4e I've found does it rather well
bab, ac, saves and the like all progress at half level. So by level 10 you have +5 to AC, saves, and bab. Keep in mind 4e doesn't worry as much about full-attacks and the like.
Something else it does is give consistent level up stat bonuses. You still get the +1s to put into anything, but at certain levels you just straight up get a +1 to all your stats.
You would have to rewrite the system so that magic items are not needed , or bake them directly into the character so he gets certain bonuses as he levels up.
It is basically not worth the trouble unless you are getting paid to do it.
Buying the items lets the player choose what to want to boost in what order to a large extent. That level of customization is a feature of the game. Removing it won't go over well with many groups if you use the current rules system. If you try to change some rules that might not go over well either.
I enjoyed using an innate bonus system that I found on these boards (with a little tweaking) along with a houserule that the Big 6 items existed, but were extremely rare and valuable (i.e. not normally for sale). For weapons/armor I made it so that you couldn't buy enhancement beyond +1 and everything after that had to be in the form of properties.
Starting at 3rd level, all characters receive points when they level up, that they can spend on bonuses to stats and attributes. The total number of points by level is given in the table. For example, a 10th level character has 15 points to spend; on reaching 11th level, they gain an additional 3 points, for 18 points in all.
Level...Points...Max Bonus...Max Bonus (Skills)
01..........00...........+0...............+00
02..........00...........+0...............+00
03..........01...........+1...............+05
04..........02...........+1...............+05
05..........04...........+1...............+05
06..........06...........+2...............+05
07..........08...........+2...............+05
08..........10...........+2...............+05
09..........12...........+3...............+05
10..........15...........+3...............+05
11..........18...........+3...............+10
12..........21...........+4...............+10
13..........24...........+4...............+10
14..........28...........+4...............+10
15..........32...........+5...............+10
16..........36...........+5...............+10
17..........40...........+5...............+10
18..........45...........+6*.............+10
19..........50...........+6*.............+10
20..........55...........+6*.............+10
*Only for attribute bonuses.
Points can be spent on the following bonuses, at the given rates:
Weapon enhancement bonus (melee/unarmed, ranged, or natural attacks): 2 points per +1 bonus
Armor enhancement bonus to AC (none/light or med/heavy): 1 point per +1 bonus
Shield enhancement bonus to AC (one hand free/buckler/light or heavy/tower): 1 point per +1 bonus
Natural armor enhancement bonus to AC: 2 points per +1 bonus
Deflection bonus to AC: 2 points per +1 bonus
Resistance bonus to saves: 1 point per +1 bonus
Enhancement bonus to one attribute (taken separately): 2 points per +2 bonus
Competence bonus to one skill (taken separately): 2 points per +5 bonus
These points can also be spent on permanent minions, such as controlled undead, Eidolons, familiars, or animal companions. Any points spent this way affect all minions (playing that by ear, so it may be subject to change) that have been under your control for at least a day. When you spend points this way, the bonuses purchased only apply to the minions, not the player character.
When the characters have "down time" (being in an area lacking random encounters for a couple days) they may spend time training or practicing to reallocate their points as they see fit. This is an intensive process and as such it is all they are able to do during such a time.
I liked the set up as it made it more about how your character is awesome and less about how his gear is. It was also a fairly low wealth game as WBL was essentially built into the level up, so most of the magic items people had tended to be oddities and items people usually ignored because of Big 6 constraints. I would recommend giving it a try.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ive also used a sort of innate bonus system in my games. Almost all magical items are tied to choices characters make as they level with more powerful ones being available later. This keeps all the customization more or less in tact. And even offers a few additional options.
In addition the only items that can be crafted by normal means are potions, wands and scrolls. Permanent magical items are rare, and effectively priceless.
Magic items appear where it makes sense in the story, and are generally something a player keeps for their entire career. Money is almost entirely a story element, since while useful, scrolls/potions/wands are not a major portion of a characters power.
I am very happy with the results.
Ive also used a sort of innate bonus system in my games. Almost all magical items are tied to choices characters make as they level with more powerful ones being available later. This keeps all the customization more or less in tact. And even offers a few additional options.
In addition the only items that can be crafted by normal means are potions, wands and scrolls. Permanent magical items are rare, and effectively priceless.
Magic items appear where it makes sense in the story, and are generally something a player keeps for their entire career. Money is almost entirely a story element, since while useful, scrolls/potions/wands are not a major portion of a characters power.
I am very happy with the results.
Would you happen to have a write up for the system you use? I'd be interested in seeing another take on the idea to maybe steal for my own game.
Here's my system for detaching power from wealth (I've posted it before):
Between adventures, your characters reset to their Wealth by Level in magic equipment. You don't have to worry about where this equipment comes from - you could say that you have unlocked a new power in your old sword, for example.
You can also choose to use Inner Powers in place of magic items. An Inner Power costs the same as a magic item that would do the same thing. An Inner Power must have a weakness, to be negotiated with the GM, to balance out the fact that an item could be sundered or stolen. For example, I could say instead of having a belt of +4 Strength, I have an innate +4 Strength enhancement bonus that only applies if I eat as much food as ten men. The cost would be the same - the gold price is notional and comes out of your Wealth by Level.
