And this, ladies and gentlemen, is what led GMs to banning PCs from crafting their own magical items in the first place. Magical weapon envy. The gaming group of adventurers keeps fighting more and more bad guys who only have magical armor and magical weapons that only the Fighter can use, and the "one-half" rule ruins selling the stuff nobody can use. The Druid, Rogue, and sometimes the Cleric look on in envy at the +2 armor and +3 longsword (three different kinds) that the Fighter has at Level 10. Meanwhile, the Sorcerer and Wizard each have a single masterwork dagger attached to their belts because no one has found a BBEG with a Returning +1 Dagger. The Ranger is miffed at his +1 longbow (no STR bonus) because he can't find anything better.
So the Wizard gets a temper and starts taking Craft Wondrous Items, Craft Wand, Craft Magical Arms and Armor and after a year of gaming time is sporting a new +4 Bracers of Armor and a +4 Headband of Intellect combination, along with his DR 5/- vestments. The Ranger sees this and barters for a +3 Longbow of Shocking (+2 STR), while the Rogue is willing to pay top gold for the Wizard making an Armor of Stealth next month. The Cleric, not to be outdone, also has the feats and is making his +5 Holy Avenger next week. The Sorcerer is now known to his friends as "Mr. Wand", for obvious reasons.
The Fighter sees the spotlight moving away from his Conan/He-Man build and starts complaining to the GM before, during, and after the game about "all the magical stuff in the game ruining the encounters".
That pretty much sums up my last decade's worth of gaming.
I used the PC fighter only as an example. Even if we exclude treasures containing random magical items that could be used by any PC's class, antagonists will have magical items that will likely be useful for their own class. So, unless the GM is only capable of creating fighter NPCs, every PCs will find magical items that are useful for them.
|
A post longer than mine will be, so I won't re-post it.
I don't get it. Why doesn't the DM just give the bad guys stuff characters other than the Fighter can use? Is it that hard to have a Ranger or Rogue villain? Does it hurt suspension of disbelief that much to put some wands in the dragon's hoard? This sounds more like bad DMing than a flaw in Maerimydra's ideas.
A post longer than mine will be, so I won't re-post it.I don't get it. Why doesn't the DM just give the bad guys stuff characters other than the Fighter can use? Is it that hard to have a Ranger or Rogue villain? Does it hurt suspension of disbelief that much to put some wands in the dragon's hoard? This sounds more like bad DMing than a flaw in Maerimydra's ideas.
It seems that jhpace1's last decade of gaming was shared with a crappy GM.
I don't get it. Why doesn't the DM just give the bad guys stuff characters other than the Fighter can use? Is it that hard to have a Ranger or Rogue villain? Does it hurt suspension of disbelief that much to put some wands in the dragon's hoard? This sounds more like bad DMing than a flaw in Maerimydra's ideas.
Most low-level modules, especially 2nd Edition, concentrated on 1.) monsters, 2.) undead, 3.) other fighters (that could be monsters, i.e., armed goblins on wolf-back). So most of your treasure is going to be: weapons, armor, and spare change. If you're lucky a +1 Amulet of Protection. It's so bad that taking Disrupt Undead at 1st Level for the Wizard or Sorcerer is just as predictable as taking Mage Armor or Magic Missile.
3.0 tried to shake up the basket a bit by giving monsters levels and better weapons, but some GMs and module-writers did come through to write in the evil sorceress or wizard to battle the party. The "Big Three" are still a staple below 7th Level, I'm afraid. It's just so cheap and easy to throw bugbears, goblins, and guards at the adventurers when most mid-level to high-level magic would kill them instantly.
Most low-level modules, especially 2nd Edition, concentrated on 1.) monsters, 2.) undead, 3.) other fighters (that could be monsters, i.e., armed goblins on wolf-back). So most of your treasure is going to be: weapons, armor, and spare change. If you're lucky a +1 Amulet of Protection. It's so bad that taking Disrupt Undead at 1st Level for the Wizard or Sorcerer is just as predictable as taking Mage Armor or Magic Missile.
3.0 tried to shake up the basket a bit by giving monsters levels and better weapons, but some GMs and module-writers did come through to write in the evil sorceress or wizard to battle the party. The "Big Three" are still a staple below 7th Level, I'm afraid. It's just so cheap and easy to throw bugbears, goblins, and guards at the adventurers when most mid-level to high-level magic would kill them instantly.
