Making magic items rare ... a point of Con to create?


Homebrew and House Rules

51 to 100 of 191 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
The Exchange

For non-crafters, scarcity would really be the prime issue. You certainly wouldn't see "magic stores" - at most, collectors would have one or two items they might be willing to part with. Which I know is the atmosphere you were after.

But what I'd probably do is require the Power Components option listed in the Gamemastery Guide for item creation, and make the market value of such items very high. If the cost of the "ingredients" exceeds the market value of the finished item (for instance, if it costs 5000 gp to build a sword +1 that will only fetch 2315 gp when sold), you achieve much the same result - people would only ever craft items when they had a specific use for that particular item.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

People forget how easy it is to get around the old scry and fry.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thinking about this a little more, while I think it achieves what I want mechanically pretty well, it may have an issue or two conceptually. I like the ideas surrounding investing life force into an item, and for that reason being limited in the number of items they can create - or weakening themselves otherwise.

As I said before, I wasn't 100% sure on the idea of Con = Life Force, but thought any other ability score would be less suitable. Of the six ability scores, Con does seem the best option.

However, if we go with Con = Life Force, are we then saying that Elves (Con - 2), who are highly magical and live for hundreds of years, on average have less Life Force than humans? That feels wrong ... (On the plus side, Dwarves have high Con ... +4 in this world ... and are seen as great crafters of magical weapons etc. ... so that works out ok).

(A minor issue is that a belt of great constitution is not merely a physical benefit, but if we strictly say Con = Life Force, then it implies the belt contains life force - perhaps up to six times as much as was given creating a standard magic item. Where did it come from? This would be easily solved by either banning the item, or ruling that it took 6 points of Con to create a +6 one - it's only one item, so not a major issue to adjust it).

So, it's only really Elves that are causing me an issue.

I may give elves an exception; being a highly magical species, in touch with the life force of nature, they do not need to give their own Con to craft items (instead conceptually drawing life force from the pool of natural life force). As in this world the elves live a decent distance from the main campaign area and don't generally deal with money this could work well in the world. If you want magic items, you can take the point of Con loss, or travel to the elves and negotiate/trade for what you need. (This exception would extend to highly magical NPC races, but I don't have other PC races in this world as magical as elves. There are no gnomes).

Going with this approach, I might make magical items created from the 'pool of natural life force' have a temporary nature or be tied in to a specific user (if the elves give you a cloak of elvenkind, only you can use it). The elves could still create permanent items by investing the point of Con, but could create personal or temporary items without doing so.

(Another alternative approach without giving elves an exception would be that giving life force to activate an item costs you years of your life instead of Con. I'm not sure how many years would balance it right ... but it would hit goblins and hobgoblins worst, humans badly, dwarves not as much and long-lived elves very little. If this aging pushed you into a new age bracket (middle-age, old, venerable) you would get the physical ability score disadvantages, but would only get the mental ability score benefits when you reached the age chronologically. This would mean that a young wizard could create their first few items with no mechanical penalties at all. Also, unlike Con, it would be easier to make it dependent on the power of the item. Say 1 year of aging per 10,000 gp (or part thereof) of the price. A +2 sword or +3 shield would age the donor of the life force by only one year. Activating a +5 sword would age you by 5 years - scary, but a human would do it once, perhaps. Activating a ring of regeneration would age you by 9 years. This would naturally mean that long-lived dwarves and elves would overall create more magic items (sounds right) and that almost anyone could get their first couple of items without any penalty to play.)

So what do you think of these options?
1) As discussed previously - all permanent item activations require Life force in the form of a point of Con
2) Permanent items generally require Life force in the form of a point of Con, but Elves can create person-locked or temporary versions of permanent items without investing Con.
3) Permanent item activations require Life force in the form of years of the donor's life, dependent on the value/power of the item (say 1 year per 10,000 gp or part thereof of the list value).
4) Permanent item activations require Life force in the form of years of the donor's life, a fixed amount of years per item (say 5).
(I'd keep the rules on willing and unwilling donors as discussed previously whether Life Force was donated as years or as Con).