Enemy magic items work in much the same way. You can steal an enemy's magic axe, but you'd have to empower it out of your own WBL.
You are restricted to spending no more than 20% of your budget on consumable scrolls and wands, since these can be replaced very easily. (Also, no more than 25% on AC-boosters - otherwise it's pretty easy for some characters to make themselves invincible.)
Actual treasure can then be spent on strongholds, charity, partying, etc.
Would you happen to have a write up for the system you use? I'd be interested in seeing another take on the idea to maybe steal for my own game.
I do in fact, though its an earlier draft. Not much but a few specific exclusions have been altered. It can be found here
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's an idea:
Step 1—Recognize that wealth progression is really just a second XP track.
Step 2—In accordance with that fact, change the currency of that progression from money to some sort of "point" (such as "mojo" or "XP type 2" or "numerical awesomeness"). PCs accumulate these points for overcoming obstacles, completing quests, or even for good roleplaying. You know, basically like XP type 1.
Step 3—Let PCs spend these points to acquire the mechanical effects/bonuses that they would get from the usual magic items, but the bonuses are inherent to the PC rather than tied to an item. For instance, a PC could spend 2,000 lollipop points to get a +1 enhancement bonus to all his weapon attacks (and count them as magical). He could later spend another 6,000 widgets to upgrade that to a +2, or to gain the ability to add 1d6 fire damage to every hit, etc. Most items can be translated just that easily, and others can be handled on a case-by-base basis.
Step 4—Watch as your world is freed from weird economical issues, the PCs are freed from weird imbalances like TWF requiring twice the price or a fighter's effectiveness plummeting if he can't use his primary weapon, your game table is freed from arguments between a player who recognizes that rust monsters are actually dealing level drain and a GM who thinks he's just acting entitled, and your narratives are freed from those weird "fate worse than death" issues where it's cheaper and easier to raise the dead than to restore lost gear, and your players are freed from the fear of being a 20th level fighter who would unquestioningly lose to a CR3 enemy if that enemy happens to be incorporeal and the Fighter20 lost his magic sword.
Hope that helps. :)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wealth and power cannot be decoupled unless wealth/power are effectively destroyed.
If your character gets a bunch of gold or magic items, do you really want the result to be, "great, now I've got some flavor, but I can't spend this gold or use this magic item to actually do anything in game?"*
*
Recognize that complaining about the Christmas tree effect is actually complaining about the presence of useful and effective magic items in the game. There are only two options to eliminate that:
1. Don't have any useful magic items. "You find a +3 backscratcher. No, you can't use it to kill more orcs, but it does scratch an itch really well."
2. Useful magic items do exist but the PCs can't get any of them. "You defeat the evil lich king, and get a few copper coins, and a pair of rotten boots. With luck, you won't starve to death before you reach level 19."
Now, you can make the game playable using either of those options by adopting a numeric bonus system as some others have suggested, however, as long as there are useful magic items in the world and players can obtain them with wealth or violence, you will still have the Christmas tree effect. The fighter who gets his +5 "items" from level based "no magic items" adjustment is still going to be stronger if he has a cape of the Montebank, a ring of freedom of movement, a helm of brilliance, a rod of rulership, a sash of the war champion, boots of speed, a ring of wishes, and a potion collection than if he doesn't have those items. And if he gets an item or two every time he adventures, he'll still acquire quite a collection of items by the time he's got a dozen adventures under his belt.
The reason that the Christmas Tree effect has been present in every edition of D&D is that getting cool magic treasure is actually a part of the fun of the game. The Christmas Tree effect is just a derogatory name that people coined to describe the results of that fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like there's a happy middle ground you could reach here. Where you have X amount of 'mojo' equal to your WBL, and you can bind items of value up to your 'mojo' and gain their benefits at one time. So money still has value for increasing your versatility of magic item options and purchasing consumables and whatnot, but PC (and enemy) strength from gear is fairly standardized.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wealth and power cannot be decoupled unless wealth/power are effectively destroyed.
If your character gets a bunch of gold or magic items, do you really want the result to be, "great, now I've got some flavor, but I can't spend this gold or use this magic item to actually do anything in game?"*
Things can do something in game without being a directly numerically beneficial item. For instance, a cloak of the arachnid is both flavorful and meaningful. In addition, if you decouple magic items and wealth, you can make each individual item meaningful. Frodo didnt turn sting in half way through his adventure for a sting +2. Its all about how you use those items. And if they are appropriately rare, you then only need to include items that would actually serve a purpose. You also dont have to destroy the power aspect, if you replace that power with something else (inherent bonuses players can choose from as they level), so the power curve remains untouched.
Recognize that complaining about the Christmas tree effect is actually complaining about the presence of useful and effective magic items in the game. There are only two options to eliminate that:
1. Don't have any useful magic items. "You find a +3 backscratcher. No, you can't use it to kill more orcs, but it does scratch an itch really well."
