there are magic items in my game, and the players can still get the bonuses on top of magic armor. i had the idea for the "heroic path" so to say and i posted the idea on the forums and someone posted this idea and said they used it multiple times and that it was successful.
Get rid of the item creation feats, or set a much higher character level req for them.
Then you can control the presence of such items.
Get rid of the item creation feats, or set a much higher character level req for them.
Then you can control the presence of such items.
thank you for the positive and helpful post. i will keep this in mind.
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!
I like the idea of no experience. I find in APs that I've run if you indulge players side quest that aren't part of the AP they end up leveling up too fast and by the end of the AP you are doing a lot of work advancing encounters to compensate for it.
So I can put in the work, not allow side quest outside the scope of the AP, or just do away with XP level players up when the AP suggests that players should be X level. I think in King Maker when I run I'm going to go with the no XP route.
You're funny. Unfortunately...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.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 have no idea what you getting at. Obviously you disagree.
In the games I've played the problem has been wizards die before they get to point where they can effectively protect themselves. Of course this was in 3.5 and 2E games. Pathfinder definitely gives you more hit points so it might not be as big of problem. In the older edition it sure was though.
|
|
Well, I haven't read anything other than the OP but here's my take:
Pandora's box has been opened -- you ain't shuttin' it.
Ever.
Now that John Q Gamer knows about all the pretty toys to make his PC more fun, you're not gonna be able to pretend those shiny toys don't exist.
Here's what I do -- other than an occassional adventure where there is no magic items or high magic at all:
Let the PCs spend their gold and collect the loot the way they want. I can make it harder to buy the One Ring or Elric's sword or whatever, sure, and I do -- but they still buy them eventually. And HAVE TO HAVE THEM if I'm ever gonna be able to throw my marilith at them.
The thing I do differently is give them the occassional magic item that, back in the olden days, Players would treasure and use in creative ways -- those odd magical items that NO ONE would ever actually spend their money on because it's just FLAT OUT smarter to get another +2 to your Ability Score or +1 to your AC.
In my case, that wierd magic item gets stuck with the PC because no one else will buy it from them. The PCs can sell the 6 +1 short swords in town to get some real treasure, but no one will ever make an offer to buy that half-used Deck of Illusions or Feather Token.
|
The power of a Wizard is inversely proportional to the amount of magic in the world.
Is this before or after he sells himself as an indentured servant to a sorcerer for a few years in the hopes of getting the sorcerer to scribe a scroll or two for him so that he can add to his pitifully meager spellbook?
I like the idea of no experience. I find in APs that I've run if you indulge players side quest that aren't part of the AP they end up leveling up too fast and by the end of the AP you are doing a lot of work advancing encounters to compensate for it.
So I can put in the work, not allow side quest outside the scope of the AP, or just do away with XP level players up when the AP suggests that players should be X level. I think in King Maker when I run I'm going to go with the no XP route.
I dont mind xpless adventures in an AP where there is a set progression that is meant to be followed. I dont like it if a DM uses an XPless game as an excuse to not let the players level up at a reasonable pace and throw unreasonable challenges at them without giving equitable reward. I once had a dm that regularly threw CR level+4 or 5 every fight at the party but didnt want to grant xp if we survived (usually after losing a PC or two) and instead kept arbitrarily (and rarely) gave out levels. That i definately disagree with.
With an AP though I really dont mind, there is a set and intended progression and usually pretty reasonable challenges (except some total bs I ran into in Return to Castle Ravenloft but thats a different story).
But i do think there is some excitement thats gets lost as a player if you dont get to erase and add to your xp total at the end of a session. Always seemed like a fun moment to me. And I like giving it to my players or even providing individual rewards in xp for good roleplay or clever ideas, which cant be done if it isn't used.
Is this before or after he sells himself as an indentured servant to a sorcerer for a few years in the hopes of getting the sorcerer to scribe a scroll or two for him so that he can add to his pitifully meager spellbook?
FWIW, I played a wizard in one campaign in which the two free spells per level comprised almost all of my spellbook.
And you know? Not that bad. I'd even go so far as to say, still better than sorcerer.
Next you'll tell me critical fumbles are a good idea.
No I won't (because they really aren't).
Save or die = win fights.
Only IF there is one enemy and only IF he fails a save does it win the fight. This option is just as likely to be a wasted turn.
Battlefield control = win fights.
Not by itself it doesn't. All it does is delay the enemy. You still need a way of killing the enemy. That's why the other two categories exist.
Evocation = waste turn (Exception: Contingency).
