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.
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.So because I avoid power trippers, I am the power tripper? How does that work? What did you burn and inhale to formulate that idea? And please do not share any with me. Not to mention that when I DM I do the exact same thing. Because I do not fear my players, and possess the ability to challenge players, and characters who are actually capable. Which means if they win, awesome, and if they don't it is their own fault (as opposed to only losing because the DM gimped...
Unfortunately, we've reached the point where the more you write, the less you actually say.
Just one reaction: All that you say would cause me no grief whatsoever, if you just had enough self-awareness to admit that they are your own opinions, rooted in your own experiences, and that maybe, just maybe, other viewpoints with equal validity might exist. That's not ever going to happen, is it? I suspect that you will continue you on playing as you post, content in your own perceived superiority with blinders firmly in place to keep you from seeing anything that might allow you to learn and grow as a player or DM, or to enjoy the experience more. Kind of sad, actually.
As I said to another poster with your exact same style, Mistah Green, I believe that I have learned a fair amount from listening to you that has helped me to improve as a player and GM. Your descriptions of your extreme style of play force me to stretch my thinking in ways my own current group does not. While the way you play doesn't appeal to me in the least, I understand better why some people enjoy it. This will make me better able to handle it if/when a player like you lands at my table.
As to what you have learned from me? Nothing, I'm sure.
It is not my cup of tea, but some players enjoy that type of thing.
And thus the difference. I have no problem with this. You've clearly stated your preferences and acknowledged that that is what they are, while acknowledging that others may prefer things differently.
And I actually agree with you that, unless the side quest is interesting in and of itself, or serves a role in the larger campaign, it is just a longer and more time-consuming way of getting to the same point Magic Mart and item creation get you. However, in my experience, the side quests are frequently even more fun than the main campaign line. Fun is what we are after, isn't it? If they aren't fun for you, by all means don't do them.
The thing that is striking me more and more is that I believe the people who are most passionate about magic item creation and Magic Mart being essential seem to overlap just about completely with those who insist point buy character creation is the only way to go, and for largely the same reason. They want to control their character completely, making that character as effective/powerful as possible, or at least making them fit exactly the character concept they imagine. This is very important to letting them enjoy the game and feel they are being fully challenged and rewarded. And I'm sure that's a perfectly wonderful way to play for people who like it, but as you say, not my cup of tea.
It is not my cup of tea, but some players enjoy that type of thing.
And thus the difference. I have no problem with this. You've clearly stated your preferences and acknowledged that that is what they are, while acknowledging that others may prefer things differently.
And I actually agree with you that, unless the side quest is interesting in and of itself, or serves a role in the larger campaign, it is just a longer and more time-consuming way of getting to the same point Magic Mart and item creation get you. However, in my experience, the side quests are frequently even more fun than the main campaign line. Fun is what we are after, isn't it? If they aren't fun for you, by all means don't do them.
The thing that is striking me more and more is that I believe the people who are most passionate about magic item creation and Magic Mart being essential seem to overlap just about completely with those who insist point buy character creation is the only way to go, and for largely the same reason. They want to control their character completely, making that character as effective/powerful as possible, or at least making them fit exactly the character concept they imagine. This is very important to letting them enjoy the game and feel they are being fully challenged and rewarded. And I'm sure that's a perfectly wonderful way to play for people who like it, but as you say, not my cup of tea.
I would not mind no magic mart if the DM in question toned the encounters down, but my experience has been that they restrict the items, but the monsters are not adjusted accordingly. As far as point-buy I normally roll well, but I still hate to see someone with "barely above commoner" stats while I have great stats. I hate the inverse also.
In short: If a DM wants to do something different it is fine, just take the changes into account.PS:I think we are in agreement, even if we play the game differently.
It is not my cup of tea, but some players enjoy that type of thing.
And thus the difference. I have no problem with this. You've clearly stated your preferences and acknowledged that that is what they are, while acknowledging that others may prefer things differently.
And I actually agree with you that, unless the side quest is interesting in and of itself, or serves a role in the larger campaign, it is just a longer and more time-consuming way of getting to the same point Magic Mart and item creation get you. However, in my experience, the side quests are frequently even more fun than the main campaign line. Fun is what we are after, isn't it? If they aren't fun for you, by all means don't do them.
The thing that is striking me more and more is that I believe the people who are most passionate about magic item creation and Magic Mart being essential seem to overlap just about completely with those who insist point buy character creation is the only way to go, and for largely the same reason. They want to control their character completely, making that character as effective/powerful as possible, or at least making them fit exactly the character concept they imagine. This is very important to letting them enjoy the game and feel they are being fully challenged and rewarded. And I'm sure that's a perfectly wonderful way to play for people who like it, but as you say, not my cup of tea.