Both 2 and 3 would increase the availability of magic items, although with 1 and 2 we expect to see more higher power permanent items and fewer lower powered permanent items. With 3 there would be more lower-end items. 4 would probably not significantly increase the number of items compared to 1, except that young adventurers could still get their first couple of items with no immediate mechanical penalties. (And if you're living a dangerous adventuring life, taking 5 years off your lifespan to get equipment that ensures you reach old age may seem a good trade).

3 and 4 would see more magic items from dwarves and elves than from humans. 1 may see less magic items from elves but more from dwarves. With 3 and 4, dragons could become stronger from activating magic items, though, which feels a little off. 3 and 4 eliminate any possible problems with belts of constitution.

(I'm not aware of any magic items or spells that reverse aging ... are there any? Also, with the age approach I'm not sure what ruling there should be for donors who are level 17+ monks and therefore have Timeless Body - though I anticipate campaigns finishing around level 12 so I can probably just ignore it. There should only be 1 or 2 monks of that level in the whole continent, and they'd be hobgoblins who don't play nicely with magic).


There is the theory that haveing a druid cast reincarnate on you brings you back in a young body.

So just to be sure are you saying that you cannot extract life force from an unwilling person?

And how do undead create magical items?
Could you even have a litch in this world? Mecanically speaking.


Freehold DM wrote:
People forget how easy it is to get around the old scry and fry.

I was thinking of scrying on the helpless villagers, teleporting them in, capturing them, and using their life force to fuel my maigc creation.

But i agree with you about scy/fry prepared people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Franko a wrote:
There is the theory that haveing a druid cast reincarnate on you brings you back in a young body.

Yes. This may require some kind of exception (i.e. reincarnation recalls your life force from the afterlife AND from any magic items containing part of it, deactivating those items).

Quote:
So just to be sure are you saying that you cannot extract life force from an unwilling person?

An unwilling victim needs to be kept in place for the hour of the activation ritual, and then gets a Will save - if they make the save, no activation and no loss of life force. If their life force is 'robbed' this way against their will, then it is released from the item upon the death of the victim, deactivating the item.

You can get round this by killing the unwilling victim during the ritual - this guarantees that you get their life force in the item, but you risk getting too much of it (again, if they make a will save), creating an intelligent magic item with their personality that sure as hell is not going to co-operate with the person that murdered their body, and has the victim's alignment. Even if the item crafter has an amazing casting stat, natural 20s still make the save, so there will be a few accidental intelligent magical items around.

Quote:
And how do undead create magical items?

They can only create magic items using the life force from a living, sentient creature.

Quote:
Could you even have a litch in this world? Mecanically speaking.

Yes. Effectively the lich stores all of their life force in their phylactery.


Thank you for your responses....

As an aside, i suggest you read Glen Cook's "Black Company" series. There is also a D20 book that has some alternate rules that you may find flavorable for you.

It seems that the world you are setting up will view magic useres as evil/frightning/powerfull. Reason that i say that is becuase only those ones that embrace evil to fuel there magic item creation will be around for any length of time.

As a followup, becuse it might not be able to be determined who made what, destroying these items may be a (good) holy necessity to release the iife force of the items, and allow their souls to "move on".

Agree/disagree?


Franko a wrote:
It seems that the world you are setting up will view magic useres as evil/frightning/powerfull. Reason that i say that is becuase only those ones that embrace evil to fuel there magic item creation will be around for any length of time.

There's definitely an element of this. Hobgoblins are a strong influence and hate arcane magic in all forms. The main human nations have powerful spellcasters within the establishment, and some powerful items left over from the a war in the previous century; this was previously essential to counteract the threat from the stronger military of the hobgoblins.

In the hobgoblin nations, arcane casting is punishable by death. (other than that, humans and hobgoblins are at peace, so humans can travel fairly freely in hobgoblin nations). In the main human nations, there are still powerful battlemages aligned with the governments who would act to shut down any threat near to the populated areas.

However, in the peripheral human nations, the less-populated areas of the main human nations, and in some of the bordering wilderness areas, there is a vacuum of power which, from time to time, an evil caster will undoubtedly take advantage of - and if he's clever, he'll amass magic items making him untouchable to local good casters of similar ability. This won't be the mainstream, but it will definitely be out there.

Quote:
As a followup, becuse it might not be able to be determined who made what, destroying these items may be a (good) holy necessity to release the iife force of the items, and allow their souls to "move on".

