Plusses or Effects?

[SLOTHmaster]

Over here a discussion started about which was more effective, in general; items with a bonus to hit/damage/AC or the like, or items with a more abstract effect, such as flight or speech with animals. What do you think?

Edit: by "more effective" I mean more effective at overcoming a large variety of possible obstacles, including combat.

 

[Li Shenron]

Effective for what? If you mean mechanically effective to "win" the game, plusses are on average definitely more effective than effects since they tend to apply to most situations and don't usually require a tactical choice (so no chance of mistake) because they are permanentely active. Of course sometimes an effect is just what you need, but on average I'd say plusses.

But mechanical efficiency kills my fun. Therefore mechanically efficient for my personal tastes means inefficient for my own real purpose of playing the game, which is not that of winning easily.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Effects are always more interesting. They actually do something in the fictional world.

 

[amerigoV]

Effective for what? If you mean mechanically effective to "win" the game, plusses are on average definitely more effective than effects since they tend to apply to most situations and don't usually require a tactical choice (so no chance of mistake) because they are permanentely active. Of course sometimes an effect is just what you need, but on average I'd say plusses.

But mechanical efficiency kills my fun. Therefore mechanically efficient for my personal tastes means inefficient for my own real purpose of playing the game, which is not that of winning easily.

I agree with what you said. With D&D being a HP driven game, the more access the PCs have to healing the more it pushes people just to max damage output. As you said, that does not always make it more 'fun'.

 

[Umbran]

Effective for what?

I would rephrase that to be, "More effective for reaching what goal?" Tell me what you'd like to achieve, and we can then discuss what's most effective.

 

[delericho]

Effects are more fun, bonuses are more effective.

One of the key poergamer/Char-Op tricks is to pick one or two things your character will be "the best" at, to take the minimal set of 'effect' options to gain access to those tricks, and then to throw every other possible bonus in to increasing your modifier when using those few tricks. And so you end up with a one-trick pony who is exceptional at that one thing.

Magic items that given bonuses are, of course, just one more source of bonuses to add to your one trick. In general, they're going to be more effective that effect-based items. (Bear in mind that almost nobody will ever construct a build that relies on a specific item to gain access to their "one trick"!)

 

[Karak]

Pluses have always been troubling to me personally. Whether its something with a plus that is so high it becomes comical, or comparison between items with pluses that don't make sense, in the end it just isn't as impacting to the game world as effects. Nor as interesting to me personally. Effects can impact things that are outside of combat far more often and just feel more connected to the game world.
Sword +1
Or sword of Ridicules Stammering

For example in AfterEarth we have a couple artistry levels to things that can add pluses. But 95% of it revolves around effects and their impact on the gameworld.

I guess it also depends on the group and the world. If people are role-playing like they are playing Diablo pluses are probably the way to go.
It depends on what the overall feel and desire of the group/GM is for the world.

 

[billd91]

It really depends on the effect whether it's more effective than a particular plus or not. The poll question is too vague to answer.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I voted "plus".

Prior to 3e, I don't believe magic items had anything to do with balance. As of 3e, and now 4e, they do. There was a step backward when it came to flavor. In 3.x you had to have your generic +1 weapon before you could have your +1 cool weapon. It's pretty similar in 4e as well.

I doubt it'll happen, but I hope D&DN doesn't have magic items with bonuses like that. They're using bonded accuracy (rather than inherent bonuses, which I think are cooler), which I think means you couldn't balance plus-granting magic items. As a result, any items might be used just for effects instead.

 

[Argyle King]

Over here a discussion started about which was more effective, in general; items with a bonus to hit/damage/AC or the like, or items with a more abstract effect, such as flight or speech with animals. What do you think?

Edit: by "more effective" I mean more effective at overcoming a large variety of possible obstacles, including combat.

Since "plusses" is an option, I'm somewhat assuming a game similar to D&D and/or Pathfinder in which advancement is mostly linear and vertical in nature. By vertical I mean the numbers continue to stack on top of each other to become larger and larger as the game goes on.

In such a game, I'd say that plusses are generally more valuable if I'm forced to choose between the two options. A cool effect is nice, but it doesn't do me any good if I'm at a level where it's ineffective against challenges I'm facing. Most often, what I see players do is use the item with the biggest plus for their primary item. If they've also acquired an item with an interesting and/or useful effect, they'll keep it in a bag until they need that effect.