Since 3rd ed days, the belt of giant strength got severely nerfed, at least this is my impression.
Back in the days of 2nd ed AD&D such belt gave its wearer the actual strength of that type of giant, so a char could start with a strength of 7 or 8 and get a Belt of Hill Giant Strength, which raised his strength to 19.
Now it just gives +2/+4/+6.....but if such char has to wear it he only goes up as far as 13/14, not exactly what i'ld call the strength of a giant (pathfinder giants are in the range of 21-42).
I understand this is a balance matter but i'ld expect a item by the name "Belt of Giant Strength" to give you a strength score around 20-25.
I guess i want too much, but i don't think i'm the only one to think that a char cannot claim he is wearing a Belt of Giant Strength while going around with a score of 13 (i know i'm quoting an extreme case, but its this what bothers me).
Actually, I have the opposite belief: I think the belt of giant strength is MUCH more powerful than in 2e (and, sadly, much less flavorful). Why? Because the bonuses stack. The belt of giant strength brought your strength to a static plateau; if a character had 25 strength, the belt did NOTHING. Now, it brings them to 31 strength.
This isnt really a balance issue in my mind. The old belts where useful because stat boosts where rare, and seeing a character above 20 in any stat was rare. Here, the books/wish allow up to a +5. You can build a character with 20 in a stat at the start.
In this case, the name "belt of giant strength" is more metaphorical than genuine. I mean, the other belts just use superlatives after all.
Still, I love those belts. So much more favorful.
|
When I played 1e/2e it became standard to expect that eventually all of the meleers in the group would get the gauntlets. It was a good way to make a powerful boss NPC, but inevitably their loot goes to the PCs, so eventually everyone gets a pair.
To not have them severely reduced the damage output.
From a design standpoint, that makes them broken. A "must-have" item, so much so that without it, you're doing it wrong.
I wasn't happy to see them reduced so much either, but overall I agree with the decision.
A belt of giant strength +6 is the closest standard magic item to accomplish the same thing - feats and weapon training help alleviate the need.
Actually, I have the opposite belief: I think the belt of giant strength is MUCH more powerful than in 2e (and, sadly, much less flavorful). Why? Because the bonuses stack. The belt of giant strength brought your strength to a static plateau; if a character had 25 strength, the belt did NOTHING. Now, it brings them to 31 strength.
This isnt really a balance issue in my mind. The old belts where useful because stat boosts where rare, and seeing a character above 20 in any stat was rare. Here, the books/wish allow up to a +5. You can build a character with 20 in a stat at the start.
And the other thing is Gandal, your character with Str 7 or 8 doesn't get that belt, a) because the Str 19 melee frontliner needs it, and b) the pencil neck doesn't - he or she undoubtedly relies on power/abilities that are unrelated to Str.
So as williamoak, notes, a +2 belt is better than the old school hill giant belt, because it does something for that melee frontliner rather than nothing.
I was reading again the GM book of 2nd ed (yes!! i still have it)
The Belts of Giant Strength had no value in those era, either you find it or you don't, you cannot craft it.
It was really rare for a melee char to start with strength around 18, and the maximum value you could get was 24 (Belt of Storm Giant Strength, but i think it could stack with Gauntlet of Ogre Power).
Once, you could raise your strength very rarely, but significantly, while now there are some means to raise your stats, but they don't give me that feeling i'm increasing my PC's power in the end.
I still prefer the old days' belts.
The GM could control loot better either,now everyone can craft his own items.
And the other thing is Gandal, your character with Str 7 or 8 doesn't get that belt, a) because the Str 19 melee frontliner needs it, and b) the pencil neck doesn't - he or she undoubtedly relies on power/abilities that are unrelated to Str.So as williamoak, notes, a +2 belt is better than the old school hill giant belt, because it does something for that melee frontliner rather than nothing.
You have never played Baldur's gate, Shadows of Amn do you?
I know of a guy who always rolled a fighter with strength 9-11 and boosted Charisma...because the first shop in Atkatla sold a Belt of Hill Giant Strength, so he knew he would be going to have str 19 almost from the start of the game...of course this is a silly example, and that was a comp game.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, BG2 and NWN yes, but SoA no :)
Also, I started with the Red Box, and have played my way through every edition, so I do actually know where you're coming from. Everything felt so much more arcane and mythical back then :) But, the Age of Information being what it is, those days are never coming back. And when everyone knows everything about the mechanics,and everyone can complain directly to the staff of the company that makes the game, a general kind of balance has replaced all that mystery, because it's about all that can be hoped for.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, BG2 and NWN yes, but SoA no :)
Not to quibble, but BG2 is Shadows of Amn.