While it's true that spellcasting antagonists = TPK at low levels, remember that a fighter only needs 1 armor and maybe 2 or 3 weapons. Every extra, sub-optimal, magic weapons and armors found are going to be converted into half their gold value in gold by the PCs (by selling them) and that gold will be used to buy what the other party members need (scrolls, wands, rings, amulets, etc). I really don't see how the figther could end up with greater wealth than the other PCs unless the others PCs choose to spend all their common gold on the fighter or if the GM shows favoritism toward the fighter.
Even if magical weapons and armors are sold at 50% their gold value, remember that, unlike shield bonus, gold stacks, and it can be stacked until the PCs are able to buy what they need. :P
Certainly it is a lot easier to say I need X items to be able to defeat Y threat, so let me go into the basement for a few weeks or run down to Magic Items 'R Us and Presto! Change-O! I've got them!
Don't you just love what 3.x did to D&D?
That pretty much sums up my last decade's worth of gaming.
*offers hankie*
I don't get it. Why doesn't the DM just give the bad guys stuff characters other than the Fighter can use?
-Because spellcasting bad guys don't NEED gear to be a threat. You can have them go au naturale and still challenge your party. So if you want to use lots of NPC's but don't want to be monty haul, you use a spellcaster. When you want a martial threat, you need to gear him out the whazoo.
I don't get it. Why doesn't the DM just give the bad guys stuff characters other than the Fighter can use?
-Because spellcasting bad guys don't NEED gear to be a threat. You can have them go au naturale and still challenge your party. So if you want to use lots of NPC's but don't want to be monty haul, you use a spellcaster. When you want a martial threat, you need to gear him out the whazoo.
This is half-true. A sorcerer or a druid could challenge the PCs even if he's naked. However, I would expect to find at the very least a spellbook on the slain body of a wizard. Anyway, even if a spellcaster don't need any magic item to challenge the PCs, that doesn't mean that the GM can't reward the PCs by giving bracers of armor +5 to the evil necromancer against which they are fighting.
Already addressed. Can't afford them, so they don't have them. If you're instead making the highly insulting argument of "MOBs guard chest of stuff they can't use" then I can safely disregard anything you say as well.And then you remember that NPCs cannot have gear upgrades for the most part, because they are incapable of affording them, and therefore the pry it from the enemy's cold dead hands approach doesn't work, and that PF heavily nerfed the gold caps on towns, so you can't just buy it either. Which means you get it by making it yourself, or you don't get it.What about treasures? Last time I checked, finding treasures was a big part of D&D/Pathfinder.
What about BBEG with powerful magic items? NPCs don't have to ''afford'' magic items, they can just have them if the GM wish so. If the PC fighter is specialized with the longsword, then the fourth-level bandit leader (read BBEG) can wield a +1 cold iron longsword if the GM say so, as a ''gift'' for the PC fighter, even if that means that he (the BBEG) would end up with more wealth than he ''should''.
I'm not saying that magic item creation feats should be removed from any campaing, I'm just saying than a specific campaing could work just fine without them.
No, you are taking the NPC treasure wealth guidelines as strict rules. They are not. They are guidelines, just like wealth by level. Giving a piece of level appropriate gear that is outside of the NPC's standard wealth level but well within the PCs is fairly standard operating procedure. NPC wealth by level is merely a guideline to help with creating NPCs in such a way that they will not over-gear the party. If you are designing an encounter, you can include XP sources that do not include treasure to ballance an increased treasure content in annother area, thus increasing the budget for your NPCs. This may change CR, but usually wont be significant.
Except that the only reason why you are doing it is that you need to grind for another +1. Whereas say... crafting can be glossed over with a "______ spends ______ part of the downtime working on a few new magic items." Or "After looking around for a bit, ______ finds the tool he was looking for and purchases it." And then you get back to advancing character goals, whatever...No, you are doing it because you are an adventurer and that is what adventurers do, you know, go out and seek adventure. What are these character goals and why do you think that they are not advanced by these quests?
Certainly it is a lot easier to say I need X items to be able to defeat Y threat, so let me go into the basement for a few weeks or run down to Magic Items 'R Us and Presto! Change-O! I've got them! If you have an end quest in mind that is all-encompassing and the only focus of your character's existence, I can see your point that sidequests are a waste of time. If, like most campaigns, you don't really know the end challenge, isn't it more fun and heroic to get your items by adventuring rather than shopping and crafting? And they don't have to be side quests, they might be part and parcel of the overall campaign.