That isnt true at all. For instance, a free hand fighter in one of my games, discovered a magical sword, that sword was a rapier with the keen property. It had not +x attatched to it because that +x comes from elsewhere. But a keen rapier is still useful to a duelist stuff. And it was all the more meaningful because he kept it. For the whole campaign. And it remained useful.
Most people who want to deal with the christmas tree remove +x items entirely. They instead have items like a brooch of sheilding, a cloak of the bat, and all those other items that normally get completely ignored if they are in the belt, shoulders, head, amulet or ring slots.
It is possible to be useful without giving a numerical bonus to a specific statistic.
2. Useful magic items do exist but the PCs can't get any of them. "You defeat the evil lich king, and get a few copper coins, and a pair of rotten boots. With luck, you won't starve to death before you reach level 19."
Actually this frees dms to give as much or as little wealth as they like. Someon can be wealthy as a story element without having an actual mechanical advantage. If I want to be the adventurer son of the richest man in town, my dm has to explain how those millions of gp I have access to dont translate into powerful magical items in the normal rules. In a decoupled game, I can gain as much wealth as I want without throwing off the game. GMs can actually be more generous, and let players live lavish lives if the story calls for it, without players turning around and using that wealth to throw off the power curve.
Now, you can make the game playable using either of those options by adopting a numeric bonus system as some others have suggested, however, as long as there are useful magic items in the world and players can obtain them with wealth or violence, you will still have the Christmas tree effect. The fighter who gets his +5 "items" from level based "no magic items" adjustment is still going to be stronger if he has a cape of the Montebank, a ring of freedom of movement, a helm of brilliance, a rod of rulership, a sash of the war champion, boots of speed, a ring of wishes, and a potion collection than if he doesn't have those items. And if he gets an item or two every time he adventures, he'll still acquire quite a collection of items by the time he's got a dozen adventures under his belt.
Thats why items are not purchasable, and are rare, priceless and hard to get. In my system, a player can expect only a handful of items over the entire course of his career. And they will all be story appropriate, and generally designed with a specific character in mind.
If the players only encounter a handful of items over the course of their career, then no one will be loaded up with them. I think in my last game each player had 4-5 items by the end of their career, and many had a specific purpose, and consequently werent always in use.
The reason that the Christmas Tree effect has been present in every edition of D&D is that getting cool magic treasure is actually a part of the fun of the game. The Christmas Tree effect is just a derogatory name that people coined to describe the results of that fun.
It results in a certain kind of fun for some, and not fun for others. Obviously it is not for everyone, but it is not outrageous to wish that hte bulk of many characters ability did not come from their gear. And you can still offer rewards and treasure that has meaning via non-numerical items, that while useful, dont directly contribute to power.
And I have found at least, that the reduced frequency with which items appear has lead to the receit of each item to be all the more fun and exciting. Ofcourse everyone is entitled to play how they want, but the christmas tree effect isnt some kind of attempt to take away fun from some, it is an attempt to improve it for others.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things can do something in game without being a directly numerically beneficial item. For instance, a cloak of the arachnid is both flavorful and meaningful. In addition, if you decouple magic items and wealth, you can make each individual item meaningful. Frodo didnt turn sting in half way through his adventure for a sting +2.Wealth and power cannot be decoupled unless wealth/power are effectively destroyed.
If your character gets a bunch of gold or magic items, do you really want the result to be, "great, now I've got some flavor, but I can't spend this gold or use this magic item to actually do anything in game?"*
Nitpick
Its all about how you use those items. And if they are appropriately rare, you then only need to include items that would actually serve a purpose. You also dont have to destroy the power aspect, if you replace that power with something else (inherent bonuses players can choose from as they level), so the power curve remains untouched.
The items still affect the power curve if they are useful. The +0 keen rapier is a lot better than a +0 normal rapier--especially for a duelist. The cloak of the arachnida still confers a number of useful abilities and immunities that make a character with one more powerful than a character without such a magic cloak. Adventure long enough and your characters will still look like a Christmas tree even if their items a brooch of shielding, a cloak of the bat, and a +0 rapier rather than an amulet of natural armor, a cloak of resistance and a +3 rapier. And most players will still ditch the +0 keen rapier if the opportunity to get a +0 vorpal rapier pops up.
As to monetary wealth, even without the ability to buy magic plusses, I'd be disappointed in any player who can roleplay "the wealthiest guy in town" without actually managing to get a mechanical benefit out of it. What, he doesn't want to bribe anyone, threaten people (do you know who I am?) hire an army, or build a castle? So, what does he have the gold for then?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except according to WBL the PC should get ALL that wealth back by next level to spend again, and let's be honest, a wand will last most folks through their entire level, maybe they'll need 2 if it's a particularly heavy-use item (CLW wand).
Yet for some reason it is always recommended to use consumables sparingly, and the idea of a wondrous item of infinite CLW is always met with a great wailing and gnashing of teeth.
