Isn't being over word count just another way to break the rules? That should hardly disqualify an entry whose sole purpose is to break all the rules :)
There are some rules which are not meant to be broken.
Isn't being over word count just another way to break the rules? That should hardly disqualify an entry whose sole purpose is to break all the rules :)
Can.. a wondrous item be intelligent?
Can.. a wondrous item be intelligent?
How many wondrous items are there in the core book that are themselves by definition intelligent, that in their description have an intelligence score?
Once you answer that question, you have your answer.
But of course I am only answering from an "auto-reject" standpoint. I was presuming your question was "can a submitted wondrous item be intelligent?"
Can.. a wondrous item be intelligent?How many wondrous items are there in the core book that are themselves by definition intelligent, that in their description have an intelligence score?
Once you answer that question, you have your answer.
But of course I am only answering from an "auto-reject" standpoint. I was presuming your question was "can a submitted wondrous item be intelligent?"
Yeah, that was it, and I was confused because a wondrous item is just a magic item that doesn't fit into one of a few strict categories. Magic items can be intelligent and Wondrous items ARE magic items, so I wasn't sure if I could create an intelligent item or not.
Maybe it's just me but I think calling them wondrous items is a little confusing :x
Maybe it's just me but I think calling them wondrous items is a little confusing :x
As long as you remember to use the correct term in your formal writing you are free to think of and use any term you like for your own use.
Have you considered "Magic Thingamajigs"?
Or "Mystic Stuff"?
Maybe it's just me but I think calling them wondrous items is a little confusing :x
That's the name of the item's category in the rulebook.
Which, mind you, is worlds better than what they were called in AD&D 1st/2nd edition: "miscellaneous magic items."
Maybe it's just me but I think calling them wondrous items is a little confusing :xThat's the name of the item's category in the rulebook.
Which, mind you, is worlds better than what they were called in AD&D 1st/2nd edition: "miscellaneous magic items."
And which were used quite often by none-other than magic-users. Not to be confused with some random schmo who just happened to be using a magic item.
And which were used quite often by none-other than magic-users. Not to be confused with some random schmo who just happened to be using a magic item.Maybe it's just me but I think calling them wondrous items is a little confusing :xThat's the name of the item's category in the rulebook.
Which, mind you, is worlds better than what they were called in AD&D 1st/2nd edition: "miscellaneous magic items."
Darn those magic users, always hoarding the "miscellaneous magic items" for themselves. I knew there was a reason I always hated magic users....wait I was one of those magic users back in the days of AD&D.
Maybe it's just me but I think calling them wondrous items is a little confusing :xAs long as you remember to use the correct term in your formal writing you are free to think of and use any term you like for your own use.
Have you considered "Magic Thingamajigs"?
Or "Mystic Stuff"?
*snrk* Ok, Point taken.
How many wondrous items are there in the core book that are themselves by definition intelligent, that in their description have an intelligence score?Once you answer that question, you have your answer.
But of course I am only answering from an "auto-reject" standpoint. I was presuming your question was "can a submitted wondrous item be intelligent?"
Okay, just for the sake of clarity, are you saying that, in your (considerable) experience, an intelligent wondrous item would be an "auto-reject"? With the usual caveat of "unless it's really, REALLY, amazing."
How many wondrous items are there in the core book that are themselves by definition intelligent, that in their description have an intelligence score?Once you answer that question, you have your answer.
But of course I am only answering from an "auto-reject" standpoint. I was presuming your question was "can a submitted wondrous item be intelligent?"
Okay, just for the sake of clarity, are you saying that, in your (considerable) experience, an intelligent wondrous item would be an "auto-reject"? With the usual caveat of "unless it's really, REALLY, amazing."
Intelligent items have a separate section in the rules. They're not wondrous items.
|
Intelligent items have a separate section in the rules. They're not wondrous items.
How many wondrous items are there in the core book that are themselves by definition intelligent, that in their description have an intelligence score?Once you answer that question, you have your answer.
But of course I am only answering from an "auto-reject" standpoint. I was presuming your question was "can a submitted wondrous item be intelligent?"
Okay, just for the sake of clarity, are you saying that, in your (considerable) experience, an intelligent wondrous item would be an "auto-reject"? With the usual caveat of "unless it's really, REALLY, amazing."
