I just started a new playtest campaign with a group of players who have varying levels of experience with different editions, and I can't wait for them to find their first magic items. 4e made magic equipment part of the character building process, and that has its place, but I'm really looking forward to magic equipment feeling like a fabulous prize again, rather than a build component you select from a menu of options. I like being excited about the prospect of the party finding treasure again. The absence of item scaling is part of what makes that possible.
"When Friday comes, we'll all call rats fish." D&D Outsider
TheLyons mentioned the Weapons of Legacy in passing. This is something that I was thinking about. It seems to me that the designers took a base idea from that and made some tweaks so that the following doesn't always happen. for example, a player gets a +1 weapon fairly early in their career, tosses it aside a few sessions later for the +2 weapon that the DM had to provide in order for the character to be happy (and continue to be able to handle the monsters in the encounters). Instead the character cherishes the weapon (or other item) because as the character grows so does the weapon/item and it becomes exciting to them. One of those "I better hold onto this because who knows what it's gonna do next" type of things. Anyway, I absolutely love the concept and can't wait for them to flush it out a little more.
I would like to see them take it further too for those who want it. I liked the idea of Weapons of Legacy in 3.5e, but the implementation I wasn't a fan of. You had to burn a few feats to get the most out of your weapon.
I've been thinking about my players and things I might give them. It's an idea, but one I want to see how it goes. I'll make sure it doesn't get out of hand for their level, and if I regret adding a feature to their weapon, you know what, it ran out. They'll know this beforehand, some features will be permanent others not so much, and you never know which is which until its gone (if ever). What they won't know is I'll be basing that off of if they are overpowered or not.
Here are some ideas I am kicking around for my playtest group over the course of their careers.
Healer cleric - I am thinking of making his holy symbol his item of power. Particularly devout (and fated) followers get extra powers from their holy symbol. I was thinking of giving it powers over time such as light equal to a torch at will, extra range to a small number of heal/buff spells a day, ability to cast a few heal/buff spells at range a day, extra few damage to undead when casting cure spells on them, and the ability to cast one buff spell a day that normally has a range of personal instead on an ally only it lasts half as long.
Melee Fighter - I am thinking of making his weapon his signature piece. It will start a sword, and eventually it can turn into a mace. Later, it can also turn into a dagger. I want it to eventually get the ability to add many damage types, at the least fire, ice and lightning, but only a small percentage of the total damage will be of this type if it is at will. I want to also give it the ability much later on to act as a dancing weapon, but only X rounds per level, at the most 1 round for every 2 levels, maybe less.
That's just the two I've thought about a little. I have a rogue and wizard in the group too. I am thinking the wizard's spellbook for his signature piece and for most wizards signature piece if they ever get one. Some wizards bond with their spellbooks more than others, especially the "fated", aka, the PCs (and a few NPCs of all alignments). I'm still thinking about the rogue. His weapon seems like an obvious choice, but its a little too obvious and that's just not roguish (unless you are fighting based mainly, and he's not). This player is more concerned about stealth and the like, and if he can end an encounter without fightint, he will. Perhaps his boots?
Do you have an opinion on what campaign settings should be printed in D&D Next? If so, please cast your votes in this poll!
TheLyons mentioned the Weapons of Legacy in passing. This is something that I was thinking about. It seems to me that the designers took a base idea from that and made some tweaks so that the following doesn't always happen. for example, a player gets a +1 weapon fairly early in their career, tosses it aside a few sessions later for the +2 weapon that the DM had to provide in order for the character to be happy (and continue to be able to handle the monsters in the encounters). Instead the character cherishes the weapon (or other item) because as the character grows so does the weapon/item and it becomes exciting to them. One of those "I better hold onto this because who knows what it's gonna do next" type of things. Anyway, I absolutely love the concept and can't wait for them to flush it out a little more.
It sounds good in theory, and since the playtests only last a short time it seems to work incredibly, but IMO this is a system that's going to end up falling flat on it's face long term.
There's a major problem with this sytem, indirectly introduced by bounded accuracy. It reduces the excitement of loot. If I find a items that grow with me over time, what is it that's going to be generated by loot that's going to excite me? At some finite point in more extended campaigns, probably a very early point, I'll stop caring what's in the treasure hoard because I'm not going to find anything that helps my character. It all just becomes some ever increasing number I put on a sheet of paper that doesn't have any real use, because I'm not going to be trying to find a magic item to buy either.
