Discussion on +x magic items

[Someone]

Maybe relevant to the discussion, maybe not, but here are some musings I had today while reading the thread.

I've been a rabid Story Hour reader once. Today I sit down and tried to remember the magic items the characters in two of these stories had (Sepulchave's and Piratecat's). It's been some time since I read them, but in addition to reading them I had a look at the character sheets and read the discussion and threads about the characters' builds.

It happens that I can name only a few of these magic items. Im sure they were loaded with +6 amulets and +5 cloaks and whatnot, but I just could remember that Velendo (sp? It's been a time...) had a stone shield he could lift as if it were made of balsa wood, that Mostin had his Looking Glass, Eadric had his intelligent Holy Avenger... All of those were quite potent stuff, and at least one of them (the mirror of mental prowess) shaped the way the game was played, effectively neutralizing the concept of distance. The point is, only a handful of the items the characters had in the story hours were memorable enough for the reader. I presume it's true for the player too: revising some of my old characters or PCs played in my campaings, I can only name a handful of the most significant items those PCs had.

Almost always those items have several things in common; they are quite potent and they very rarely (or never) have a pure mechanical benefit (a plus or bonus): either they have a conditional benefit that activates on certain circumstances, or need to be actively invoked, or else are homebrew and stick out precisely because they are unheard of. I'll add another cathegory: those with powers that are difficult to use because they are very specific but saved the party in some ocasion, and/or those who are used in creative ways. But even those don't offer pluses, but do things on their own.

So, if those special and memorable items are the ones that add to the game's wonder and magical feeling and increase the character's identity, is there a real need for the other ones? Do +1 swords or Gloves of dexterity +2 add atmosphere to the game? I don't think so. Repeating what I've already said in this thread, the game could benefit by removing them, so it could accommodate more styles of play (no magic items) without breaking the game's basic math, simplifying it (less magic items mean simpler high level play) and making room for the meaningful, cool magic items that are lost because of it's reduced efficiency compared to those that add pure mechanical benefits.

 

[pawsplay]

I don't really accept the "math is hard" argument. Having a bunch of specific, unique function magic items is really a lot more to keep track of.

 

[Nifft]

I don't really accept the "math is hard" argument. Having a bunch of specific, unique function magic items is really a lot more to keep track of.

It's not that math is hard. It's that it's annoying to track, especially when you have 20-30 effects which each change 1-10 numbers.

Now dispel half of the effects, and recalculate 1-10 things per effect.

It's not the difficulty of the simple arithmetic. It's the quantity of it during a single round of combat.

Cheers, -- N

 

[ThirdWizard]

I really wish +X items were out of 4e. Ah well... It's not so difficult to build them into character progression (what I already do for NPCs and was going to do with my next D&D campaign before the 4e announcement). I'll run 4e un-HRed once to see, but most likely that'll be HR #1.

By the way, the bonuses are part of the reason I heavily use Excel when I DM nowadays. I wouldn't DM D&D after level 10 without it!

 

[RangerWickett]

Why does WotC think the game needs +x items at all? Let's compare the game with them and the game without them, and see which is more interesting.

 

[FireLance]

Over in the magic item level thread, Prodigal Sun made a suggestion that I thought was quite interesting: a weapon's "plus" could add to its damage roll, but not to its attack roll.

This reduces the number of factors that could influence the probability of success (the attack roll), while still allowing a gradual escalation of the effects of a success (the damage roll).

In order to make the higher "pluses" more interesting, perhaps certain properties can only be added to a weapon with high "pluses", e.g. you could have a +1 flaming sword, but a vorpal sword needs to be at least +5 quality. Alternatively, if there are rules for enhancing or improving weapons, certain properties could improve with the number of "plusses" on your weapon, e.g. a a flaming sword deals +1d6 fire damage per "plus", or after the basic +1d6 fire damage, the wielder might be able to choose an additional ability per "plus" from a "flaming weapon" menu: e.g. +1d6 additional fire damage (may be selected multiple times, stacks), cold resistance 5 (may be selected multiple times, stacks), scorching ray 1/encounter, flaming burst property, etc.

 

[HP Dreadnought]

OK, given this answer, then what do we do with game mechanics like damage reduction and incorporeal?

How would a fighter ever hurt a ghost, spectre, wraith, etc., without a magical weapon? How about iron golems? Demons?

Would we change those monsters so that anyone can hurt them with any old sharp stick? Or would we assume that fighter will hide behind some cleric or mage for that encounter? Is his only recourse carrying around a backpack full of holy water?

Or do we build something into the character mechanic that says something like "all characters of level 8 or higher can hit incorporeal monsters" etc. Maybe modify that higher or lower for different classes?