I'm not sure on this one ... if you die and part of your life force is still in a magic item, what happens?. If you gave up that life force willingly, then it may be that it is no longer part of you and doesn't hold you back. Or it may be that their souls are prevented from moving on, or are incomplete in the afterlife until the item is destroyed and their life force released. I think it would be interesting to leave this unexplained, but have some around (a few influential clerics or paladins perhaps) who have a range of firm opinions on the idea and act on them.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Oh - I meant to mention: For wands/potions, a solid way of 'limiting' them is to require the items have a minimum caster level equal to the feat requirements (5th for wands, 3rd for potions). Keeps a huge proliferation of wands from happening and makes them more fun to actually use.

Perhaps you could remove the feats for those as well.

Scarab Sages

Franko a wrote:

As an aside, i suggest you read Glen Cook's "Black Company" series.

One of my favorite series.


Majuba wrote:

Oh - I meant to mention: For wands/potions, a solid way of 'limiting' them is to require the items have a minimum caster level equal to the feat requirements (5th for wands, 3rd for potions). Keeps a huge proliferation of wands from happening and makes them more fun to actually use.

Perhaps you could remove the feats for those as well.

Thanks; I have no intention to limit potions. Wands I'd like to limit a lot ... I'm not quite decided on the exact method though. One option is to only allow them as bonded objects (they can still have stored spells added to them). (Yes, I'm aware that many parties rely on wands of cure light wounds so I'll probably get some hate on this one. Remember that this is not for Golarion, but for a world with a different atmosphere and challenges to be designed appropriate to the resulting power level).


So, with the lack of comment on it, I'm guessing you don't like my "how outsiders get their stuff" idea?


Tacticslion wrote:
So, with the lack of comment on it, I'm guessing you don't like my "how outsiders get their stuff" idea?

Actually I do like it, though there's a lot there to think about. I've never tended to do much with the outer planes though, so other than for interest, it's not as relevant for me.


sgriobhadair wrote:
Quote:
So just to be sure are you saying that you cannot extract life force from an unwilling person?

An unwilling victim needs to be kept in place for the hour of the activation ritual, and then gets a Will save - if they make the save, no activation and no loss of life force. If their life force is 'robbed' this way against their will, then it is released from the item upon the death of the victim, deactivating the item.

Hmm, thinking about this some more, maybe it should be so that if the victim makes their save, the item is still activated - but by taking the life force from the caster instead of from the victim??

Also, what do people make of Con vs years representing life force (or Con with elven exceptions) above?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
phantom1592 wrote:

I heard this was common in the older editions. I think 2E drained life to permanency things... I'm not sure. Few of our wizards ever crafted for pretty much that reason.

It was the rule for First Edition. The essential assumption was that all those +1 weapons you found were ancient as magic makes them very durable.

Being raised from the dead also cost you a permanent Con point in those days.


LazarX wrote:
phantom1592 wrote:

I heard this was common in the older editions. I think 2E drained life to permanency things... I'm not sure. Few of our wizards ever crafted for pretty much that reason.

It was the rule for First Edition. The essential assumption was that all those +1 weapons you found were ancient as magic makes them very durable.

Being raised from the dead also cost you a permanent Con point in those days.

Also in those days, wizards damage from spells did not cap.

which made spells like magic missle VERY POWERFULL.
Not going to remiss about the good old days, just understand that the magic systems of first is very, very different from PF.


sgriobhadair wrote:
sgriobhadair wrote:
Quote:
So just to be sure are you saying that you cannot extract life force from an unwilling person?

An unwilling victim needs to be kept in place for the hour of the activation ritual, and then gets a Will save - if they make the save, no activation and no loss of life force. If their life force is 'robbed' this way against their will, then it is released from the item upon the death of the victim, deactivating the item.

Hmm, thinking about this some more, maybe it should be so that if the victim makes their save, the item is still activated - but by taking the life force from the caster instead of from the victim??

Also, what do people make of Con vs years representing life force (or Con with elven exceptions) above?

I am not sure if this is that big of an impediment.