Sure, we can do as a poster earlier noted. Collect a sword of fire, a sword of frost, a sword of acid, but then that becomes very rote. Every campaign becomes: Collect your element weapons, done. Sure, they can have random powers, and that's not a bad thing, but there's limited progression in what you've found.
At some point, it's very possible that Players will cease to care about what loot they find from an encounter, and may even stop searching for loot. If a player can't obtain a sword that's obviously better than the one they have, will they bother to search that weapon rack? If there's nothing to gain but some additional gold they can't really use, because there aren't obviously better items, will they risk death and dismemberment doing a side quest to kill a dragon?
Perhaps they have some as yet hidden component of this system that they'll roll out, but at present, I fear this system is ultimately going to be harmful to the game as it currently looks to me like it'll end up killing the excitement of loot.
TheLyons mentioned the Weapons of Legacy in passing. This is something that I was thinking about. It seems to me that the designers took a base idea from that and made some tweaks so that the following doesn't always happen. for example, a player gets a +1 weapon fairly early in their career, tosses it aside a few sessions later for the +2 weapon that the DM had to provide in order for the character to be happy (and continue to be able to handle the monsters in the encounters). Instead the character cherishes the weapon (or other item) because as the character grows so does the weapon/item and it becomes exciting to them. One of those "I better hold onto this because who knows what it's gonna do next" type of things. Anyway, I absolutely love the concept and can't wait for them to flush it out a little more.
It sounds good in theory, and since the playtests only last a short time it seems to work incredibly, but IMO this is a system that's going to end up falling flat on it's face long term.
There's a major problem with this sytem, indirectly introduced by bounded accuracy. It reduces the excitement of loot. If I find a items that grow with me over time, what is it that's going to be generated by loot that's going to excite me? At some finite point in more extended campaigns, probably a very early point, I'll stop caring what's in the treasure hoard because I'm not going to find anything that helps my character. It all just becomes some ever increasing number I put on a sheet of paper that doesn't have any real use, because I'm not going to be trying to find a magic item to buy either.
Sure, we can do as a poster earlier noted. Collect a sword of fire, a sword of frost, a sword of acid, but then that becomes very rote. Every campaign becomes: Collect your element weapons, done. Sure, they can have random powers, and that's not a bad thing, but there's limited progression in what you've found.
At some point, it's very possible that Players will cease to care about what loot they find from an encounter, and may even stop searching for loot. If a player can't obtain a sword that's obviously better than the one they have, will they bother to search that weapon rack? If there's nothing to gain but some additional gold they can't really use, because there aren't obviously better items, will they risk death and dismemberment doing a side quest to kill a dragon?
Perhaps they have some as yet hidden component of this system that they'll roll out, but at present, I fear this system is ultimately going to be harmful to the game as it currently looks to me like it'll end up killing the excitement of loot.
The problem with this argument is that magic weapon progression is ultimately down to the GM. Bare in mind that not every magical item is included in the playtest, and the playtest even gives you some vague guidelines to create your own magical weapons / armor.
In terms of losing interest in magical items... that can be applied to previous editions. As soon as you find a +6 weapon, you lose interest immediately; you've no need to care about any other magical weapons besides what is considered your "Best in Slot" based around your build (4E frostcheese anyone?)
In Next item progression is still there. Just not in the usual conventional manner. Let me elaborate with an example;
A fighter finds a normal +1 longsword, a nice start. He then finds a +1 Dwarven longsword that can take more punishment (assuming in this case you play broken equipment rules) He then finds a +1 Elven Longsword that's lighter, so he has a choice or, ultimately, keeps both. He then finds a +1 Dwarven Greatsword, so now he can choose to go longsword or greatsword. He then finds a +1 Giant Greatsword that does extra damage to undead. He then finds out that his +1 Elven Longsword can be attuned to, which now becomes +2 and does more damage against Orcs. His Elven Longsword gets destroyed or somewhat lost, so he then must switch back to another weapon.
And so on, and so fourth. Ultimately the playtest packet does not outright state that weapons of +5 or +6 or whatever are nonexistent. Ultimately, it's down to your GM as to how he handles magical items, whether it be through this new system or the progressive +X system.
TheLyons mentioned the Weapons of Legacy in passing. This is something that I was thinking about. It seems to me that the designers took a base idea from that and made some tweaks so that the following doesn't always happen. for example, a player gets a +1 weapon fairly early in their career, tosses it aside a few sessions later for the +2 weapon that the DM had to provide in order for the character to be happy (and continue to be able to handle the monsters in the encounters). Instead the character cherishes the weapon (or other item) because as the character grows so does the weapon/item and it becomes exciting to them. One of those "I better hold onto this because who knows what it's gonna do next" type of things. Anyway, I absolutely love the concept and can't wait for them to flush it out a little more.