This is actually not true.
It is assumed that some of this treasure is consumed in the course of an adventure (such as potions and scrolls), and that some of the less useful items are sold for half value so more useful gear can be purchased.If you're actually at full WBL you tend to be somewhat over the mark, because the WBL chart assumes you'll have some consumable and some stuff you sell.
I once figured it up (and should do so again), but if you take the standard treasure values for an equal CR, multiply it by the number of encounters it needs to level you up, you'll actually end up quite a bit over WBL.
IIRC, I think about 15% of your income each level could be safely spent on consumables without falling behind to WBL curve, and in some case you could actually use consumables to get more out of your WBL with smart usage.
I should recheck it again sometime when I have time.
|
I am personally in love with Jiggy's idea, because it helps bring PCs back from being economic wrecking machines.
I acknowledge up front that I, and maybe six other people in the galaxy, care about this sort of thing, but it does disrupt my own sense of immersion every time I realize that my 17th-level wizard is walking around with a headband that is worth more than the nearest six villages and the hub city that they trade through. This has pushed me to look for alternative systems, and I like Jiggy's notion as much, if not more, than the one I just linked to.
I understand that getting cool loot is a big part of the fun for some players, but it is getting in the way of the fun for others (as the build-up to our next campaign locally is showing me). I'll be interested to see in Paizo has some notions in Unchained about that.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
However, there is an instance where the idea (both of them) may clash with our theoretic instance (or simply practice).
Under your idea, how would you handle a character utilizing a weapon that is stronger than he is (effective cost higher than remaining Mojo/lollipop/moneyxp)?
A level 1 rich character who inherited a Vorpal longsword or a ring of wishes (as we established the decoupling of wealth/power) is an example.Would the item be effectively downgraded, as it requires the character himself to grow stronger until they realize its true capabilities? Would they be flat-out unable to use them?
The idea is not simply to de-couple this power progression from money but also to de-couple it from items. So there's no such thing as "a vorpal sword".
Instead, your grandpa's sword is just your grandpa's sword. This might sound unappealing at first, but think about it:
In Pathfinder, if a Fighter1 picks up his grandpa's sword, then that sword needs to be level-appropriate (so, masterwork at best). Then, as the fighter levels, he needs a better sword, so he has to either relegate his heirloom to "flavor" status and do all his fighting with a level-appropriate weapon, or he needs to repeatedly spend lots of downtime having a crafter upgrade his grandpa's sword into not-really-his-grandpa's-sword-anymore so he can keep using it.
With the method I'm suggesting, grandpa's sword is just grandpa's sword. But because it never needs to be replaced or upgraded (since upgrades are attached to the character, not the item), he can keep wielding it throughout his career. And as an extra bonus, if he ever needs to conceal his identity and wield a different weapon, he can do so without gimping himself, because the ability to add +2 to attacks/damage and deal half to incorporeals and crit on a 17-20 with a longsword are all skills the fighter knows and can do with any sword he picks up.
"But wait!" you say, "If all items are the same, you can't have cool stuff like legendary weapons, like Excalibur!"
Actually, this system enables legendary weapons better than Pathfinder does. In Pathfinder, any given piece of gear is relevant only temporarily, and eventually has to be replaced. Therefore, Excalibur (or grandpa's ubersword, or both if grandpa's name is Arthur) has to either (1) appear only at the very end of the campaign when there's barely anything left to do, which sucks because you don't get to spend any real time with it; or (2) you'll upgrade past it eventually, making Excalibur not the least bit special at all.
But in a world where, on the whole, magic items just aren't a thing? Well, now you can throw in something like Excalibur with special, unique abilities, and the fighter will keep using it throughout the campaign because it exists completely outside of his actual power progression. You can even invent cool new powers for it, since you don't have to match a wealth progression. So maybe Excalibur bypasses all DR of evil creatures, or Grandpa's Ubercleaver lets you smite constructs x/day.
There is SO much creative freedom for legendary weapons when you break out of Pathfinder's magic item structure. Attach the expected power curve to the character, and then actual magic items can be rare and special again.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Under this system, extraordinary weapons are extraordinary not because they have more plusses than other weapons, but because they have peripheral abilities that can not be replicated by existingitemscharacter abilities.
Fixed that for you. ;)
Remember: Pathfinder is about getting a +1 sword; this revamp is about becoming a +1 fighter.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Under this system, extraordinary weapons are extraordinary not because they have more plusses than other weapons, but because they have peripheral abilities that can not be replicated by existingitemscharacter abilities.Fixed that for you. ;)
Remember: Pathfinder is about getting a +1 sword; this revamp is about becoming a +1 fighter.
Yep. I actually suggested this very thing in the ascetic character writeup I did for Mikaze way-back-when, and in that writeup (which basically is intended to be a vow of poverty that doesn't suck donkey-tails) there's a section about dispensing with gold and such entirely and just awarding ascetic points directly to PCs Final Fantasy style.
