|
Doing some lobby work for the next edition of Pathfinder ( still way down the line, IMO ) OTOH might not be a bad idea. Development cycles are pretty long after all.
That is generally the intent of my posts. I regret I wasn't here for the original playtests, but I shall not let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and the current rules are the best on the market for what I want to do.
But I will say that Paizo is built on innovation and improvement...I'm hoping the eye isn't being taken off the ball with the Goblinworks stuff...
Yeah, I may be a cynical bastard for thinking this way, but I see "disaster" all written over the MMO. But then again I've seen just too many MMO's crash and burn over the last years, ones which did not look like their graphics are directly from 2004.
|
Yeah, I may be a cynical bastard for thinking this way, but I see "disaster" all written over the MMO. But then again I've seen just too many MMO's crash and burn over the last years, ones which did not look like their graphics are directly from 2004.
World of Warcraft is from 2004. EVE is from 2003. Lineage is from 2003. Guild Wars 1 is from 2005. Everquest is from 1999 (and still looks the part). They're all still very much alive, profitable and going strong. Not sure what's your argument here.
Yeah, I may be a cynical bastard for thinking this way, but I see "disaster" all written over the MMO. But then again I've seen just too many MMO's crash and burn over the last years, ones which did not look like their graphics are directly from 2004.World of Warcraft is from 2004. Not sure what's your argument here.
World of Warcraft has affected a stylized comic book art style, which has helped it to avoid many of the ravages of its graphics engines age. There are still numerous complaints on their forums about the, for modern standards, outdated textures and graphics.
What I've seen so far from the Pathfinder MMO art style looks like what did pass for "realistic graphics" from lots of years ago. It's not exactly building much confidence on my part.
Hey, I wish the guys all the best, but in regards to MMOs chances of success, I am really an old grumpy cynical bastard. SWTOR failing so hard ( both on a financial level and in my own expectations for the game ) really crushed a lot of my enjoyment of the genre out of me.
Also, personally I'd rather have seen some epic single player RPGs to bring Golarion to life as a video game. Rise of the Runelords or Curse of the Crimson Throne in Baldurs Gate/ Dragon Age style, anyone?
How about the good old "go play 1E/2E"?
No, really. You'll be happier - these games have none of things you identify as problems. No rules for magic item creation, no problematic spells, no WBL, no wording problems (because most of the time, there's no wording), no MIMs and "GM is the Overgod of Creation" is spelled out right there in the book.
We will be happier - we won't have to endure 65 threads of yours that ultimately lead to nothing, because what you really want is to revert half of the ruleset to Gygaxian paradigm, something that most of people here are not the least interested in. While at the same time you have no issue with things that most people actually identify as 3.5/PF ruleset inadequacies, such as the iterative attack system, 15min adventuring day, Rogues/Monks being weaksauce, high levels being too unwieldy, Ivory Tower, etc. etc.
I'm not saying that you don't have the right to your opinions, but you're getting nowhere.
Whoa, you need to reread your 1E and 2E.
1) There are Item creation rules.
Permanent magic items have a 10% chance of losing Con permanently, but you get EXP when it is created.
Non-permanent (potion, wands, scrolls, staffs) have no penalty and you get EXP when it is created.
However, both take 9-11th level to finally start crafting.
There are optional rules for quest to get components.
2) Problem spells exists
3) While there wasn't WBL the rules caution you should have magic weapons that can pierce the DR of monsters sent against you before you are sent against them.
4) Wording problems yeah...there are... Haste (undefined if it system shocks you). Most things that system shock you say they do, but Haste doesn't. But it ages you, so some people argue one way and the other the other way.
5) Monks still are weak sauce. As are Thieves.
6) High levels still unwieldy
There was a...I want to say Book of Artifacts that had a section in the back about creating magic items in 2nd Ed., plus rules on charging up wand/staff items. Then later with the "2.5" Options books there was one that had some different options - Spells & Magic or High Level Campaigns?