Baldur's Gate
--Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast (Expansion Pack)
Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn
--Baldur's Gate 2: Throne of Bhaal (Expansion Back)
There was also Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, but we'll just pretend that NEVER HAPPENED.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, BG2 and NWN yes, but SoA no :)Not to quibble, but BG2 is Shadows of Amn.
Baldur's Gate
--Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast (Expansion Pack)
Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn
--Baldur's Gate 2: Throne of Bhaal (Expansion Back)There was also Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, but we'll just pretend that NEVER HAPPENED.
Right you are - was a long time ago. BG, plus the expansion pack. The bit I still remember best is the hours spent trying to connect all our computers to play co-op...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There was also Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, but we'll just pretend that NEVER HAPPENED.
Actually i liked it, i've played consolle games as well as action rpgs
No, BG2 and NWN yes, but SoA no :)
Also, I started with the Red Box, and have played my way through every edition, so I do actually know where you're coming from. Everything felt so much more arcane and mythical back then :) But, the Age of Information being what it is, those days are ever coming back. And when everyone knows everything about the mechanics,and everyone can complain directly to the staff of the company that makes the game, a general kind of balance has replaced all that mystery, because it's about all that can be hoped for.
Great words,i still have all of the original colored boxes :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, my knowledge of 2e mainly comes from those games. And yes, what you propose is a legitimate tactic, in a computer game, where you start at level 10 (no small feat in itself for 2E, from what I've been told about leveling speed). I dont know a single GM that would let that sort of cheese fly.
But yeah, it's a different sort of game. I'm quite fond of BG1&2, and planescape torment. But I'm also fond of pathfinder (I like crafting, especially when I'm allowed to create weird stuff). Different strokes for different folks. There are a TON of "old style" rpgs out there that do follow your desired philosophy, but pathfinder aint one of them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually i liked it, i've played consolle games as well as action rpgs
There was also Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, but we'll just pretend that NEVER HAPPENED.
Loved Dark Alliance- I was able to play with my wife for the first time ever.
Not saying i hate pathfinder, i just would have like more flavorful items.
I think the problem is that it is now far to easy to buy or make magic items and this makes them less special .
Gone are the days when players got excited when it came to casting detect magic on a pile of loot to see what they had , and even minor items where hard won and players where much more careful about what was used and when.
Where as now they only get excited if they find a major magical item and the minor stuff is just tossed into the bag of holding to be sold in the next town
But to get back on topic i think the belts are less powerful over all but players in general are more powerful from the start i don't think I've played in a ny pathfinder game where the characters didn't have at least 16 in there primary stat
Actually, I have the opposite belief: I think the belt of giant strength is MUCH more powerful than in 2e (and, sadly, much less flavorful). Why? Because the bonuses stack. The belt of giant strength brought your strength to a static plateau; if a character had 25 strength, the belt did NOTHING. Now, it brings them to 31 strength.
While this is technically true, it is completely missing the boat. Simply put, there was no strength score higher than 25. The belts may have taken a PC to a static plateau, but that was a pretty high plateau for the system and that character was a melee combatant pretty awesome to behold. They were much more powerful, relative to the system, in 1e/2e than in 3e and PF.
@ Bill dun: While I do agree that a belt of fire giant strength (in 2E) is much more powerful than a belt of giant strength +6 (in pathfinder), these are still two very different systems. In 2E, there was a much lower expectation for magic items, and thus they where generally more valuable. This is an apples and oranges situation to me, because they act as VERY different items in each system. The +6 belt is weak in 2E, and the fire giant strength belt is weak in pathfinder. My comparison was for pathfinder and pathfinder alone, in 2E it absolutely doesnt hold true; comparing across systems is very iffy since they have such massively different expectations from magical items.
Also: as for the flavor issue, I agree, a belt of fire giant strength is a lot cooler that a "+6" belt. Then again, this is a setting-dependent thing. It's up to the GM, and some people would rather just stick with what's in the book.
The current belt isn't too weak, the previous one was too powerful.
Don't know what ed you are talking about, on mine the description specifically says it stacks only with Gauntlet of Ogre power....will read again the whole thing to be sure.
I found that combo of items in SoA but never crafted the hammer: preferred to have all the items to give to more char in the party.
That hammer required:
the only one pair of Gauntlet of Ogre Power of the game (strength 18/100)
the only Belt of Frost Giant Strength of the game (strength 21)
the Hammer of Thunderbolts (incredibly hard to get,as you had to wipe an entire illithid outpost,and the key for it entrance was no easy gain too)
the scroll/recipe for the crafting (from the treasure of the Red Wyrm Firkraag).
I really didn't feel like destroying all of those items just to have one
+3 shocking hammer (even thou it gave its wielder strength 25!!!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You shouldn't be able to dump your strength score into the toilet and still be the strongest guy in the party the second you find a magical doohicky.
I'm actually more underwhelmed by the rlative weakness of wishes in this arena.