It sounds good in theory, and since the playtests only last a short time it seems to work incredibly, but IMO this is a system that's going to end up falling flat on it's face long term.
There's a major problem with this sytem, indirectly introduced by bounded accuracy. It reduces the excitement of loot. If I find a items that grow with me over time, what is it that's going to be generated by loot that's going to excite me? At some finite point in more extended campaigns, probably a very early point, I'll stop caring what's in the treasure hoard because I'm not going to find anything that helps my character. It all just becomes some ever increasing number I put on a sheet of paper that doesn't have any real use, because I'm not going to be trying to find a magic item to buy either.
Sure, we can do as a poster earlier noted. Collect a sword of fire, a sword of frost, a sword of acid, but then that becomes very rote. Every campaign becomes: Collect your element weapons, done. Sure, they can have random powers, and that's not a bad thing, but there's limited progression in what you've found.
At some point, it's very possible that Players will cease to care about what loot they find from an encounter, and may even stop searching for loot. If a player can't obtain a sword that's obviously better than the one they have, will they bother to search that weapon rack? If there's nothing to gain but some additional gold they can't really use, because there aren't obviously better items, will they risk death and dismemberment doing a side quest to kill a dragon?
Perhaps they have some as yet hidden component of this system that they'll roll out, but at present, I fear this system is ultimately going to be harmful to the game as it currently looks to me like it'll end up killing the excitement of loot.
The problem with this argument is that magic weapon progression is ultimately down to the GM. Bare in mind that not every magical item is included in the playtest, and the playtest even gives you some vague guidelines to create your own magical weapons / armor.
In terms of losing interest in magical items... that can be applied to previous editions. As soon as you find a +6 weapon, you lose interest immediately; you've no need to care about any other magical weapons besides what is considered your "Best in Slot" based around your build (4E frostcheese anyone?)
In Next item progression is still there. Just not in the usual conventional manner. Let me elaborate with an example;
A fighter finds a normal +1 longsword, a nice start. He then finds a +1 Dwarven longsword that can take more punishment (assuming in this case you play broken equipment rules) He then finds a +1 Elven Longsword that's lighter, so he has a choice or, ultimately, keeps both. He then finds a +1 Dwarven Greatsword, so now he can choose to go longsword or greatsword. He then finds a +1 Giant Greatsword that does extra damage to undead. He then finds out that his +1 Elven Longsword can be attuned to, which now becomes +2 and does more damage against Orcs. His Elven Longsword gets destroyed or somewhat lost, so he then must switch back to another weapon.
And so on, and so fourth. Ultimately the playtest packet does not outright state that weapons of +5 or +6 or whatever are nonexistent. Ultimately, it's down to your GM as to how he handles magical items, whether it be through this new system or the progressive +X system.
I agree that in previous editions a +1 longsword was pretty useless when you had a +3 longsword, other than sale value.
But with the example you illustrate, is this an improvement in extended play? In that example, the prime differentiating factor is that a couple of those weapons do extra damage versus a creature, which seems to me very reminiscent of Asheron's Call. I'm going to go ahead and assume that no one else played it extensively and explain...
In Asheron's Call, generally speaking one sword is equivalent to the next in it's base form (Since spells are ubiquitous, and I'm generalizing a little since things like damage are randomized). So you find a sword with maximum values, and give it one of several enchantments...
Armor Rending, Critical Hit, Critical Blow, Damage type rending, and/or creature type slaying.
Ultimately, a Sword using character in Asheron's call ends up carrying around about a dozen different swords (Two dozen if he's dual wielding), so he can switch weapons based on the creature he's fighting.
Your example seems to be leading in that direction, where instead of generalized weapons that are better across the board with one or two exceptions (Flame toungue, Frost), we have highly specialized weapons that are situationally better. I can envision melee characters all resting and pulling things out of a bag of holding that contains an arsenal equivalent in size to what an army might need.
Further, Asheron's Call's system was one in which you would keep the same weapon for many levels, originally you'd keep it for the life of your character. No one bothered to loot anything after awhile, because there was 0 chance of you finding anything that would be better, and nowhere to buy anything that was better than what you already had. Of course, that existed in previous editions, but it generally happened late in the game where this system seems to me to be similiar to Asheron's Call where it happens very early in the game.
