I know armor sizes "refit" to accommodate the wearer in 3.0. This did change in 3.5, but am I correct in assuming that most of the valuable treasure in RRR is basically unusable to the PCs?
I know that by the time they are looting the lizard king and the trolls the PCs will probably have more valuable gear than what they pick up. I am only curious if this gear is for the most part, assumed to be sold. That being the case, I can't help but wonder how hard it would be to find a buyer for said large equipment. Do most people just hand wave this and offer the PCs the standard 50%?
|
Handwaivium (for the record only Hargulka seems to have large arms and armor, most of the other trolls are naked except for rings and amulets which do resize to fit).
As to selling Hargulka's gear?
Perhaps it could be sold to a friendly-ish giant like Munguk, or a wizard with a charmed ogre companion.
That or assume the armor resizes to fit, and the weapon can be used as an oversized weapon. I'm sure there's a barbarian somewhere that will pay a good price for such a thing :)
|
Handwaivium (for the record only Hargulka seems to have large arms and armor, most of the other trolls are naked except for rings and amulets which do resize to fit).
As to selling Hargulka's gear?
Perhaps it could be sold to a friendly-ish giant like Munguk, or a wizard with a charmed ogre companion.
That or assume the armor resizes to fit, and the weapon can be used as an oversized weapon. I'm sure there's a barbarian somewhere that will pay a good price for such a thing :)
I thought magical armor also re-sized it self. I could understand if a gm said no though. I normally let it happen.
I guess I'll have to hand wave the wish/miracle spell it's gonna take to get the cheese smell and arm pit crustys out too.
So much for being a proponent of verisimilitude.
|
|
It's magic.
Do your players really ask questions like: "Who's going to buy a large set of armor?" Or do they just ask how much GP they can get for buying/crafting stuff they DO want?
Magic armor resizing itself isn't really that crazy. Especially in a fantasy world where monsters don't do a lot of their own item crafting.
If after all that you still aren't happy, remember it's just a game, not the next great fantasy novel. :)
My player *does* ask who buys Large armor. After all, it might be a clue as to which of his neighbors are arming Large units (hello, Pitax). He is very keen on having the world make sense.
That said, his PCs are also arming Large creatures, so he has a clear use for the items.
I don't think Kingmaker runs very well if treated as a standard party-centered adventure. It's not particularly challenging as such. So we are running with a heavy emphasis on the kingdom-building, politics, long-term strategy, and world detail, and finding it to be a really good campaign. My player found out about Nyrissa fairly early, and everything is building up toward #6. (We are both in the middle of #4 and the middle of #5 at the moment, due to the action being more PC-driven and less GM-driven in this model.) I'm looking forward to it. (Have to cut it down, though, as we are not going to high levels.)
It's magic.
Do your players really ask questions like: "Who's going to buy a large set of armor?" Or do they just ask how much GP they can get for buying/crafting stuff they DO want?
Magic armor resizing itself isn't really that crazy. Especially in a fantasy world where monsters don't do a lot of their own item crafting.
If after all that you still aren't happy, remember it's just a game, not the next great fantasy novel. :)
Not "who" but "why"
I play with cynics. But I love them for it.
+1Magic arms and armor don't spoil, so it's a perfectly good investment.
-Kle.
Agreed. They should eventually be able to unload the armor (and it's actually worth more than Medium-sized magic armor), but it could take some time and effort. At this stage, thir kingdom isn't very big and isn't likely to have the major merchant concerns that could find a buyer for this relatively easily. They'd probably have to take it or send it to Restov or another good-sized city.
I'm not really in favor of the houserule allowing magical resizing of odd-sized equipment. While anything is possible with magic, of course, I don't find such a houserule either necessary or immersion-enhancing. But then, I remember when dwarves and humans each had unique armor sizes that couldn't easily be shared with each other, and all sets of full platemail had to be individually fitted and would not be likely to fit any other individual.
As for my group, they took the long view and kept the armor, raised the little owlbear orphan and have him trained as a castle guard, wearing the armor.
|
My logic behind my ruling is that magic is able to resize magic items on a person (ie enlarge person), so why can't a suit of armor be modified to increase or decrease it's size? The enchantments on the armor will remain there as long as the item remains intact. Modifying sections in the chest and arms won't require complete disassembly, unlike a magic weapon, which would need to be melted down. Straps can be lengthened or shortened, chain links can be added onto or reduced, or extra plates could be modified to fit the new size.