As an evil soul socking wizard (TM), i will make sure i use the youngest child i can capture (low will save).
Then i will make them drunk. (lower will save).
Then use a posion of some sort (lower even more).
[of course-this makes for some great RP oppurtunities]

Sczarni

Just for the record: no matter what mechanics you throw at players, they will work around them. The only thing you can really do to limit magic items in a campaign is to simply not give them the items or the gold. Or throw them into a "non-magic zone" like the Mana Waste (or Worldwound if you feel really mean and don't want them to get gold (its all taken back to Hell) and have to fight magic critters (devils and demons)). Personally, as a player, if you throw a mechanic that says I have to drain x to make something, I will probably find some sucker to do it for me (another player that we later reincarnate (several times!!!) or a familiar, etc...).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Anthromorphic elephant + Magic Jar = Lots of magic items and a weak and frail elephant


Franko a wrote:
sgriobhadair wrote:
Quote:

An unwilling victim needs to be kept in place for the hour of the activation ritual, and then gets a Will save - if they make the save, no activation and no loss of life force. If their life force is 'robbed' this way against their will, then it is released from the item upon the death of the victim, deactivating the item.

Hmm, thinking about this some more, maybe it should be so that if the victim makes their save, the item is still activated - but by taking the life force from the caster instead of from the victim??

I am not sure if this is that big of an impediment.

As an evil soul socking wizard (TM), i will make sure i use the youngest child i can capture (low will save).
Then i will make them drunk. (lower will save).
Then use a posion of some sort (lower even more).
[of course-this makes for some great RP oppurtunities]

Fair enough ... as you said, supplies for some good RP, makes reports of the evil wizard even more evil, which is all good for atmosphere. And, if it's "on-screen" so we actually make the dice roll, there may still be a natural 20. It adds an element of risk for the evil caster, even if often only a 5% one.


maouse wrote:
Just for the record: no matter what mechanics you throw at players, they will work around them. The only thing you can really do to limit magic items in a campaign is to simply not give them the items or the gold. Or throw them into a "non-magic zone" like the Mana Waste (or Worldwound if you feel really mean and don't want them to get gold (its all taken back to Hell) and have to fight magic critters (devils and demons)). Personally, as a player, if you throw a mechanic that says I have to drain x to make something, I will probably find some sucker to do it for me (another player that we later reincarnate (several times!!!) or a familiar, etc...).

With less magic items around, the PCs won't need, and therefore won't find, as much gold anyway. After all, what are they going to do with hundreds of thousands of gp if they can't use it on magic items?

Reincarnation recalls the departed life force of the character into a new body - so let's say that it recalls ALL of their life force, drawing it back from any items part of it is contained in (see my response to a question above).

An important part of this is not about limiting the players, but about giving a certain atmosphere to the world they're in. I also prefer playing with role players to roll players. Any game can be broken if there's a mix of people playing for the atmosphere and people optimising and only interested in 'winning'.


sgriobhadair wrote:
maouse wrote:
Just for the record: no matter what mechanics you throw at players, they will work around them. The only thing you can really do to limit magic items in a campaign is to simply not give them the items or the gold. Or throw them into a "non-magic zone" like the Mana Waste (or Worldwound if you feel really mean and don't want them to get gold (its all taken back to Hell) and have to fight magic critters (devils and demons)). Personally, as a player, if you throw a mechanic that says I have to drain x to make something, I will probably find some sucker to do it for me (another player that we later reincarnate (several times!!!) or a familiar, etc...).

With less magic items around, the PCs won't need, and therefore won't find, as much gold anyway. After all, what are they going to do with hundreds of thousands of gp if they can't use it on magic items?

Reincarnation recalls the departed life force of the character into a new body - so let's say that it recalls ALL of their life force, drawing it back from any items part of it is contained in (see my response to a question above).

An important part of this is not about limiting the players, but about giving a certain atmosphere to the world they're in. I also prefer playing with role players to roll players. Any game can be broken if there's a mix of people playing for the atmosphere and people optimising and only interested in 'winning'.

Here is where i disagree.

The way that you are setting it up, there will still be the same amount of magical gear. Its just created by "evil wizards" probably being sundered by Paladins.

It will still be there, just normally unacessable to players.


Franko a wrote:

Here is where i disagree.

The way that you are setting it up, there will still be the same amount of magical gear. Its just created by "evil wizards" probably being sundered by Paladins.

It will still be there, just normally unacessable to players.

You obviously envision a higher evil, mid+ level wizard demographic than I do.