I grabbed my copy of Player's Option: Spells & Magic (1st printing, 1996*). Spell Research & Magical Item creation is Chapter 7. On page 102-103 it reads, "Crafting magical items has been described in great detail in the book Book of Artifacts, and again in DM Option: High Level Campaign."
So yeah, it's in all three of those books.
*I've noticed that different printings have different wordings and organization of the text. Often times, material can appear on entirely different page numbers. I've seen rules completely removed or altered with different printings, with no mention of the change anywhere in the books.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now I understand that I am derailing what the current thread has become but I would like to respond to the original poster and his concerns with Pathfinder. Possibly much/all of this was brought up in the previous thread but to be frank I am too lazy/disinterested in sifting through the many pages. I agree with some of Shallowsoul’s points, mainly the fact that magic items have largely become static numeric bonuses that are neither fun nor interesting. As a player and as a DM I want the entire group to think Awwww, sweet! when a magic item is gained and generic cloaks of resistance +x and shopping at a magic mart does neither. However after playing and DMing several APs (our group pretty much only plays APs) I have come to the conclusion that static magic item bonuses are built into the system. Frankly without cloaks of resistance the DC on saves is too high for players to have a reasonable chance of making, without rings of protection and magic armor even mooks will have a far greater than 50% chance of hitting front line fighters, and without stat boosting items a 15 point buy is too limited for any character that needs more than one primary stat to function.
Myself and the other DM for our group talked about it and realized that to play Pathfinder without players having a ton of magic items we would either have to modify every single creature in an AP to balance it with the lower overall stats the party or we would have simply incorporate static enhancement bonuses into character leveling. Now I can’t take much credit for this idea as our system was based on a very nice system that someone posted on the house rules section of the forum. The basics are that on even levels players get several stats to increase while on odd levels they get to add enhancement bonuses to weapon damage/attack, armor, deflection, saves and natural armor. We have now gotten to 12th level in our Jade Regent campaign and it has more or less worked. I admit I think there are some improvements that could probably be made and at times it doesn’t play as nice with specific class abilities as I would like but I certainly think it works just as well as the standard Christmas tree effect that so many seem to complain about. Players have far fewer magic items but the items are actually interesting ones. Since there is no magic item economy when players find magic items they actually try to figure out cool ways to use them instead of selling them for half value so they can buy a better cloak of resistance.
If Pathfinder ever went to a second edition I would much prefer a system similar to this where there were no magic items of +1 to +5 but instead all magic items did something fun and cool. Overall I like the Pathfinder rules and they work better for me than any other system I have come across. When they don’t work our group sits down talks about how something does or doesn’t work and then comes to a consensus on wither or not to make a houserule.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's like the game was designed to give you options of what to include in a world--and it automatically went to including every thing in it in the same world...i dunno--
D&D/Pathfinder is what we call 'kitchen sink fantasy'. It gives you everything and lets you decide what you want to throw out.
How is that getting carried away. I go to other forums where if a poster does get out of line one of the flagging options include something along the lines of "trolling/flamebaiting" as a option that can be chosen. I think if they actively included it as a flagging option the amount of traffic in terms of negative threads imo would decrease. It's obvious we can't really police ourselves and some people go out of their way to cause trouble so why not. That would apply to myself. If I get out of line I deserve to be reported to the mods.
Hey now, let's not get carried away!
|
|
How is that getting carried away. I go to other forums where if a poster does get out of line one of the flagging options include something along the lines of "trolling/flamebaiting" as a option that can be chosen. I think if they actively included it as a flagging option the amount of traffic in terms of negative threads imo would decrease. It's obvious we can't really police ourselves and some people go out of their way to cause trouble so why not. That would apply to myself. If I get out of line I deserve to be reported to the mods.
Hey now, let's not get carried away!
Good to know. Thanks Ross, sorry I am a pain sometimes. I'm trying to be better :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The op really does not want any actual debate. All that Shallowsoul wants is validation of his gaming style and RAW to be rewritten to fit his houserules.Don't we all.