'I wish I was a genius!'
Poof - you're 5% smarter. Hope you can find more wishes.
'I wish I was super-strong!'
Poof - you're 5% stronger. Such is the power of the genie of the lamp.
Compared to some of the far-reaching potentially life-changing uses for Wish, a +1 to a single attribute is pretty weak imho.
I think there is a mistake beinf made. You cannor compare the old belts to the new ones. For one the scale of the stats was wholly different.
The top end belts in the old game gave you the highest str the game had. It doesn't scale well with the new game and as somone above me said would be an artifact.
I'm actually more underwhelmed by the rlative weakness of wishes in this arena.
'I wish I was a genius!'
Poof - you're 5% smarter. Hope you can find more wishes.
'I wish I was super-strong!'
Poof - you're 5% stronger. Such is the power of the genie of the lamp.
Compared to some of the far-reaching potentially life-changing uses for Wish, a +1 to a single attribute is pretty weak imho.
I don't know where you get the "5%" thing from. +5 strength is x2 your normal strength. More like 20% for +1
Plus, you can probably get granted much higher, albeit temporary, bonuses. That would just be DM discretion, though.
In 1st and 2nd ed. AD&D, you needed at least a 16 Strength to get any damage bonus at all, and a 17 before you got a Strength modifier to attacks. Comparing apples and oranges here.
I remember it,but the mechanics can be adjusted.
Essentially the question is:
is it possible to have, instead of a +6 (max) belt, a belt which raises your stat to a fixed amount (like 30+).
Of course with the current ruleset you'll be in the major artifacts sort of things (which will take us to the beginning problem,you cannot craft it or buy it, only find it)
And maybe i should have said from the start that i completed (again) Baldur's Gate 2:SoA few months ago and am now playing the first Icewind Dale title (again).
I remember how stats were calculated in that ruleset.
Going from an 18 Int to a 19 Int made you immune to all level 1 illusions, and allowed you to learn an unlimited number of spells at 95% chance.
The only race that could get a 19 Int naturally was the Grey elf.
As your int increased, you became immune to more illusion spells. at 20 Int you were immune to invisibility used by others!
Going from 18 Wis to 19 Wis gave you more bonus spells, and immunities to low level charm type spells. This also increased quickly. This was the only ability score that could get easily over 18, because of age modifiers.
Going from 18 dex to 19 meant you could TWF with no penalties at all. Gloves of Dex and 18 Dex could get you there.
Going from 18 Con to 19 got you another HP/level. If you could get a 20 Con, you started getting fast healing (1 hp/hour). And, of course, only fighters could get the HP benefits.
No real bonus to charisma other then the increased modifier.
But in a world where Stats were almost impossible to get above 18, breaking that barrier meant you were superhuman.
==========
Girdles of Giant Str were much more powerful relative in 1e then such are now.
Mainly this is because you couldn't reach those ability scores without the belts. In PF, you can shapechange and there's all sorts of ways to get higher th/dmg scores.
A belt of Fire Giant Str is the PF equivalent of Str 30 (+10 dmg). A Girdle of Storm Giant Str is Str 34. That IS huge, if you translate it over. Another way of looking at it is that it gave you the strength of an average Giant. So it could also be seen as a Girdle of +12 Str (Large Giants get +8 from size) for Fire Giants, which adds a +8 Size bonus if you become size L.
Yeah, the old Girdles of Giant Str were hugely strong. I wonder why all 3 that I saw in the Forgotten Realms were all being worn by halflings...
Belts of Giant Str and Gauntlets of Ogre Power stacked with all magic warhammers, not just the Hammer of Thunderbolts. And that little toy was a +5, 2-12 dmg weapon that did double damage when thrown, and instantly killed any Giant hit by it when thrown. It was hugely and stupidly powerful, especially with the stacking Gaunts and Belt.
We tended to prefer the Dwarven Throwers, which were almost as good, but didn't require two hands. Note that Dwarven Throwers specifically returned to your hand, but the Hammer of Thunderbolts did NOT...
==Aelryinth
You shouldn't be able to dump your strength score into the toilet and still be the strongest guy in the party the second you find a magical doohicky.
It was rarely an issue. Nobody could plan on finding (or creating) the thing so if you put your lowest roll in Strength, you expected to be stuck with it. If you managed to recover gauntlets of ogre power or a girdle of giant strength (and could use it, and nobody else had a better claim over it), you thanked your lucky stars. And the party had another good melee basher (never a bad thing).
|
|
Not saying i hate pathfinder, i just would have like more flavorful items.
Sadly, more often than not the "colorful items" end either being unused because they use one of the big item slots and aren't better than the standard items that go there or become a "I want that" because when combined with another colorful item or an archetype ability (that probably appeared in some different supplement) they become overpowered.
