Community

StSteven wrote:

It is viable. You just don't like it. Kind of like the paladin. Both paladins and low magic are perfectly viable. High magic is viable without Magemarts too. I have done all three.

Negative. Because the system expects you to have these +x items, when you don't things that would normally be easy to moderate in difficulty are now kicking your asses back and forth across the dungeon. This assumes it is merely 'low magic' and not 'low magic for you, high magic for your opposition' or 'low magic as a smokescreen for power tripping'. In such cases, you obviously will have more and bigger problems than being around 3 CRs under par. But even the best case scenario kicks you in the crotch early and often.

Paladins are right around Fighter and Monk level, and for many of the same reasons. In other words, they suck miserably and are not viable. They aren't even worthwhile dips because you still get screwed by the Fighter sans bonus feats clause. Their only worthwhile ability is Cha to saves, which is quite good but does not a workable class make, especially when considering levels 3-20.

High magic without mage marts... that just doesn't make any sense.

Compare to simple good alignments which I don't like, and believe the entire concept of goodness is critically flawed but that does not extend to the entire thing being unworkable. It just means you'll be constantly exploited by anyone of a mind to do so, because that's the reaction such generosity and selflessness provokes. Kinda the same thing, but still a decent enough example of opinion to compare and contrast to facts so you can see the difference between 'I don't like it' and 'It sucks'. :P

StSteven wrote:

While disagreeing with almost all that is in that post, I will only say that low-magic (i.e. no mage marts and not a large amount of magical treasure) can still get the players all the + items that the system is looking for. Melee types need +1 by level 3, +2 by level 6, +3 by level 10 to 13. Rings of protection are needed in a similar manner. Cloaks of resistance, bracers of armor, and probably some stat boosts at higher levels are needed in the same way. There is no need to have a +3 flaming keen bastard sword by level 9. Just because the DM controls the flow of magic items doesn't mean that players can't handle appropriate EL's. They may need tactics, preparation, and the ability to know when to flee. How many freakin' magic item slots are there? You don't need to have them all filled in to keep up with the system.

A 50k item when you're only supposed to have... 36k, was it? Um, bad example?

Sunic_Flames wrote:

A 50k item when you're only supposed to have... 36k, was it? Um, bad example?

Umm...a bit of sarcasm...maybe...you think...And it isn't far off...

runestar wrote:

This statement does not make sense. Tactics is something every party will use, regardless of whether they are optimized or not.

OK...insert the word good (man...I thought that was obvious...no wonder you guys don't think you can stray from the guidelines).

runestar wrote:

You are expected to fill most, if not all of them. I believe that was one of the underlying game design assumptions behind monster crs - that PCs are adequately equipped for their wealth guidelines. For example, a balor would be deemed a fair fight against a party who has spent most of their money on magic items to equip themselves adequately, not a party who just carries all their money around in a bag of holding.

12 slots...I looked. Most of those slots will not help you against a balor. You need a good weapon, some AC boosts, maybe two protective things, and a utility item that may come in handy. Balors are not supposed to be easy. I find that my players, who couldn't optimize themselves out of a paper bag and lack any sort of tactical knowhow, can beat off CR appropriate monsters easily because of their gear. It takes the smarts out of the game. It is a crutch. Take away most of their magic items and their CR appropriate encounters become challenging (as has been pointed out that C stands for challenge, not chump). You MUST have a magic weapon to hit a lot of things. +1 does that. You can't tell me that hitting an extra 5% of the time is going to sway a battle, most of which don't last long enough for the 5% to show up. Fancy wands and staffs mean that a caster has more stamina (so to speak), it won't make or break an encounter that he is ready for. Wands and such used to be treasured "break glass in case of emergency" items, now they are the first thing that some characters reach for. It is not needed. The system does not require that everyone have 12 wearable magic items on them. That is just silly. Players assume that they need 12 because there are 12 places to put things. Ridiculous.

12 slots...I looked. Most of those slots will not help you against a balor. You need a good weapon, some AC boosts, maybe two protective things, and a utility item that may come in handy.

It is rare that every single item equipped will help them against a balor, but then again, a party won't consistently be fighting balors all day long.

Balors are not supposed to be easy. I find that my players, who couldn't optimize themselves out of a paper bag and lack any sort of tactical knowhow, can beat off CR appropriate monsters easily because of their gear.

Which is only right.

By definition, a cr20 foe is supposed to be a fair fight for an adequately equipped lv20 party. Meaning that they are expected to be able to steamroll right over the balor with only minimal losses (roughly 20%).

If you want a challenging fight, then throw something of a high cr. For example, if you want a climatic battle for your lv20 party, throw a cr23 or cr24 dragon at them, not a cr20 monster, and then complain that it is too weak, when it is supposed to be.

Take away most of their magic items and their CR appropriate encounters become challenging (as has been pointed out that C stands for challenge, not chump).

As stated above, the fight is not supposed to be anywhere as challenging as what you might have envisioned.

You MUST have a magic weapon to hit a lot of things. +1 does that. You can't tell me that hitting an extra 5% of the time is going to sway a battle, most of which don't last long enough for the 5% to show up. Fancy wands and staffs mean that a caster has more stamina (so to speak), it won't make or break an encounter that he is ready for. Wands and such used to be treasured "break glass in case of emergency" items, now they are the first thing that some characters reach for. It is not needed.

Every little bit adds up. A ring of prot+1 might seem insignificant, but what when you have a +5 armour, +5 ring, +5 amulet of NA and +5 shield? Does that +20AC seem more significant now? Likewise, the attack/damage bonus from a magical weapon is going to stack with other items for better effects.

The system does not require that everyone have 12 wearable magic items on them. That is just silly. Players assume that they need 12 because there are 12 places to put things. Ridiculous.

Well, a lv20 PC is expected to have 760,000gp worth of magic gear (as mentioned in the DMG). What else are you going to do with your money?

I now see what the difference of opinion is. You are saying that most encounters should be easy. This comes from the "everyone gets a trophy for participation" generation. I get it. Go on playing that game if you wish. I never liked it or the attitudes (and lack of preparation for life) it breeds. (Not that D&D is preparation for life or anything like that, it is just what is expected by some today.)

Don't go around putting words into people's mouth. I am simply reiterating the guidelines as delineated in the DMG, and my own personal experiences. And I certainly don't appreciate personal attacks and strawman arguments being thrown at me. Really. I thought we were all above that.

Nor did I say that fights had to be easy, just that it should be easy in my example because of the cr of the monster vs the EL of the party. In your case, you are needlessly making the balor a much tougher encounter than what the party ought to be facing.

The concept is similar to pitting say, a cr8 foe against a 10th lv party. Is your party powergaming just because they overcame it in 1 round without any injuries? Of course not. It is far too weak to pose a credible threat to them.

You say a balor should be a challenge. Yes, it can be. But at cr20, it is not expected to be a tough challenge to a lv20. But it can still be a difficult challenge to a lv19, 18 or even lv17 party. Is that concept so hard to grasp?