No, I don't want RAW to be rewritten to fit my houserules. My houserules are no better than the houserules anyone else has made. If I want my houserules published, I will make a PDF of them and publish them myself.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just a few words about the previous thread that got locked.
First, I'm sorry that it got locked. In spite of the heated exchanges that were flaring up from time to time, I think a lot of really good discussion was made and I believe that most of us had the issue clarified a good bit. In the end I believe that the majority, probably the vast majority, of players have a very similar attitude about how magic items should be made available to players. Some GMs feel the magic shop allows players some freedom and flexibility, some GMs prefer to roll item acquisition into the story in a less arbitrary manner.
I think that several of us demonstrated quite well that magic shops do not automatically reduce role playing, unbalance the game or create free access to magic items as if there is some sort of Infinite Capacity Vending Machine of Magic Items. In the case of careful use of magic shops the game really operates much like a game without magic shops.
I think that we also demonstrated that availability of magic items is not restricted to the existence or lack of magic shops. Magic items found, quested, bought from locals or looted from treasure can be just as freely available as those in a magic shop.
So as far as I am concerned, that thread pretty much demonstrated for the vast majority of players that magic shops are just another tool that GMs can use to facilitate the development of players' characters.
I would like to apologize for baiting a couple of posters in that thread, I have to admit that I have a tendency to yank certain chains to see the person on the other end dance a bit. It's a bad habit and it's exacerbated significantly when the dance is so predictable. But I shouldn't do it, and I think that contributed to the tone of the thread degenerating to the point that it was closed.
I'll be better this time. Honest. :)
No, I don't want RAW to be rewritten to fit my houserules. My houserules are no better than the houserules anyone else has made. If I want my houserules published, I will make a PDF of them and publish them myself.The op really does not want any actual debate. All that Shallowsoul wants is validation of his gaming style and RAW to be rewritten to fit his houserules.Don't we all.
Tri's comment was a joke.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
OR WAS IT? *DUN DUN DUN*
Dude, you are no help whatsoever, at all, ever.
I think I'm in love. :P
|
While I certainly respect your right to dislike aspects of the system, Shallowsoul, the simple fact of the matter is that there already exist games out there that behave the way you want: AD&D (1E or 2E) spring to mind. Pathfinder does not work that way (for better or worse). The point you keep making is that you want Pathfinder to change back to ways that were abandoned over a decade ago.
So, try this question out: why do you want Pathfinder to change when there are already rulesets out there that function the way you want?
I can't answer for SS, but I know why I personally wish that Pathfinder would move more towards my gaming tastes, despite there being games out there that far better suit them; the availability of players. Unfortunately, some players are unwilling to try out new systems. If it's not 3.X/PFRPG, then they have absolutely no interest. Hell, that attitude is fairly prevalent just on these boards.
I could make thread after thread like SS does trying to convince Paizo to change Pathfinder to be more like BRP or Swords & Wizardry, but I realize that that type if change is unlikely to be even considered before a new edition of Pathfinder comes out. I also pay attention to the posts of developers, and I would be vastly surprised if Pathfinder 2e moved in that direction; it seems much more likely to me that the game will move exactly in the opposite directions, and I have serious doubts that I will continue as a Pathfinder RPG customer once the new edition does arrive.
Kthulhu, I also share many of Shadowsoul's problems with the current version of Pathfinder. I've noted on many threads that I feel the magic item system is wholly and completely broken from concept to the last errata. It's a mess. It is counter-productive towards true character development. It provides intentional and unintentional synergies that create huge imbalance between player characters.
But Paizo isn't going to fix any of that. And as you point out, I'm not going to find many groups playing other, supposedly "better" RPGs. For general playing it's pretty much Pathfinder or D&D 4e right now. And as many problems as I have with PF, 4e is simply a completely different and less fulfilling game (to me).
So working within the confines of the rules we have, my approach is to accept the problems inherent in the game and provide the means to allow character development as cleanly and logically as possible, instead of trying to bend the rules to make the game more like I personally like it.
Thus I have magic shops in my game.