In the first place, the +x property of a weapon no longer figures into DR in most situations. Its simply a magic weapon, or it isn't. In addition, we don't yet know what changes, if any, have been made to these mechanics.

. . . but let's take your golem example.

What's wrong with having a golem that simply has DR of 5?

There's no particular reason the hero has to have a sword that defeats the damage reduction. Higher level, more powerful heroes will be able to do more damage through feats/class abilities/non + properties of weapons etc. and therfore overcome the golem's natural damage resistance more easily.

In fact, having DR being a defense you can bypass creates a real problem in classifying the difficulty level of a monster. If the PCs have the right equipement, the monster becomes a much easier encounter, than for those parties that don't. . . even if they are the same level.

So when classifying the monster, do you assume that the PCs are properly equipped. If so, why bother giving the monster DR at all? Or do you assume the party doesn't have the right equipment. . . in which case a party that does will earn a disproportionate reward relative to the difficulty of the encounter.

From an overall perspective, there is no compelling mechanical reason why +x items have to exist in the game. There are plenty of ways to handle things without +x items.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Over in the magic item level thread, Prodigal Sun made a suggestion that I thought was quite interesting: a weapon's "plus" could add to its damage roll, but not to its attack roll.

I've thought about this before. A D&D +X sword actually increases damage in two ways, and there really is no need for that. And, to hit is by far the most difficult variable to pin down in a balance sense, so it would be the logical one to go. I would be for this kind of change, if only it would happen!

 

[pawsplay]

It's not that math is hard. It's that it's annoying to track, especially when you have 20-30 effects which each change 1-10 numbers.

Now dispel half of the effects, and recalculate 1-10 things per effect.

It's not the difficulty of the simple arithmetic. It's the quantity of it during a single round of combat.

Cheers, -- N

If you have nearly as many items, each of which is a special case of some kind, is it going to be easier? Anyway, area dispel affects spells, not magic item effects.

 

[Cadfan]

Why does WotC think the game needs +x items at all? Let's compare the game with them and the game without them, and see which is more interesting.

Players like getting stuff and increasing their stats. If every item is a "unique ability" item instead of a "+X" item, you either have to decrease the number of items a character has, irking players, or you end up drowning in minutia.

If you drop all the +X items and give out the same number of items as before, you end up with too much stuff. If everyone in the party needs not only a unique weapon, but unique armor, shield, gloves, belt, cloak, amulet, and two rings, you end up with the christmas tree effect except worse, because now you're overloaded with special abilities, making encounter design a nightmare.

If you drop all the +X items, and give out fewer items than before, my players won't be happy, and I wager a lot of other people's players will be the same way. I'm all for killing sacred cows, but "kill monsters, take their stuff" is probably too sacred even for me to slay.

I personally favor a middle ground. Keep +X weapons. Keep +X [skill] items. Probably keep +X armor and shields, so that the math from the +X items works out. Drop items that increase your ability scores, and break items that increase your saves up into multiple types of items, one for each save (probably put these bonuses in the armor). Lower "X" for most +X items, and add additional abilities to the item.

"+2 Sword" = boring.
"+1 Flaming Sword" = cooler.

And a note on skills- this is the one place where +X items are practically mandatory. Items like "Slippers of Spiderclimb" are actually damaging to the game because they're NOT +X items. Lets say that so far in your campaign, climbing problems have been solved by the Ranger. He climbs whatever it is you need to get over, ties a rope and lowers it for everyone else. To do this, he's got maxed ranks in Climb, no armor penalty, and a good strength score. His current Climb mod is +12.

Then you find Slippers of Spiderclimb. If you give them to the Ranger, he now automatically climbs things. That's nice and all, but it means all his skill ranks are wasted. Plus, you can get more mileage by giving the Slippers to the Cleric. Now he can wear his full plate and climb better than the Ranger, while the Ranger follows and does his best. You now have two characters who can climb instead of one. Except the Ranger lost his niche to a pair of shoes.

Change Slippers of Spiderclimb to read "+10 to climb checks," and your problem is fixed. Now you have two choices. If you give the Slippers to the Cleric, the Cleric will be able to sort of keep up with the Ranger. Lets say, Climb mod +7 total, due to armor penalties. So you'll have two climbers, the good one, the Ranger, and the ok one, the Cleric. Or, you can give the Slippers to the Ranger, giving him a total mod of +22. Now he's ridiculously good at climbing, and its all because he invested in the Climb skill.

That's why certain +X items are helpful. Non +X effects tend to be all or nothing, which devalues classes that do things on a percentage chance. Making them into +X items with the same theme empowers the classes who do similar things, by letting them do those things even better, instead of being pushed out of their niche.