No more or less than the above two types of spells. Direct damage can be great for clearing out groups of weak enemies, or pummeling the big bad with enough hurt that your companions are able to take him down in the same round.
Please take a look at THIS THREAD, where I provide evidence showing that no type of combat spell is inherently better than any other (and that they all seriously rock when used in combo). I would be happy to debate it with you there.
Stuff.You have it exactly backwards. The power of a Wizard is inversely proportional to the amount of magic in the world. The power of a Fighter is directly proportional to the amount of magic in the world.
High magic world = enemies have lots of magic defense, spells fizzle often etc. Fighters get nice things.
Low magic world = everything has a big target saying 'insert spell to win encounter'. Fighters are disposable mooks. You'll mow through them by the dozens. Even, and especially if they are yours.
In addition, regardless of the level of magic the Fighter and the Rogue are in no way capable of defending anyone else, and need high magic just to protect themselves.
You are right, the wizards spell in low magic game can equal "I win". Only problem in our games was the Wizard never survived long enough to get the spell in. Usually ambushes nailed the wizard and dead wizard. If you start from 1st the wizard with out magic item coming tends to lack AC. The fighters are buying mundane armor and using feats to boost their AC. Sure this stops being useful around 5th but getting the Wizard to 5th is hard.
Now if you start at 10th level, heck go all casters. Who needs a fighter in low magic game when you are starting at 10th.
I remember much less problems in 1st and 2nd edition days. I remember characters spending all their extra time and resources trying to get the hammer of thunderbolts, belt of giant strength, and ogres gauntlet. or chase after a sun blade or vorporal sword. They would give a dragons horde just for the knowledge of where they could possibly find a holy avenger. New spells were hard to come buy, and scrolls found in dungeons weren't the ones players really wanted. It took a good amount of convincing and treasure to get the local sage to teach you lightning bolt or fireball. But those days are long gone.
Low magic game and low magic item game aren't just "different," they're the opposite.
The dirty secret people don't like to talk about is that wizards don't need magic items. They don't. They have spells. They don't need items because they can already cast whatever "item" it is they want. A low magic item game doesn't hurt them in the slightest.
Fighters DO need magic items. Fighters can't fly, or spider climb, or breath underwater. In fact, open up any of your previous edition books, and you'll find that the vast majority of those magic items are intended for fighters. Hell, you want a christmas tree? Pop open your 2e book - when when a fighter gets henchmen/companions, they're decked out in magic! Two different magic weapons, armor, magic rings...and that's just your henchman!
3e didn't add the christmas tree effect, it just stopped lying and pretending it wasn't there. And a low magic game brutally punishes non-casters and only leads to more caster supremacy.
GOBLINS!!! ALL GOBLINS!!!
Advanced goblins, giant goblins, half dragon goblins, fiendish goblins.
Giant/half dragon/fiendish/advanced goblins, GOBLINS!!!
And an orc.
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.
Why wouldn't the fighter use his feats? Great Cleave and Lunge alone would make him awesome in this situation. Combine that with many other feats and he would do just fine. Sure, the army might eventually take him down but who wants to fight a guy who is going to take out 8-30 (more if he is already using a reach weapon and quick draw would let him switch as needed) of them every 6 seconds?
I understand the point you are making. Magic > mundane especially at high levels. Gear is very useful at keeping the characters alive. This becomes more and more true as the characters level. Even the wizard is going to need some magic items if he wants to remain effective, if only by increasing the DCs of his spells.
The best way to avoid the Christmas Tree Effect is to not require it for characters to do well. Don't have the characters battling the most potent enemies all the time. Use more of the lower challenge rating opponents. It makes for a more interesting battle anyway. Also, don't use so much combat. Increase the roleplaying in the game and provide XP for overcoming obstacles by using their skills instead of their equipment.
Give their more powerful gear charges too. So a magic sword would have 20 hits per +. Once it uses 20 hits, then it is reduced by one +. A +5 sword would be a +4 sword after 20 hits, +3 after 20 more, etc. Save the more potent creatures (ie dragons) for when they might need to pull out their big guns.
You want to do a low or no magic game in Pathfinder/d20/3.5?
There are two choices.
1. The hard choice.. rework encounters, creatures, Crs, class abilities so that they do not assume the wealth by level measure, spell acquisition by wizards, and rework on how many if any caster classes you should have an what to do about magical healing.
2. The not so insane choice. Forget about trying to shorehorn non magic into 3.5 or Pathfinder and use a d20-derived system built from the ground up with these assumptions... Iron Heroes.
Um, thank you for your response (sincerely). Did you even read my initial post? (sincere question)
Seriously, folks, if the only recommendation is "play another game" you're:
A) Wasting your time, 'cause I already considered & discarded that idea. My kids like Pathfinder just fine & I like Golarion & the modules.
