Pathfinder 1E Pathfinder: How Should it Handle High Level Dependence on Magic Items, ie the "Big 6"

Pathfinder: How Should it Handle High Level Dependence on Magic Items, ie the "Big 6"


I vote to put that stuff in the PC's leveling mechanics. Make it so you gain a stat every 2 levels, and 2 every 4. Make weapon focus scale to a +1 every 5 levels. Whatever results in the math being roughly equal without worrying which bonus spells are lost when someone takes off their headband of intellect or whatever.
Good idea, but the problem is with PC that want to level like this, but have a DM that still hasn't fully rid themselves of the 3.x mentality for magic item distribution. Then you get hyper powerful 3.x characters.

This idea would be good, but requires a major paradigm shift in DMing when it comes to NPCs, spells and magic item management.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Loss of flavor

Hi,

A problem that I see in ever escalating bonuses is that the flavor of inherent differences is lost:

The difference between a 14 strength and a 18 strength is washed away when both are modified by +4 (from stat boosts) and +4 (from spell boosts).

The same is true for armor: With a big natural armor bonus and enchantment bonus, the difference between +4 armor and +6 armor is diminished.

Or, lets say a buckler +5 compared to a shield +5? That's +6 compared with +7, a small difference.
 

Give everyone the mechanical benefits of VoP. Any items they have will have to have interesting abilities, because they already have all the plusses they need...
 

IE, :):):):) the fighter. Because apparently gamers were so traumatized by jocks, fighters arent allowed easy access to nice things.

Um, without magic shops, no one is allowed easy access to nice things.

Besides, I said limit them, not eliminate the ability to buy magic items.
 

Midway through my last 3.5 campaign I made some changes along these lines. Characters improved any one ability score at every even level, as well as a different one at multiples of four. I kept magic armor and weapons (which play such a huge part in the math and also have a pleasing variety in many cases), but ditched the rest of the big 6 completely. The only stat-boosting items left in the game were the occasional relic.

I didn't remove ability or defense-boosting spells, and my players were careful not to abuse these. If I were writing a system for a general audience I'd probably adjust (maybe remove) those and tweak save progressions. The PCs defenses were a bit lower than the assumed math uses, but this was OK for the style campaign I ran (limited use of save-or-die, and a homebrew luck/fate point system useful in emergencies).

Overall, I think everyone was happy with these changes. The characters had a much more diverse and enjoyable array of magic items. We didn't make these changes until the Magic Item Compendium was released, and I don't see it working nearly as well without that book.
 

Ouch! Part of the ethos of 3E is that spellcasters are supposed to create magic items.


Yeah sure. It's true. but if you really want to have an enjoyable session, you just don't have to go with every single point of 3e (or any other e).

My take to this to my players is : give me a wishlist of loot. Then we'll see what you really get.
 

Yeah sure. It's true. but if you really want to have an enjoyable session, you just don't have to go with every single point of 3e (or any other e).

I think it's a common error that I always did often (and probably repeat in the future, too.)

"That's how it happens to be, we shouldn't change it."
But that is the wrong approach. Figure out why it is this way. If you don't find a satisfying answer, change it to the way you prefer it.

We recently had this question in our office with an external consultant:
(paraphrasing)
"So, this other department does not belong to yours, but you all work in the same area of expertise? Why is it this way?"
"Because that's what it grew into..."
"No, I mean, is there a reason why it has to be this way?"
"Oh. No, not really."
Of course in this case, the ones that gained this insight do not have the power to change this. But for your own game, especially if you _want_ to redesign things, you shouldn't be held back by "that's how it has always been."

3.x might have assumed an easy access to magical items (item shops or item crafting).But does it have to keep this way?

Personally, I think there is primarily one problem with magical items:
They change the baseline power of your players, and if you want to have something like CR / XP Budget system, you need to find a way to account for that.

Both 3E and 4E seemed to go the way to set a certain amount of magical items as a "baseline". 3E did it with wealth by level (which is a very vague baseline, since nobody knows what you actually buy for it), 4E has its 3 standard items whose increasing bonuses are expected in your characters advancement, the rest is treated as minor.