I would not mind no magic mart if the DM in question toned the encounters down, but my experience has been that they restrict the items, but the monsters are not adjusted accordingly. As far as point-buy I normally roll well, but I still hate to see someone with "barely above commoner" stats while I have great stats. I hate the inverse also.
In short: If a DM wants to do something different it is fine, just take the changes into account.PS:I think we are in agreement, even if we play the game differently.
Yep. Nest thing you know De,mocrats and Republicans wuill cross the aisle to sit next to each other during the State of the Union address. What ... ? They're actually going to do that this year (in response to the self-reflection caused by the Tucson rampage)? Time to invest in ski resort timeshares in Hell.
Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.
Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
I've often thought of using laws of magic from other games, like Ars Magica, in Pathfinder / D&D.
You can't use magic on consecrated ground, can't discover the plans of infernal creatures, can't change the nature of the infernal...
You could simply say that the castle was built where a god once stood, so magic can't be used in it, or maybe the lord has holy objects in his room that make it into some kind of technical temple, so that it can't be entered through magic.
Even if one did, the AP places the castle on the edge of a swamp in the middle of nowhere, and the boss was a two-timing scumbag, so plot insulation would be cheesy. And while there is a resident wizard, he is nowhere near powerful enough to stop scry&fry.
I have made two "house-rules" from this point onward:
- Teleportation across more distance than 1 mile creates a loud noise and a flash, as distortion of sound and light travels with you, and you're automatically dazed for a round. This is also so I have a reason why the BBEG with the magical power of a lesser god doesn't simply do the same to the players once they enter his/her awareness and start posing a threat.
- All castles in civilized/magic-aware lands are now built with lead lining around important locales. A thin sheet of lead blocks scrying, so national secrets are not known by every curious caster in a 1000 mile radius.
I've come up with new house rules to rein in teleport in my games.
I redid the teleport spell, so that it works very safely if you teleport from one teleport node to another you already know. T-Port stones can be aligned to a t-port node, and touching one of them familiarizes you with the node. You add your level to the combined ratings of the t-port nodes when you t-port node to node and that's the max range. If you t-port from the field to a t-port node, your range is just your level, and it's dangerous. If you t-port field to field (normal t-port) it's EXTREMELY dangerous. This keeps the effectiveness of t-port around, without everything becoming 'scry port fry' all the time.
I also feel that in a society where scrying were common, then there would be defenses against it. Wards, charms, sacred places, all block scry. So you can scry a city, but trying to scry the king's bedroom is not going to work. Again, to avoid high level games turning into 'scry port fry'.
The thing that is striking me more and more is that I believe the people who are most passionate about magic item creation and Magic Mart being essential seem to overlap just about completely with those who insist point buy character creation is the only way to go, and for largely the same reason. They want to control their character completely, making that character as effective/powerful as possible, or at least making them fit exactly the character concept they imagine. This is very important to letting them enjoy the game and feel they are being fully challenged and rewarded. And I'm sure that's a perfectly wonderful way to play for people who like it, but as you say, not my cup of tea.If you don't control your own character, what do you control? Why are you there? What purpose is there to your sitting at the table with the DM, if you're not even running your own character? Literally, there isn't any. The DM is playing with himself, and you're just kinda there feeling awkward. As opposed to say... working together to make a game. I know, what a concept.
As for PB, that is more for balance purposes than being screwed by randomness, but it is true that no one that has this great Druid idea in their mind wants to see a bunch of 14s and 10s... it's also true that someone with this great Warblade idea doesn't want to see an 18, a 16, and a bunch of 10 and downs. That's basically telling them they can't play their character like they want it and they haven't even necessarily said what that character is yet. The Mage Mart thing is also for balance purposes of course.
If I wanted my DM to write a book, I would ask him to do so. He actually is an amateur book writer. Fortunately for game quality, he is more than intelligent enough to realize that D&D games are not single author fiction and is quite happy to give his players plenty of room to participate in his campaigns.
Which is why I don't mind that the players in my Kingmaker campaign has all the items they need. Sure, conventional CR-equivalent beasties can't hit the fighters on anything but a 20, but who cares? Bruisers are easy mode. They still suffer when the higher save DCs come to play.
And if they become overpowered, I power up as well. Slap the advanced template on 2-4 times and voila, problem solved.