B) Contributing nothing to the ciscussion. I didn't ask the question "I hate the x-mas tree effect,SHOULD I play Pathfinder?"
People do house rules & variant rules all the time. Publishers create additional, and sometimes optional, content for the core game so requesting suggestions regarding how other GMs of like mind have dealt with the issue is hardly unprecedented.
What I'm working on is an extrapolation of the Vow of Poverty to be a standard part of character advancement. It works the "expected bonuses" that characters of various levels are supposed to have into the character without having the characters chasing down +4 cloaks of resistance, etc. I lower expected wealth by level accordingly, and it allows magic items to all be more fun, interesting things like special abilities, wondrous items, etc.
The PCs just hit 3rd level, so the characters haven't seen much of it in action yet, but I'm looking forward to it when they do.
So, how do you help your players avoid the “My Character is his Gear” trap?
I restrict their access to it. That's all.
1) Only potions and scrolls are generally for "sale" and almost universally, only divine ones at that. And most holy establishments don't just give them to anyone.
2) The feats for crafting magic items are off-limits, save for making scrolls or potions. A character can still make any other item, but they don't need to spend a feat to do it. They must research, adventure, and spend a great amount of game time to accomplish the task.
3) Without the sale of magic items for the most part and placing restrictions on crafting magic items, control of access to them is firmly in my control as GM. The distribution of them is deliberate, if sometimes random, as I like to randomly select them at times using the tables in the GMG or the 3.5 DMG.
4) Magic items are not sacred. I reserve the right to play monsters and villains sensibly. If it is in their interest to steal of break a magic item in the party's possession, they will try to do so. Sometimes, the possession of a particular magic item draws the envy of powerful enemies who will try to take them from the PCs.
Thus, if PC's overall have less items, they tend to define themselves less by them.
2) The feats for crafting magic items are off-limits, save for making scrolls or potions. A character can still make any other item, but they don't need to spend a feat to do it. They must research, adventure, and spend a great amount of game time to accomplish the task.
This is an interesting idea. I had already been considering several of the things suggested on this thread. Some I like, some I think would only cause problems. This is something I had not considered. I do very much like the idea of making Item Creation more complex.
Thus, if PC's overall have less items, they tend to define themselves less by them.
Except melee classes are built around items. Fighters? Rangers? Rogues? They define themselves by their items because their items is what makes them able to do what they are able to do. I fail to see how depriving them of items does anything but empower spellcasters even further. You know who doesn't care about a lack of magical items? The Wizard. The Cleric. The Druid.
You know who doesn't care about a lack of magical items? The Wizard. The Cleric. The Druid.
I agree 100%, and if a DM wants to run a low magic campaign, but he can't convince of how he will balance it out or refuses to answer my questions then I will definitely be playing a caster of some sort.
I removed some posts that served very little purpose other than to belittle others. A reply to these posts was also removed.
Except melee classes are built around items. Fighters? Rangers? Rogues? They define themselves by their items because their items is what makes them able to do what they are able to do. I fail to see how depriving them of items does anything but empower spellcasters even further. You know who doesn't care about a lack of magical items? The Wizard. The Cleric. The Druid.
Thus, if PC's overall have less items, they tend to define themselves less by them.
I think you have to ask what the characters actually need. A few well-selected magic items rather than a major decking out in tinsel goes a long way.
But I think it is true that gear-based characters are more likely to appreciate certain kinds of gear, not simply because they depend on it but because it may be part of the personality of someone in that profession. It's not that different from an auto enthusiast going on about their ride, or a guitar enthusiast being particular about his strings, pickups, and amps to get the precise sound he wants.
|
I just... don't do it. Stat boosters are rare items, not expected items. Magic weapons and armor come along as appropriate, but they tend to be somewhat sparse too (although everyone in my current game had a magic weapon by 4th level or so, and I think they all have magic armor or the equivalent now at 7th level). Wands tend to be plentiful, since I find those are self-limiting and seem very much "in genre" to me.
I simply reject the idea that the game is based around this stuff. Pish-posh, utter BS. If you don't want it, you don't need to have it -- the game can adjust just fine if this is the way it is across the board. If the end result is that some adversaries are much harder than their standard CR would say, I can live with that. So far, looks like my players can too (because we like our worlds to seem more cinematic and less like "OK, now I'm going to go buy a +1 sword; you guys need anything from Joe's Magic Emporium?").
