General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
It always strikes me as amusing when folks say that the 1e X wouldn't be as good if it was being played now, little realizing that, included in the people that they are speaking to, are several folks who are playing 1e now and still find X to be good.
The nostalgia argument falls apart pretty fast when you realize that we are not always talking about what we did when we were 14. One of the specific design goals I had for RCFG was to put the Encyclopedia Magica into play within a system that didn't utilize THAC0.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
There's also such a thing as looking back on certain things and discovering a new appreciation for things you hadn't fully considered in the past.
__________________ Words of wisdom from Gary Gygax:
From my perspective wanting less in the way of rules constraints comes from being a veteran Game Master who feels confident that more good material comes from imagination and player interaction with the environment than from textbook rules material.
more words of wisdom:
Rashness and foolhardiness are harbingers of death, as is timidity, in such adventure setting.
Those that complain about real challenges might be better off playing Candyland with their little sister
First and foremost, munchkinism arose as a contemporary of the OD&D game. Nothing in the rules of that or any other version of the game was needed to make it flourish.
There is no relationship between 3E and original D&D, or OAD&D for that matter. Different games, style, and spirit.
[E]xperience has taught me that everyone has their own gaming preferences, and it is not a matter of "good" or "bad" in all, save in light of one's own preferences.
The 3E nerfing of Gaultlets of Ogre Power is an excellent example of ways that magic items were changed that I didn't care for.
The change in wands meantion earlier in the thread was another one.
I don't believe this is in any way related to nostalgia.
__________________ I play 4E, it's too bad we cannot discuss its flaws yet without flamewars and thread crapping.
I would agree that magic items in older editions (pre-3e) tends to be wackier, more flavourful and more "magical" than modern ones. I think there are several interconnected reasons for this:
1. Rarity. In older editions, magic items were much rarer. Whether you get any magic items were purely up to the DM. But from 3e on, the game expects a character of a certain level to have a certain amount of items in order to face the challenges expected at those levels, causing a proliferation of magic items in modern games.
2. Balance. Modern games are more focused on balance and thus DMs have to have an idea of how powerful a magic item is, whether by assigning a level or a GP cost value to the item. In order to do this, the magic item has to be analyze-able. You have to be able to assign values to the effects of said item. Once you can analyze and do math with the effects of an item or magic in general, mysterious magic quickly becomes applied science.
3. Rules vs. DM ruling. In modern games, RAW is king. The DM has to make his rulings consistent with the rules of the game, rather than make completely arbitrary rulings. So, in order to maintain game balance, magic items and effects have to be codified and presented in simple, concrete terms describing exactly what they do, to allow the DM to make quick, accurate judgements. The easiest way to do this is to standardize the magic items and their effects. And also because of the importance of RAW, the magic items have to be created to fit into the rules framework. If you have a magic item A that can cast three wish spells and if a wish spell can create a magic item of item A's power level, you get an abusable loophole in RAW. This is a much greater problem in modern gaming due to the RAW>DM paradigm.
4. Secondary Magic Market. In 2nd ed and older editions, magic was pretty much untradeable. I've never encountered the mage-mart idea until 3rd ed. But the existence of magic item trading in modern game means that a magic item has to be useful to the player or it gets traded for more useful items. Since magic items can now be analyzed and compared, it's easy for players to see which items are more useful or powerful. Wacky, oddball items are only used to overcome challenges in funny, memorable ways because the players didn't already traded it for something that would allow them to overcome the same challenge in a conventional manner. Would you rather have item A which is cool in theory but unreliable and might only be useful a few times sometime in the future, or trade it for item B which is more mundane in comparison but is reliable and always useful? Most players would choose item B. A lot of players want simple, reliable items that they know would add a certain amount of power to their character rather than complicated items with unreliable abilities that rarely gets used.
Last edited by nightwyrm; 12th December 2008 at 08:31 PM..
There's a magic item in Thunderspire Labyrinth that's cursed; it makes you fly into a rage when you are Bloodied.