Though I'm really liking this version of events where evil casters will snatch victims to use in arcane rituals in order to further their own powers; it seems the kind of thing that evil casters should do. As stated above, though, social factors will limit this to only being able to happen in the quieter corners of the world.


Why not just ban the crafting feats, but make crafting magic items require difficult quests or conditions? Like ... forged in dragon breath, tempered on the elemental plane of water, requiring the tears of a greater basilisk, stuff like that?

Heck, just bringing monsters into it will keep a lot of people from making stuff.


sgriobhadair wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
So, with the lack of comment on it, I'm guessing you don't like my "how outsiders get their stuff" idea?
Actually I do like it, though there's a lot there to think about. I've never tended to do much with the outer planes though, so other than for interest, it's not as relevant for me.

Fair enough! (I'm a really big fan of world-building.) :D

(Incidentally, if you add years to the equation, the petitioner's time could also be utilized in such a manner - in fact, that may be one great reason for Amadeus to "hasten" the process along.

As for your years idea... sure, that's okay, if you like.

One variant is to make it cost a number of years equal to the caster level.

Personally, it doesn't matter to me - I could easily see elves having less CON and thus taking more care (being slow and perfectionists) in the CON that they have, for example (which is what I originally got out of your basic idea).

sgriobhadair wrote:
Franko a wrote:

Here is where i disagree.

The way that you are setting it up, there will still be the same amount of magical gear. Its just created by "evil wizards" probably being sundered by Paladins.

It will still be there, just normally unacessable to players.

You obviously envision a higher evil, mid+ level wizard demographic than I do.

Though I'm really liking this version of events where evil casters will snatch victims to use in arcane rituals in order to further their own powers; it seems the kind of thing that evil casters should do. As stated above, though, social factors will limit this to only being able to happen in the quieter corners of the world.

I think that it's just normal extrapolation. If people can do this, then people will do this. I don't necessarily agree that there will be the same number (I figured that was exaggeration), but I do think the ratio will be quite different simply because, in this version, evil doesn't care, and, in fact, can get away with not caring easily.

That said, the elephant isn't a really big deal, as this is E6, if I recall?

Zhayne wrote:

Why not just ban the crafting feats, but make crafting magic items require difficult quests or conditions? Like ... forged in dragon breath, tempered on the elemental plane of water, requiring the tears of a greater basilisk, stuff like that?

Heck, just bringing monsters into it will keep a lot of people from making stuff.

People, yes, but not adventurers so much, unless the monsters are so much more powerful than the weapons that it's not worth the effort. In which case... meh, there are still ways of making it much more easily.


Since adventurers are a tiny, tiny, TINY minority of the population, they are still rare and special.


But that doesn't solve his actual issue of making magic items rare and special for the players that are, in fact, adventurers.


Tacticslion wrote:
But that doesn't solve his actual issue of making magic items rare and special for the players that are, in fact, adventurers.

agreed

If only "evil magic useres" can have magic, then only evil magic users willhave magic.

The Exchange

Would it be moral for folks dying of old age to agree to contribute their life energies toward the creation of magic items? That might lead to a tradition of magic items largely being family heirlooms. (PCs, of course, would still steal other peoples' grannies' last bequests rather than waiting for their own elderly relatives to die.)


Lincoln Hills wrote:
Would it be moral for folks dying of old age to agree to contribute their life energies toward the creation of magic items? That might lead to a tradition of magic items largely being family heirlooms. (PCs, of course, would still steal other peoples' grannies' last bequests rather than waiting for their own elderly relatives to die.)

Thats a good idea. Although it would probably be used for things that would help the family as opposed to tools of "war"

A ring of skill bonus for animal husbandry, or blacksmithing.
Or reading/comprehending languages...


Huh. That's an interesting thought.
... all those sentient spinning needles...


Franko a wrote:
Lincoln Hills wrote:
Would it be moral for folks dying of old age to agree to contribute their life energies toward the creation of magic items? That might lead to a tradition of magic items largely being family heirlooms. (PCs, of course, would still steal other peoples' grannies' last bequests rather than waiting for their own elderly relatives to die.)

Thats a good idea. Although it would probably be used for things that would help the family as opposed to tools of "war"

A ring of skill bonus for animal husbandry, or blacksmithing.
Or reading/comprehending languages...