You are still making the highly insulting argument that the whole point of the campaign is to grind for +1s, instead of those merely being a necessary means to an end to accomplish your actual goals. I'm not going to dignify that with a response.
Some of us prefer quality in our campaigns, and have Diablo or a similar game for grinding for +1s.
I'm sorry if you've found anything I've posted insulting. It was not intentional. I've looked back through my recent posts and have to say I fail to see anything insulting to you in them. Perhaps someone else can clue me in if I'm being thick. I have to say I didn't have to look nearly as hard to find the insults in your posts, including this one.
I've asked you twice now, in different forms, what these "actual goals" are. Let's go for 3. Why do you think PCs creating their own magic items or purchasing them at the local Magic Mart is more conducive to advancing campaign goals than obtaining them through the natural adventuring process?
In your various posts, you have accused me and others of wanting to "control" our players, and being "afraid" of really powerful PCs. I'd have to say it looks like it is you that has the control issues. To me it looks like you are afraid of any DM who actually runs his game and sets any limits on his players. You want a compliant DM who allows you to have complete control over all aspects of your character and allows you to interpret the rules in ways that maximize the power of your character so that you can cakewalk through encounters and adventures and feel good about how wonderful a player you are.
Now I am being fairly insulting in that last paragraph. I admit it when I'm doing it. So, if I am misunderstanding you or wronging you, please explain why. I'm one of the few people on these boards actually willing to engage with you at times and give you a chance to explain and expand upon your extreme statements. I do so because I think you do occasionally have something to contribute to the conversation. I'd love to have you prove me right on that, at least.
Banning Permanent items: MAD characters, martial and skill characters suffer greatly. No personalization of items, no keeping of a low-level story-award +1 weapon. No exotic weapons/armor without severe GM fiat. Party NEEDS to have at least 2 casters to be viable, preferably more.
Banning consumables: Fight. Rest. Fight. Rest. Fight. Rest. Solve puzzle. Rest. At higher levels you might be able to take 2-3 fights before resting, but not likely. GM fiat of wands might help mitigate.
I'm not sure people are suggesting removal of magic items from the game but rather that removing (or modifying) the Creation feats might be worthwhile.
As long as the PCs get reward packages that incorporate the big six at the level appropriate times then there is no appreciable decrease in PC power. In fact there is an increase in power because casters can now invest feats in metamagic rather than creation feats.
Further it's abundantly clear that many of the big six can be effectively consolidated thereby actually reducing the percentage of the WBL needed to actually meet commonly accepted norms.
Example:
I personally loathe the cloak of resistance because it's a boring item that is pretty much required to boost defenses. This is mainly because poor saves simply don't keep pace with opposition DCs. The resistance bonuses become pretty much a requirement but unfortunately they eat up a cloak slot.
You could make a slot-less item but that actually requires more resource expenditure, which the fighter types really can't afford until level 12+.
My theoretical solution is to have magical armor provide a resistance bonus equal to it's enhancement bonus. Suddenly the Big Six becomes a Big Five.
Deflection Bonus can be replaced with a Class Defense Bonus that scales with BAB and stacks with armor. Maybe a +1 Deflection Bonus per +3 BAB. Fighters would have a Deflection Bonus of +5 by 15th level, Clerics and Rogues by 20th and Wizard a +3 Deflection Bonus by 18th level. Rings of Protection are still valuable when the bonus is higher than the CDB but eventually the need for high end rings disappears.
Now the Big Six becomes a Big Four.
The natural armor bonus is a frustrating one for me because it didn't really exist prior to 3.x and I still think it's a bad addition. That being said most people think it's still necessary. If Barkskin had a 1/hour per level duration like Greater Magic Weapon and Magic Vestment a lot of the issue would be reduced. A feat that scales with BAB that simulates barkskin, named Iron Skin Concentration ;) would give martial types a nice feat to invest in.
Now the Big Six becomes a Big Three.
So let's keep going :D
Ability score boosters are currently priced to benefit SAD classes. The combo belts help with item slot limitations but their high cost makes it so that a combo belt generally lags behind a SAD item by a +2.
My proposal is to change the cost structure of combo belts (and only combo belts) so that rather than an increase in base value of +50% for each additional stat modified, the belt has a base value and each additional stat has a price reduction applied of -50%.