IN a D&D world a castle would be even MORE important. A roaving bullette can mow down half an army on its own, you need somewhere to run. While magic makes it easier to take down, it also makes it easier to put up.
You also need a limited area where you put up every abjuration spell known to man to protect your own backside. While doing that you may as well make it physically defended as well.
Edit: anyway, I don't see anything wrong with banning creation as long as the players have a decent level of gear that appropriate for their play style and suitable to their character. If that's what's happening though, why would anyone take the feats?
Edit: anyway, I don't see anything wrong with banning creation as long as the players have a decent level of gear that appropriate for their play style and suitable to their character. If that's what's happening though, why would anyone take the feats?
If I did that in Kingmaker, ONE of the martial characters would have appropriate gear, and the other one would have next to nothing. Just like how I have found ZERO magical heavy armors for my paladin in Serpent Skull over the 7 levels we have played.
That is why the feats are not only useful, but required to make the combatants scale.
Or what a DM should be doing is looking over the entire adventure, evaluating his party and placing items as treasure so that they're found just before they should be needed. It's part of that DM adjusting and tweaking the published adventures to fit their party. That was standard advice even in the days of TSR.Edit: anyway, I don't see anything wrong with banning creation as long as the players have a decent level of gear that appropriate for their play style and suitable to their character. If that's what's happening though, why would anyone take the feats?If I did that in Kingmaker, ONE of the martial characters would have appropriate gear, and the other one would have next to nothing. Just like how I have found ZERO magical heavy armors for my paladin in Serpent Skull over the 7 levels we have played.
That is why the feats are not only useful, but required to make the combatants scale.
I do, but even so, 95% of the items found are used by NPCs, which would be fluff-inappropriate to alter heavily. There are three characters wearing heavy armor in the party, and there has been zero NPCs that is appropriate for wearing heavy armor, and only two or three who would even be proficient. And in serpent skull, where people are crude savages wearing bone and hide, it would be even weirder to find heavy armor on the opposition.
What about finding what the heavy armor wearer needs for sale/trade somewhere?
What about finding what the heavy armor wearer needs for sale/trade somewhere?
Fluff. If the PC casters, who are the most powerful forces of magic in the land cannot make items, why would anyone else be able to? And if "magic is rare", why would it be on sale in the frontier? I cannot bypass such a glaring inconsistency and not feel like a s++#ty GM.
Or what a DM should be doing is looking over the entire adventure, evaluating his party and placing items as treasure so that they're found just before they should be needed. It's part of that DM adjusting and tweaking the published adventures to fit their party. That was standard advice even in the days of TSR.
Therein lies the problem: too many GMs, or at least the GMs I play with, treat the module's pages as sacred text and don't even think about adding to the treasure found in the module. They are far more likely when translating from 2nd Edition to 3.5 to Pathfinder, or even while playing a brand-new module, leave out treasure from the party or discourage the party from finishing a dungeon once the Big Bad/Evil Guy is defeated. They're not looking to "round out" the players. Somehow the players are to develop to higher level without the assistance of found items.
Your party didn't search that fork in the cave and missed out on the adamantine sword? And the next encounter is a stone golem that you could have used the adamantine sword on? Too bad, you're not allowed to go back to the dungeon to find the adamantine sword, and gosh, adamantine is so rare in the world (i.e, it's not specifically in the module as being for sale) that it's never for sale at the weapon shops.
Limiting magic item discovery is just as bad as banning magic item creation, because if the artificer can't make what they don't find, then the net result is no magical items at all after the first pass through a dungeon.
Also, for the hell of it here's a half dozen sets of rolled stats. 4d6, drop lowest, any order:17, 14, 13, 12, 12, 11.
17, 15, 13, 12, 12, 8.
16, 15, 14, 13, 13, 11.
15, 14, 12, 12, 10, 8.
18, 13, 12, 12, 11, 9.
15, 12, 12, 10, 10, 7.A few sets are just terribad. The others are half decent, but still not good for any character of any class and the only one that has an 18 also has nothing else to speak of.
The reason why rolling dice for stats got phased out was because everyone would just houserule a better rolling arrangement or worse, roll over and over until they had what they wanted anyways.
Uhm,
I see 1 set I'd call 'bad'. Not terribad, just bad, and that's the last one. And even that one I've seen people play and enjoy their character.The first three are good, and the fourth one is ok.
I'm assuming you'd rather see 18, 18, 15, 10, 6, 6? That seems to be the suggested build stat array, two crippled negatives and two 18's.