Would a Belt of Giant Strength/Gauntlets of Ogre Power that changed your Strength score be unbalanced in 4e? I'm thinking maybe if you get them too early - the Fighter might like 25 Strength at level 1 - but if they are given out at a good level, maybe not. If the Gauntlets of Ogre Power give you 18 Str, and you find them at level 4-8 (level 8 item, maybe), it doesn't seem like it would ruin things too much.
I think that, since adjudicating strange occurances seems easier to me in 4e, strange items that do crazy things would be very cool in 4e. Let's say the Decanter of Endless Water is a level 5 item. If you open it in a tight stream, trying to push someone back: Standard Action, +7 vs. Fort, Hit = 1d6+4 damage and the target is Pushed 1.
__________________ "If people bring so much courage to this world the world has to kill them to break them, so of course it kills them. The world breaks every one and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good and the very gentle and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too but there will be no special hurry."
-- Ernest Hemingway, "A Farewell to Arms" Burning Empires:Boldaq Keep on the Shadowfell
I don't think it's quite what the OP is talking about, but I disliked Girdles of Giant Strength changing into Belts in 3e.
__________________ Words of wisdom from Gary Gygax:
From my perspective wanting less in the way of rules constraints comes from being a veteran Game Master who feels confident that more good material comes from imagination and player interaction with the environment than from textbook rules material.
more words of wisdom:
Rashness and foolhardiness are harbingers of death, as is timidity, in such adventure setting.
Those that complain about real challenges might be better off playing Candyland with their little sister
First and foremost, munchkinism arose as a contemporary of the OD&D game. Nothing in the rules of that or any other version of the game was needed to make it flourish.
There is no relationship between 3E and original D&D, or OAD&D for that matter. Different games, style, and spirit.
[E]xperience has taught me that everyone has their own gaming preferences, and it is not a matter of "good" or "bad" in all, save in light of one's own preferences.
I would agree that magic items in older editions (pre-3e) tends to be wackier, more flavourful and more "magical" than modern ones. I think there are several interconnected reasons for this:
1. Rarity. In older editions, magic items were much rarer. Whether you get any magic items were purely up to the DM. But from 3e on, the game expects a character of a certain level to have a certain amount of items in order to face the challenges expected at those levels, causing a proliferation of magic items in modern games.
If you consider published adventures this is actually false. If you go back and look at any of the 1st ed classics, you will find that players will be veritable Christmas trees after surviving those scenarios.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightwyrm
2. Balance. Modern games are more focused on balance and thus DMs have to have an idea of how powerful a magic item is, whether by assigning a level or a GP cost value to the item. In order to do this, the magic item has to be analyze-able. You have to be able to assign values to the effects of said item. Once you can analyze and do math with the effects of an item or magic in general, mysterious magic quickly becomes applied science.
4. Secondary Magic Market. In 2nd ed and older editions, magic was pretty much untradeable. I've never encountered the mage-mart idea until 3rd ed. But the existence of magic item trading in modern game means that a magic item has to be useful to the player or it gets traded for more useful items. Since magic items can now be analyzed and compared, it's easy for players to see which items are more useful or powerful. Wacky, oddball items are only used to overcome challenges in funny, memorable ways because the players didn't already traded it for something that would allow them to overcome the same challenge in a conventional manner. Would you rather have item A which is cool in theory but unreliable and might only be useful a few times sometime in the future, or trade it for item B which is more mundane in comparison but is reliable and always useful? Most players would choose item B. A lot of players want simple, reliable items that they know would add a certain amount of power to their character rather than complicated items with unreliable abilities that rarely gets used.
I think your point 2 by itself is not correct. Even when playing the older editions, we were able to assess which item was useful and which was not. Using the earlier mentioned Wand of fire as an example, some of its abilities provided just a much better bang for buck than other abilities, so only those got actually used. The math was always part of the game.
However, as you said, selling magic items was pretty much pointless. Hence we kept weak magic items around on the off chance that we might use them.
There's a magic item in Thunderspire Labyrinth that's cursed; it makes you fly into a rage when you are Bloodied.
