Artefact Concordance - how do you handle it?

Diplomat123 · May 21, 2010

My pc acquired an artefact a few levels ago. There are +1 and -1 modifiers to the concordance available for fighting or not fighting specific creature types. These are however totally dwarfed by the d10 points i get for levelling up.

After 3 or 4 levels i was at maximum concordance and if i wanted could act against the wishes/goals of the artefact and with a d10 level bonus still stay at maximum concordance.

There are obvious RP reasons not to do this, but mechanically it seems very unsatisfactory. Two questions. Have i missed some errata? Does anyone have a good houserule to make them work better?

ryryguy · May 21, 2010

I think maybe that just means it's time for the artifact to "move on".

There isn't a hard limit on the number of levels someone should keep an artifact, but maybe 4 is too many? I just gave one out as a DM and only expect it to stay around for two levels, maybe three maximum.

Diplomat123 · May 21, 2010

Maybe, but the same pc picked up Boots of Spiderclimb (Lvl 5) at 1st level, and at level 13 he still wears them. Should an artefact really be disposable after 4 levels?

Lancelot · May 21, 2010

I believe the intention of the rules is that artifacts move on fairly quickly. In part, it's because they "break" the assumptions of the rules. 4e is balanced based on expected wealth (incl. magic items) guidelines. An artifact is outside that balance - it typically gives the PC a "bonus" magic item, and usually one that is substantially more powerful than anything they could normally attain at their level.

If you intended to have an artifact stick around for a while, perhaps revisit or remove the +1d10 concordance per level gain. The one time I've used an artifact in my own campaign, I reduced the gain to +1d4 per level.... and that's only because it had some fairly stringent negative modifiers (-2 concordance if the PC ever retreats from a fight, for example). If I had less punishing negative modifiers, I probably would have removed the auto-gain per level altogether.

MrMyth · May 21, 2010

I have made a couple custom artifacts for my PCs, and have them go up +1 per level, rather than +1d10. The amount gained by default for leveling really trivializes the rest of what is a really cool system. Even without it, the PCs have managed to get concordance up to max with the artifacts, but primarily by working on the actual goals and interests of the items.

Nikosandros · May 21, 2010

I think that the +1d10 for each level gained is a really poor rule. As the OP stated, it basically makes all other considerations irrelevant.

bganon · May 21, 2010

I think the 1d10 per level is there under the assumption that once an artifact enters the story, it dominates the plot and the party will be driven to the conclusion of its goals one way or another within three levels or so. You could probably replace the 1d10 with a roll every time the party advances to some major artifact-related plot point, but the two should work out to be roughly equivalent.

The other reason I think artifacts are expected to go away fairly quickly is that if the DM gives an artifact to one PC, then out of fairness it's tempting to give artifacts to at least some of the other PCs at another point in the campaign. Then unless you overlap them (which is problematic for power balance reasons), you have artifacts around for 10-15 levels even if each one moves on after three. If you have them move on after six levels or so instead, then your campaign from levels 1-30 is almost entirely about artifacts... which seems a bit much unless you're specifically planning for it in advance.

ryryguy · May 21, 2010

In the end, it's up to the DM and how he wants to use it in the story. But I think the default design assumption is that it doesn't stick around more than three levels or so. Remember, the section in the DMG does say that it's not expected for an artifact to stick around forever, and each one has an explicit "Moving On" section.

If the DM is choosing to use an artifact in a different way, then maybe he should change the +1d10 per level rule, as others have suggested.