It's for the same reason we don't make classes based on bakery, butcher, and candlemaker. There are people that do these things.. but HEROES have more important demands on their time.What about finding what the heavy armor wearer needs for sale/trade somewhere?Fluff. If the PC casters, who are the most powerful forces of magic in the land cannot make items, why would anyone else be able to? And if "magic is rare", why would it be on sale in the frontier? I cannot bypass such a glaring inconsistency and not feel like a s%&!ty GM.
Only they don't. At least not in Kingmaker aka "Lootmaker". They go around and police their patch of land, chase some trolls and owlbears, see cities grow, and weeks upon weeks go by where the players can do pretty much whatever. This is so the king can rule, the general can muster and train armies, the bard/rogue can create his information network... and the wizard and cleric can craft until their faces turn green.
In Serpent Skull on the other hand, part 1 the players are shipwrecked, and have their starting gear, so no item creation. Part 2 is called "Race to Ruin" which means next to no downtime. There, we are busy, and that approach holds true.
But even then, any wizard/alchemist/cleric/caster get the feats for free (or would likely take at least one of the feats) to craft consumables. And using the "crafting on the road" rules, you can still squeeze out a scroll or potion almost every day, as it takes less than half an hour to make a lv1 thingy. Banning even consumable-creation feats makes for a party without the ability to react to threats, and one that will not be able to succeed if a time-limit is imposed.
|
And in serpent skull, where people are crude savages wearing bone and hide, it would be even weirder to find heavy armor on the opposition.
Grugan of the Regulars wears thin after a couple of times. (Behind the link, short version: song about a US scout in 19th century Upper Midwest, finds a dead Sioux in steel armor, wonders where it came from.)
Which is why I don't mind that the players in my Kingmaker campaign has all the items they need. Sure, conventional CR-equivalent beasties can't hit the fighters on anything but a 20, but who cares? Bruisers are easy mode. They still suffer when the higher save DCs come to play.And if they become overpowered, I power up as well. Slap the advanced template on 2-4 times and voila, problem solved.
The first line of this makes sense. The rest does not.
As for stats, if SAD I want to see an 18, and a 16, and admittedly the rest don't matter especially much and could be 10 or less.
For an MAD character... probably do need multiple 18s to get anywhere.
2nd line: If the players become too powerful for an AP (which they are, they can chainsaw through the whole thing without breaking a sweat unless they roll poorly AND go full retard in terms of tactics) I just slap a few templates on monsters and make them as optimized as the players. But do not give them extra XP for it. That way, the AP stays relevant, and they get a challenge. I know it is a rules violation, but I would rather deprive them of XP than options.
Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
Edit:I forgot I was not playing in the same campaign world as everyone else meaning my map was different which allowed my version of the bad guy to be more civilized.
I have not played Serpent's Skull, but it would make sense that other adventurers have been there before and died. The players could find their loot, at least until they get access to teleport(way to hop to a nearby city hopefully)*. At the point the NPC's that could teleport would leave the area due to how dangerous it is if they had gotten stuck there otherwise.
*I am also hoping by this time the PC's are deep enough into the plot that running away and not coming back is not an option because after all, somebody has to save the world.
Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
** spoiler omitted ** It also did not make sense to me to have a high level character be that silly.
Edit:I forgot I was not playing in the same campaign world as everyone else meaning my map was different which allowed my version of the bad guy to be more civilized.
The area is not completely savage, but it is a frontier. And the character in question IS a highborn, and should have a modicum of education.
I am in the process of re-writing parts 5 and 6 to meet the size and power of the party, and upgrade lots of NPCs with fitting archetypes and rebuilding some with new APG classes. I think it is going to be interesting from now on.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
** spoiler omitted ** It also did not make sense to me to have a high level character be that silly.
Edit:I forgot I was not playing in the same campaign world as everyone else meaning my map was different which allowed my version of the bad guy to be more civilized.
The area is not completely savage, but it is a frontier. And the character in question IS a highborn, and should have a modicum of education.
I am in the process of re-writing parts 5 and 6 to meet the size and power of the party, and upgrade lots of NPCs with fitting archetypes and rebuilding some with new APG classes. I think it is going to be interesting from now on.
If you are interested in seeing a version of War of the River Kings with, shall we say, some higher-level countermeasures already installed, email me at tjaden jason at gmail dot com.
If you are interested in seeing a version of War of the River Kings with, shall we say, some higher-level countermeasures already installed, email me at tjaden jason at gmail dot com.Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
** spoiler omitted ** It also did not make sense to me to have a high level character be that silly.
Edit:I forgot I was not playing in the same campaign world as everyone else meaning my map was different which allowed my version of the bad guy to be more civilized.