You know who doesn't care about a lack of magical items? The Wizard. The Cleric. The Druid.I agree 100%, and if a DM wants to run a low magic campaign, but he can't convince of how he will balance it out or refuses to answer my questions then I will definitely be playing a caster of some sort.
Personally, for our low magic campaign we don't let folks play wizards/sorcerers/clerics/witches/oracles/druids. They simply don't exist.
Bards, Inquisitors and Summoners become the main casters, followed by Paladins and Rangers.
Inquisitors hunting Summoners is a riot!
My idea for less magic items has always been two fold. First use Epic point buy or a libral rolling method and eliminate all stat boost items from the game. Think about how many players use up multiple slots or spend a monster amount of cash on getting their stats where they want them. Wouldnt it be cooler if they could use those slots on some interesting niche item instead...or put that money into the crafting of their one epic style weapon that they have named and carried since 3rd level. Heroes in novels are fantastic and powerful individuals who posses abilities that allow them to become legends, not average farmers who's belt, headband, boots, gloves, and coat make them able to run faster, lift, more, jump higher and hide better.
The other thing I would do is place a large emphasis and the metal types to counter damage reductions, so that you dont need to have a +4 sword to be viable. I would do this by aranging the metals in a ladder system where one metal also encompases the damage reduction of the ones bellow, cost mods would be needed to the metals on the upper rungs, but this method eliminates the power creep from ever ascending pluses and frees up the player to seek out cooler more flavorful enchantments since they wont waste all of their hard earned loot in the persuit of generic +1's every couple of levels to stay in the game.
I have tinkered with methods to increase defense as well in persuit of removing the ring of protection, ring of force shield and amulat of Nat armor that dominate our game table. My favorite was from the wheel of time campaign setting, in which each class got a A.C. boost by level, varying by martial prowess... but I think that is too big of a rule change for the O.P.'s purposes so I will digress on that one.
|
|
You put a "naked" party of four level 15 characters--make them as optimized as you can, 20 point buy or good results from 4d6 drop lowest--versus a CR 15 dragon, and statistically, that CR 15 dragon is more likely to be able to squash...
OK, so it's a CR 18 Dragon now. I can deal with that.
I mean, I'll agree that there are gaps magic items fill right now. I just don't agree that if you reduce the ubiquity of that filler, the result is an unplayable game. In fact, I think it is a much more fulfilling game, because items pulled from the book as De rigueur for your level seems far too vanilla. If you're statted up with all the gear every other character of your level and type in every other campaign has, what is the fun in that?
I'll agree that if you decide to pull away from the reliance on magic items, you inherit some other issues. As a GM, I tend to run with a mix of the following:
- I tend towards smaller numbers of more interesting items. The fighter-types tend to be much more likely to get armor or weapons with smaller enhancement bonuses but with the addition of a special ability. I believe they deserve items with some personality and some differentiating factor. To fill in gaps in the party, I then have the more standard +1/+2 weapons and armor pop up often enough to have everyone get something along those lines as they level up.
- My general rule of thumb is that everyone has some magic weapon and some protective gear fairly early on, although maybe the wizard doesn't get his +1 dagger until later in game; he'll deal with it. Then I sprinkle in the extras -- wands for the wizards (so long as they don't start needing a bandoleer for them), scrolls for the clerics, plenty of potions, and a mix of rings, cloaks, and other wondrous things so everyone has 1-2 special things. On average, 2-3 permanent items per person in the party, and consumables to a reasonable degree. One of those permanent items tends to be fairly potent and does become part of the character's persona -- but that might be the hat of disguise for the rogue, not the +6 Dex stat booster.
- I encourage the party to work as a team. Buff spells and abilities can help fill in the need for bigger bonuses in appropriate combats. This isn't a big deal; I mostly play with the same people I've played with for 25 years, so players and characters tend to mesh well.
- I do tend to evaluate encounters as more like 1-2 CR higher once the game gets to the levels cited above. That sort of evaluation can be pretty dependent on specifics of the party and the threat, of course. A party full of people with evasion might not be as hard-pressed when they fail Reflex saves against a threat, and if they also have a cleric with Healing domain, they bounce back quicker too.
I just so incredibly loathe the Christmas Tree effect, I'm more than willing to work around the gaps and work with my players to have a game that doesn't need it in order to work. It takes adjustments as you go along, but by the time I hit those problem areas, I know my party well enough to anticipate and plan around them.
You put a "naked" party of four level 15 characters--make them as optimized as you can, 20 point buy or good results from 4d6 drop lowest--versus a CR 15 dragon, and statistically, that CR 15 dragon is more likely to be able to squash...OK, so it's a CR 18 Dragon now. I can deal with that.