The items still affect the power curve if they are useful. The +0 keen rapier is a lot better than a +0 normal rapier--especially for a duelist. The cloak of the arachnida still confers a number of useful abilities and immunities that make a character with one more powerful than a character without such a magic cloak. Adventure long enough and your characters will still look like a Christmas tree even if their items a brooch of shielding, a cloak of the bat, and a +0 rapier rather than an amulet of natural armor, a cloak of resistance and a +3 rapier. And most players will still ditch the +0 keen rapier if the opportunity to get a +0 vorpal rapier pops up.
True, but its not the same core need in order to remain competant at your job that hte +x items represent. In addition, as mentioned, once they have them in my system, thats it, there isnt a new thing to get, they arent there to get. And there is a difference between power and versatility. My concern is that the math pans out. The +x items represnt someone's chances of success or failure. A clock of the arachnid doesnt affect that, it just offers other options. Its nice to have but it isnt neccesary.
And again you are sort of missing the point of rarity. There isnt going to BE a a succession of more powerful items. The party in my game is only going to encounter a handful of items over their entire career. They wont light up like a christmas tree because they wont have access to the number of magic items that would permit it. Someone that has 4 magic items at mid to high levels, isnt going to light up. They will instead have a few magical tricks up their sleave, but the remainder of their ability comes from the character themselves. That is what is important to me.
As to monetary wealth, even without the ability to buy magic plusses, I'd be disappointed in any player who can roleplay "the wealthiest guy in town" without actually managing to get a mechanical benefit out of it. What, he doesn't want to bribe anyone, threaten people (do you know who I am?) hire an army, or build a castle? So, what does he have the gold for then?
First of all they can, there is even a system to manage it. Its in ultimate campaign called the downtime system. Want to bribe someone? No problem. Buy or earn influence, spend it as mentioned in the rules. Poof, mechnical, and meaningful benefit in place.
What it wont do is determine your combat power. A bonus on some skill checks related to your position in the local city, not a problem, being measurably better able to stab/shoot/blast things because you have more money is the problem. Bill gates shouldnt be the worlds best soldier on account of his wealth.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another thing, if WBL is flat-out wrong when you pregen a character to be 10th level because your Paladin Fell (into a pit of lava), what IS the correct WBL that the new one should have when she shows up with all her gear? Apparently the paladin was supposed to have 62k gold, "some of which" would be potions and his wand of Heal Mount and "some of which" would be an evil sword he needed to sell. When the sorceress comes in, what percentage of her items need to be magical axes she can't use and has to sell at half price?
I think you might be missing the point. WBL is a little lower than the amount of wealth you will get playing the game because the designers assumed that you would not keep 100% of the wealth you acquired over the course of your career since some of it would have been invested into (used) consumables, some of it would have been sold for 1/2 value, etc.
Here's a quick example of what I mean.
Say you're level 1. You're supposed to amass around 1,000 gp by the time you reach 2nd level. On the standard speed and standard fantasy/loot levels, the following is true.
To go from Level 1 to Level 2 requires 2,000 XP
It takes 20 CR 1 encounters (400/4=100 XP/player) for a party to reach 2,000 XP
In 20 CR 1 encounters, you'll earn an average of 5,200 gp, and each member of the party's share will be 1300 gp.
However, from the course of 1st-2nd, a fair amount of that loot is expected to go towards consumables like acid flasks, alchemist fires, potions, oils, scrolls, partially charged wands, etc. It's also assumed that you might sell off the odd items that no one in the party wants. But you're given the benefit of the doubt that even if you spent a lot of your cash on stuff that you won't see tomorrow, you'll still have at least 1,000 gp at 2nd level.
If you actually wanted the entirety of the wealth that a PC is expected to amass over 20 levels of play, it would actually look more like this.
1st Level: +1,300 gp
2nd Level: +2,750 gp
3rd Level: +4,000 gp
4th Level: +5,750 gp
5th Level: +7,750 gp
6th Level: +10,000 gp
7th Level: +13,000 gp
8th Level: +16,750 gp
9th Level: +21,250 gp
10h Level: +27,250 gp
11h Level: +35,000 gp
12h Level: +45,000 gp
13h Level: +58,000 gp
14h Level: +75,000 gp
15h Level: +97,500 gp
16h Level: +125,000 gp
17h Level: +160,000 gp
18h Level: +205,000 gp
19h Level: +265,000 gp
20h Level: +335,000 gp
Total = 1,545,300 gp from 1st-21st level.
Do you all as DMs, really have this much trouble balancing encounters if you don't slave yourself to the wealth by level tables? I'm genuinely curious because i've never had this problem, or never to the extent that adding in an extra monster doesn't cure any balance issue.
If you insist on the existence of the big six as absolute must haves and a pc uses all of their wealth to acquire them... does your campaign really go all to crap if they get a pair of magic boots on top of it? or an adamantite dagger and a cache of potions?
I've seen a lot of posts about this, but I'm just not getting how it's such a dilemma for other Dms if they deviate from the WBL table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you all as DMs, really have this much trouble balancing encounters if you don't slave yourself to the wealth by level tables? I'm genuinely curious because i've never had this problem, or never to the extent that adding in an extra monster doesn't cure any balance issue.
