Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7345653" data-attributes="member: 12731">(written before I browse the thread)Two more important design fundamentals:1. Reduce drops - a larger proportion of items are supposed to be purchased rather than lootedBy this I merely mean the obvious - if you keep finding as much loot with magic shoppes as you did without, you are going to end up with more magic items. I will simply assume this to not be the intended result. Instead, whenever a module tells you to place a +1 dagger and an Ioun Stone of Leadership in a cave somewhere, you might want to remove one or both items and instead place perhaps a thousand gold or so.The characters still end up with magic items, only they find the gold and can then choose for themselves which exact item to get.If you remove all items and just hand out gold, I believe we all agree that's too harsh. Finding items is after all fun too. Sometimes NPCs are issued signature items that really ought to remain lootable. Sometimes you simply want to let the players get a few rolls on the random treasure lists of the DMG.If you remove no items, I hope we agree that easily leads to &quot;too many&quot; items. Since you can buy more back in town. In a gold-rich campaign, you'll end up with many times more items.So to keep it simple I'm assuming/suggesting1a. Half the lootable items (like every other item) are removed. 1b. This is not an exact science and does not need to be. The gold you place instead does not have to be exact or even close. You can even simply remove items with no gold replacement at all, provided you're either generous elsewhere or like handing out fewer items.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CapnZapp, post: 7345653, member: 12731"] (written before I browse the thread) Two more important design fundamentals: [B]1. Reduce drops - a larger proportion of items are supposed to be purchased rather than looted[/B] By this I merely mean the obvious - if you keep finding as much loot with magic shoppes as you did without, you are going to end up with more magic items. I will simply assume this to not be the intended result. Instead, whenever a module tells you to place a +1 dagger and an Ioun Stone of Leadership in a cave somewhere, you might want to remove one or both items and instead place perhaps a thousand gold or so. The characters still end up with magic items, only they find the gold and can then choose for themselves which exact item to get. If you remove [B]all[/B] items and just hand out gold, I believe we all agree that's too harsh. Finding items is after all fun too. Sometimes NPCs are issued signature items that really ought to remain lootable. Sometimes you simply want to let the players get a few rolls on the random treasure lists of the DMG. If you remove [B]no[/B] items, I hope we agree that easily leads to "too many" items. Since you can buy more back in town. In a gold-rich campaign, you'll end up with many times more items. So to keep it simple I'm assuming/suggesting 1a. Half the lootable items (like every other item) are removed. 1b. This is not an exact science and does not need to be. The gold you place instead does not have to be exact or even close. You can even simply remove items with no gold replacement at all, provided you're either generous elsewhere or like handing out fewer items. [/QUOTE]

Verification