I think you peeps are not thinking about+n swords properly!

The problem with this is what happens to people who have trained with a sword and now they have an axe. Or when they train with axes and keep getting swords.

The fighter should be trained with all weapons. The B/X fighter can pick up any weapon and use it well. Specialization just leads to pidgeonholing the fighter into a guy that just hits things with a chosen weapon and kind of sucks with everything else. Doesn't sound like much of a master at arms to me.

The fighters greater skill is already represented by the combat progression whether by improvement on the attack matrix, improved THAC0, or BAB increases.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

You can't get around players being jaded unless you have them locked in your closet from age 3 and up and never let them experience anything more interesting in any game than a math weapon.

Flaming swords just have a lot more emotional staying power than math swords.
 

Flaming swords just have a lot more emotional staying power than math swords.

But, so do a lot of miscellaneous magical items.

I remember several times years ago where the group came to a grinding halt when a +2 sword (or similar item) was found and they had massive negotiations in order to figure out who got it. It was a part of the game to do this and it wasn't just blown off because the DM had a PC name label on every item he handed out. It felt more like the player was actually there when s/he had to try to convince others that the +2 sword should go to the Bard instead of the Fighter for xyz reason. These types of negotiations didn't always happen and even if they did, they were sometimes quick, but it wasn't always just a matter of checking the name tag on the item for the PC that was supposed to get it.

In fact, I remember our groups coming up with party agreements for magic item distribution, and/or chit systems (i.e. tokens that could be used to auction items) and such. It added flavor to the game. The PCs seemed more like living breathing creatures with their own agendas and there was none of this "you are a party of PCs, you can not have contention in the party, you must use your abilities to help the other PCs at all times, the DM will enforce this by handing out magic items specifically keyed to one PC at a time" mindset. Good PCs helped out others in the group when appropriate. Neutral and Evil PCs sometimes tried to screw the other PCs. It felt real and not artificially forced.


Late in the 2E days, I bought the Encyclopedia Magica four volume set. It was so cool. :cool: It had all of these cool items listed. It went WAY beyond the Book of Marvelous Magic or other sources of magic items (because it was every item every published by TSR and then some).

And, I hardly ever used it. There were just so MANY magic items in it, that I only used a very tiny fraction of them in my game.

There was such a flood of magic items available that I would have myself made the players jaded if I had handed a lot of it out. Even the cool flaming sword that you commented on as having more emotional staying power would have seemed mundane and quickly forgotten.

I feel this way about 4E magic items as well. There are 3581 items, 3111 of which are magical items, in the Compendium at the moment. 3111. That's a huge number. At 15 seconds to read each one, it would take almost 13 hours to read them all (and I would probably conk out after 5 minutes). And PCS are expected to get 24 or so of these items each over the 30 levels of play. zzzzz


I hope 5E creates fewer items, but more memorable items and doesn't flood the gaming community with so many magic items that +1 weapons aren't even considered magical anymore. I would hope that special magic swords would be the exception instead of the rule and that special magic would be found more in miscellaneous magical items and in wands and such, not in swords. Excaliber should be one of a few dozen super special magical swords, there shouldn't be 432 special weapons out of 438 like there is in 4E.

everyone can have powers. Everyone can be super! And when everyone's super, no one will be.

When every magic weapon has powers, then no magic weapon is special.
 

But, so do a lot of miscellaneous magical items.

Well sure. My 6th level campaign only has two magic weapons, because there're sooooo many interesting items outside of that. I think the Cask of Liquid Gold gets the most use.

I remember several times years ago where the group came to a grinding halt when a +2 sword (or similar item) was found and they had massive negotiations in order to figure out who got it. It was a part of the game to do this and it wasn't just blown off because the DM had a PC name label on every item he handed out.

It felt more like the player was actually there when s/he had to try to convince others that the +2 sword should go to the Bard instead of the Fighter for xyz reason. These types of negotiations didn't always happen and even if they did, they were sometimes quick, but it wasn't always just a matter of checking the name tag on the item for the PC that was supposed to get it.