I'd already had a similar thought. :-)


Interesting idea about CON. I think I'd use more than one stat and, for more powerful items, maybe more than one point. This might make for a wider spread in power levels of magic items - if you want that. An item with a charm effect would be CHA, scrying WIS, magic weapons STR, Magic armor CON, etc. Lesser magic items one point of a relevant characteristic. Powerful items more, and perhaps from multiple stats. Sacrifice makes sense whether voluntary or not, but I'd jack the price for using someone else's stats. Special rituals required (? a feat or skill or knowledge)... fun stuff.

Old fashioned geezer that I am, I still use experience points for permanent / rechargeable items.


Incidentally, according to the Pathfinder CRB, magic items should be moderately rare.

'crb' wrote:
In general, you must travel to a small town (or larger settlement) to be reasonably assured of finding a spellcaster capable of casting 1st-level spells, a large town for 2nd-level spells, a small city for 3rd- or 4th-level spells, a large city for 5th- or 6th-level spells, and a metropolis for 7th- or 8th-level spells. Even a metropolis isn't guaranteed to have a local spellcaster able to cast 9th-level spells.

(Granted there are more casters than this, these are just the ones who will sell their spellcasting abilities).

So, you need a 'small city' to find the services of a 5th level caster (who can cast 3rd+ level spells); the minimum for arms and armour crafting. And that's only to be 'reasonably assured' - some small cities won't even have a 5th level caster available.

The Gamemastery guide tells us that a 'small city' is population 5000+.

The world I'm using, based on european medieval populations, has only 25 settlements that are 'small city' or larger in size that may have arcane casters, and 39 that may have divine casters. (14 of the cities are under hobgoblin rule; hobgoblins don't have any magical ability and kill arcane spellcasters. However 3 of the cities are elven and have plenty of magic going around - but about two weeks' travel from the main adventuring areas).

(My biggest cities have a population of around 30,000 people, about the population of London in 1350 AD - The Gamemastery Guide lists 25000+ as a metropolis.)


R_Chance wrote:
Sacrifice makes sense whether voluntary or not, but I'd jack the price for using someone else's stats. Special rituals required (? a feat or skill or knowledge)... fun stuff.

I've been considering this but can't decide the best mechanic ... .perhaps some special/rare mineral is needed as a focus to force a part of someone's life force out of their body. (The Pathfinder standard for such things seems to be a diamond of xxxx gp value that is consumed in the ritual/spellcasting, but that just feels a little too predictable.)

One of my original thoughts that I didn't go further with was that unwilling donors had to be subject to Dominate Person - and therefore to take part in the ritual would get additional +2 will saving throw for carrying out an act against their nature. I rejected this because giving up a point of Con is arguably 'self-destructive', which Dominate Person can't force someone to do at all.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'll just leave THIS... here....


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snorter wrote:
I'll just leave THIS... here....

LOVE the dark crystal ... anyone want to drink some essence of gelfling?

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

No thanks; that stuff makes me gassy. I'll stick to this hobbit-colada.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Might I suggest you play Iron Heroes instead?

The Exchange

Oh, you mean the OP. I was about to say, "Heck yes, I'll play Iron Heroes! Why? You running it?" ;)

(For those who aren't in the loop, magic items in Iron Heroes are quite rare, and almost always double-edged. Kind of the way artifacts have a drawback to balance all that awesomeness.)


It's a cool game, quite powerful heroes, who if they are lucky, just MIGHT have a magic weapon by the mid levels.

It's d20, also.

I know why DMs always come here looking for advice on Low Magic games. I mean, Iron Heroes would be perfect for them. But Pathfinder is hot, everyone wants to play PF. Thus, DMs who can't handle magic advertise their game as Patgfinder... But with low magic, rather than just running a game designed from the ground up as Low Magic.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:

It's a cool game, quite powerful heroes, who if they are lucky, just MIGHT have a magic weapon by the mid levels.

It's d20, also.

I know why DMs always come here looking for advice on Low Magic games. I mean, Iron Heroes would be perfect for them. But Pathfinder is hot, everyone wants to play PF. Thus, DMs who can't handle magic advertise their game as Patgfinder... But with low magic, rather than just running a game designed from the ground up as Low Magic.