And I would have magic shops in any game with magic items at all. But in a game with far less reliance on permanent scalable magic items those shops would probably mostly sell potions, scrolls and one-shot magic items.
But they'd still exist. People will find a way to make money.
I can't answer for SS, but I know why I personally wish that Pathfinder would move more towards my gaming tastes, despite there being games out there that far better suit them; the availability of players. Unfortunately, some players are unwilling to try out new systems.
I can definitely see that. I've played multiple systems, and have enjoyed several of them. Rifts and Shadowrun are still favorites of mine. However, now that I'm married and my wife games with me, she does not like learning new rules or new systems. So I try to stick with one system for her benefit. Most of this has to do with her being dyslexic, so she doesn't read the rulebooks - everything has to be explained. So if she is going to learn a new system, I have to have a mastery of it in order to explain everything. It's kind of a catch 22. In order for me to master a game's rules I have to play it, but since I won't play without her, I can't learn the games rules well enough to be able to explain it to her.
So we stick with Pathfinder, because it's a system I know well and we already have an established group that works well together.
For a short while we had two games a week, one Pathfinder and one 2nd ed AD&D. You could imagine how confused she got trying to remember which was which when we played. (Not that she's stupid, mind you; she'll school anyone here when it comes to chemistry. And when it comes to the sciences, she out-performs me in almost every way. Oh, and she never studied in college and still ranked the top in every science class. She just has a hard time reading).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In our games we care about plot advancement, personal growth of the character, AND stats & gear.
It's not one or the other. Liking statistical mathematics and gear enhancements does not mean one must sacrifice plot development and character growth. That line of thinking is very akin to the idea of a roleplay vs powergamer. They are two separate ideas; they are not opposing concepts.
|
@ Kyrt - yeah Kyrt, I actually suspect this is part of the reason we've had the dosconnect in our approaches over the past. Our group has always made gear readily available at times, which means we probably don't see many of the issues you have pointed out or come up with house rules for. I've always seen the game as balanced as long as you use everything that's provided. Sometimes that could break verisimiltude, but mostly it just let us play the characters we wanted.
For us it works, but I can see why others would want a change in things.
cheers
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
From the last (closed) thread to this one, this discussion has become a rhetorical parade. Shadowsoul, please lay out your house rules for magic item availability, either here or in the House Rules boards. If I like them I'll use them. Some other people may do the same. If the rules are thoughful they may become widely accepted, maybe popular enough to be at the forefront some developer's thoughts when writing product. That's really all you can ask for from this thread.
Lay it out. I'm not fond of the current rules, I'm an active DM. I'm all ears (eyes?).
|
|
In our games we care about plot advancement, personal growth of the character, AND stats & gear.
It's not one or the other. Liking statistical mathematics and gear enhancements does not mean one must sacrifice plot development and character growth. That line of thinking is very akin to the idea of a roleplay vs powergamer. They are two separate ideas; they are not opposing concepts.
I agree bookrat, they're not the same.
However, you can approach it completely from the side where making magic items available makes for an amazingly great game.
My group meets once a fortnight for about 3 hours. This is more time than we've ever had, and yet when running an AP from level 1 to level 20 it seems to take forever. We focus on developing the personality and actions of our characters in pursuit of the plot. We don't focus on the history of our gear, as it takes away from the plot, rather than adds to it.
Earthdawn (first edition at least, haven't played the new ones) went the other way. You could actually buy magic gear from shops in that game. Each item had been looted at some point from the pre horror world. In order to unlock its full potential, you had to research the history of the weapon so you could tie more threads to it. In that game system, the gears history was part of your character.
I see no reason why you couldn't do the same thing in Pathfinder if you wanted history for your items. A shop is still available, the owner might even know its history. I could see a scene where the seedy merchant says "This dagger was once used to kill the high priest of teh cult of Rovagug, just as he was about to enact the ritual to awaken the Tarrasque. The owner traded it for some shoes of expeditious retreat and a new set of underwear". Now you have your magic shop and your magic item history.
