Inherent Bonuses and Magic Items

[Obryn]

Hey, all!

I'm wondering about the interaction between inherent bonuses and magic items (as the subject line might have led you to believe). In short, do you just use the stacking rules as normal, or does a held magic item override any inherent bonuses in some way?

I'm thinking it's the former, so, near as I can tell, if you're using a magic item which has a lower enhancement bonus than your inherent bonus, your inherent bonus will override it.

I'm assuming that this also means that you can still use any of the magic item's properties if you do so, but the magic item still has its "real" bonus for the purpose of anything that references it.

So, under this theory, a 12th-level character could use a Level 4 +1 Avalance Hammer, charge with it for 2[w], get +3 attack and damage, and 3d6 crits for a very reasonable price. Which doesn't quite seem fair to me, but I'm willing to go with it.

Thoughts?

-O

 

[666Sinner666]

The idea of inherent bonuses is to allow a campaign with NO magic items. Not sure why you would want to "mix and match" so to speak. Are you going for a higher power campaign? Or just fiddling with the character builder?

 

[Incenjucar]

Because there are some items with powers that don't increase with item level (Feyswarm staff, etc), which can be abused by cheapskates, I would tend to assume that any attack or defense can only benefit from the magic item OR the inherent bonuses. However, I work under the assumption that inherent bonuses are not strictly natural, and that weak magical items disrupt those inherent bonuses so that they cannot be used in conjunction.

 

[fba827]

I may be misunderstanding something because, admitedly, I never looked very closely at it all. But ...

For attacks and damage modifier, use the higher of inherent modifier or the weapon's modifier (i.e. they do not stack, use the better of the two)

If the weapon has some property or power that is keyed off the weapon's enhancement bonus, then you use the weapon's enhancement bonus (and not inherent bonus). I think this includes crits since that's usually written as +d6 per enhancement bonus of the weapon (they still don't stack, but in this case, it's entirely the strength of the weapon that matters and inherent bonus doesn't apply)


Though, again, I didn't read inherent bonuses very carefully, so it may have some clause that changes what i wrote up above (for instance, maybe on crits you can use the better of your inherent bonus or the weapon's enhancement bonus, etc).

 

[Daern]

I would probably not allow players to buy magic items if I were using inherent bonuses. It is a good issue to bring up. I hadn't thought of it. What are the rest of the assumptions that go along with the inherent "math fix"?

 

[Incenjucar]

I have no problem combining inherent bonuses with magic items, using that "one or the other" rule, but I do significantly reduce resources to compensate, as per Dark Sun. This allows people who really want to use magic weapons to do so, but to also still be able to use normal weapons just as easily. For me, inherent bonuses are mostly about not penalizing characters that use multiple or a variety of weapons.

 

[Larrin]

The bonuses in general do not stack, they are both enhancement (certainly they should be), so to hit and damage use the higher of the two. Critical damage is not addressed to my knowledge, but i think counting the higher of the two as the "per plus" is a legitimate ruling. I wouldn't let the inherent bonus do much else though (items that grant a bonus 'equal to enhancement' i would keep at the bought value)

Why mix the two? You can also use inherent bonuses when you want characters to care less about weapon/armor/neck items, ie they don't NEED to spend lots of money to keep their axe up to level, so they can get neat rings, potions, wondrous items. I've experienced this in a campaign and didn't think it was a bad idea at all. In this case you got 1d6 per plus on a critical even without a magic weapon.

The real question is: If your +3 enhanced player has a +1 weapon, should it be worth his time worth his time to use it? Do you want them using magic weapons at all? Only the DM can answer this, since he made the call to allow both inherent bonuses AND magic weapons. If you want them to have magic weapons, then you need to adjust to the fact that they can buy cheap +1 weapons and maybe get some good lifetime benefits from this; this should be taken into account with enemies, treasure, and future magic items. If you don't want to forbid the existence of magic items but feel that if the players want a +3 axe with extra sauce they should pay +3 prices, then announce that using a +1 item gives a +1 bonus, even if its lower than what you'd get with a normal axe. Kinda silly, the PC being better with a crappy stick than an +1 enchanted stick, but its certainly a choice.

If you want things simple and straight forward, don't mix magic weapons/armour/neck items with inherent bonuses.

 

[GameDoc]

Seems to me you could use the inherent bonuses and just remove item bonuses to attacks, defenses, or damage. This would only eliminate your basic magic weapons, armor, and amulets . Anything that has another power or benefit is still viable.

You'd still want to keep basic magic weapons with the "thrown" property since they return to the thrower.

 

[Obryn]

The idea of inherent bonuses is to allow a campaign with NO magic items. Not sure why you would want to "mix and match" so to speak. Are you going for a higher power campaign? Or just fiddling with the character builder?

Er.... No, it's not. Dark Sun, for example, doesn't assume PCs have no magic items. Inherent bonuses are perfectly usable in a magic-poor campaign, or even in a full magic campaign if the DM doesn't want to worry about the numbers arms race.

I would probably not allow players to buy magic items if I were using inherent bonuses. It is a good issue to bring up. I hadn't thought of it. What are the rest of the assumptions that go along with the inherent "math fix"?

Oh, there's no purchasing other than basic healing poultices. But I have been giving out occasional magic items for big rewards.

For attacks and damage modifier, use the higher of inherent modifier or the weapon's modifier (i.e. they do not stack, use the better of the two)

If the weapon has some property or power that is keyed off the weapon's enhancement bonus, then you use the weapon's enhancement bonus (and not inherent bonus). I think this includes crits since that's usually written as +d6 per enhancement bonus of the weapon (they still don't stack, but in this case, it's entirely the strength of the weapon that matters and inherent bonus doesn't apply)

Per the DSCS's section on inherent bonuses, you get crit d6's based on your inherent bonuses, too.

Otherwise, yep, that's how I read the rules.

In the end, yeah, since nobody's buying or making magic items, I think I'll just live with it. It's not really a big deal, I suppose!

-O

 

[DracoSuave]

Actually, if you actually look at the sections of the DMG2 that suggest inherent bonuses, there's a lot more going on and being asked of you than 'Simply add in bonuses.'

Bear in mind, it being a variant rule, nothing involved is mandatory, but everything is strongly suggested; Instead of weapon powers, you should be granting the players boons, grand master training, etc. Essentially, inherent bonuses, in conjunction with boons, form a basis to completely replace magic weapons, armor, and neck slot items.

On top of this, you're also supposed to alter treasure parcels to accomodate this change. If you give them a boon OR magic item that combines with their inherent bonus to form an upgraded version of that item, you're totally within your rights to count that as a higher version of that item for the purposes of item treasure.

The system of inherent bonuses and boons requires a little more work to balance... it's a variant rule for a reason. But they're supposed to be taken together. You're not supposed to use inherent bonuses as a way to circumvent the treasure system, and as a DM you are responsible for keeping control over this.