So Belt of Physical Perfection +2 (+2 to all physical stats)
+2 to Str (Bonus Squared x 1000)
+2 to Dex (Bonus Squared x 1000) x 0.5
+2 to Con (Bonus Squared x 1000) x 0.5
results in a final cost of 8000 GP which is a 50% reduction from it's base Pathfinder cost.
Belt of Perfection +4 is 32,000 GP and +6 is 72,000 GP.
This is a very significant cost savings for MAD characters that combined with a the other changes frees up a huge amount of resources.
Note I really didn't screw with armor, shields and weapons because I feel most people accept the need for magical arms and armor but the other components of the big 6 have less justification.
As long as you remove all Crafts from the game, cool. Let fighter buy there bows and arrows, let paladin buy there armor, let wizards buy there spell books, etc
As long as no one in the game can craft.... then Crafting become a NPC skill.
This is to FORCE pc to spend gold, use up supplies, and MAKE them go off to adventure to get good and coin.
..............
I do not like it,
but that is the Old way of running a game. Usually as players play the game longer, they start wanting to make there own stuff, instead of throwing gold to the wind.
Also, crafting is in the game as a money sink. True, without crafting, your players will have to find another way to spend money.... most likely buying towers, castles, or forts. Which in itself, might be a good thing. Hiring NPC to man these building would be another Money sink.
Even then, your players will just get to the point, were they will want to spend there gold, hiring NPC to craft stuff for them... although it would still cost them retail price.
.............
To each his own, every world is different, wish you luck with your.
As long as you remove all Crafts from the game, cool. Let fighter buy there bows and arrows, let paladin buy there armor, let wizards buy there spell books, etc
As long as no one in the game can craft.... then Crafting become a NPC skill.
This is to FORCE pc to spend gold, use up supplies, and MAKE them go off to adventure to get good and coin.
..............
I do not like it,
but that is the Old way of running a game. Usually as players play the game longer, they start wanting to make there own stuff, instead of throwing gold to the wind.Also, crafting is in the game as a money sink. True, without crafting, your players will have to find another way to spend money.... most likely buying towers, castles, or forts. Which in itself, might be a good thing. Hiring NPC to man these building would be another Money sink.
Even then, your players will just get to the point, were they will want to spend there gold, hiring NPC to craft stuff for them... although it would still cost them retail price.
.............
To each his own, every world is different, wish you luck with your.
Your prediction is the exact opposite of my experience. IME, players are very uncreative with crafting magic items, but they come up with amasing ways of spending ludicris ammounts of extra cash. Airships, month long block parties, castles, orphanages, information networks, political campaigns, and mass armies are just some of the things I have seen/done in campaigns where money and gear wasn't an issue.
1. Make it so they have difficulty crafting/buying but still have the equipment they need, and you can significantly reduce monetary rewards. The players don't need to come into contact with large hordes of cash because they don't need to buy stuff. This allows you to focus more on the story than the loot. This can allow you to bring the PCs back into the same economy as the rest of the game world without decreasing combat effectiveness.
2. Make it so they have difficulty crafting/buying but still have the equipment they need, and you can still give the players fat sacks of cash. Now they have money to spend on mon-magical things. They become players in international politics, celebrities, cultural icons. They can live like kings without hampering their ability to kill things.
Note I really didn't screw with armor, shields and weapons because I feel most people accept the need for magical arms and armor but the other components of the big 6 have less justification.
A little off-topic but: Vuron, have you ever considered making the enhancement bonuses from weapons and armor inherent based on level or BAB? Magical weapons and armor just provide the cool stuff in that case.
Airships.... Ah how do you craft that :) now that does sound cool
Note I really didn't screw with armor, shields and weapons because I feel most people accept the need for magical arms and armor but the other components of the big 6 have less justification.A little off-topic but: Vuron, have you ever considered making the enhancement bonuses from weapons and armor inherent based on level or BAB? Magical weapons and armor just provide the cool stuff in that case.
And it makes DR/magic mean something since you can be effective at high levels without a magic weapon.
Note I really didn't screw with armor, shields and weapons because I feel most people accept the need for magical arms and armor but the other components of the big 6 have less justification.A little off-topic but: Vuron, have you ever considered making the enhancement bonuses from weapons and armor inherent based on level or BAB? Magical weapons and armor just provide the cool stuff in that case.
