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.
So, has anyone done up an Artifact style writeup for the classic 1e version of the gauntlet of ogre power or better yet how would you writeup the trifecta - gauntlets, belt and hammer?
As an aside, what's your favourite artifact in the 4e writeup? I got to go with WHELM from Open Grave....
The talking head from Pyramid of Shadows sticks out the most to me, but I also love the elephant figurine of wonderous power (I forget its name) that appeared in Dragon.
__________________ Veronica: Where's your brother?
Dick: I think he took Ghost World up to his room. They're probably up there making love. Or playing Dungeons and Dragons. Or both, at the same time. They're both, like, 12th-level dorks. I'm just sayin'
It is a vicious cycle really. Mystic bling has a value because you want PC's to be able to purchase or make the thing, and you want them to do that so they can have a magical item suitable to their suite of abilities.
The only way out of not having magical items worth more than a king would spend is to have magical items be priceless, as was assumed in 1e/2e. Unlike 1e and 2e though, you shouldn't use magical items to determine whether or not you can hit a monster, to balance the powers of different classes (in 1e - 3e the warrior classes were more dependent on their magical items than their arcane counterparts).
In other words, arcane items will have to be a freebie that adds to a character's power, but doesn't dominate the character. Ideally, the number of magical items would simply change play style on a scale from the more gritty and drawn out slow mundane combats up to the 2-3 round blazing, booming, blood-fests of a high magic party. In other words, playable and survivable in both modes, with the same set of monsters from the monster manual, but with a different feel. Perhaps high magic games give out less XP to reflect that you are able to kill more monsters and easily loot more dungeons.
I would think that this would require building a D&D clone from the ground up. I've played games from 1e - 3e with DM's who refused to give out magic items as much as they should have (ie. the amount that was given out in official modules), and it SUCKED. I'm absolutely positive that the same holds true for 4e as well.
Last edited by ferratus; 29th May 2009 at 03:11 PM..
I would think that this would require building a D&D clone from the ground up. I've played games from 1e - 3e with DM's who refused to give out magic items as much as they should have (ie. the amount that was given out in official modules), and it SUCKED. I'm absolutely positive that the same holds true for 4e as well.
Overall solid idea and it makes sense. In keeping with your idea the amount of magic that "should" be given out really depends on the campaign. If the PC's are always running into things that require magical weapons to combat effectively then such weapons should be available. A great many published modules included more magical goodies than a typical campaign required.
They had gold costs and you could sell them to generate XP...You just couldn't BUY magic items in 1e even if you had just recently sold said items...
re: Monetary costs
Explicitly mentioned in both 3e AND 4e, don't the higher price items only appear in exotic locales like the City of Brass and Sigil? There is simply no way to have a rational medieval economy with decidely non-medieval locations such as those...
EDIT : MAgical treasure in modules
Search out for Bullgrit's posts on the matter....1e was OFFICALLY awash with magical items (moreso than a 3e or 4e character would have IMO).
It's only in 2e where they cut down on the treasure...
It is a vicious cycle really. Mystic bling has a value because you want PC's to be able to purchase or make the thing, and you want them to do that so they can have a magical item suitable to their suite of abilities.
The only way out of not having magical items worth more than a king would spend is to have magical items be priceless, as was assumed in 1e/2e. Unlike 1e and 2e though, you shouldn't use magical items to determine whether or not you can hit a monster, to balance the powers of different classes (in 1e - 3e the warrior classes were more dependent on their magical items than their arcane counterparts).
In other words, arcane items will have to be a freebie that adds to a character's power, but doesn't dominate the character. Ideally, the number of magical items would simply change play style on a scale from the more gritty and drawn out slow mundane combats up to the 2-3 round blazing, booming, blood-fests of a high magic party. In other words, playable and survivable in both modes, with the same set of monsters from the monster manual, but with a different feel. Perhaps high magic games give out less XP to reflect that you are able to kill more monsters and easily loot more dungeons.
I would think that this would require building a D&D clone from the ground up. I've played games from 1e - 3e with DM's who refused to give out magic items as much as they should have (ie. the amount that was given out in official modules), and it SUCKED. I'm absolutely positive that the same holds true for 4e as well.
In my experience, it hasn't applied to 4e provided you preserve the +x bonuses (I just give the players an inherent enhancement bonus to attack/damage/defenses at 3/8/13/18/23/28).
I've done various experiments in my [4e] campaigns to see how magic items affect the game (including a boss who suppressed all their magical items for a battle, but not their inherent bonus) and it really has been fine. There's a difference between a character who's completely blinged out and one who isn't, but it isn't a big one and it certainly hasn't been game breaking IME.
Magical items are a lot less powerful than in previous editions, so characters really don't depend on them as much (except for the plus to hit/defenses at higher levels). The pluses only come from the basic three items (weapon/implement, armor, and neck piece) so as long as you have those covered, it really doesn't matter how you spend your gold (and it isn't hard to keep those basic three up to date and still have gold to spare). The downside, of course, is that some people feel that the magic items have been watered down to the point where they generally don't care much about them one way or the other (I've got a player like this myself).