For us though, and apparently quite a few others, the history doesnt matter. "This sword is mine, there are many like it, but this one is mine. I will use it to destroy evil and loot the tombs of the ancient races."
Cheers
I... what?
I think you may have misunderstood me bookrat. I like the statistical mathematics and the different options that gear opens up to me. But for me the gear is entirely background stuff. It's part of the character's abilities and not something I put any real narrative value on, if that makes sense.
After rereading what the two of you wrote, I think I did completely misunderstand you. I apologize. :(
I once played in a low magic 2nd ed campaign where we were constantly fighting demons and devils. If you recall, in 2nd ed, demons and devils had certain immunities where you were required to have a magical weapon to even be able to strike them. Getting that magical item was very important to the game, and if you lost one (like my character did, twice - once due to a critical miss where the sword got lodged in the ceiling and the next round we had to flee, and the other time because we needed information and to get it we had to sacrifice something important, and I was the only one willing to sacrifice anything at all), you were screwed. Losing that magical weapon meant you couldn't attack the demons and devils - and those were the only monsters we fought the entire three years I played that game. It also really sucked that the GM considered you losing your magical weapon to be your fault (as in you the player), and as punishment it often took months to get a new one - both in character and in real life. Literally, 10+ sessions without a consistent way to contribute to combat.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I need to read this page, but before I do, I want to post before I have to read another page, and then the thread is locked. So if some of what I have to say is redundant, bear with me.
First off, it should not be surprising that people that often like to play spellcasters as players are also the same ones that don't like magic items readily available. While all classes can benefit from easy access to magic items, it is the non-casting classes that benefit most.
Take something like a shadow for example, for spellcasters these might be annoyances because they might have not taking/prepared the best spells to fight something like this, but a non-caster with only a mundane weapon can't even threaten it at all.
So restricting access hurts non-casters more (especially if you are not seriously nerfing the spellcasters at the same time), so why do it? I can think of two reasons, (1) they just don't realize it since they play casters they just don't consider what effect it has on non-casters. (2) They don't like non-casters competing with casters, "No you can't get an item that will allow you to fly a certain number of rounds a day, only a spellcaster can do that. Maybe if they feel generous they might share some of that with you." I hope it is more of the former than the latter.
Next up, I thought someone in the other thread made a good point. They said that if the obtaining gear was in itself an adventure worthy thing, then sure go for it. But if the party is already involved in a world-saving epic adventure, then tracking down some gear probably should be hand-waved and done off-stage. I don't know, maybe it is because of my life, but I don't get to game as much as I would love to. This means my gaming time is important to me. Saving the kingdom from the rampaging dragon is more important to me than trying to convince the old fellow out in the cottage to make me a ring of sustenance. It would be great if I had time for both, but I don't and that is the trade-off I (and the people I game with) choose to make.
Some people had said, they don't like the feeling of being able to walk into a shop and get anything. I agree, that is hokey. On the other hand, just because my group says, "We spend the next month stocking up in town and enhancing our equipment." Doesn't mean they went into a shop and everything was there already. What it means is those details were handled off-screen. They could have involved running mini-quests for some old hermit or killing some exotic beast for its blood or whatever, but it wasn't part of the action that took place during the game session.
Just as I never saw Captain Kirk take a dump, didn't make me assume that in the future, all Star Fleet captains didn't defecate. Likewise, just because an action isn't played out during the game session doesn't mean it couldn't have happened.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just as I never saw Captain Kirk take a dump, didn't make me assume that in the future, all Star Fleet captains didn't defecate. Likewise, just because an action isn't played out during the game session doesn't mean it couldn't have happened.
Potentially gross response:
|
|
Until I decide to ever work on a homebrew setting will be using either Forgotten Realms or Golarion as my world to game in. so I'm keeping the magic shops in the game. I may restrict it in my homebrew yet to be honest never saw a problem with them. So far no player in my group or being a player in another game. Have never seen anyone run rampant with magic shops or see a game fall apart because of access to magic items. After all if the pc have access to those shops so do npcs and in certain areas intteligent monsters.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I havent joined this discussion before, but Id like to throw my 2 cents in on how I view and use Magic Shoppe's in my campaigns.