Actually I'm really happy with the power and variety of magic users in Pathfinder (except maybe summoners - which seems a common complaint). The wizard arcane schools, sorcerer bloodlines, oracle mysteries etc provide a flavour I'm very happy with. And I'm not advocating nerfing these classes.

I also don't want to learn and invest in another system.

What I do want is to create a campaign world full of flavour, and in this one I want fewer magic items - and I want a convincing explanation/mechanic that not only simply reduces the number of items, but in doing so adds some particular twist/flavour. Again, I'm happy to use the variety of magic items from the rules - I just prefer the feel and balance of this world having low level characters generally with 0 to 1 significant magic items, high levels with 2 to 3, and each item feeling special.

It doesn't mean I'm not happy to run out-of-the-box Golarion at other times; it's a strength of Pathfinder that minor houserules can easily accommodate a range of different styles.


Fewer magic items? Oh, well, that's easy. Just hand out cool personalized items for each PC. The old Legendary items. No "Christmas tree". You could also get rid of "ye Olde Magic Shoppe" and magic item crafting (except for consumables, potions, wands, scrolls).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:

Fewer magic items? Oh, well, that's easy. Just hand out cool personalized items for each PC. The old Legendary items. No "Christmas tree". You could also get rid of "ye Olde Magic Shoppe" and magic item crafting (except for consumables, potions, wands, scrolls).

If magic items exist at all, someone can make them. And if NPCs can, PCs should be able to as well. But if PCs can make them but there're not many around, there has to be a reason for that. And that reason may as well be an interesting one.

But there'll definitely be no magick shoppes. And yes, the players will be finding some unique items.


As long as you take the party's effectively lower challenge rating into account, it should work.

It is a strong relative buff to casters (who can supply their magic effects themselves) and a nerf to non casters (who cannot). Cleric buffs especially will become priceless. But its your game.


A clarificataion please:
Are you saying that magic users will still be there in the same proportions, just not as much magic creation?

And did you clarify the "con points" could be forcibly extracted or volunteered?


Yes, in most of the world (the exception being hobgoblin nations, who suppress magic) there will be the usual level of NPC magic users and no restriction on PCs taking arcane magic classes (except that hobgoblin PCs can't be arcane casters).

Con points can be volunteered; they could also be forcibly extracted but this is risky. (If the victim makes a will save, possibly with a bonus, the Con point is taken from the item crafter instead).

I might change it so it has to be willingly, with the exception that Dominate Person can be used to force the victim to comply (Dominate Person allows a Will Save of a +2 bonus for actions not normally in the nature of the subject). As Dominate Person is a level 5 Sorcerer/Wizard/Witch spell, this will limit the Con-stealing to level 9+ evil casters.


If you ever try the as a play by post, i'd like to try to play a wizard in that game.....

with those restriction, it would probably make spell casters more efective.


It's a neat idea, and I'm a fan of low-magic settings, but like others have said you'll need to throw martials a bone somehow. If the wizard gets to keep all his spells, but I lose my +3 sword, I'm not sure why I'd ever play a melee character.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
mephnick wrote:
It's a neat idea, and I'm a fan of low-magic settings, but like others have said you'll need to throw martials a bone somehow. If the wizard gets to keep all his spells, but I lose my +3 sword, I'm not sure why I'd ever play a melee character.

A minor bone at lowish levels is the existence of superior masterwork items.

Regular masterwork costs +300 gp for a weapon, gives +1 to hit, +0 damage
Superior masterwork costs +1200 gp for a weapon, gives +2 to hit, +0 damage
Supreme masterwork costs +2700 gp for a weapon, gives +3 to hit, +0 damage

(Imagine how much easier and more efficiently you can handle a sword that is perfectly balanced. As usual, masterwork and magic benefits on the same weapon do not stack).

Regular masterwork costs +150 gp for armour, armor check penalty reduced by 1

Superior masterwork costs +600 gp for armour, armor check penalty reduced by 2, maximum dexterity bonus increased by 1 and spell failure chance reduced by 5%; however superior masterwork armour has to be fitted to a particular wearer and will not give its additional benefits to wearers of significantly different height, weight or shape.

(No Supreme masterwork for armour, as it doesn't seem feasible to me to reduce the effects of bulky armour by that much).

51 to 100 of 191 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Making magic items rare ... a point of Con to create? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.