Nonetheless, I would say that magical items are far less significant in 4e than 3.x (which isn't to say that 3.x was bad, just a different approach from 4e).
The only way out of not having magical items worth more than a king would spend is to have magical items be priceless, as was assumed in 1e/2e.
How so? Logically, I don't understand why you exclude the option of lower costs for magic items. One way of making magic items cost less than a king would spend is to *make them cost less than a king would spend* (And, as has already been mentioned, magic items were not priceless in 1e)
Look at it from the supply and demand side (too simulationist for 4E probably, but suppose-) Imagine you're a rich fighter. I can either hire soldiers with my money or buy a magic sword. Hiring 0 soldiers is less useful than a +1 sword obviously, hiring 1 million soldiers is more useful. There's some sweet spot in the middle, and that value could be considered the basic value of a +1 sword. The same reasoning can be applied to +5 swords. I can't see how you get to 225,000 gp for a +5 sword given the other things that you could do with 225,000 gp that would make more sense.
The thing about "the other things that you could do" is that they're mostly forbidden by DM fiat. The private army that you could maintain with 225,000 gp is forbidden by most DMs IME. In fact, you could buy a +4 sword for 45,000 gp and still hire a pretty decent army for the amount of money it would take you to upgrade a measily +1 value. You actually get more of a attack bonus for flanking with your thousand soldiers.
Search out for Bullgrit's posts on the matter....1e was OFFICALLY awash with magical items (moreso than a 3e or 4e character would have IMO).
If this was actually OFFICIAL, as you say, then I wouldn't have to search someone's post - you could simply indicate the page number in the 1e DMG that makes this clear. IME the treasure tables in the 1e MM were very stingy.
It's a broken system for an economy not because a laborer could not afford a magic sword, but because the value of any given item is based on the available resources of a handful of individuals.
Precisely. I never said the 4e economy isn't broken (Although I prefer to call it not realistic, since we play 4e just fine with the system). I merely pointed out to GW that his "argument" was a hyperbole. Which you agree with in your comment quoted above.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mevers
The problem I have with the crazy high prices of stuff in DnD is the disconnect I feel between my PC spending hundreds of thousands of gp on magic items (or at least walking around with gear "worth" that much), while his family / home village etc are basically poverty stricken dirt farmers. If my PC is good, or even just loves / likes his family, I find it very hard to justify the situation in game.
When just one of your 5 or more magic items is worth more gold than your entire family is likely to ever earn in their entire collective lifetimes, I have a hard time imagining why my PC doesn't sell it and buy his family a much better standard of living.
Most of my PC's do just that Maybe this issue is with the characters or players, not with the system.
I sometimes compare players to american rap stars - A lot start out as trailer trash, and at some point, they make it big and start making so much money that they pay for their whole family or town and not even feel the expense. Some do, and some don't.
__________________
355 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 21th level Musings of an Epic Virgin
I generally would agree that the D&D world should try to simulate its own economy rather than a medieval one. I think that if the planes are going to interact with the mortal world at all, and have creatures that can be interacted with and killed, they should be probably be traded with. Sigil would be a good way to do it, or the City of Brass (which I like better than Sigil myself). Now a good question would be what the material world could offer these far more wealthy and cosmopolitan places. Certainly not raw materials (more abundant in the elemental chaos), heck perhaps they wouldn't even desire gold. Really, the only thing that I can think extra-planar creatures would want is human (and other mortal) slaves. Otherwise possibly they might want wood and other organic materials. Still, not a very profitible relationship.
However, it is largely beside the point. The price of D&D magical items is not based on what gives you personal power in the mundane world (which is full of dirt farmers) but what helps you hit the defenses of dragons and extra-planar monsters. It is for weaker creatures to kill stronger creatures, which are impervious to creatures weaker than you. Millions of common soliders are useless against Orcus. Which is generally why, in my opinion, magical blades should be found in dungeons with a prophecy to kill Orcus, rather than bought for huge sums of money.
I merely pointed out to GW that his "argument" was a hyperbole.
I like how you ignore everything else I've said in the thread except the one sentence that irked you.
__________________ While I play D&D, it is not my game of choice, regardless of edition.
"You're insane AND Jurassic, GW." - garyh
"The reverse side also has a reverse side." - Japanese proverb
----- Steamworks: A guide for introducing technology to a fantasy setting. (d20) Journey: The journey of a thousand miles begins beneath your feet... (Work in progress)
I generally would agree that the D&D world should try to simulate its own economy rather than a medieval one. I think that if the planes are going to interact with the mortal world at all, and have creatures that can be interacted with and killed, they should be probably be traded with. Sigil would be a good way to do it, or the City of Brass (which I like better than Sigil myself). Now a good question would be what the material world could offer these far more wealthy and cosmopolitan places. Certainly not raw materials (more abundant in the elemental chaos), heck perhaps they wouldn't even desire gold. Really, the only thing that I can think extra-planar creatures would want is human (and other mortal) slaves. Otherwise possibly they might want wood and other organic materials. Still, not a very profitible relationship.
