Do Magic Item "Shops" wreck the spirit of D&D?

[howandwhy99]

Err... you've left off the Disguise modifier. You've basically got a Hat of Disguise that adds +6 Cha there. As I said, the hat of disguise is inherently cool.

I wasn't discussing custom items, though, but existing items that have been used in cool ways.

Cheers!

Hmm... Well the items were in game justifications for how +6 Cha items would work. Off the top of my head, I was thinking they actually were the personas in question. They appear over time in different eras of history and have some fun stories for the players to hear about when they hunt down who they were. (and the effect was alteration, not glamour)

Another good one would be Cloak of the Bat. It has a light curse effect, in that the longer one continuously wears it, the more one believes they are a vampire. That and the character grows more and more attached to wearing it (strengthening the bond). I'd make secret rolls for it like disease.

This one is actually an old item from a game where we thought we were being stalked by a high-level vampire. After we killed it we learned he was just a nerdy, pimply, kid commoner with tons of magic items. Due to the curse he had collected a number of vampire ability mimicking magic items (I don't recall which) all so he could more accurately realize his belief in him being a vampire. It was really funny actually. Little did we know the cloak was cursed when we scavenged everything.

Perhaps the dullest, most common DMG item I can think of is the Cloak of Resistance. It's nothing by a +1->+5 number to all saves. I suppose keeping the rain off isn't a novel use either.

The key is: why does it work? What is the in game justification for the mechanics? Mechanics have rationales in game or they just become pointless power boosts. In this case, let's say it works as it's a magical creature's hide. Outsiders have all good saves, so make it an angel's skin.

In game, it gives +1 to saves, confers negatives on social skills with good outsiders, positive bonuses with evil ones (balancing out), can be studied to learn it's originator, functions as the go between during clerical divination spells, and might even subtly influence the wearer's worshiping practices.

As for novel uses, that's harder. Stitch it into a protective saddlebag? Use it as cover? How many hobbits can fit under it?

 

[Vocenoctum]

I think you are entirely missing my point.

I believe your point was that magic items should be unique and flavorful. My point was that given a plethora of magical items, no matter what flavor you have introduced, the players will still focus on certain items, thus reducing the other items to simple gear. This is assuming you're using the rules as written, rather than custom rules, and applies to every edition.

You can tailor magic items to your campaign, and that will be straying from the RAW, but that doesn't really have any bearing on how the common D&D game is played, basically. Nothing wrong with it, but it's a different sort of discussion.

 

[Vocenoctum]

Here's my response: "Dear players, as you have correctly pointed out, you are currently well behind the "wealth by level" guidelines in the DMG. However, you are so vastly ahead of the "whiny little crybaby" guidelines that everything balances out. Sincerely, the D-fn-M."

"Wow DM, sorry we intruded on your little power play. We'll just have Bob run from now on, and you can go back to writing up your Hermoine fanfic."

I'm sure that if they were well ahead of the wealth guidelines you would not have gotten a reminder email.

I've complained about a DM giving away too much stuff before. We had almost double the gear we should have, and he had no clue how CR worked, it really hurts the game.

 

[FireLance]

Let me ask you this: are you using the CR/EL system, or are you choosing stuff based on what you know aout the players and their PCs? Do you run the game by the book, dice fall where they may, or do you wing it and handwave stuff? because if you do the latter in either or both situations, it is easy to have a game that provides appropriate challenges. If you do the former, I am impressed with your ability to manipulate an arcane and broken system of setting up challenges in the face of a completely unbalanced character dynamic.

Depends on what you mean by "use" the CR/EL system. For me, the CR system is generally a first cut to eliminate creatures that would be either too powerful for the PCs to handle, or not powerful enough to provide a decent challenge. So, when planning challenges I would first shortlist creatures with CR between party level -2 and party level +2. From this band of creatures, I would pick those that fit the theme of the adventure and provide an interesting encounter for the PCs - either because they have a special ability that the PCs have not encountered in a while, or they play to a particular character's strengths (to make the player feel good), or to a particular character's weaknesses (to give the player some tension).

From that creature base, I generally plan encounters to have an EL of party level to party level +1, with ELs of party level +2 to +3 for the climatic ones. There will usually be at least one encounter with multiple weaker foes (CR less than party level), at least one encounter with a single tough opponent (CR more than party level), and at least one encounter with a tougher opponent supported by some weaker ones (boss with CR equal to party level or party level +1, minion(s) with CR less than party level).

If the adventure is set up so that that PCs do not have the option of retreating and resting whenever their resources run low, I will plan how to insert contingency rest breaks seamlessly into the flow of the adventure in case an encounter turns out to be tougher than expected (or the PCs were just unlucky) so that during the actual running of the game, it is easier for me to pace the encounters.

With this set-up, the need for me to fudge almost never comes up when I'm DMing 3.5e. The one time a PC actually got killed (not just knocked into negatives) in a game I ran, it was partly due to a tactical mistake on the part of the player which left him open to a full attack, and partly because I rolled the entire full attack sequence for the opponent instead of one attack at a time. If I had rolled one attack at a time, the opponent would have stopped attacking the PC once he was unconscious and turned his other attacks on the other PCs instead.

 

[howandwhy99]

EDIT: Tnagential, but related -- I got an email today from my players "reminding" me that they were well behind the "wealth by level" guidelines in the DMG. i mean, when would that have happened with 1E? WTF?