And it makes DR/magic mean something since you can be effective at high levels without a magic weapon.
Note I really didn't screw with armor, shields and weapons because I feel most people accept the need for magical arms and armor but the other components of the big 6 have less justification.A little off-topic but: Vuron, have you ever considered making the enhancement bonuses from weapons and armor inherent based on level or BAB? Magical weapons and armor just provide the cool stuff in that case.
Yeah intrinsic bonuses to arms and armor that scale with level are definitely the way to approach a sword and sorcery style "low magic" game.
That way a high level fighter is just as efficient with a battle ax he picked off a opponent as he is with the blade of his father and his father's father ;) (assuming no weapon specific or weapon group specific feats).
You'd probably want to include some sort of feats that allow characters to bypass certain types of DR specifically the alignment, magic and epic DR. Silver, Cold Iron and Adamantite could probably stay as is. I'm okay with monk natural weapons simulating other materials but I like having to have a silver dagger as back-up. DR/Weapon type should also remain.
Sample Feat
Guide my blade
Prerequisites-BAB +6, Weapon Focus
Benefits:Given a 10 minute period of peaceful meditation The warrior can focus his mind on his weapon and impart a piece of his personal energy to the weapon. This can give the weapon an alignment trait for the purpose of bypassing DR/Alignment.
At BAB +11, the warrior can bypass DR/Magic as if he was wielding a magical weapon
at BAB +16, the warrior can bypass DR/Epic as if he was wielding an epic weapon
I'm just spitballing this though. I suspect BAB +11 might be right for DR/Magic but +16 might be too early for DR/Epic.
Another option is to bring back the oils concept from earlier editions and allow for low cost oils to impart various effects like bypassing various DR, imparting the ability to hit incorporeal targets, etc. As long as they are a low cost consumable that lasts 10 minutes/per usage or even 1 hour per/level then the Fighter type can customize his weapon based upon scouting out the opposition.
I've also started to dislike the crafting system. It comes from years of things like "The ring of enlarge person and gravity bow" on a half giant fighter with vital strike and a spell storing great crossbow.
What 1d12 upsized 3 times with imp vital strike? ... Its a dead monster 3 crs above the party....
Airships.... Ah how do you craft that :) now that does sound cool
You usually don't use Craft (Airships) for that. You use Knowledge (Engineering) for the ship itself, and then some various crafts for things on the ship (like Craft (Arms & Armor) for the weapons).
In general, an airship is a HUGE undertaking. What you normally have is the ship itself broken up into sections of work, with an engineer in charge of each section (hull, engine, quarters, etc) and build the bits simultaneously as sections. Then put them together at the end. And you have one engineer in charge of the whole project making sure the 3 teams work in harmony (don't want the engines to not fit you know).
So, you might have :
HULL : Engineer + 40 assistants
ENGINES : Engineer + 20 assistants
QUARTERS/DECK : Engineer + 40 assistants
So, the Engineer for the hull, assuming he has a 14 check, gains from assistants (+2 for 1, +4 for 2, +6 for 4, +8 for 8, +10 for 16, +12 for 32) +12 to his check, assuming MW tools for all gives another +2, so +28. Assuming he takes ten it's 38 per week. Set the difficulty to 38, and you get 38 x 38 = 1444 sp per week done. If the hull costs 3000 gp, then it takes about 20 weeks to complete the hull.
The Engines might cost 2000gp, so that engineer, assuming the same 14 check and assistants and MW tools has a 36 x 36, or about 15 weeks (you want the engines done early so you can test them before they go into the hull).
The guy building the quarters and deck (in sections) probably doesn't do them all at once. He probably breaks his 40 people up into teams of 8 each, and has each team build a section of the hull or section of the ship's internals, then slot them in from above with a crane. So those being much less in price, you don't really need to roll for them, the 20 weeks for the hull takes up most of it.
Obviously, we're talking here about a sloop type airship, for only 6,000 gp. If you go up to a corvette type, at 12,000, double the time. For a warship or cargo hauler at 24,000 quadruple the times and prices. Of course, bigger ships you can toss more people at to speed up.
EDIT: Another way to speed it up is to instead of building in sections, build as a whole, and have each engineer and team work 8 hour shifts. Three shifts per day. In this case, assuming a 14 skill check, MW tools, and 32 team members per shift, you'd end up with 38 * 38 * 3 = 4332 sp per week. Or about 14 weeks to finish the ship as a whole. Of course, that's not taking into account any issues you might have with supplies, or illness or whatever. Neither did the first though.
