How to use 3.5 DnD without the "Big Six"
- Thread starter Kestrel
- Start date
WhimsyTheFae
Explorer
The easiest way to deal with many of these types of issues, as has been alluded to in the prior posts, is to put the kitchen sink back in the kitchen. Just because it is in the book (whether monster or item), doesn't mean that it has to find its way into your game.
If you craft the challenges carefully, you can run a game without the "Big Six", but instead hand out the seldom used specialized items.
If you craft the challenges carefully, you can run a game without the "Big Six", but instead hand out the seldom used specialized items.
Celebrim
Legend
On the subject of mitigating save or die...
I've long said that if I was going to have to choose between hit points or getting rid of saving throws, I'd choose to get rid of saving throws.
I'd replace saving throws with 'Will Points', 'Reflex Points', and 'Fortitude Points'. They'd work much like hitpoints, with an attack roll, damage, and an effect if the player loses a certain % of his points in a single throw (essentially this would be a failed save).
As for the 'big six', I'm less convinced there is a problem with needing new magic items as I think there is a problem with the assumptions of a setting. I'm really not offended by the 'big six'. I'm offended by wealth per character level limits and false assumptions of absolute balance and alot of the other highly limiting 'point buy' crap that drove me from GURPS back to D20. The 'big six' are a consequence mainly of games that are combat oriented. Naturally, things that give advantages in combat are going to be desired. So what?
If the rules regarding magic items really need an overhaul, its not so much with the prices as it is with the assumptions about duration and so forth. To hint where I'm going with that, in 3.5 they took the 'Persistant Spell' feat and nerfed it as if it were broken - which is no better than it being too good. The problem with the 'Persistant Spell' feat wasn't that it was broken, it was that it was absolute. Regardless of the original duration of the spell, it cost the same amount to bump the duration up to 24 hours. That's not very thoughtful design. Thoughtful design would have been that you get a bigger advantage from increasing the duration of spells limited by thier short duration, than you get from increasing the duration of spells with longer durations. Instead of nerfing it, they should have fixed the real problem - its absoluteness. The same basic thing could be said for magic items that grant spell use.
I've long said that if I was going to have to choose between hit points or getting rid of saving throws, I'd choose to get rid of saving throws.
I'd replace saving throws with 'Will Points', 'Reflex Points', and 'Fortitude Points'. They'd work much like hitpoints, with an attack roll, damage, and an effect if the player loses a certain % of his points in a single throw (essentially this would be a failed save).
As for the 'big six', I'm less convinced there is a problem with needing new magic items as I think there is a problem with the assumptions of a setting. I'm really not offended by the 'big six'. I'm offended by wealth per character level limits and false assumptions of absolute balance and alot of the other highly limiting 'point buy' crap that drove me from GURPS back to D20. The 'big six' are a consequence mainly of games that are combat oriented. Naturally, things that give advantages in combat are going to be desired. So what?
If the rules regarding magic items really need an overhaul, its not so much with the prices as it is with the assumptions about duration and so forth. To hint where I'm going with that, in 3.5 they took the 'Persistant Spell' feat and nerfed it as if it were broken - which is no better than it being too good. The problem with the 'Persistant Spell' feat wasn't that it was broken, it was that it was absolute. Regardless of the original duration of the spell, it cost the same amount to bump the duration up to 24 hours. That's not very thoughtful design. Thoughtful design would have been that you get a bigger advantage from increasing the duration of spells limited by thier short duration, than you get from increasing the duration of spells with longer durations. Instead of nerfing it, they should have fixed the real problem - its absoluteness. The same basic thing could be said for magic items that grant spell use.
Nifft
Penguin Herder
"No change, just be careful" = change in CR system and implicit NPC guidelines, including spells and magic items. 
If we're talking humanoid vs. humanoid, then the lack of stat boosters may compensate for itself: if no fighters have Girdles of Strength, they don't also need Amulets of Health. Same goes for wizards with Headbands of Intellect vs. Cloaks of Resistance.
With no Headband of Intellect or Tome of Clear Thought around, that Spell Focus feat is suddenly a lot more attractive.
(And note that you do not need an 18 to play a spellcaster: starting with a 15, +5 for levels, you'll have a 20 at level 20. 25-point-buy is still viable. However, I'd recommend giving more stat boosts, but probably only allowing half to be in mental stats.)