If you insist on the existence of the big six as absolute must haves and a pc uses all of their wealth to acquire them... does your campaign really go all to crap if they get a pair of magic boots on top of it? or an adamantite dagger and a cache of potions?
I've seen a lot of posts about this, but I'm just not getting how it's such a dilemma for other Dms if they deviate from the WBL table.
It's my experience that WBL is better used as a sort of minimum actually. It's far more detrimental for PCs to be under-geared rather than over-geared.
WBL is, generally speaking, the amount of gear a character should have when they reach that level. Realistically they're probably going to have more, but it's an okay benchmark for how much cash you need to be properly equipped to deal with a variety of situations and problems.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you all as DMs, really have this much trouble balancing encounters if you don't slave yourself to the wealth by level tables? I'm genuinely curious because i've never had this problem, or never to the extent that adding in an extra monster doesn't cure any balance issue.
If you insist on the existence of the big six as absolute must haves and a pc uses all of their wealth to acquire them... does your campaign really go all to crap if they get a pair of magic boots on top of it? or an adamantite dagger and a cache of potions?
I've seen a lot of posts about this, but I'm just not getting how it's such a dilemma for other Dms if they deviate from the WBL table.
Discussions of sticking to WBL generally aren't about being off by just a little bit. Also, it's usually a discussion of giving too little treasure, not too much.
Discussions of WBL often center around players wondering why the party is 8th level with a single +1 weapon between them, and the GM saying "Magic is special! Magic-Mart is the WoW-devil!". Then the players say "Sure, but could we find more treasure? I mean, by WBL we're—" and then the GM says "ENTITLEMEEEENNNNT!!!"
Or something like that.
Nobody uses WBL as a strict boundary, but it's a good guideline to make sure you're at least in the general ballpark that the game expects.
It's my experience that WBL is better used as a sort of minimum actually. It's far more detrimental for PCs to be under-geared rather than over-geared.Do you all as DMs, really have this much trouble balancing encounters if you don't slave yourself to the wealth by level tables? I'm genuinely curious because i've never had this problem, or never to the extent that adding in an extra monster doesn't cure any balance issue.
If you insist on the existence of the big six as absolute must haves and a pc uses all of their wealth to acquire them... does your campaign really go all to crap if they get a pair of magic boots on top of it? or an adamantite dagger and a cache of potions?
I've seen a lot of posts about this, but I'm just not getting how it's such a dilemma for other Dms if they deviate from the WBL table.
That makes more sense to me, though I don't see why you can't just avoid throwing creatures at the party that have too high an AC to hit, or insurmountable DR, etc.. against a party that is "under geared"
CR, ECL, wealth by level tables, they all seem to be attempts to make encounters fit some sort of computerized formula, that just doesn't work the way it was intended.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you all as DMs, really have this much trouble balancing encounters if you don't slave yourself to the wealth by level tables? I'm genuinely curious because i've never had this problem, or never to the extent that adding in an extra monster doesn't cure any balance issue.
If you insist on the existence of the big six as absolute must haves and a pc uses all of their wealth to acquire them... does your campaign really go all to crap if they get a pair of magic boots on top of it? or an adamantite dagger and a cache of potions?
I've seen a lot of posts about this, but I'm just not getting how it's such a dilemma for other Dms if they deviate from the WBL table.
A little above or bellow, no its not a problem. Its when you significantly diverge, or a significant portion of that wealth doesnt go into useful items that there is a problem. Mind you this problem only starts getting particularly problematic around mid levels and only gets severe at high levels, where items can make a dramatic difference in the ability of a character to function.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
That makes more sense to me, though I don't see why you can't just avoid throwing creatures at the party that have too high an AC to hit, or insurmountable DR, etc.. against a party that is "under geared"
CR, ECL, wealth by level tables, they all seem to be attempts to make encounters fit some sort of computerized formula, that just doesn't work the way it was intended.
Let me give an example.
So I'm running a homebrew campaign, and my party was heading toward my next major "lair". But there'd been a lot of talking/exploring lately and not much action, and I knew there was going to be some more before things really got juicy, so I wanted to throw them an encounter.
But what to use?
I went to the Bestiary, looked up the "Monsters by CR" list, and skimmed until I found something a little under their level that was setting-appropriate (in this case, a desert) and threw a pair of them at the party.
It was waaaaay less work than crafting a custom monster to make sure it fit my party's unique capabilities. Don't get me wrong, I still meticulously hand-craft many of the encounters. But sometimes, I wanna throw in another one just to keep the excitement up, and just want to grab a pre-printed monster and go.
If I was too far off of WBL, or if the CR system didn't exist, etc; then I wouldn't be able to do that. Ever.
Again, not talking about 100% adherence. But being in the ballpark on WBL and looking at the Monsters by CR list makes my life WAY easier as a GM.
