Blowing up magic items, yes or no?

[Xarlen]

The wizard did a very logical, Reasonable thing.

It's been pointed out that sure, the character could've been True-Ressed, if disintegrated. The Wizard probably knows this, too. So, the option is either A) Kill him, and POOf, he's back lickidy split, or B) Keep him alive, but reduce his utter effectiveness, so that he may be alive, but he's sure as heck not going to be as dangerous.

This Is Not Pulling Punches. Really, that's an effective use of a spell, if you ask me. If Death is not something to fear, then use something else to put Fear into them. When Death is but an annoyance, then something else needs to be a concern, or There *is* no Risk.

Let us consider the situation where a mage is flying over a battlefield, where grounded baddies are trying to kill him. Their ranged weapons aren't hurting him. So, what's the reasonable thing to do? DISPEL the flying effect, so the wizard comes down and is wackable.

Consider that same example, where a wizard is flying over the battlefield, and being shot by archers. Sure, he can Kill the problematic archer, but instead, he nukes the blow, and flies over the group, mooning them, taunting them, then flying off. That's more satisfying. In one case, you have people who want you dead for killing their comrad, not to mention a comrad who will want you dead for killing them. In This case, you just erked them by hampering their ability to kill you.

Also something to consider. Now, I don't have the rules in front of me, but when destroying an item, you use the character's base save, right? So, they would use the fighter's base fort save. Now, this is the BASE save. Not upped via magical items, or con. So, really, if it doesn't use the con bonus/magic bonus, it's easier to destroy.

 

[Hakkenshi]

You know, I find this an interesting phenomenon that most players I hear of or know--except the better ones I play with--would rather lose the character than an item. Maybe it's a DM's perspective, but I'd much rather my character live. That's also because in our games, WE DON'T ALLOW RESURRECTIONS. There, I've said it

Also, and I'd like everyone's opinion on this, a player of mine had once argued he'd much rather lose the character than lose a level, since he swore it was too much like loss of self, from the character's point of view. I thought (and still think) that's bunk, but I'm curious as to what you think.

 

[Xarlen]

We also play with no raising, Hakkenshi. It's VERY RARE in my campaign. Atleast, you can't buy it. If you cast it, there are some other complications...

I'd rather die, and stay dead, and make a new character.

There's nothing heroic about dieing, only to come right back.

 

[Hakkenshi]

Exactly. I mean, where's the risk???

Plus imagine the cool story that goes with losing a weapon like that!

Tavern-goers: "Tell us more, El Ravager!"

El Ravager (takes a sip of ale): "Alright. So there I was, facing down the evil necromancer with my toothbrush +5, since my trusty Hackmaster +12 had--quite literally--bitten the dust (*sniff*), and then..."

The stuff of legends, man. The stuff of legends.

 

[Dragonblade]

The problem is with the rules. In D&D a character is defined by his items. All the "role-players" can argue otherwise but the simple fact is that a fighter is not just a fighter in D&D. He is a fighter with a cloak of this, armor +x and a sword of mighty gerbil cleaving +20.

All the CR's of all the monsters are predicated on the character having X amount of magical gear and wealth including weapons of a certain plus and an AC strong enough to cause those tough monsters to actually miss. Thus items of magic are essential to the game.

As a PC acquires items, that PC begins to see some of those items as defining his character and becomes attached to their items. He is not just a fighter but a legendary dragonslayer armed with his magical dragon hide armor and his trusty dragon slaying sword.

If you destroy the sword you have just destroyed part of the character's image and you might as well have just killed the character. Thus I totally agree with the sentiment that its better to die than to lose an item that you feel defines your character.

 

[Hakkenshi]

Bah, explain the sense behind that!
Think about real life, man. The character is supposed to be a living person in the game. I think many people are too quick to say "My character would rather die than do this!"

Think about how many playaz (not the D&D kind) crash their "ride", the spiritual centre of their funkiness and getting-me-someness. They live on afterward (provided the crash didn't kill them).

If someone breaks into your house and busts up (or steals) your computer (let's say you're really attached to it for the purpose of the argument), do you commit suicide??? Would you really rather have been shot by the nervous punk of a kid who decided he deserved your computer more than you?

If you do this in-game because you can be resurrected, you're abusing the rules. The first character I DMed who would do that would find his resurrection to be unpleasant indeed.

Items define character, sure, but a +5 sword doesn't define a character. If it's really a precious heirloom, then the DM can have you go on a quest to restore it. And you'd certainly want revenge. If you'd died instead, the sword would have gone to someone who wasn't part of your family, maybe even to your killer. Would that have been better?

 

[James McMurray]

Well, sometimes sh*t happens and PC lose something of their magical equipment (to pay a powerful evil dragon to spare their lifes, get a companion ressurected with a True Ressurection, get touched by a Rust Monster, Nightshade or Nightwalker, get hit by a Mordenkainen's Disjunction or drawing the wrong card from a Deck of many Things...). Magic items are still items and can be destroyed, so it's simply natural that some of them get broken.

Do I know you? 3 out of 5 of those have happened in my current campaign.

 

[Stormdale]

I hate the 3E “magic items only need to save if you roll a one on your save” rule (and only 4 items at that!) Me, I grew up with ye olde 1E. Cool you failed a save vs fireball, start rolling for all your items! Now that was fun, especially when the PC had dropped the fireball on themselves by mistake...ah expaning fireballs. I’m actually contemplating bringing back the 1E saving throws for items tables, just to scare my PCs. However, I’ve found that green slimes and grey oozes in 3E are the ideal magic items destroyers.

None of my players characters are defined by their magic items.
“Hi I’m Bob, with a +5 sword.”
“Great to meet you Bob, say hi to Bob everyone.”
If a player packs a sad (and one of ours occassionally does) because his favourite sword goes boom, that’s tough. After all it’s only a game and if they are that upset about it they can go game by themselves.

Stormdale

 

[Dragonblade]

The problem is that this isn't real life. Its a fantasy game with strong literary roots. And in literature characters are defined by not only their personality, but especially in fantasy, their abilities or items.

Would spider-man still be spider-man if he suddenly lost his ability to shoot webs and climb walls? No, he wouldn't because those abilities are part of what defines him. Would Hercules be Hercules without his strength? etc.

In D&D items are a provider of abilities and power and as result the item becomes an essential part of the character. If the fighter could simply pick up another sword and still do +5 keen damage then the loss is acceptable. But instead the character is robbed of his abilities and rendered effectively impotent.

An essential character defining ability has been taken away and in a literary sense the character as he was no longer exists. He is effectively "dead". Especially, to a player who considers his trusty magic blade as integral to his PC.

 

[Hakkenshi]

And yet both mythical and fantasy literature are both full of characters who survive on their wits alone to attain their vengeance and claim what's rightfully theirs.

Odysseus left his +5 bow at home, you'll notice, and since he was the only one who could string and use it, you'd think it's pretty iconic for him. Yet he managed.

My point is that there's no reason in D&D that the character could not retrieve the item somehow. Magic, a deity, a wish, whatever.

And unless I'm mistaken, even fantasy characters ought to behave believably.