More: if archers, ray-wizards & swashbucklers don't have Gloves of Dex and magic weapons, your Ring of Protection and magic armor are less necessary. Not to mention the Amulet of Natural Armor, which I've never actually seen one of my PCs buy, so I don't really consider it a "big" item... but whatever. Anything that makes a Ring of Protection less valuable does twice the same to an Amulet of Natural Armor, because a natural armor bonus is lame compared to a deflection bonus.
Cheers, -- N
WotC Article said:
If we're talking humanoid vs. humanoid, then the lack of stat boosters may compensate for itself: if no fighters have Girdles of Strength, they don't also need Amulets of Health. Same goes for wizards with Headbands of Intellect vs. Cloaks of Resistance.
With no Headband of Intellect or Tome of Clear Thought around, that Spell Focus feat is suddenly a lot more attractive.
(And note that you do not need an 18 to play a spellcaster: starting with a 15, +5 for levels, you'll have a 20 at level 20. 25-point-buy is still viable. However, I'd recommend giving more stat boosts, but probably only allowing half to be in mental stats.)
More: if archers, ray-wizards & swashbucklers don't have Gloves of Dex and magic weapons, your Ring of Protection and magic armor are less necessary. Not to mention the Amulet of Natural Armor, which I've never actually seen one of my PCs buy, so I don't really consider it a "big" item... but whatever. Anything that makes a Ring of Protection less valuable does twice the same to an Amulet of Natural Armor, because a natural armor bonus is lame compared to a deflection bonus.
Cheers, -- N
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
I think that characters should have a level based bonus that overlaps with the bonuses of the big six. And make the items of the big six considerably more expensive.
For instance, a very crude fix would be as follows: each character gains a +1 enhancement bonus to their weapon, armor, shield, natural armor and ability scores every 4 levels. And a +1 resistance bonus to saves every 4 levels. This overlaps with similar bonuses from items.
And then double the cost of big six items.
For instance, a very crude fix would be as follows: each character gains a +1 enhancement bonus to their weapon, armor, shield, natural armor and ability scores every 4 levels. And a +1 resistance bonus to saves every 4 levels. This overlaps with similar bonuses from items.
And then double the cost of big six items.
Sir Brennen
Legend
And what about PCs who select Craft Item feats which allow them to introduce Big Six items into the game themselves? Would you disallow the feats, then?FickleGM said:
And "craft challenges carefully" seems to be a pretty generic answer. What does that mean, exactly? I think you need to have a good understanding of how much an impact eliminating Big Six items is going to have on the game. A fighter who doesn't have +2 on his armor, shield, weapon, cloak and STR that he might ordinarily have... how much do you reduce the encounter? -1 CR? Do you lower the STR on creatures so they aren't as likely to hit? Do you lower their CHA so their spell-like abilities don't have as high a save? Do you lower their DEX or Natural Armor so they're a little easier to hit? What to you do, why, and when?
Last edited:
WhimsyTheFae
Explorer
Sir Brennen said:
Yes, like monsters and items, all feats don't have to be used. If my goal was to run a campaign without the "Big Six", that would be an option. Of course, all of this falls under the assumption that the group as a whole wants to (or at least agreed to) play in such a campaign.
The simple answer is to avoid challenges that cannot be overcome by the party. They may gain items that are made of special materials (silver, cold iron, etc.). There would be some trial and error, but I'm not against that.
hbarsquared
Quantum Chronomancer
My thoughts.
First, it seems incredibly silly to include the bonuses of the Big Six items in character progression (which I have seen): there's already a progression!
But here's an idea:
Eliminate Big Six items. However, include the effects of the Big Six with all other items commesurate with the level (caster or otherwise).
For example, you no longer have +1 swords. All fire enchantments now necessarily include a +1. All fiery burst enchantments necessarily include a +3.
You no longer have the cloak of resistance. The cloak of the bat now necssarily includes +2 Dex. Cloak of the manta ray necessarliy includes +4 Dex.
These are just brainstorming examples. But possibly by linking the flat bonuses of the Big Six to different items, the items remain viable as well as providing the necessary bonuses.
First, it seems incredibly silly to include the bonuses of the Big Six items in character progression (which I have seen): there's already a progression!
But here's an idea:
Eliminate Big Six items. However, include the effects of the Big Six with all other items commesurate with the level (caster or otherwise).
For example, you no longer have +1 swords. All fire enchantments now necessarily include a +1. All fiery burst enchantments necessarily include a +3.
You no longer have the cloak of resistance. The cloak of the bat now necssarily includes +2 Dex. Cloak of the manta ray necessarliy includes +4 Dex.
These are just brainstorming examples. But possibly by linking the flat bonuses of the Big Six to different items, the items remain viable as well as providing the necessary bonuses.