That makes more sense to me, though I don't see why you can't just avoid throwing creatures at the party that have too high an AC to hit, or insurmountable DR, etc.. against a party that is "under geared"
CR, ECL, wealth by level tables, they all seem to be attempts to make encounters fit some sort of computerized formula, that just doesn't work the way it was intended.
Let me give an example.
So I'm running a homebrew campaign, and my party was heading toward my next major "lair". But there'd been a lot of talking/exploring lately and not much action, and I knew there was going to be some more before things really got juicy, so I wanted to throw them an encounter.
But what to use?
I went to the Bestiary, looked up the "Monsters by CR" list, and skimmed until I found something a little under their level that was setting-appropriate (in this case, a desert) and threw a pair of them at the party.
It was waaaaay less work than crafting a custom monster to make sure it fit my party's unique capabilities. Don't get me wrong, I still meticulously hand-craft many of the encounters. But sometimes, I wanna throw in another one just to keep the excitement up, and just want to grab a pre-printed monster and go.
If I was too far off of WBL, or if the CR system didn't exist, etc; then I wouldn't be able to do that. Ever.
I have to disagree there, 2nd edition didn't have any WBL or CR, and DMs were perfectly capable of gauging an appropriate encounter.
I'd even argue that the methods used are still viable in pathfinder... ignore CR, look at the HD, AC, SR/saves and decide.. how hard will it be for my party to defeat this, and look at it's attack bonus and damage and gauge.. how quickly would this kill a pc in a corner.
Sure CR can give you a rough starting point.. but i still check the creatures stats, and then there is the encounter environment.
An encounter for a 4th level party against say... a group of gnolls in a desert is far different challenge wise then if you stick said gnolls up on a 20' cliff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adding to Jiggy's post, some classes have an easier time working with a low WBL than others. Warpriests and magi can self-buff their weapons, wizards really just need their spellbook, clerics get every spell in the game automatically and so on. Conversely a slayer really needs his WBL to buy the items that other classes can emulate with class features.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have to disagree there, 2nd edition didn't have any WBL or CR, and DMs were perfectly capable of gauging an appropriate encounter.
But the math was different in that system. Not every system is equally forgiving on encounter design/selection. You can't assume that what could easily be done in a game made by one company decades ago will automatically be feasible in a nominally-similar game made by a different company more recently.
I'd even argue that the methods used are still viable in pathfinder... ignore CR, look at the HD, AC, SR/saves and decide.. how hard will it be for my party to defeat this, and look at it's attack bonus and damage and gauge.. how quickly would this kill a pc in a corner.
Oh, I definitely still spot-check my monster selection. But there's a big difference between looking at a list of a couple dozen CR-appropriate monsters and making sure there's not a glaring issue (like energy drain for a 1st-level party), versus looking at the entire Bestiary.
I think you just don't realize how much you have memorized, and how much of your on-the-fly approach is made possible by YOU, not by the system, and in fact in spite of the system.
EDIT: Or what kestral said, below. That was the point I originally started to make, then accidentally sidetracked myself with my own anecdote. :/
You can also completely divorce money and magic items. Award them from nobles and other connections, let them be found, etc. but run your economy such that they're simply above purchase. It's basically what D&D 5E did. However, to preserve the interactions in the PF rules, keep them. Also, it creates an impetus where the players have to search for them rather than simply buying them. Let them still be created crafting feats, but really play up the crafting material acquisition. With all that, give your players millions of gold at level 1. They still can't twink their characters. Just remove the marketplace and not the magical.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's my experience that WBL is better used as a sort of minimum actually. It's far more detrimental for PCs to be under-geared rather than over-geared.That makes more sense to me, though I don't see why you can't just avoid throwing creatures at the party that have too high an AC to hit, or insurmountable DR, etc.. against a party that is "under geared"
It basically requires you to custom-build everything, or keep using lots of low level monsters. Sometimes you want to fight something other than orcs. If you're rising in levels but are behind in WBL, it complicates things further since the sorts of challenges that you can face become very limited.
For example, if you're sticking with creatures with low attack and/or AC bonuses, etc, you're tying them down to low-CR enemies. Meanwhile, if they face anything that's roughly around their level that isn't as reliant upon gear (such as wizards, druids, sorcerers, or even bards and clerics), or creatures with supernatural abilities it starts getting really crazy.
It suddenly requires you to evaluate every single NPC to make sure that there's nothing that will bring suffering and ruin to your PCs, while knowing good and well that the PCs who are less shackled are going to bring much ruin to them.
CR, ECL, wealth by level tables, they all seem to be attempts to make encounters fit some sort of computerized formula, that just doesn't work the way it was intended.
Actually it's not computerized, it's standardized, and it actually does work as intended. As in, it's a standardization insofar as understanding scale. Having a good scale helps GMs quickly gauge stuff.
