Confirmed: Magic items and summoned monster stats in PHB

[Brother MacLaren]

Why does it have to be one or the other? That is my problem with your whole attitude.

You have a problem with my attitude?

I've found this thread to be an interesting conversation about the changing expectations over time of what information players should have and what information DMs should have. There really is a difference from earlier editions to 3E/4E. The issue of buying magic items ties into the importance of optimization; another very significant difference from earlier editions to 3E. The fact that 3E was designed to reduce the importance of DM judgment calls is also worth talking about.

Some of the responses have been illuminating, some frustrating, and some thought-provoking. Overall I thought it was a conversation worth having, and I didn't try to insult anybody. Okay, I didn't preface my initial post with "in my opinion, it's better when the DM is the one deciding what magic items exist and deciding how to adjudicate things," and I guess that was a mistake. I'm sorry to have offended you, and I guess I should bow out of this thread now.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Two simple statements which perfectly encapsulate my thoughts on this matter. Thanks.

Me, too.

I don't want to bother with micromanaging my PCs statistics. I am pretty content with managing the flow of the campaign and the adventures, and adjudicating crazy stuff my players come up with...

 

[Lord Zardoz]

I despise the entire idea of PCs buying magic items -- whether I am a player or a DM. It kills the wonder.

Exactly how much wonder can you have in a situation that generally amounts to 4-6 geeks sitting around a table, possibly in a basement, rolling dice and playing make believe while moving little figurines around on a grid?

While the fantasy and story elements of D&D are of great importance, attempts to look past the fact that it is a game is impossible. There are some things where a DM judgement call are perfectly fine, such as in a goofy player stabbing himself with a sword because he knows he has more HP than the weapons max damage output. And no matter how many ranks in Diplomacy a player has, he is not going to convince the king to abdicate and turn the throne over to him just because he asked nicely.

However, sooner or later, there will be some metagame aspects added in. You cannot turn a balony sandwich into a steak sandwich by slathering on A1 Steak sauce. No matter how much effort you put into describing the damage the player is taking, if he still has 50 out of 60 HP, he is not likely to act all that hurt until his HP drop low enough to make death a real threat. No matter how dangerous you describe the spears of the hobgoblin warriors, he may choose to eat the AoO while going after the primary villain. Most importantly, the magic of the D&D game is about as likely to inspire wonder as an empty pop can. I just do not see how anyone can expect otherwise. At the end of the day, this is a game that describes magical weapons as a "Sword +1" at times. Not a whole lot of wonder regarding that kind of item. Maybe magic ought to be rare and wonderous, but it is not likely to be. If it were, a 1st level mage could probably cow an entire town into obedience by his aw inspiring burning hands spell.

Ultimately, relying on Wonder through Obscurity Of Game Elements is not a particularly good approach. Having compelling characters, interesting story elements, and a compelling adventure hook seem much more important. And no amount of rules knowledge is likely to to impair those things.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[jaer]

The last thing I want to do as a DM is control summoned monsters. Had a druid player who summoned 1d4+1 monsters often in order to crowd out enemies or get flanking bonuses. If I'm already controlling 4 or 5 creatures in combat, I don't want to deal with 4 more!

As a player, I had a wizard with an infernal owl familiar. The owl had personality, and often spoke with me as an NPC would (it had it's own agendas, too, which we worked together on), but in combat, he did as I directed. If he was to deliver a touch spell, he did so. I was in control...but that does not mean he didn't have his own personality.

My players tend to have their summoned monsters react animalistically as appropriate unless they can be directed otherwise. Similarly, when PCs are charmed, dominated, or confused, I don't start playing for that person. I might write a note telling them what the dominating created ordered them to do, but they must do it (I really don't need to suddenly have some character sheet I've never seen before in my hands, and me trying to use it in a fight). If a PC typically Power Attacks in combat, it is understood in my group that he should continue to do so when confused and fighting a friend. They should do their best to not metagame the confusion; I trust my players to do so.

