|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 10:44AM
#21
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm all for stripping the necessity of magic items to make characters just be able to play the game. In fact, I'd go farther and say that if a magic item doesn't add color and flavor to the game, we don't need it. The robe of useful items is great! The portable hole is awesome. The ring of sustainance is fantastic. These things don't so much give stat boosts as they inject a feel of wonder and fun into the game. Now yeah, a belt of giant strength is going to make you stronger and it should do that--but things that have +1 bonuses to saves, AC or attack/damage should be given a healthy dose of flavor to make them actually mean something or they're just another shiny ornament on the tree. Shield amulets are neat in that they form a magical forcefield around the character--but would be so much better if it was treated like a forcefield around the character first and a +1 to AC or saves second.
It just seems like so much game design is aimed at success in the dungeon first and foremost, at which point it's tried to be written as flavorfully as possible within those constraints...and it feels a little like cart before the horse thinking, and really the root cause of the whole "magic item christmas tree" issue.
Just going to say that I don't like the ring of sustainance. It is one of those items that falls into the world of either useless (no one cares about keeping track of food) or game breaking (keeping track of food is important). Otherwise I agree with you, just saying my opinion. Magic items are a lot cooler if they have an ability like flaming sword lights on fire converts damage to fire damage, no extra damage or to hit, casts light like a torch. (Yes I know the 4th ed does this, but it also requires you to have it to keep up).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 10:48AM
#22
|
Date Joined:
Feb 15, 2010
|
I agree with the intent the OP is stating and I agree with many that the best way to do this is to remove the need for +x to attack/defense as part of the characters advancement track, build the math into the character classes.
This way you can make magic items that have cool effects and give the player an edge but that the (perhaps temporary) removal of does not make the heros unable to be heroic. There would still be a need to balance all magic effects but thats true already. This system would work equally well in a low, middle or high magic setting.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:01AM
#23
|
|
|
Balance the game such that characters are balanced against appropriately levelled threats based on their abilities and stats alone.
...
In short, magical gear should be an edge, and not a requirement to stay relevant.
...
update: ... I just don't want it to be required just for my character to remain useful. I want the balancing to be done before magic items are tacked on, with those items just being an additional edge. The mathematics of the system should not require them.
This seems contradictory to me. If something is giving you an "edge", it's having an effect on the balance of the game.
I think magic items *have* to be figured into the balance. A 5th-level character without an "edge" can face 5th-level challenges, but a 5th-level character *with* an edge can face 6th-level challenges (or higher, depending on how much of an "edge" the character has).
On a related note, I don't even begin to understand the logic of people who don't want magic to be able to affect attacks and/or defenses. That would be taking magic completely away from the fictional magic system(s) that inspire it in the game.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:08AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
That was what I liked about the Iron Heroes variatn rule system - it was all about the man, not the sword.
4E's treasure just doesn't feel like treasure any more. It is one part of 4E that annoys me.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:21AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Feb 10, 2007
|
Why? Why should the DM have to do that if the game can just be balanced for it in mind? Not all DMs are experienced enough to be able to adjust the game's balance like that on a whim, you know.
Think about this for a second. If the game is designed where a DM has to give his players level appropriate gear all the time, he spends too much of his time digging around in the lists trying to find stuff to give the players. This certainly isn't going to help a new or inexperienced DM, it's going to overwhelm him. I know I hated it. Instead of writing dungeons I wound up tying to keep my game from getting unplayable. (It didn't help that fights took so long nothing else ever got done).
Another aspect of this approach is that there is never any really cool items available because really cool stuff breaks the carefully orchestrated supply of gear needed to keep up with the increasing difficulty of the things they fight.
Once the player gets loose in the treasure chest there's nothing for the DM to do but throw thousands upon thousands of coins at them so they can do it again between adventures. It's just plain dumb. Every item in the book looses it's specialness. There is really nothing to adventure for. The chase for the next level up becomes the reason for playing and that gets old fast.
Somewhere along the line the whole reason for playing the game has gotten lost or twisted. Some people actually play the game to have fun with their friends, some of us have chosen to take on the more difficult role of dm to give our friends the chance to play the game. When the people who supply the materials we use decide that the tried and true methods aren't good enough things get broken.