1st- They are an intricate part of a 'Magic' filled world.
A) Unless you play in worlds that have a shortage of spellcasters, it is highly unlikely all spellcasters will be adventurers. Many will be advisors, but just as many will be using it as a source of income.
B) That being said, using the rules of economics- The quick to make easily profitable items are what will be readily available. Wands, Potions, scrolls. Things that the crafter knows customers will be coming back for many times.
C)Permanent items are less likely to be readily available- because of the time needed to craft them, and the investment vs return for the creator.
2nd- So Shoppes will be more like curio's with lots of low powered things, but few few few of any high dollar items.
A) It's up to the GM to control what items are availabe In Shoppes. Don't rely on a die roll. pre-ordain whats there and whats not there.
B) Each Shoppe will have several Casters who supply them with goods. So the Shoppe becomes the place where the when a customer says "I want a belt of Giant Strength." The Shoppe Keeper says "Well I know I guy. For a fee I can pass on the info.
C) Turn these forays into adventurers in and of itself
D) The Caster says "Thats quite a time investment. I tell you what Ill work on that for you, which will take me away from my normal routine, if you do....XXXX for me."
3rd- I think what turns most DM's off on the Shoppe Idea is to treat it like Walmart. or inbetween game shopping.
A) Make it part of the game evironment and I think most will hae fun with it
B) I dont see any issues with parties going to the temple and saying "We need a cure light wounds wand." The Priest says "Thats quite a time investment, It will take me away from tending my flock. But I tell you what I can have one ready for you in 10 days time if you are willing to go tend with this Bandit whos been terrorizing some of my people in this area..."
Catch my drift?
my 2 cents
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that several of us demonstrated quite well that magic shops do not automatically reduce role playing, unbalance the game or create free access to magic items as if there is some sort of Infinite Capacity Vending Machine of Magic Items. In the case of careful use of magic shops the game really operates much like a game without magic shops.
I gotta say that I am coming around to this line of thinking. Prior to the original post's discussion I was definitely against it, but negative extreme connotations of "Magic Shoppe" overshadowed what can truly be a cool concept. It just has to be treated with some degree of thought and consistent within the context of the campaign. I see now for me it's not the "Magic Shoppe" issue but the 75% availability issue...and even that's not really an issue if it's not the entire list of Magic Items potentially on the racks.
Somewhere I keep running into a need to homerule a line of separation, beyond gp value. What's commonly known and understood in the heroes' line of work? What's uncommon or rare? What's never been seen before and so jealously guarded as to provide an advantage to that country/society/clan/whatever? What's made by crafters that they'd never sell except to those they implicitly trusted (by reputation or quest)? Somewhere for me there's another line besides "artifact" and "magic item" but not sure how to tackle that one. It's not a problem in my campaign now, but I could see it becoming that way later on - especially if I loosened up the reigns on incorporating the Magic Shoppe concept.
just as I never saw Captain Kirk take a dump, didn't make me assume that in the future, all Star Fleet captains didn't defecate.
While it can't be confirmed or denied that Kirk ever dropped a deuce, we know for a fact that Mal Reynolds pees standing up. Just say'n...
I think that several of us demonstrated quite well that magic shops do not automatically reduce role playing, unbalance the game or create free access to magic items as if there is some sort of Infinite Capacity Vending Machine of Magic Items. In the case of careful use of magic shops the game really operates much like a game without magic shops.I gotta say that I am coming around to this line of thinking. Prior to the original post's discussion I was definitely against it, but negative extreme connotations of "Magic Shoppe" overshadowed what can truly be a cool concept. It just has to be treated with some degree of thought and consistent within the context of the campaign. I see now for me it's not the "Magic Shoppe" issue but the 75% availability issue...and even that's not really an issue if it's not the entire list of Magic Items potentially on the racks.