Maybe if it had been called "Belt of greater strength" people would have expected less, or just what it is supposed to be.
Huh. Until this thread, despite playing for 10 years now, it's never even crossed my mind that "giant strength" could have been an allusion to an actual Giant's strength :)
I mean, "gauntlets of ogre power" obviously alluded to Ogres, but I didn't see that connection for "belt of giant strength"..
Huh. Until this thread, despite playing for 10 years now, it's never even crossed my mind that "giant strength" could have been an allusion to an actual Giant's strength :)
I mean, "gauntlets of ogre power" obviously alluded to Ogres, but I didn't see that connection for "belt of giant strength"..
You obviously haven't played Baldur's Gate 2 SoA.
Near the end of the game all of my PCs had one.Through the game there are:Gauntlet of Ogre power (18/100) in the planar sphere
Belt of Hill g.str (19) sold by a shop in Atkatla
Belt of Rock g.str (20) found in Suldanesselar, near the end of the game
Belt of Frost g.str (21) equipped by a demon knight in the sahuagin caves
Belt of Fire g.str (22) in the expansion Throne of Bhaal, i believe it is found in the fire giant citadel, can't remember where even thought i finished it again few months ago.
More, once you forge the powered version of the Angurvadaal Longsword it gives who wields it permanent strength 22.
In the end the weakest PC in the party has str 18/100 :)
|
|
Don't know what ed you are talking about, on mine the description specifically says it stacks only with Gauntlet of Ogre power....will read again the whole thing to be sure.
I found that combo of items in SoA but never crafted the hammer: preferred to have all the items to give to more char in the party.
That hammer required:
the only one pair of Gauntlet of Ogre Power of the game (strength 18/100)
the only Belt of Frost Giant Strength of the game (strength 21)
the Hammer of Thunderbolts (incredibly hard to get,as you had to wipe an entire illithid outpost,and the key for it entrance was no easy gain too)
the scroll/recipe for the crafting (from the treasure of the Red Wyrm Firkraag).I really didn't feel like destroying all of those items just to have one
+3 shocking hammer (even thou it gave its wielder strength 25!!!)
You hadn't to destroy anything, the items stacked together. Actually belt of giant strength and gauntlet of ogre power stacked together when using any magical hammer.
And you didn't get 25 strength, you did get the belt strength, then you added the gauntlets bonus, so with a frost giant strength girdle: +4 to hit +9 to damage plus +3 to hit +6 to damage. Total +7 to hit, +15 to damage when using magical warhammers. (p. 170 2nd edition AD&D)
In D&D3rd ed terms that is a 24 strength for the to hit and a 40 strength for the damage bonus.
A friend told me the videogame destroyed the items.Could be a programming issue, but never saw the item in the tabletop game.
|
It probably wouldnt bother people as much if hadnt used the iconic names.Generally I see no sign that it bothers people at all.
I think it bothered those who went from 1e/2e to 3.x. They may not have gotten on the forums and b&*#$ but I think it probably bothered them.
I hae GM who thought them way under powered ompaired to the ealier editions so he made a houserule
The bonus the belt/gloves gave was a str bonus not a bonus to str.
So a +2 gave you a 14 str, +4 18, and +6 22 equivalent.
I would consider that houserule underpowered compared to how they actually work, unless a character could choose between gaining 14 STR and gaining +2 STR :)
Reading this has caused me to die a little inside. Munchkins are taking over it seems.
It probably wouldnt bother people as much if hadnt used the iconic names.Generally I see no sign that it bothers people at all.I think it bothered those who went from 1e/2e to 3.x. They may not have gotten on the forums and b~#*& but I think it probably bothered them.
I hae GM who thought them way under powered ompaired to the ealier editions so he made a houserule
The bonus the belt/gloves gave was a str bonus not a bonus to str.
So a +2 gave you a 14 str, +4 18, and +6 22 equivalent.
hmm....
Reading this has caused me to die a little inside. Munchkins are taking over it seems.Please explain this comment.
The forums are full of thread discussing rules or items balance. What is wrong with this?
Not saying i hate pathfinder, i just would have like more flavorful items.
It's all part of the shift from GM power to player power which came about with 3E. Now the players decide what items they get instead of the GM. Not that I'm saying that this entirely a bad thing, coming from the perspective of being both a GM and a player.
Anyway, stat enhancer items are sadly some of the most important magic items in the game (part of the Big Six: Armor, Weapon, Stat Enhancer, Resistance Cloak, Ring of Deflection, Amulet of Natural Armor), since they give static and incremental bonuses to some of the most important stats your character has. If we ever see a new edition of Pathfinder, I'm going to lobby heavily for removing the last four of the Big Six entirely from the game, since they take away too much from pursueing more interesting magic items.