Worlds of Design: When There's Too Many Magic Items

If you’ve GMed a long-standing campaign where players reached fairly high levels, you may have run into problems of too much magic, or of too many low-powered magic items (such as +1 items) in the hands of the heroes. What to do?

If you’ve GMed a long-standing campaign where players reached fairly high levels, you may have run into problems of too much magic, or of too many low-powered magic items (such as +1 items) in the hands of the heroes. What to do?


While you could simply buy up the surplus, there are other ways that don’t put lots of gold in character’s hands. These methods can be built into a game’s rules (as in Pathfinder 2 “resonance”) or they can be added by the GM.
[h=3]Limit the Supply (i.e., limit ownership)[/h] The proper game design way is to severely limit supply, as could be done in a board game. No magic item sales. Middle-earth is an example of a world with very few magic items.

But what about joint campaigns, where several people GM in the same world? New GMs, especially, will tend to give away too much “to make people happy.”

But that’s a setting thing, not rules/mechanisms. An RPG designer doesn’t control the setting, not even his or her own.

In these days where “loot drops” are the norm, where every enemy in a computer RPG has loot, it’s really hard to get players accustomed to a severe shortage of stuff to find. So limit usage, or provide ways to use up the small stuff.
[h=3]Limit Usage[/h]
  • Tuning to just three (5e D&D)
  • Resonance
  • Easy to come up with other methods
5e D&D’s tuning of magic items to characters is one of the best rules in the game, at least from a designer’s point of view.

Pathfinder 2 beta was using resonance (level plus charisma), whereby use of a magic item uses up some of your resonance for the day, until you have no more and can use no more magic until the next day. It was more complex than that, with you “investing” in items that could then be used all day. There are lots of ways to use the idea.
[h=3]Destroy Them[/h] The D&D method was fireball or LB with failed saving throw. But that was so all-or-nothing that even I didn’t like it. Moreover, the tougher characters tend to end up with even more magic items, relative to others, because they fail their save less often; that may not be desirable.

Have everything (most, anyway) wear out. This is a hassle if you have to track something like charges or uses. I assign a dice chance (or use a standard one for a type of item), and the player rolls after each use (or I do, so the player won’t know until the next time they try to use the item). When the “1" comes up, the item is done, finis, kaput (unless you allow it to be “recharged”). For example, 1 in 20 failure rate is obvious; roll a 1 on a d20, that’s it. With two dice you can make 1 in 40, 1 in 50, whatever you want. If you want armor, shields, and other passive defensive items to wear out, rolling once per combat might do.
[h=3]Burn Them Up[/h]
  • My Skyrafts
  • Furnace Helms in Spelljammer
  • Rituals?
I devised something called Skyrafts, made of segments of Skystone (of course), that could slowly fly when powered by magic items. So you could sacrifice something like a +1 sword to get X miles of travel, X being whatever a GM wishes. The more segments (carrying capacity) in the Skyraft, the more magic it consumed. Yes, this could be expensive, but if your world has become infested with +1 items, this is a way to get rid of them.

Furnace Helms in SpellJammer accomplish the same thing, but only if you’re running a Spelljammer campaign.

You could also devise powerful ritual spells that consume magic items.
[h=3]“Enforcers”[/h] These are people who seek out wimpy characters with magic items much too powerful for them, and take them away. I don’t do this, as it doesn’t make much sense to me. But it could in some contexts.

I'm sure others have devised yet more ways to limit the influence of magic items.

This article was contributed by Lewis Pulsipher (lewpuls) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program. You can follow Lew on his web site and his Udemy course landing page. If you enjoy the daily news and articles from EN World, please consider contributing to our Patreon!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I don't recall 1E being that... over run with magic items or swords. And most swords were +1. Maybe that's your point about "shared campaigns"?
The published modules of the day did tend to give out quite a bit of magic - in part, perhaps, because the authors were expecting it to be split out among a party of maybe a dozen PCs.

Also, in 1e items weren't as permanent as they seem to be now: if you failed a save vs. fireball, for instance, everything you carried also had to save (by far my preferred way of doing it - easy come, easy go).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ryujin

Legend
The published modules of the day did tend to give out quite a bit of magic - in part, perhaps, because the authors were expecting it to be split out among a party of maybe a dozen PCs.

Also, in 1e items weren't as permanent as they seem to be now: if you failed a save vs. fireball, for instance, everything you carried also had to save (by far my preferred way of doing it - easy come, easy go).