That being said. If you make a great item that maybe spiritually influences the user or has a conscious of some sort. I don't see where that would be a problem. Just don't give it intelligence. Don't let it communicate with the owner.
But, let's say, you made a "Tankard of the Drunken Dwarf" that was infused with the spirit of the greatest drinking dwarf of all time. And aside from its many useful powers the owner can feel the spirit of the dwarf calling to him when he is in bars or taverns and experiences a -2 to Will Checks to resist getting drunk. lol
|
|
But, let's say, you made a "Tankard of the Drunken Dwarf" that was infused with the spirit of the greatest drinking dwarf of all time.I think you just skipped straight over into artifact territory. Wondrous items cannot, by their nature, be so unique as to preclude copies.
Well, I just grabbed the first thing that came to mind. :P Instead of the single greatest dwarf, it could be a holy item that's imbued with the dwarven god of drink. lol Just saying, it can have influence and still be a wondrous item. It just can't have a conscious or intelligence of any sort. It's no different than a cursed item (which I know is totally against the rules).
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
I think that "purpose-driven" items could be made into multiple copies, while still being unique. To use an example off the top of my head, say there are tools that are imbued with divine power from Abadar. Couldn't these be true wondrous items that are mass-produced by the church of Abadar and also purposeful servants of civilization? Maybe they create things on their own, or they encourage people to craft and improve their skills as they do it. They don't even need an intelligence score in order to work. Does purpose and motivation = intelligence, and as such, put an item firmly in another category than wondrous items?
Edit: Of course a tool that works on its own may be close to a construct as well. Also, note that this idea isn't anything I'm considering for this contest. I'm just interested in the subject.
For the whole discussion around intelligent wondrous items, if you're depending on your item being intelligent to make it Superstar, it doesn't. In fact, by the intelligent item rules, pretty much every ability glommed onto an intelligent item is a SIAC. We're looking for wondrous items. As long as it's wondrous before you layer on the intelligence, that's what matters most.
I always thought intelligent items moved any item into minor artifact territory. Hogwarts Sorting Hat: Wondrous Item or Minor Artifact?
I'm sure a true superstar could find the fine line, but I would shy away from intelligent items, which tend to deserve uniqueness.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32
|
The Sorting Hat is totally an artifact. Especially considering the role it plays throughout the books.
And I agree that for the sake of RPG Superstar it's best to avoid those edge-of-cliff items, unless of course it's the coolest idea ever and worth the risk of getting shot down.
|
Star Voter Season 6, Dedicated Voter Season 7, Star Voter Season 9
|
For the whole discussion around intelligent wondrous items, if you're depending on your item being intelligent to make it Superstar, it doesn't. In fact, by the intelligent item rules, pretty much every ability glommed onto an intelligent item is a SIAC. We're looking for wondrous items. As long as it's wondrous before you layer on the intelligence, that's what matters most.
I, for another competition years ago created an intelligent magic item that was also wondrous. But what seperated it from most intelligent items was that was not unique, thus didn't go into minor artifact territory. In addition it was, from the point of view of the wearer, cursed.
Even if I didn't have the 300 word limit, I would have never entered it into this competition because it would be up against two definitional debates. That is enough right there for the wrong/right type of judge to kill it.
It was--
Still, making the first round 'design an intelligent magic item' would be a good way to shake up next year's competition.
The Migrus Locker had intelligence, did it not...
if it didn't have intelligence it would just be a dead cat with a human head lol!
|
|
Still, making the first round 'design an intelligent magic item' would be a good way to shake up next year's competition.
I think Neil or Sean mentioned this in another thread, but making the first round "design an intelligent magic item" using the current intelligent item rules might be like asking someone to design while wearing a straight jacket. The rules for crafting intelligent items basically dictate that the item will be a "spell in a can" or "swiss army knife" type of item. The pricing for such items is wonky compared to regular items and the menu of abilities is somewhat limited. Such a round would be more a test of what kind of cool flavor you could come up with to spruce up the same ingredients. (Did I just make an inadvertant "Iron Chef" reference? I don't watch that show. Is that how it works?)
Not saying it's impossible to make an intelligent magic item that's not A) a spell in a can, B) a swiss army knife, or C) unique or bordeline artifact. But I don't think there's enough room to play there to have an entire round that results in 32 such items, in my opinion.