The area is not completely savage, but it is a frontier. And the character in question IS a highborn, and should have a modicum of education.
I am in the process of re-writing parts 5 and 6 to meet the size and power of the party, and upgrade lots of NPCs with fitting archetypes and rebuilding some with new APG classes. I think it is going to be interesting from now on.
Color me intrigued ^^
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Color me intrigued ^^If you are interested in seeing a version of War of the River Kings with, shall we say, some higher-level countermeasures already installed, email me at tjaden jason at gmail dot com.Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
** spoiler omitted ** It also did not make sense to me to have a high level character be that silly.
Edit:I forgot I was not playing in the same campaign world as everyone else meaning my map was different which allowed my version of the bad guy to be more civilized.
The area is not completely savage, but it is a frontier. And the character in question IS a highborn, and should have a modicum of education.
I am in the process of re-writing parts 5 and 6 to meet the size and power of the party, and upgrade lots of NPCs with fitting archetypes and rebuilding some with new APG classes. I think it is going to be interesting from now on.
Sent.
Sent.Color me intrigued ^^If you are interested in seeing a version of War of the River Kings with, shall we say, some higher-level countermeasures already installed, email me at tjaden jason at gmail dot com.Castles and dungeons would be more useless in D&D than bunkers are in the 21st century.Would be? They are. Noticed this when I had to throw out the first half of Kingmaker part 4 when they sidestepped a plot-line meant to revolve intelligence gathering and infiltration of a castle, and the wizard just scryed on the ruler at night, teleported himself and the rogue invisible into his bedroom, and had the rogue sneak past his wards and coup-de-grace him in his sleep.
Dimension-locked towers made of lead, located on parallel planes is the way to go.
** spoiler omitted ** It also did not make sense to me to have a high level character be that silly.
Edit:I forgot I was not playing in the same campaign world as everyone else meaning my map was different which allowed my version of the bad guy to be more civilized.
The area is not completely savage, but it is a frontier. And the character in question IS a highborn, and should have a modicum of education.
I am in the process of re-writing parts 5 and 6 to meet the size and power of the party, and upgrade lots of NPCs with fitting archetypes and rebuilding some with new APG classes. I think it is going to be interesting from now on.
Reading it, loving it, planning on using it :D
I dont ban item creation, per se, I just dont let you do it until they can get the permanency spell (which i make available to all casting classes) but you have to be 10th or 11th level to get this 5th level spell, so I dont have 5th-7th level parties creating something.
I also dont allow the creation of something over +3. Magic items with "age" have potential to be greater. So at my table something more than +3 has, oompf, history and style.
Charatcers also cant just "craft" in their room at the inn and frequently have to do things like "craft the ring in the fires of mount doom" etc etc.
i dont want players crafting to out shine what they could get in the adventures of the game.
I hate the xmas tree effect.
Taking away Magic Item Creation is like taking away feats. You can do it if you think its going to improve the game, but its just adding more restrictions on your characters and taking away paths for the characters to find. Wizards and alchemists would really suffer. They are given Magic Item Creation Feats as class features.
Taking away Magic Item Creation is like taking away feats. You can do it if you think its going to improve the game, but its just adding more restrictions on your characters and taking away paths for the characters to find. Wizards and alchemists would really suffer. They are given Magic Item Creation Feats as class features.
Actually it makes it more likely that someone will play a caster since most magic items only duplicate spells. If I can't get the items I want I will just be a caster and have the "item" every day.
Taking away Magic Item Creation is like taking away feats. You can do it if you think its going to improve the game, but its just adding more restrictions on your characters and taking away paths for the characters to find. Wizards and alchemists would really suffer. They are given Magic Item Creation Feats as class features.Actually it makes it more likely that someone will play a caster since most magic items only duplicate spells. If I can't get the items I want I will just be a caster and have the "item" every day.
I have to agree with this.
Potions and scrolls aren't 'magic items', they are spell storage.
Rings, cloaks, and other wondrous items, is essentially where the xmas tree effect and perma buffs break down the game.
WoTC did huge damage to the game when they created the CRs, WBL, and other things that basically "require" these items.
when you get to a point in the game, where you are +17 to something on a d20 roll (or +34!!) you are in "ridiculous land" the longer you can prevent this from happening the longer your game will last.
do you have to modify a few monsters as far as AC, BAB or Saves, yea occasionally.