However, it is largely beside the point. The price of D&D magical items is not based on what gives you personal power in the mundane world (which is full of dirt farmers) but what helps you hit the defenses of dragons and extra-planar monsters. It is for weaker creatures to kill stronger creatures, which are impervious to creatures weaker than you. Millions of common soliders are useless against Orcus. Which is generally why, in my opinion, magical blades should be found in dungeons with a prophecy to kill Orcus, rather than bought for huge sums of money.
I think human slaves are possible but not especially likely (human slaves would be far less durable than their planar counterparts). I think it more probable that planar entities would trade for things not commonly traded in the mortal world (like souls) or services (a powerful imprisoned devil might reward the BBEG, who is working towards the devil's freedom, with a mighty blade or whatnot).
The DMG (pg 155) has suggestions if you want to run a world where magic items can't be bought or sold. Even with a magic item economy in place, it doesn't necessarily mean the PCs can always find what they want or walk around a corner in Sigil and find an umbrella stand filled with +6 swords of Orcus slaying on sale. Tracking down the one priest in all of Sigil reputed to have the skills to forge a blade capable of killing Orcus (+6 Holy Avenger or whatever) could be an adventure in and of itself.
I realize that the baseline assumption is that the players can find the items they want, but I think it's an acceptable starting point. Not every DM (particularly newbies) can make tracking down "Ye Olde Magic Item Vending Machine Guy" that interesting, and some DMs would rather just skip to the "interesting part" (hunting down and slaying Orcus).
Finding the sword in a dungeon with a prophecy attached is good too, and due to the way the parcel system works the PCs should find that sword quite a few levels before they can actually afford to buy it.
Taking the Ring of Invisibility as an example, I'll say I'm SO happy WotC went this way. Magic like that devaules the skills of characters who specailize in Stealth. For too long utility magic has marginalized character skills. You want to sneak in somewhere...hire a sneak!
Agreed 100%
One of the few things that held my interest in the lead up to 4E's release was that the new design would make characters more important than their gear (which hadn't been the case for in 3E since it's inception).
The "problems" that the OP lists are, to me, features.
__________________
"...show me a game where the roleplaying involves deep emotional experiences and making tough decisions in-character and experiencing vicarious unpleasantness and, generally, all the stuff that people like Ron Edwards insist is the very heart of roleplaying without which the activity has no meaning and is so much wasted time, and I'll show you me leaving the room..."
There is no magic item economy. There's a point buy system for magic items that uses gold pieces instead of something more abstract. It's been that way since 3E.
Magic items aren't valued according to any relative or perceived worth, as they would be in a functioning economy. They're valued so that a character can't generally afford them until the game expects it.
I find magic items to be among the weakest things about 4e, they are pretty lame for the majority of them. I still like the game overall however. I won't use it as suggested, I'll pick & choose what items are about/available & improve some.
I have also been considering a low frequency magic item campain, by just adding the expected bonuses in automatically. Artifacts/Relics being the "magic items", but rare of course. A swords & sorcery style D&D like the Conan stories or the Grey Mouser & Fafherd. Magic tends to be very strong, but also very rare &/or dangerous to the user. Anyone try this sort of thing out?
For the folks lamenting giving up a signature +1 weapon for a shiny new +3 weapon, can't you just say the signature weapon is always of the proper plus? 4e tells you a specific magic item is +1 at level 2 and goes up every 5 levels. So just create a ritual where the character bonds to a signature weapon/implement/whatever. Now the item automatically increases with his level. Now the only reason he has to discard the item is if he finds an item with better properties/powers. Make the cost of the ritual equal to the item's current cost (based on his level). So when the fighter with the cool +1 sword finds the boring +3 sword he use the +3 item to pay for the ritual to bond with the +1 sword (elevating it to +3 if he is of sufficient level, +2 otherwise).
Example, the +1 sword is a 4/9/14/19/24/29 item. He find the +3 item at 12th level. So he does the ritual destroying the +3 sword and bonding him to his current sword which rises to +2 because he is 12th level. At 14th level, the sword will automatically become +3 for him and him alone. (For the rest of the world it is still a +2 sword.)
__________________ Joe Mucchiello, Head Honcho at Throwing Dice Games
Priority One: Fatherhood.
Priority Two: Sanity.
Down on the list: seemingly real close to releasing a notebook essential. It's in layout! Has been for months now. (Just nod politely so I won't cry about this.)
"I've never heard of the term Flavor lawyer..." -- Scribble
Maybe this issue is with the characters or players, not with the system. 
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