In fact, I remember our groups coming up with party agreements for magic item distribution, and/or chit systems (i.e. tokens that could be used to auction items) and such. It added flavor to the game. The PCs seemed more like living breathing creatures with their own agendas and there was none of this "you are a party of PCs, you can not have contention in the party, you must use your abilities to help the other PCs at all times, the DM will enforce this by handing out magic items specifically keyed to one PC at a time" mindset. Good PCs helped out others in the group when appropriate. Neutral and Evil PCs sometimes tried to screw the other PCs. It felt real and not artificially forced.

You've got a little bit of Dorito on your shoulder there. In the games I've been involved with, wish lists are general suggestions and requests, and not demands, much like character backgrounds. I also don't allow new players to start off with any equipment beyond 100go, since I do inherent bonuses and weave everything into the story. Just because some people take things to literally doesn't mean that everyone does.

Late in the 2E days, I bought the Encyclopedia Magica four volume set. It was so cool. :cool: It had all of these cool items listed. It went WAY beyond the Book of Marvelous Magic or other sources of magic items (because it was every item every published by TSR and then some).

And, I hardly ever used it. There were just so MANY magic items in it, that I only used a very tiny fraction of them in my game.

There was such a flood of magic items available that I would have myself made the players jaded if I had handed a lot of it out. Even the cool flaming sword that you commented on as having more emotional staying power would have seemed mundane and quickly forgotten.

I feel this way about 4E magic items as well. There are 3581 items, 3111 of which are magical items, in the Compendium at the moment. 3111. That's a huge number. At 15 seconds to read each one, it would take almost 13 hours to read them all (and I would probably conk out after 5 minutes). And PCS are expected to get 24 or so of these items each over the 30 levels of play. zzzzz

Inherent bonus rules fixes this like you wouldn't believe. Throw in "Magic items scale to your inherent bonus." and it gets even better. The +X weapon is behind the magic item treadmill that makes every item into future pocket money.

I hope 5E creates fewer items, but more memorable items and doesn't flood the gaming community with so many magic items that +1 weapons aren't even considered magical anymore. I would hope that special magic swords would be the exception instead of the rule and that special magic would be found more in miscellaneous magical items and in wands and such, not in swords. Excaliber should be one of a few dozen super special magical swords, there shouldn't be 432 special weapons out of 438 like there is in 4E.

When every magic weapon has powers, then no magic weapon is special.

If the powers are all different, they're all special. They're just not specialer. More magic items means more options for DMs. There are soooo many stories out there that a weak magic item roster won't fulfill.
 

When every magic weapon has powers, then no magic weapon is special.

What if we stretched out the possibilities of mundane equipment?

All of those +1's, +2's, +3's are now just grades of masterworkyness. There really is no reason why a mundane weapon can't be +1 and cost appropriately.
 

What if we stretched out the possibilities of mundane equipment?

All of those +1's, +2's, +3's are now just grades of masterworkyness. There really is no reason why a mundane weapon can't be +1 and cost appropriately.

We could do this.

Course, what's the point of having +5 and +6 weapons anyway? If the bonus is not required to maintain PC capability, then +1 through +3 weapons should be the norm and there's no real reason to make them masterwork.
 

You've got a little bit of Dorito on your shoulder there. In the games I've been involved with, wish lists are general suggestions and requests, and not demands, much like character backgrounds. I also don't allow new players to start off with any equipment beyond 100go, since I do inherent bonuses and weave everything into the story. Just because some people take things to literally doesn't mean that everyone does.

I wasn't talking about wish lists.

I was talking about item distribution. When a +1 Ring of Protection was somewhat common in the game system and there weren't any whiz bang +1 Rings of Protection with a lot of other features, it was good for almost anyone in the party.