Then you're ready to go chop down some Christmas trees and make some nice firewood. :)
|
I see alot of the posters advocaticing a low magic low wealth game.
Why play in a game like that. Players play to not only rle play but get bright shiney treasures that they can't get IRL.
There is also the issue of game balance if non-spell slingers do not get magic at higher levels, the non-spell casters either can't effect the monsters or just sit there and get pounded by creatures they can not effect. This equals no fun for the non-spell slingers.
I will give you a perfect example of this. Last tuesday my PFS group played the Citidal of flame. We got t the finial encounter and could not effect the BBG because we had no way of effect the bbg because of a wall of fire that the bbg used to spilt the room. None of the casters were high enough level to dispel magic and do to the low magic of PFS none of non-casters had any items to effect the wall of fire the one PC that went through the wall of fire died. {sorry for the no spoiler tag don't know how to use them.]
Another thing I noticed is that several posters whined that GM's had to do more work if they gave players magic items or had to change AP's
if PC's had magic Items. IMO this is just very poor GM'ing on their parts.
Now I am going to say something really contversial Adventure Paths encougarge bad Game Mastering. This is not in any way to Slam Pazio they create very good AP's to make money and stay in business while putting out heavy crunch books we all love. But i see to many posters relying on AP's any not running there own game set in Golarian.
Pazio has created a very rich world for us but I see to few on these boards using the world and relying on AP's.
Magic is what the game is formed around wether is cast magic or bound magic in items. Use magic and have fun in your games.
THe players can never have more Magic/Power than the GM. Remember the second golden rule Power attracts power. Rule one He who has the gold makes the rules.
|
|
I see alot of the posters advocaticing a low magic low wealth game.
Why play in a game like that. Players play to not only rle play but get bright shiney treasures that they can't get IRL.
There is also the issue of game balance if non-spell slingers do not get magic at higher levels, the non-spell casters either can't effect the monsters or just sit there and get pounded by creatures they can not effect. This equals no fun for the non-spell slingers.
I will give you a perfect example of this. Last tuesday my PFS group played the Citidal of flame. We got t the finial encounter and could not effect the BBG because we had no way of effect the bbg because of a wall of fire that the bbg used to spilt the room. None of the casters were high enough level to dispel magic and do to the low magic of PFS none of non-casters had any items to effect the wall of fire the one PC that went through the wall of fire died. {sorry for the no spoiler tag don't know how to use them.]
Another thing I noticed is that several posters whined that GM's had to do more work if they gave players magic items or had to change AP's
if PC's had magic Items. IMO this is just very poor GM'ing on their parts.
Now I am going to say something really contversial Adventure Paths encougarge bad Game Mastering. This is not in any way to Slam Pazio they create very good AP's to make money and stay in business while putting out heavy crunch books we all love. But i see to many posters relying on AP's any not running there own game set in Golarian.
Pazio has created a very rich world for us but I see to few on these boards using the world and relying on AP's.
Magic is what the game is formed around wether is cast magic or bound magic in items. Use magic and have fun in your games.
THe players can never have more Magic/Power than the GM. Remember the second golden rule Power attracts power. Rule one He who has the gold makes the rules.
Steps down from soap box.
Off the top of my head?
Seriously, martial guys need stat boosts and other miscellaneous bonuses, or they can't compete. If you simply drop the ELs to compensate, then casters overwhelm the enemy that much more easily. There are two ways around that, to still reduce the number of stat-boost items people are wearing.
Option 1: Give non-casters magic item-like bonuses (resistance, AC boosts, stat boosts) as additional class features. For example: "Physical Training (Ex): The fighter gains an enhancement bonus to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution equal to +1 per 3 class levels." This doesn't replace any other class feature; rather, it supersedes his need for more expensive belts.
Option 2: Make multi-function items a discount, not a price hike. In other words, instead of a fighter having a +1 sword, and +1 full plate, and a belt of Str*, and a cloak of resistance, and a ring of protection, and gloves of Dex*, and an amulet of health*, he'd have the Sword of Might (a +1 strength and Dex enhancing sword) and King Duristan's Armor (a suit of +1 full plate of resistance, deflection, and endurance). Every time he would normally gain a new item, add that ability to one of his two existing items instead. And don't charge him extra for it.
The easiest way to do this is to just move the bonuses from the gear to the character. Give them automatic enhancement bonuses to attack/damage/AC/saves/two stats every so often. This involves by far the least amount of re-designing the game. Like it or not, the game DOES assume that characters have bonuses to hit, damage, AC, saves, and stats; thus, your only solutions lie in giving them those bonuses in a new way or completely re-designing the system.