EDIT EDIT: The edit above assumes everyone can work on all aspects of the ship equally, engine, hull, flight controls, etc. One reason I break it up when I allow people to do it in game is that that doesn't make sense to me. I'd think you'd have an engineer specializing in engines, one in hull and control surface, one in internals, etc.
Why? what sane wizard keeps his spellbook on him unless he's traveling?
This is half-true. A sorcerer or a druid could challenge the PCs even if he's naked. However, I would expect to find at the very least a spellbook on the slain body of a wizard.
What sane wizard would let the spellbooks be out of his sight, and not on his person.
I play a more 1e-2e style game so Wizards typically maintain a travel spellbook (or even multiple copies of that spellbook) and a master spellbook that they keep secure in their abode.
Generally you always have a traveling spellbook on you unless you are an NPC hanging out in your lair. You don't want to be caught out from your lair without the ability to memorize a spell or two and relying on scrolls for all your casting needs gets expensive.
The traveling spellbook doesn't have every spell known and should be harder to learn from because it probably has abbreviated formulas and theory but it should handle most of the caster's needs.
Spellbook looting is one of the key methods in which up and coming wizards both PC and NPC increase their power.
Even traveling spellbooks will probably be trapped in various ways to prevent theft or to punish those who killed the owner.
I play a more 1e-2e style game so Wizards typically maintain a travel spellbook (or even multiple copies of that spellbook) and a master spellbook that they keep secure in their abode.
Generally you always have a traveling spellbook on you unless you are an NPC hanging out in your lair. You don't want to be caught out from your lair without the ability to memorize a spell or two and relying on scrolls for all your casting needs gets expensive.
The traveling spellbook doesn't have every spell known and should be harder to learn from because it probably has abbreviated formulas and theory but it should handle most of the caster's needs.
Spellbook looting is one of the key methods in which up and coming wizards both PC and NPC increase their power.
Even traveling spellbooks will probably be trapped in various ways to prevent theft or to punish those who killed the owner.
The only problem with trapped spellbooks is that, per RAW, only a spellcaster who's level dipped into Rogue can disable a magic trap. :(
That doesn't make a whole lot of sense with trapped books, etc, but that's the RAW. There are some high level spells that can take care of that, such as anti-magic zones and such, but, it makes it hard for low level casters to get rid of traps on spellbooks.
One way to overcome it, of course, would be with a custom feat.
Wiley Researcher
When researching magic and other forbidden knowledge, one often runs into trapped tomes and scrolls. By dint of study, you have learned some of the skills rogues employ in order to bypass those dangers.
Benefit : You may add Disable Device to your class skill list. You may also disable magical traps.
Special : Because of your specialized knowledge, you gain a +2 circumstance bonus to disabling magical traps. However, also due to that specialized knowledge, you are at a -5 to disable mechanical traps.
Edit : Should add a requirement to the feat, ability to cast Detect Magic at will or something.
I play a more 1e-2e style game so Wizards typically maintain a travel spellbook (or even multiple copies of that spellbook) and a master spellbook that they keep secure in their abode.
Generally you always have a traveling spellbook on you unless you are an NPC hanging out in your lair. You don't want to be caught out from your lair without the ability to memorize a spell or two and relying on scrolls for all your casting needs gets expensive.
The traveling spellbook doesn't have every spell known and should be harder to learn from because it probably has abbreviated formulas and theory but it should handle most of the caster's needs.
Spellbook looting is one of the key methods in which up and coming wizards both PC and NPC increase their power.
Even traveling spellbooks will probably be trapped in various ways to prevent theft or to punish those who killed the owner.
The only problem with trapped spellbooks is that, per RAW, only a spellcaster who's level dipped into Rogue can disable a magic trap. :(
Detect magic, dispel magic?
Also, to the previous posters: A smart wizard keeps one book at home, one stored away in a Secret Chest, and one on his person. Since wizards don't have to go all Christmas Tree to survive, this is a reasonable investment. The wizard in my Kingmaker campain have already seen the benefits as some antagonists burnt his villa.
Detect magic, dispel magic?Also, to the previous posters: A smart wizard keeps one book at home, one stored away in a Secret Chest, and one on his person. Since wizards don't have to go all Christmas Tree to survive, this is a reasonable investment. The wizard in my Kingmaker campain have already seen the benefits as some antagonists burnt his villa.