You can also completely divorce money and magic items. Award them from nobles and other connections, let them be found, etc. but run your economy such that they're simply above purchase. It's basically what D&D 5E did. However, to preserve the interactions in the PF rules, keep them. Also, it creates an impetus where the players have to search for them rather than simply buying them. Let them still be created crafting feats, but really play up the crafting material acquisition. With all that, give your players millions of gold at level 1. They still can't twink their characters. Just remove the marketplace and not the magical.That also works, but the problem becomes knowing what the players want.
Some GMs handle that better than others. I've seen GMs ask players what kind of gear they wanted. I've seen GMs who feel that the Fighter who took Weapon Focus (Falcata) should use the magic +2 Butterfly Sword that an ogre dropped, despite the Fighter having no interest in it and their build (Two-Handed Fighter with WF/WS in two-handed weapons) not supporting TWF at all.
Since the marketplace (or lack thereof) runs both ways, either the PCs accumulate a pile of magic stuff that they don't use, or the world suspiciously drops exactly what they need.
Not that this can't be done, and can't be done well, but it creates some extra steps and might not fit everybody.
I would suggest a) have your players actively quest for the things they want (connections, dungeon delving, extraplanar stuff, etc.), b) use the magic items they do find (and don't want) as bargaining chips to get the things they do or to let them break them down toward crafting resource purposes, and c) use these reasons (among others) to keep generating adventures for your group for rocking good times. I won't deny the advice I'm giving inherently changes the style of adventures for a group. It's just one way to accomplish the goal in the OP.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
ExcaliburWhat's the plan for the macguffin sword that you go questing for?
No wait, that seems passive-aggressive; what's YOUR plan for the Macguffin sword that the party goes questing for? I can think of a few ways, but I'm curious what yours would be.
I'm not sure what you're asking.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure what you're asking.ExcaliburWhat's the plan for the macguffin sword that you go questing for?
No wait, that seems passive-aggressive; what's YOUR plan for the Macguffin sword that the party goes questing for? I can think of a few ways, but I'm curious what yours would be.
You've got a plot, the plot involves searching for a MacGuffin Sword of power (golden lance, holy avenger, Master Sword, whatever) somewhere on the way to completing the adventure.
How does the career of the sword-swinging warrior's sword abilities go through this plot?
I'm just curious what your preferred method would be.
Um... his abilities would progress just like they would progress if the story weren't about the Sword of Uberness? I mean, the Sword of Fabulosity probably has some special powers of its own that any wielder can use, but that would be 100% independent of the fighter's capabilities.
I'm still not sure if I completely answered your question, though. Feel free to rephrase and try again if I missed it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose the question would be two-fold:
1. How many options are there for the Sword of Uberness to be truly Uber when the standard numerical +X options (and presumably DR penetration as a function of that +X) are off the table?
Presumably at least some of the other party members are going to want some nifty weapons throughout the course of the campaign. And the sword swinger probably would like one too--"I'm the paladin, so I don't get any special weapon until 75% of the way through when I find the holy avenger" doesn't sound like a terribly attractive option. But if the rogue has a +0 keen rapier, the cleric has a +0 axiomatic mace, and the paladin was wielding a +0 flaming sword in the interim, what do you have to give to the sword of Uberness in order for it to seem Uber? The normal holy avenger is +5 in the hands of the paladin, sheds a magic circle against evil, and grants dispel magic at will. That serves to distinguish it from the +1 axiomatic mace that the cleric has, but the big difference is the +5. The magic circle and dispel magic are relatively minor abilities since they are easily duplicated by abilities that the party has possessed for seven to ten levels. So in order for the +0 holy avenger to not be underwhelming compared to the other options, it seems like it will need more special powers than it normally has in order to be uber.
The other alternative has traditionally been to rely on the numerical plus in order to represent Uberness. The sword of Kas, for example, was +6. Since you normally can't get there, it represented uberness even if it was not really that big a deal. But that option would seem to be completely closed off in the no numerical plusses system.
2. If you do significantly expand the powers, is there enough design space to be Uber without being overpowered?
When dealing with a sword of uberness, those two factors are ordinarily rather challenging (witness the abject failure of at least two legacy weapon design systems--I lost track and stopped paying attention after that). Do you think you have an answer with the reduced design space you have created?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Elder Basilisk—I don't think you're understanding the full scope of my suggestion. I'm not talking about just moving the "pluses" over from items to PCs and leaving the rest of the magic item structure intact. I'm talking about completely removing magic items as a central mechanic of the system and replacing it with character abilities.
So you don't have a +1 fighter wielding a flaming scimitar (for example), you have a +1 flaming fighter wielding any old weapon he pleases (scimitar or otherwise). Maybe it's ancestral, maybe it's what he first bought upon graduating fighter college, maybe his old sword got rust monster'd and he grabbed this one off a downed enemy. It doesn't matter, because gear isn't really a thing anymore.
As a result, the Sword of Awesomeness could have ANY ability, because the very fact that it's any different from any other weapon of its type AT ALL makes it inherently unique and special.
When the only difference between longsword A and longsword B is the power of the fighters wielding them, suddenly it becomes really easy to design That One Special Sword That's Actually Different.
Does that address your concerns?