It seems silly to me that armorers would be able to make adjustments to nonmagical armor and not magical armor.
|
|
My logic behind my ruling is that magic is able to resize magic items on a person (ie enlarge person), so why can't a suit of armor be modified to increase or decrease it's size? The enchantments on the armor will remain there as long as the item remains intact. Modifying sections in the chest and arms won't require complete disassembly, unlike a magic weapon, which would need to be melted down. Straps can be lengthened or shortened, chain links can be added onto or reduced, or extra plates could be modified to fit the new size.
It seems silly to me that armorers would be able to make adjustments to nonmagical armor and not magical armor.
Agreed!
|
Agreed!My logic behind my ruling is that magic is able to resize magic items on a person (ie enlarge person), so why can't a suit of armor be modified to increase or decrease it's size? The enchantments on the armor will remain there as long as the item remains intact. Modifying sections in the chest and arms won't require complete disassembly, unlike a magic weapon, which would need to be melted down. Straps can be lengthened or shortened, chain links can be added onto or reduced, or extra plates could be modified to fit the new size.
It seems silly to me that armorers would be able to make adjustments to nonmagical armor and not magical armor.
Magical armor is extremely resistant: +10 hp and +2 hardness per +1 enhancement bonus if I recall; there's also the fact that you can't damage a +3 armor with anything below a +3 sword... so what kind of tool would reshape a +3 piece of fullplate and what kind of pliers could separate the links of a +4 chain mail???
So, my house rule would be that you would need to be at least a spellcaster with the magic arms and armor feat or a non spellcaster with the Master Craftsman feat... a better solution would be a specialized magic item that can be used to re-size weapons and armor with an appropriate Craft check... (perhaps also provide a bonus to that Craft check)
there's also the fact that you can't damage a +3 armor with anything below a +3 sword...
I didn't know that this was a rule. Is it new to PF or have I missed It for ALL my years of playing?
Do you know what page I can find it on?
My logic behind my ruling is that magic is able to resize magic items on a person (ie enlarge person), so why can't a suit of armor be modified to increase or decrease it's size? The enchantments on the armor will remain there as long as the item remains intact. Modifying sections in the chest and arms won't require complete disassembly, unlike a magic weapon, which would need to be melted down. Straps can be lengthened or shortened, chain links can be added onto or reduced, or extra plates could be modified to fit the new size.
It seems silly to me that armorers would be able to make adjustments to nonmagical armor and not magical armor.
Well, since you're bringing logic into it (always a dangerous thing with fantasy RPGs), the very liberal rules for armor that already exist stretch logic more than a little bit. I support them, mind you, for convenience of play, but honestly, why would anyone think that the same suit of armor would fit both a 4'6" dwarf that weighs 180 lbs and a 6'6" elf that weighs 160 lbs? That is preposterous on the face of it. But the rules say they are both medium sized creatures and that any medium-sized armor will fit them. Like I say, for ease of play, I'm willing to suspend disbelief and buy it.
Making Large and Small armor fit Medium creatures as well is a bridge too far, unless you make the houserule that all equipment magically resizes to fit whoever wields it. I can buy that, but it's not the way the rules work now, and I don't really see a need for it, given that it is already preposterously easy (Magic Mart assumption and/or trivially easy crafting) for characters to get pretty much exactly the magic items they need in most campaigns,
As for the altering it easily to fit different sized creatures, I would simply suggest that it is not as easy to do as you suggest. In real life, armor was relatively rare and was hand-crafted for individuals, particularly when you start talking about platemail. It would generally be easier to just make a new set of platemail than to alter one already made to fit someone of a completely different size. Of course, magic changes the equation, meaning it might be worthwhile cost-wise to alter the mail rather than enchant a new suit, but I would wager it is also pretty difficult to perform alterations on it without disturbing the magical enchantments. That would be my ruling, anyway.
|
|
there's also the fact that you can't damage a +3 armor with anything below a +3 sword...I didn't know that this was a rule. Is it new to PF or have I missed It for ALL my years of playing?
Do you know what page I can find it on?
PRPG p.468
"Damaging Magic Weapons: An attacker cannot damage
a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his
weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the
weapon struck."
Hmm... sounds like you were right about the armor... can't find similar wording for armor...
there's also the fact that you can't damage a +3 armor with anything below a +3 sword...I didn't know that this was a rule. Is it new to PF or have I missed It for ALL my years of playing?
Do you know what page I can find it on?
PRPG p.468
"Damaging Magic Weapons: An attacker cannot damage
a magic weapon that has an enhancement bonus unless his
weapon has at least as high an enhancement bonus as the
weapon struck."Hmm... sounds like you were right about the armor... can't find similar wording for armor...
Either way its really a small leap from that quote and a totally legitimate assumption/house rule.