In 1e you could really be a prick, if you wanted to, while sticking to the rules. Two words; Burning Hands. That's magical fire with no save, triggering a save against Magical Fire for everything carried.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
In 1e you could really be a prick, if you wanted to, while sticking to the rules. Two words; Burning Hands. That's magical fire with no save, triggering a save against Magical Fire for everything carried.
Burning Hands had a range of three feet, thus to cast it and have it hit someone you were within reach of that person the entire time; meaning that if you-the-target didn't do something to interrupt the casting the results are your own silly fault.
 

Ryujin

Legend
Burning Hands had a range of three feet, thus to cast it and have it hit someone you were within reach of that person the entire time; meaning that if you-the-target didn't do something to interrupt the casting the results are your own silly fault.

3' range so essentially right next door, 1 segment casting time so unlikely to be interrupted, and a 120 degree arc. Not a bad option for a F/MU, though Shocking Grasp would be better. I once had a player try to pull the saving throw for all opponents thing. He quickly changed his mind when I reminded him that NPCs can have spells too.
 

jasper

Rotten DM
Burning hands would be 30 feet now days. I would argue since the wording does cloth, wood, will burn. No save would be require for metal. but if so 1E DMG 80 Magical Fire DC 2. And the foot note about magic item gain a +2 for every +2. Furthermore on the right column it does not list burning hands but higher level fire spells.
againgst a fireball the save is 6
 

jasper

Rotten DM
The published modules of the day did tend to give out quite a bit of magic - in part, perhaps, because the authors were expecting it to be split out among a party of maybe a dozen PCs.

Also, in 1e items weren't as permanent as they seem to be now: if you failed a save vs. fireball, for instance, everything you carried also had to save (by far my preferred way of doing it - easy come, easy go).
It was bad. I just pulled my copy of WG4 The Forgotten Temple of Tharizdun. My group in high school was 7 players 6 dms. No waiting and no campaigns finish. We finished 2 modules all the way thru with a dm. And we generally ran just modules so by the time the 4 or 5th dm ran a module.
Page 13 Quall Feather Token 4 arrows of +4
Page 14 incense of meditation
Page 16 Oil of slipperiness
Page 17 -2 Cursed bastard sword,
Page 21 dust of appearance
Page 22 +1 dagger, +1 elf size cloak of protection, Elvin chain mail, Scroll of protect from magic, ring of invisibility and weakness,
Page 24 +2 battleaxe note I just notice the weapons are not being bolded so I made have missed some items.
page 25 decanter of endless water.
page 25 6 potions of longevity. (either made you 10 years younger, lifespan increase 10 years, or reversed aging affect)
Page 26 +2 footman mace
Page 30 wand of force new item
I think this module introduced Annis, boggart,
Wand of force +5 bastard sword, 1 charge per 10 minutes, couple of stuff. But my eyes are blurring trying to read the text.
 

....But what about joint campaigns, where several people GM in the same world? ... Joint or Shared campaigns I have seen both use to mean the same thing. So if you want to limit magic items. DON'T do Joint a campaign.
Read some 1e Modules. They are magic heavy. If you have more than 1 DM in the group by the time the group runs through them twice, people will have multiple magic items.
Under the Storm Giant's castle there are 9 new magic items.

We didn't run joint campaigns, and, for the most part, we did our own adventures / settings / dungeons. Starting with OD&D there weren't any modules. By the time there were and 1E was the game we were too far along in our own games. A couple of guys incorporated modules into their games then. I always preferred to do my own. So, no experience with that as a DM and not that much as a player.

*edit* Still run my own material. I've bought more adventure books in 5E than ever before because there are so few books to buy. Primarily just to read them, and crib anything I like. My game has its own feel and... style I guess you'd say. Thank the odd gods that 5E is easier to prep for than 3.x. And that gives me more time to play and homebrew for the game :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

The published modules of the day did tend to give out quite a bit of magic - in part, perhaps, because the authors were expecting it to be split out among a party of maybe a dozen PCs.

Also, in 1e items weren't as permanent as they seem to be now: if you failed a save vs. fireball, for instance, everything you carried also had to save (by far my preferred way of doing it - easy come, easy go).

Mostly we didn't run modules. And yes, items should be "destructible". I loved the 1E saving throws for items chart. In addition to special items, the players map of the dungeon was always fun :)
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top