If all you needed was to cast dispel magic to open the spellbook, that would pretty much negate the whole value of a trap. A trap should logically be a detection spell that detects certain things, like dispel magic being cast on the book, and then detonating a rune. And you layer the spells, so if you have two detects and two runes on the book, then dispeling any of the four spells sets off traps.
I tend to use both magical and non-magical traps to guard spellbooks.
The spellbook might have a poison needle trap on the lock (he's got the key to bypass the lock so no problem there), contact poison on the pages (he uses gloves to read the book), and a "disarm" word or phrase that prevents the spell defenses if any from going off.
Typically the magical trap might include a summoned monster, or a bestowed curse, or a AoE blast effect. Stuff that ruins the spellbook when goes off are always pluses.
It simply doesn't make sense for traps (magical or not) to not have a way of disarming them. Unless you are Acerack you probably want to walk around your lair on occasion and it sucks if you get fried by your own spell while going to the kitchen for a later night snack.
Even if it's not RAW, it's the way I roll ;)
If all you needed was to cast dispel magic to open the spellbook, that would pretty much negate the whole value of a trap. A trap should logically be a detection spell that detects certain things, like dispel magic being cast on the book, and then detonating a rune. And you layer the spells, so if you have two detects and two runes on the book, then dispeling any of the four spells sets off traps.
Detect magic, dispel magic?Also, to the previous posters: A smart wizard keeps one book at home, one stored away in a Secret Chest, and one on his person. Since wizards don't have to go all Christmas Tree to survive, this is a reasonable investment. The wizard in my Kingmaker campain have already seen the benefits as some antagonists burnt his villa.
I assumed we were talking about stuff you can do with the existing rules, without inventing spells/house-rules to specifically counter the most legitimate tactic of dealing with magical hazards.
I assumed we were talking about stuff you can do with the existing rules, without inventing spells/house-rules to specifically counter the most legitimate tactic of dealing with magical hazards.
I think most DMs detest the use of Detect Magic as a fool proof method of detecting magic traps and have pretty much made it so that all magical traps are either lead-lined or use a permanent magic aura effect to prevent detect magic.
The simple fact of the matter is that if an unlimited use cantrip can prevent the use of magical traps regardless of level then that is a bad design.
Making traps undetectable from detect magic doesn't prevent you from using dispel magic to "disarm" the spell but 3rd level spells are a limited enough resource that they don't completely remove an entire trap type from play.
I assumed we were talking about stuff you can do with the existing rules, without inventing spells/house-rules to specifically counter the most legitimate tactic of dealing with magical hazards.
I think most DMs detest the use of Detect Magic as a fool proof method of detecting magic traps and have pretty much made it so that all magical traps are either lead-lined or use a permanent magic aura effect to prevent detect magic.
The simple fact of the matter is that if an unlimited use cantrip can prevent the use of magical traps regardless of level then that is a bad design.
Making traps undetectable from detect magic doesn't prevent you from using dispel magic to "disarm" the spell but 3rd level spells are a limited enough resource that they don't completely remove an entire trap type from play.
I don't mind as a GM, as it is a standard action, meaning you cannot do any actions not covered by move action, it doesn't penetrate walls, meaning you can walk right into one if it is around a corner, and you count as "Distracted" for perception purposes (-5). (At least I rule that concentrating on a spell counts as a distraction)
And you can cast Magic Aura on stuff every weekend, and voila, foiled. Works on the book-traps as well, but can still be sniffed out by a rogue or any other archetype with trapfinding.
You'd probably want to include some sort of feats that allow characters to bypass certain types of DR specifically the alignment, magic and epic DR. Silver, Cold Iron and Adamantite could probably stay as is. I'm okay with monk natural weapons simulating other materials but I like having to have a silver dagger as back-up. DR/Weapon type should also remain.
You could probably get rid of DR completely on the majority of monsters with it as many of them seem arbitrary and many are bypassed by the time PCs are of an appropriate level to fight said creatures anyway.
I assumed we were talking about stuff you can do with the existing rules, without inventing spells/house-rules to specifically counter the most legitimate tactic of dealing with magical hazards.If all you needed was to cast dispel magic to open the spellbook, that would pretty much negate the whole value of a trap. A trap should logically be a detection spell that detects certain things, like dispel magic being cast on the book, and then detonating a rune. And you layer the spells, so if you have two detects and two runes on the book, then dispeling any of the four spells sets off traps.