Now, there are so many "unique" items and so few bonus only items that one rarely expects for there to be more than one Amulet of Protection ever handed out. Hence, the vast majority of magic items with bonuses (i.e. the big three) are good for only one or two PCs out of the entire group and there isn't much discussion on who gets it.

Sure, a given DM could hand out mostly non-special items, but does that really happen in games?

Inherent bonus rules fixes this like you wouldn't believe. Throw in "Magic items scale to your inherent bonus." and it gets even better. The +X weapon is behind the magic item treadmill that makes every item into future pocket money.

Not really.

Inherent bonuses drops the number of different magical items from 3111 to about 2400 or so (approximately dropping 3/4ths of 306 armor down to about 74, 159 neck down to 40, and 438 weapon down to 110). That's still a pretty large number of items. And of course, there are thousands of variations of armor and weapons (i.e. it could be a +2 mace or a hammer or a longsword, etc.) that I'm not even taking into account.

There are soooo many stories out there that a weak magic item roster won't fulfill.

Who has the Doritas on his shoulder now?

If magic items are required to fulfill good stories and the stories are crappy without certain magic items, then something's wrong with the game system.

Player: "If only I had a Sun Globe, this would have been a much better story."

Err, what???

I think the game system plays just fine with a max of 500 magic items instead of a max of 3000+ items. Just because some game designer thinks of a magic item concept doesn't make it a good idea. In fact, a significant majority of 4E consumables totally suck and are not worth the paper they are printed on.
 

I hope 5E creates fewer items, but more memorable items and doesn't flood the gaming community with so many magic items that +1 weapons aren't even considered magical anymore. I would hope that special magic swords would be the exception instead of the rule
If special magic swords are the exception instead of the rule then it kinda sucks to play in the campaign in which they never come into play. I don't care whether the rules contain 50, 100 or 1000 worthwhile items (though more items calls for a better index). To some extent, the more the merrier - a bit like monsters, maps, races, etc, me and my players can pick and choose.

I used to make the GM's mistake of holding back all my best, most gonzo material because "if everything's special than nothing is". Then I realised that in good movies, good stories, good novesl the creators don't hold back. They give their best material. And I've changed my GMing correspondingly. The PCs in my game have special items.

The wizard/invoker wields the Sceptre of Erathis (3 parts, at present, of the Rod of 7 Parts). He also carries a mystical tome from which he reads during combat, and with which he once killed a gnoll when he struck it with the book and the book burst briefly into flame (critical opportunity attack with a Tome of Replenishing Flame).

The warpriest of Moradin wields Whelm, a dwarven thrower artefact, alternating between it and his halberd, and has plans to turn Whelm into Overwhelm (ie reforge it as a mordenkrad).

The paladin had, but has since lost, the Sword of Kas (Kas took it back). And he wears Meliorating Armour (granted him by his patron, the Raven Queen) so that, as a Questing Knight, the more he strives, the more resilient he becomes.

The drow sorcerer has sigils magically burned inside his eyelids by the Queen of Chaos, who came to him in a dream. From time to time the sigils blind him (next level, when he gets the 16th level feature for a Demonskin Adept, they will also from time to time blind his enemies); they also give him a strange awareness of the flow of chaos energy. In my session yesterday, this sorcerer stood atop the body of the dead firedrake Calastryx, Staff of Ruin in one hand (taken back, many levels earlier, from the goblin shaman who had stolen it from him), Wyrmtooth Dagger in the other (from the tooth of a black dragon killed by the PCs, carved by an elven crafter belonging to the same secret society as the drow), summoning a storm of fire and chaos and imbuing it into himself (granting the Gift of Flame) and into a carved elven horn the party recovered on an earlier adventure, transmuting it into a Fire Horn.

Those are all memorable items, for me and my players.