I'm just unconvinced that this system is a healthy foundation, but we don't know the full implementation yet. I'm just worried that this could prove to be a bad path to walk from past experiences with systems that used situational weapons and/or had systems with little magic item progression.
I agree that in previous editions a +1 longsword was pretty useless when you had a +3 longsword, other than sale value.
But with the example you illustrate, is this an improvement in extended play? In that example, the prime differentiating factor is that a couple of those weapons do extra damage versus a creature, which seems to me very reminiscent of Asheron's Call. I'm going to go ahead and assume that no one else played it extensively and explain...
In Asheron's Call, generally speaking one sword is equivalent to the next in it's base form (Since spells are ubiquitous, and I'm generalizing a little since things like damage are randomized). So you find a sword with maximum values, and give it one of several enchantments...
Armor Rending, Critical Hit, Critical Blow, Damage type rending, and/or creature type slaying.
Ultimately, a Sword using character in Asheron's call ends up carrying around about a dozen different swords (Two dozen if he's dual wielding), so he can switch weapons based on the creature he's fighting.
Your example seems to be leading in that direction, where instead of generalized weapons that are better across the board with one or two exceptions (Flame toungue, Frost), we have highly specialized weapons that are situationally better. I can envision melee characters all resting and pulling things out of a bag of holding that contains an arsenal equivalent in size to what an army might need.
Further, Asheron's Call's system was one in which you would keep the same weapon for many levels, originally you'd keep it for the life of your character. No one bothered to loot anything after awhile, because there was 0 chance of you finding anything that would be better, and nowhere to buy anything that was better than what you already had. Of course, that existed in previous editions, but it generally happened late in the game where this system seems to me to be similiar to Asheron's Call where it happens very early in the game.
I'm just unconvinced that this system is a healthy foundation, but we don't know the full implementation yet. I'm just worried that this could prove to be a bad path to walk from past experiences with systems that used situational weapons and/or had systems with little magic item progression.
Sure enough I think the system is flawed in respect of lugging around your own personal armory, nothing that carry-weight number changes can't solve though, or even equipment weight. But, I think I prefer your way as opposed to +X stat scaling. The more I think about it, the more I believe that your argument would apply more so to the +X scaling that of the Next system.
I think the intent of saying that magic items are pure bonuses was to "free" DMs a bit to introduce those magic items however they wish. You can give party members weapons that scale with time, weapons that gain attunement, or just a progression of cooler weapons (a +1 sword, then flametongue, then vorpal...) or you can mix it up within one party (so the samurai unlocks the power of his ancestral blade while the treasure-hunter seeks out powerful relics on his travels).
The downside is that this gives the DM less guidance on how to balance encounters.
One thing I'm going to explore with my next game that lasts a while, whether it is Next or not, is really limiting the amount of magic items that the players find, but letting the players upgrade their items. So, instead of the players finding a new magic weapon in a dungeon, they might find an elemental forge, and they can throw a piece of equipment on there and improve it. Or if a player's weapon becomes important to his character and he has some character development, maybe the weapon will reveal new properties. I think I'm going to stick with +1 weapons for the most part and not improve them except in extreme circumstances - I have always liked properties more than + number anyways.
One experiment I'm playing with is an item a rogue player found in a previous game. He's a rogue and found a masterwork pick in Blingdenstone. Because it was boring, I said it wasn't enchanted but had him roll on the random charts to see if he found anything cool. He found it was a Pick of Song - so it was a masterwork pick of the bards of Blingdenstone, and over time had inherited their love for song. When he kills enemies with it, it reveals pieces of a legendary song to him. I'm going to have him keep track of enemies defeated, and if he ever reaches some arbitrary point I set, maybe it'll have revealed the entire song and I'll give it a new property. This is cool, because if all of that does happen maybe it would convince his character to take a level of Bard as a multiclass.
Sorry, that got long, but I like the way Next is taking it because I feel like it gives far more options than in 4th, and I was always frustrated with being forced to give out magic items in order for players to keep up.
The difference between a +1 weapon and Excalibur is not in its intrinsic power but in its history and it's that symbolic meaning to the people it belongs too. What that means is that the creation of a powerful magic item is not in an ever increasing power base but in how you weave that item into the storyline. If the item is one everyone sees as very important, just possessing the item makes the character shine that much more. "The One who pulls this sword from the stone shall be King." I dont think anyone cared what the sword did, just the possession of the sword made it very desireable.