As for magic items, when I DM, I tend to start of restricting the PCs. Generally they are in places that don't have a lot of magic items; selection is low. I control the flow through low levels. But when they get higher, I remove those restrictions. They still clear items with be before any purchase, but I try not to hamper my character's ability to buy or create items. Having them in the PHB does make it easier; much less "what does this do again?" and "can I borrow someone's DMG?"

And just because it is in the PHB, even if the game is intended for open-market, there is nothing to restrict the market or add smaller side effects.

 

[MaelStorm]

As a player, I DON'T WANT the DM to equip my PC with all his gear. And as a DM, I really don't want to do that either.

Yeah, me too I totally agree 100% on this. Live and let live.

Ultimately, relying on Wonder through Obscurity Of Game Elements is not a particularly good approach. Having compelling characters, interesting story elements, and a compelling adventure hook seem much more important. And no amount of rules knowledge is likely to to impair those things.

I agree 100% on this too. This is the single most important element in RPG.

 

[Set]

Ironically, we've had less of the 'magic item shop' syndrome in 3E than we had in 2nd edition, when we'd go into a town and roll to see if they had any Elven Chain for sale (which they never did), mutter and then roll to see if they had any Sea Elven Scale (which, even in deserts, if the GM gave them a 1% chance, they always seemed to have in stock, leading to a whole lot of Sea Elven Scale clad magic-users...).

In 3.5, I'm not even sure if there are availability rules for items. In our gaming group, the GM just decides if something is available, and, if not, how long it will take to special order.

 

[RigaMortus2]

I'm astounded that people are used to running thier own familiars. What's the fun of that? Do you set there talking with yourself? Does your familiar never get into mischief? Does it never have a mind of its own?

Just for fun, we usually pick another player to play the role the a familiar. So Player A's familiar may be run by Player B.

Mostly though, the DM allows the player's to control familiars and companions, so long as they don't abuse the ability. I don't know if it is expressly written anywhere as to WHO should be controlling these creatures (Player or DM), it is just something we've adopted that works for our group.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Seems to be continuing and even exacerbating the 3E trend.
Players shouldn't be equipping their PCs with magic items; DMs should be equipping the PCs with magic items.
Players shouldn't need the Monster Manual to adjudicate shapechanging or summoning effects; DMs should adjudicate all effects of any kind whatsoever.

I do enough work. The more block-stacking tasks I can delegate to my players, the better.

 

[pukunui]

For what it's worth, I've also found that my players, all of whom are older gamers who don't really like 3e's dependence on mechanical optimization, often suffer because they haven't got the right magical equipment ... and this is primarily because they don't have access to the magic items in the DMG (most of them don't, anyway) so they don't even know what they're missing let alone what they could be using to make things easier for them.

 

[Caliban]

You have a problem with my attitude?

Just as much as you have a problem with the very idea of PC's being able buy magic items out of the PHB.

I think comes down to the attitude of "My Campaign" vs "My Character".

As a DM (especially those with the "Great Storyteller" slant) the tendency is to want as much control over the elements of the campaign as possible so as to better to direct the direction and story of the campaign.

As a Player (especially those with a competitive slant) the tendency is to want as much information about and control of your characters abilities as possible.

As time has progressed and the player base has grown up and matured, the core rules of the game have leaned more and more towards the "My Character" side of things.

Obviously, I think this is a good thing. I've been on both sides of the screen, and I simply don't have the time to be the DM and keep track of everything the PC's have at the same time. The more control the PC's have over their characters (within reason), the more I can focus on creating the story and running the game.

As a player, I personally don't enjoy it much when I'm kept in the dark about my character can do or what options he has available. Too much of that, and I feel like I'm basically a spectator in the DM's "Great Story" that will unfold as he wills it, regardless of the wishes of the players. Some DM's are good enough storytellers that even this can be enjoyable, but most are not. What's worse is the DM's who think they are that good a storyteller, when they are not.

And of course things can go to far in the other direction. But I don't think we are there yet.

I'm sorry to have offended you, and I guess I should bow out of this thread now.

Meh. I don't think I'm the one who has been "offended".