An alternative might be to seriously assign some kind of "level equivalent value" to items. Something that tells you: "A character with this item is +1 level stronger then an equivalent level character."
It wouldn't be easy to implement, but hey, nobody cares if it's easy to design stuff. Important is whether it works when I play the game! :p

A starting point might be to classify items for certain situations. Boots of Flying don't give you straightforward "+2 levels" to your character or something. But they give you an advantage regarding movement, which is important in certain situations:
- Terrain that makes ordinary movement difficult.
- Monsters that have a unusual movement mode and are hard to counter.
- Monsters that are not very mobile and can be easier to counter.

An Ooze might have the challenge attribute (weak mobility), so Boots of Flying give +3 levels against him.
A Arrowhawk might have the challenge attribute (good mobility), so Boots of Flying give +2 levels against him (since he would be harder without them.)
Your encounter area has the attribute (Difficult Movement), so the boots add +1 levels to him.

(I am not convinced that levels would be the right term. If we assume an encounter budget and fixed XP values for monsters, the modifiers might apply to them.)
 

I voted none of the above- I wouldn't want Pathfinder to encode into the game's mechanics what, IMHO, should be campaign-level decisions by the DM.

I'd rather they came up with better guidelines for limiting "magic shops" in the game world.

That is something that really should be left to the DM. Really, the only guideline you need is a base-level understanding of economics...supply & demand type stuff.

1) Anything that becomes too common drops in value. If the party floods the market with +1 swords from their kills, they drop in value with each sale...meaning all those swords enter the local economy at such a price that anyone can get one, even the youngest street urchin.

2) Just because something is available in the game doesn't mean its available where the PCs are. That applies for both mundane and magical items. Just last year, we finished a campaign in which my PC- who had a background in spelunking- wanted to get a Dire Pick. However, the party was pretty much in the back of nowhere, so he was never able to find a true weaponsmith who either had one for sale or could make one to order.

The party's coffers may be filled to bursting, but you can't buy a +5 Holy Avenger for any amount if all the local Magic Shoppe proprietor only carries the +1 swords the party's been plundering from bandits. Instead, they're going to have to find a Magic Merchant in a big city- possibly the biggest in the region.

Assuming such swords are even on the market- magic item prices aren't just a measure of how much an item would cost to buy, its also an indicator of just how rare such an item would be to find before you could even buy it. Perhaps there are only 9 +5 Holy Avengers in the world- the only 9 ever made. One- the first one- is in the hand of a King who used to be a Paladin, 2 in the hands of active adventuring Paladins, 2 in the vaults of particularly powerful churches, 2 in the hands of powerful persons who don't want anyone to know they have them, 1 is in the treasure of a Dracolitch who defeated its owner, and 1 is lost at the bottom of the sea.

I don't see anyone selling a +5 Holy Avenger on that list- a PC wishing to acquire one will have to have one made, wrest it from the hands of a current owner, or do without.

3) The prices in the DMG should be treated as guidelines, and buying magic items (especially powerful ones) should be a spark for roleplaying some haggling. Sure, a +1 sword costs a certain amount in the DMG...but if its the only +1 sword in the count- and you're not a local?- the price may be a bit higher.

OTOH, if Paladin Sir Prettyboy makes goo-goo eyes at the proprietor's eldest marriageable daughter, he may just get a steal of a deal.
 
Last edited:

I voted none of the above- I wouldn't want Pathfinder to encode into the game's mechanics what, IMHO, should be campaign-level decisions by the DM.



That is something that really should be left to the DM. Really, the only guideline you need is a base-level understanding of economics...supply & demand type stuff.
I think you are answering a question that he didn't ask. ;)

If you don't want magic item shops, he would want any economy where this might be feasible. Because it could be feasible with some kind of market and demand/supply. But that's not what it's about.

The question is - how does it change the game (not the world) if there are no magic item shops and magic items become less available? How will it play differently? How can he ensure that the players still can face the challenges they meet (or figure out which challenges are "fair" to them).

It's a question of game design and not a question of world design.
 

Step 1. Rank Magic Items (and any items really) in Experience Points.
Step 2. Do not use these points as character rewards, but as measures of class ability.
Step 3. Total Character XP and Item XP together for accurate measures of PC & NPC Class/Power Level.
Step 4. Profit!
 

Remove ads

Top