I like that. 4e needs more cursed stuff. Magic is too safe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostSoul
Would a Belt of Giant Strength/Gauntlets of Ogre Power that changed your Strength score be unbalanced in 4e? I'm thinking maybe if you get them too early - the Fighter might like 25 Strength at level 1 - but if they are given out at a good level, maybe not. If the Gauntlets of Ogre Power give you 18 Str, and you find them at level 4-8 (level 8 item, maybe), it doesn't seem like it would ruin things too much.
I think that, since adjudicating strange occurances seems easier to me in 4e, strange items that do crazy things would be very cool in 4e. Let's say the Decanter of Endless Water is a level 5 item. If you open it in a tight stream, trying to push someone back: Standard Action, +7 vs. Fort, Hit = 1d6+4 damage and the target is Pushed 1.
I'd certainly allow Gauntlets of Ogre Power at the Heroic Tier...I don't think it would be particularly broken. Alternatively, you could really pull the stops out and add a Belt of Giant Strength but add considerable drawbacks...maybe your muscles bulge so much you can't wear armor at all. It would be interesting to see the Fighter wade into combat with a 26 Strength and 10 AC.
Nightwyrm, I agree with a lot of what you wrote, except for the first thing, here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightwyrm
1. Rarity. In older editions, magic items were much rarer. Whether you get any magic items were purely up to the DM. But from 3e on, the game expects a character of a certain level to have a certain amount of items in order to face the challenges expected at those levels, causing a proliferation of magic items in modern games.
A quick read-through of the classic 1e modules shows that magic items were anything but rare. Additionally, many creatures required +X weapons to even hit, so naturally many campaigns had to include magic weapons.
Now, if what you mean by "rare" is that buying magic items was much less common, I'll agree 100%. But they're easy enough to find in most classic adventures. (I'm kind of surprised how much treasure - magical and otherwise - there is in ToEE, for example.)
However, as you said, selling magic items was pretty much pointless. Hence we kept weak magic items around on the off chance that we might use them.
Not if you used the RAW and considered 1 gp = 1 xp. In fact, it is very worthwhile to sell off those unneeded items as soon as you can, once you get out of the dungeon.
A Gem of Seeing (to name an extreme example) nets you 2,000 xp if you keep it, but 25,000 gp+xp if you manage to sell it! That'll keep you in hirelings for years.
Heck, even a humble +1 sword only nets you 400 xp for keeping it, but 2,000 gp+xp for selling it.
Nightwyrm, I agree with a lot of what you wrote, except for the first thing, here...
A quick read-through of the classic 1e modules shows that magic items were anything but rare. Additionally, many creatures required +X weapons to even hit, so naturally many campaigns had to include magic weapons.
Now, if what you mean by "rare" is that buying magic items was much less common, I'll agree 100%. But they're easy enough to find in most classic adventures. (I'm kind of surprised how much treasure - magical and otherwise - there is in ToEE, for example.)
-O
Ah, I was unaware of that since my old 2nd ed group never used any module. I think I got a +1 sword after 7 levels....anyways, maybe rare isn't the correct term. What I do mean is that getting magic items in older editions were completely up to the DM. There was no wealth by level tables or stuff like that. If the DM didn't want you to have anything, you don't get jack and there isn't anything anyone can do about it. Thus, anything you get was valuable and precious....or maybe my old DM was just a meanie...
Anyways, another thing that comes to mind is that there is usually not a alot of duplicate items in the party while playing in older editions. The DM might not like to give out duplicate items and there's no mage-mart, so if you have a cloak of resistance, you're probably the only one in the group that have a cloak of resistance. This makes it feel that your cloak is a unique item. In 3e and later, everyone buys a cloak of resistance if they're not using the slot for something more important.
Last edited by nightwyrm; 12th December 2008 at 09:15 PM..
Same here. My groups 4e campaign is still quite new, we're still clearly in the "learning the system" phase. But once we get more comfortable, I'm sure the DM will begin deviating more from the written rules to produce the desired level of "WTF just happened?".
I mean, the seeds are already sown. My PC is running around his home city with an unbreakable wooden box containing a very small god stuffed into his codpiece.
I'm sure something odd will come of that, mechanically and otherwise.