Detect magic, dispel magic?Also, to the previous posters: A smart wizard keeps one book at home, one stored away in a Secret Chest, and one on his person. Since wizards don't have to go all Christmas Tree to survive, this is a reasonable investment. The wizard in my Kingmaker campain have already seen the benefits as some antagonists burnt his villa.
I'm talking about RAW. The RAW is that if you trap a spellbook, only a rogue can disable it if it's got a magical component.
My point was, per RAW, there's nothing you can do. The only way to allow a magic user to disable traps on a spellbook is via level dipping or custom house rules. I hope this is fixed in Ultimate Magic, because it doesn't make any sense.
DR's not really there for level appropriate PC's. It's there to make the monsters and NPCs with it highly resistant and hence scarier to mass quantities of mooks.
I find that the high ACs and HP of those monsters with DR keep the mooks in their place well enough.
EDIT: For example, I just cracked open my copy of the Bestiary randomly and got: p.102-3: Adult Brass Dragon – DR 5/magic, AC 28, 161 HP. What are mooks doing to that? ;)
I tend to use both magical and non-magical traps to guard spellbooks.
The spellbook might have a poison needle trap on the lock (he's got the key to bypass the lock so no problem there), contact poison on the pages (he uses gloves to read the book), and a "disarm" word or phrase that prevents the spell defenses if any from going off.
Typically the magical trap might include a summoned monster, or a bestowed curse, or a AoE blast effect. Stuff that ruins the spellbook when goes off are always pluses.
It simply doesn't make sense for traps (magical or not) to not have a way of disarming them. Unless you are Acerack you probably want to walk around your lair on occasion and it sucks if you get fried by your own spell while going to the kitchen for a later night snack.
Even if it's not RAW, it's the way I roll ;)
Never said there wasn't a way of disarming the traps. I only said that per RAW, your 5th level wizard has no way of safely disabling a well made trap on a spellbook. Unless he's level dipped into Rogue, he has no way to reliably disable the magical portion of the trap. All he can do is cast dispel or anti-magic and hope that it works. And if it's a mechanical trap, he has to have ranks in disable device. Else that, or a friendly rogue to disable both.
There is a difference between 'a way to disarm a trap' and 'a way to bypass a trap'. Nobody in their right mind builds ways to bypass security into their traps. In fact, they go into great pains to make it hard to bypass them.
It is defined by the lack of being forced to grind for +1s. Which is exactly what the thing he describes does.Quality is not defined by the inclusion of magic item creation. It's not even helped by it., in fact arguably MIC more often hinders than helps the evolution of a quality campaign.
Some of us prefer quality in our campaigns, and have Diablo or a similar game for grinding for +1s.
In your campaign your gm gives you random crap you sell to then craft and get +1s. Limmitting item creation/purchasing, it is now the GMs responcibility to make sure you have the gear you need. Instead of him putting random crap in, he now puts in relevant gear you will want to keep. For the most part this works. If you want a specific item though, you have to go out and find it yourself. Its not the GMs job to put it in your lap. This then becomes a part of the story in and of itself, and if you don't pursue the leads he gives you its nothis fault. You just obviously don't want/need the item enough. You don't do this for the big 6 unless the players want something out of line with their level. The GM doesn't care about those items more than giving them to you at the appropriate time.
I've asked you twice now, in different forms, what these "actual goals" are. Let's go for 3. Why do you think PCs creating their own magic items or purchasing them at the local Magic Mart is more conducive to advancing campaign goals than obtaining them through the natural adventuring process?Already answered this. The actual goals depend on the character but do not involve grinding for +1s. That is a means to an end, and not the goal itself. Getting the process of keeping your numbers up quickly, with little screen time being devoted to it (such as by creating them themselves or picking them up at the Mage Mart) is more conducive to advancing campaign goals for the direct and simple reason that you will have more time to do so. Whereas going off on some random side quest means that you are not advancing your actual goals. You are prep grinding. And even the MMO players hate prep grinding.
I don't want anyone sending me on a quest to get a magic item unless it is a plot device. Shopping should be quick if I am a player. I often have my groups do it off-screen(through email), but I have had players that wanted to do a side-quest for magical components to make item X. It is not my cup of tea, but some players enjoy that type of thing.