Somewhere I keep running into a need to homerule a line of separation, beyond gp value. What's commonly known and understood in the heroes' line of work? What's uncommon or rare? What's never been seen before and so jealously guarded as to provide an advantage to that country/society/clan/whatever? What's made by crafters that they'd never sell except to those they implicitly trusted (by reputation or quest)? Somewhere for me there's another line besides "artifact" and "magic item" but not sure how to tackle that one. It's not a problem in my campaign now, but I could see it becoming that way later on - especially if I loosened up the reigns on incorporating the Magic Shoppe concept.
You might try some sort of Knowledge: Arcane roll (or something else if the item relates to one of the other knowledges) to determine if a PC has ever heard of a specific magical item that they haven't specifically encountered before. Or an INT check to see if the character can come up with the idea to either commission one or design one.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that several of us demonstrated quite well that magic shops do not automatically reduce role playing, unbalance the game or create free access to magic items as if there is some sort of Infinite Capacity Vending Machine of Magic Items. In the case of careful use of magic shops the game really operates much like a game without magic shops.I gotta say that I am coming around to this line of thinking. Prior to the original post's discussion I was definitely against it, but negative extreme connotations of "Magic Shoppe" overshadowed what can truly be a cool concept. It just has to be treated with some degree of thought and consistent within the context of the campaign. I see now for me it's not the "Magic Shoppe" issue but the 75% availability issue...and even that's not really an issue if it's not the entire list of Magic Items potentially on the racks.
Somewhere I keep running into a need to homerule a line of separation, beyond gp value. What's commonly known and understood in the heroes' line of work? What's uncommon or rare? What's never been seen before and so jealously guarded as to provide an advantage to that country/society/clan/whatever? What's made by crafters that they'd never sell except to those they implicitly trusted (by reputation or quest)? Somewhere for me there's another line besides "artifact" and "magic item" but not sure how to tackle that one. It's not a problem in my campaign now, but I could see it becoming that way later on - especially if I loosened up the reigns on incorporating the Magic Shoppe concept.
I use the minor/medium/major item rule. That's what it's for. Major items are never available. They are almost exclusively quest items. That quest can be contained within the confines of said city, however. Medium items are extremely rare and are only available as I "once in a blue moon" drop them in. Minor items above 5000 gp are uncommon at best, below are a little more common. These items are still not readily available and have a 75% chance rule. Items below 1000 gp tend to be more common. Potions/scrolls/ and sometimes wands are readily available. Not all though. I use the Ultimate Equipment Guide common and uncommon to determine what is READILY available and CHANCE to be available.
|
|
I use the minor/medium/major item rule. That's what it's for...I use the Ultimate Equipment Guide common and uncommon to determine what is READILY available and CHANCE to be available.
A couple of things:
First, practical: the entire list of magic items doesn't fall into the 75% availability category, even in a metropolis. The price cut off is actually fairly low, so a large number of the more prized and sought after thing won't be there.
Those points make sense to me - a quick examination of the Ultimate Equipment Guide shows a Metropolis 16K gp cutoff between the "Medium" class of items, so what falls on either side of that seems like a good place to start.
Second more conceptually: Are you thinking of the various magic stores in a town actually having three quarters of the eligible magic items (or more, since there would be extras of many of them) sitting on shelves? I prefer to think of all the stores only having a few score items (beyond the basic potions and scrolls) that have a 75% chance of having the item you're looking for.
No the latter as you stated, but having the problem in my mind that player X decides "I have to swing by Irongate and pick me up a Medium-class Metamagic Rod of Ubersauce" because he has 15K gold saved up and assumes the d100 is in his favor.
I also would go with what a couple people said in the previous thread. 75% is a rough estimate. Things that match the community would be mroe available. If you're looking for heavy armor and axes, the dwarven town is a better bet than the elven ones, etc.
I'd also make weaker items more available in general. Things towards the top of the base cost less so.
That's the flavor I'm thinking about, and any "Magic Shoppe" I definitely want to fit the context of the region and not be a pure random Skyrim-esque shopping experience (not that I don't love Skyrim mind you, but not looking for that aspect in a PF campaign).
Thanks!