If the DM didn't want you to have anything, you don't get jack and there isn't anything anyone can do about it. Thus, anything you get was valuable and precious....or maybe my old DM was just a meanie...
Something about this really, really appeals to me (and i'm not a meanie). I can appreciate the level of balance built into 4e, but when i'm "expected" to hand out items of a certain power level at a certain time, well, it just reinforces the gaming aspect of the game and reduces the fun factor. For me, as DM. I don't think players look at it like that. I really have no problem handing out magic items, i just don't like being told i have to do something or i'll break the game.
What I do mean is that getting magic items in older editions were completely up to the DM.
It's my experience that this resulted in more items of greater power in characters hands at lower levels.
Quote:
There was no wealth by level tables or stuff like that.
But there were commonly used published modules that were chock-full of magical items. They were essentially parcels of items grouped by a level range. So there really wasn't that much of a difference.
Quote:
Thus, anything you get was valuable and precious....
This is something I like to call the "+1 longsword fallacy". The relationship of scarcity to value works a little differently with imaginary goods.
Interesting items are precious, as are ones that confer significant bonuses. Dull-but-rare items, and ones that confer minor bonuses, not so much...
__________________ "We're pimps and killers, but in a philanthropic way." -- Boyd, Dollhouse.
There's a magic item in Thunderspire Labyrinth that's cursed; it makes you fly into a rage when you are Bloodied.
Would a Belt of Giant Strength/Gauntlets of Ogre Power that changed your Strength score be unbalanced in 4e? I'm thinking maybe if you get them too early - the Fighter might like 25 Strength at level 1 - but if they are given out at a good level, maybe not. If the Gauntlets of Ogre Power give you 18 Str, and you find them at level 4-8 (level 8 item, maybe), it doesn't seem like it would ruin things too much.
I think that, since adjudicating strange occurances seems easier to me in 4e, strange items that do crazy things would be very cool in 4e. Let's say the Decanter of Endless Water is a level 5 item. If you open it in a tight stream, trying to push someone back: Standard Action, +7 vs. Fort, Hit = 1d6+4 damage and the target is Pushed 1.
I don't think anyone is disputing the notion that you could make up or recreate old school magic items for 4E but rather lamenting the need to do so. Many of the changes to magic items that I don't like happened in 3E so this isn't really about knocking 4E from my perspective.
__________________ I play 4E, it's too bad we cannot discuss its flaws yet without flamewars and thread crapping.
Something about this really, really appeals to me (and i'm not a meanie). I can appreciate the level of balance built into 4e, but when i'm "expected" to hand out items of a certain power level at a certain time, well, it just reinforces the gaming aspect of the game and reduces the fun factor. For me, as DM. I don't think players look at it like that. I really have no problem handing out magic items, i just don't like being told i have to do something or i'll break the game.
Shrug. I warned the players in my game that I tend to be stingy with magic items and that they should not expect level-appropriate equipment. I think 4th handles poverty of magic items better than 3rd or older editions, so i am pleased by that.
Last edited by Harlekin; 12th December 2008 at 09:39 PM..
Reason: that's what i get for trying to use fancy words
I think 4th handles papacy of magic items better than 3rd or older editions, so i am pleased by that.
What does the Pope have to do with it?
__________________ Words of wisdom from Gary Gygax:
From my perspective wanting less in the way of rules constraints comes from being a veteran Game Master who feels confident that more good material comes from imagination and player interaction with the environment than from textbook rules material.
more words of wisdom:
Rashness and foolhardiness are harbingers of death, as is timidity, in such adventure setting.
Those that complain about real challenges might be better off playing Candyland with their little sister
First and foremost, munchkinism arose as a contemporary of the OD&D game. Nothing in the rules of that or any other version of the game was needed to make it flourish.
There is no relationship between 3E and original D&D, or OAD&D for that matter. Different games, style, and spirit.
[E]xperience has taught me that everyone has their own gaming preferences, and it is not a matter of "good" or "bad" in all, save in light of one's own preferences.
Additionally, many creatures required +X weapons to even hit, so naturally many campaigns had to include magic weapons.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