Now I don't particularly care how the game system models these sorts of things - although I think there can be good reasons, arising from the underlying system maths, to be wary of bonuses to d20 rolls (damage bonuses, on the other hand, are welcome!). In my game we don't use inherent bonuses, but most treasure gain takes the form of levelling up existing items rather than finding loot (as per the appendix in Adventurer's Vault), and even new items are as often the gifts of patrons (mortal or divine) as loot found in enemies' lairs.

But whatever the mechanics, I want the modelling to support the story, and I want the story to be one worth spending 4 hours a fortnight tuning in to.
 
Last edited:

I wasn't talking about wish lists.

I was talking about item distribution. When a +1 Ring of Protection was somewhat common in the game system and there weren't any whiz bang +1 Rings of Protection with a lot of other features, it was good for almost anyone in the party.

Now, there are so many "unique" items and so few bonus only items that one rarely expects for there to be more than one Amulet of Protection ever handed out. Hence, the vast majority of magic items with bonuses (i.e. the big three) are good for only one or two PCs out of the entire group and there isn't much discussion on who gets it.

By unique do you mean non-generic? Because the only unique items in the game I'm aware of are artifacts or named items.

Also, who exactly got the shield +5 in your pre-4E games? Anyone? The wizard had equal claim? What about the great axe? Do the paladin and rogue haggle over it?

Not to mention the huge number of items that were so class-specific that they had to invent an entire skill to allow people to use class-specific items, based on an ability of the same sort from earlier.

Sure, a given DM could hand out mostly non-special items, but does that really happen in games?

Not really.

Because that would be bloody dull for most people. It's like eating nutrient paste instead of a home-cooked meal.

Inherent bonuses drops the number of different magical items from 3111 to about 2400 or so (approximately dropping 3/4ths of 306 armor down to about 74, 159 neck down to 40, and 438 weapon down to 110). That's still a pretty large number of items. And of course, there are thousands of variations of armor and weapons (i.e. it could be a +2 mace or a hammer or a longsword, etc.) that I'm not even taking into account.

And yet I want more. Though I do wish they'd be more careful about nearly-identical items showing up, unless those items were actually upgraded versions of previous items.

Who has the Doritas on his shoulder now?

Still you. I made a factual statement, while you went on about how your personal table changed and coined "name tag" as a dysphemism of that change.

If magic items are required to fulfill good stories and the stories are crappy without certain magic items, then something's wrong with the game system.

Some of the most important stories in fantasy are centered around very specific magic items. D&D is, as well as a game, a way to tell a story. If you think LotR or Elric are failures, what can I say.

Player: "If only I had a Sun Globe, this would have been a much better story."

Err, what???

Some characters are defined by their equipment, some are not. See my avatar? That's the end result of many many years of fantastic stories that came about as a result of me begging my DM for a Ring of whatever-lets-you-resist-heat from 2E, back in the 90s. My current character adopted a huge shift in RP after getting ahold of modified Feyswarm Staff the DM called the "Staff of Whispers" - it ended up inspiring him to create the campaign's Changelings from the souls that were whispering within it.

There are many stories with objects as their centerpiece, either as loot or as items used. Not to mention that just the right gadget can completely alter what someone can do, like a Flying Carpet.

I think the game system plays just fine with a max of 500 magic items instead of a max of 3000+ items. Just because some game designer thinks of a magic item concept doesn't make it a good idea.

If we're both lucky, they'll start the game off with 500 magic items, and then pump out delicious magic item books for those of us who like more magic items in our games. You don't have to use the stuff I use.

In fact, a significant majority of 4E consumables totally suck and are not worth the paper they are printed on.

I agree! but that's related more to WotC's quality control.
 

I used to make the GM's mistake of holding back all my best, most gonzo material because "if everything's special than nothing is". Then I realised that in good movies, good stories, good novesl the creators don't hold back. They give their best material. And I've changed my GMing correspondingly. The PCs in my game have special items.

Must spread XP. I'd give you some for that paragraph alone, even though the whole post was gold. Took me awhile to learn that, too.
 

Remove ads

Top