It's time for them to get fixed. If the fixing isn't good enough then the game is doomed.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:22AM
#26
|
|
|
The one issue with magic items is a balance against monsters. If you balance monster stats against PCs with magic items, then the magic items are required (like in 4E). If you balance monster stats against PCs without magic items, then when a character gains a magic sword, then he or she is more powerful then a monster on the same level.
It's the reason I'm proposing to make all magic items temporary just for one or two levels. When a character gains a magic sword for complete a hard quest, then he or she gains it as a true reward for one or two levels (in fact, for the next adventure). Character will have easier life for a moment, and the magic item will feel like a true reward. And when the character completes the next adventure, the magic item becomes just a common item (a common sword, for instance). Now the character needs to be a true hero once again to gain another magic item!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:27AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Feb 15, 2010
|
The one issue with magic items is a balance against monsters. If you balance monster stats against PCs with magic items, then the magic items are required (like in 4E). If you balance monster stats against PCs without magic items, then when a character gains a magic sword, then he or she is more powerful then a monster on the same level.
It's the reason I'm proposing to make all magic items temporary just for one or two levels. When a character gains a magic sword for complete a hard quest, then he or she gains it as a true reward for one or two levels (in fact, for the next adventure). Character will have easier life for a moment, and the magic item will feel like a true reward. And when the character completes the next adventure, the magic item becomes just a common item (a common sword, for instance). Now the character needs to be a true hero once again to gain another magic item!
Your idea might work well as a optional rule for low magic settings but many players want thier own "excaliber" and to be honest I do to, also the concept of magic items as part of your characters "inventory" is too iconic for the devs to mess with too much.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:31AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Feb 10, 2007
|
The one issue with magic items is a balance against monsters. If you balance monster stats against PCs with magic items, then the magic items are required (like in 4E). If you balance monster stats against PCs without magic items, then when a character gains a magic sword, then he or she is more powerful then a monster on the same level.
It's the reason I'm propose to make all magic items temporary just for one or two levels. When a character gains a magic sword for complete a hard quest, then he or she gains it as a true reward for one or two levels (in fact, for the next adventure). Character will have easier life for a moment, and the magic item will feel like a true reward. And when the character completes the next adventure, the magic item becomes just a common item (a common sword, for instance). Now the character needs to be a true hero once again to gain another magic item!
I think it's easier to use a slightly more difficult monster or give the thing a +1 sword too.
It is only a +1 by the way nor an aditional + per 5 levels and the other junk that is added like stronger armor and more healing and items to buff strenght and intelligence and dexterity and to make you a better sneal and ... see where this is going. Why does a character need a +50 to hit and an armor class 42?
Once apon a time a giant spider was the size of a cat now they are the size of a house. Why? Because some genius decided that the only way to make them more dangerous was to use this brilliant new monster advancement system where the bigger a critter got the tougher it was.
It's way less unbalanced just to let the fighter have the damned +1 sword.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:46AM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2005
|
If the game is designed where a DM has to give his players level appropriate gear all the time...
I don't know why you're directing this premise at me, because I am suggesting no such thing. What I am suggesting is that DMs have the option of giving their players however much gear they want to give them.
Every item in the book looses it's specialness.
THIS IS WHAT I WANT. I don't want for magic items to be special. My character shouldn't be any more defined by its magic items than I am defined by my cell phone, car, television, computer, etc. The reason that I'm not defined by those things is because they're not special.
There is really nothing to adventure for.
That's absurd. Adventuring for magic items is and always was a waste of my time. I will never play a campaign where magic items are all that I adventure for, because that's boring. I adventure to be badass and save the world.
The one issue with magic items is a balance against monsters. If you balance monster stats against PCs with magic items, then the magic items are required (like in 4E). If you balance monster stats against PCs without magic items, then when a character gains a magic sword, then he or she is more powerful then a monster on the same level.
The solution is to make monsters easily scalable to whatever magic item level you desire for your campaign.
Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TMSpeaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Jan 18, 2012 - 11:50AM
#30
|
Date Joined:
Feb 10, 2007
|
Oh, then never mind.
|
|
|