That's just wrongheaded. Tell 'em they need to improve upon their treasure hunting skills, as they are obviously behind the class average.

 

[MerricB]

In AD&D, if they didn't have enough magic items to function, they'd...

...(a) complain
...(b) leave.

In AD&D, if they were given too many magic items, the serious players would complain or leave.

Monty Haul games are related directly to magic items given out. Killer Dungeons can be related to a lack of magic items.

Cheers!

 

[howandwhy99]

You know what's getting tiresome? People pretending that items like this are matters of fact instead of matters of opinion and lively debate.

These are not safe assumptions by any sort of a long shot. So, I guess:

4) Wrong..

Perhaps you missed the absolute pronouncements of rightness from the other side a few pages back? C gives a number of backing arguments for each assertion.

 

[Vocenoctum]

It doesn't have to be the case, though. There might only be one set of said gloves, thereby making them inherently special. There's a similar issue with monsters in the game. if every other orc the PCs come up against is also a half dragon, the half dragon is dull and rote. But if there is *a* Half Dragon, it is suddenly much cooler.

Right, but either way you need the stats for Half Dragon. Whether common or unique or some place in between, the option comes first. Glove of Dexterity can be a unique set, or it can be a mundane set. Either way GoD are required to be somewhere in there.

FOr myself, as I've mentioned before, I like being able to evolve items, though I prefer having the option myself rather than DM Fiat. I think I'd prefer to make my own legend, rather than inherit some story that will never sync up with what I want for my PC.

3E sets up a situation in which it is assumed that there are reasonably large numbers of "normal" magical gear, all for sale. That's not something the game designers should decide. That's something for the DM to decide. Unfortunately, it would be impossible to run a "1 of each" style campaign in 3rd Edition because ueful, fairly standardized magical gear is an expected part of the equation. You'd have to do a whole bunch of fiddling with an already uncertain CR/EL system to bring the uniqueness back to magic in 3E using just the Core. And that shouldn't be the case.

I'm generally of a mind that it is;
1) easier to remove a race/class/item/spell than it is if the material didn't exist already
2) easier to scale down monsters to match a weaker group or a groups weakness, rather than scaling up a group when they're too powerful (since Save or Die and such effects can get quite hard to figure on the fly when trying to find the right "shelf" for the players abilities)
3) it is more fun to focus on gameplay and gloss over shopping. A tangent here is that 3e doesn't assume that there are lots of magic items laying about. It simply assumes that the players have access to items appropriate for their level of ability. They can find what they wish without a lot of trouble, since they've learned over long hours of adventuring where such things are.

These are just my opinions, based on my DMing style.

3E added a whole bunch of neatness to magic items -- both mechanically (quantifying prerequisties for their creation, standardizing bonuses, etc..) and flavor wise (love, love, LOVE weapon and armor special abilities). But built into that same system was an inherently high magic level and an actual need for things like magic shops. i mean, why they kept random treasure rolls, magic and otherwise, around is beyond me, since everything is supposed to be counted to the last bean in order to ensure balance.

randomness is still present, based on the idea that the average value of 13 encounters will come to close to the suggested wealth. The sense of discovery is still present to an extent, and as mentioned, it's still an advantage to find an item over having to buy it (since you only sell at half price).

I realize that there was aubiquity of magical items in previous editions as well, especially when you're talking about +1 swords and the like. However, adjusting that element of the game did not have the same balance breaking effect as it does in 3E.

I think the problem with earlier editions was the complete randomness of the encounters. There wasn't a simple way to adjust anything, you just winged it. I think it's just as easy in 3.5 edition, actually easier since DR is no longer + of the weapon related.

EDIT: Tnagential, but related -- I got an email today from my players "reminding" me that they were well behind the "wealth by level" guidelines in the DMG. i mean, when would that have happened with 1E? WTF?

I tend to gloss over treasure during long stretchs, then play "catchup" by adding stuff at some point in a big batch. I've always liked Treasure Troves more than rooting through the nest of a bunch of kenku or whatever. I don't know your players, so can't judge. The email could be a simple "hey, there's neat stuff we want" or a gentle reminder because they think you forgot....

or one or more of them may have bought MIC and want to go shopping.

 

[DragonLancer]

The DMG was OFF LIMITS to the players. Learning how magic items worked was to be as shocking, terrifying, and wondrous as learning what a module had in store for you. If the players CHEATED and knew them all, you're going to have to alter every one or make new ones. Ditto on monsters and the MM.

I do kinda agree on this a little. It's a different topic but we could get away from a lot of the unnessecary powergaming and metagaming (with magic items in this discussion) if players did not have access to anything outside of character creation, skills, feats and spells. It's their ease of scouring the combat rules and MI's that spoil the game for players and cause D&D to lose some of it's magical nature. It has become a game of mathematics and predictability.

Thats just my opinion.

 

[Korgoth]

"Wow DM, sorry we intruded on your little power play. We'll just have Bob run from now on, and you can go back to writing up your Hermoine fanfic."

Oh right, because in the world of 3E any DM who isn't an obsequious toady to munchkin powergamers is some kind of weirdo. I forgot about that.

But yes, if the players feel like they can do a better job one of them should step up. It's easy to call the DM's creative decisions a "power play"... but the fact is that if anything goes wrong with the game it is blamed on the DM. The buck stops with the DM, so he is obligated to be more than the players' stepandfetchit boy.