Drow items

[Ravellion]

What is so difficult about treating drow weapons differently than other weapons? Just amke sure there is enough other, regular loot for your players, should they desire such things.

If they are not magical, I see no need (and no possibilty either) for them disintegrating. If they are Unholy (something I think definitely makes sense) I also don't see the need for them disintegrating as a security mechanism. If they are really a lot cheaper to make with the 'drow disintegration' tag, I can see why this would be the case though.

I actually kind of see where most posters are going with this, or to quote fenes 2: "high-level drow (and only those have magic weapons imc)". Ie. they don't give 2nd level drow fighters 32000 gp of equipment (which is a rough estimate of three +3 items), they give the 9th level drow treasure for it's level, but then still make it disintegrate when it gets hit by sunlight.

That, I think, is a wholly different animal, though not completely inline with what I read in the 2e sources. That solves my 'economy complaint' easily.

Rav

 

[Fenes 2]

That, I think, is a wholly different animal, though not completely inline with what I read in the 2e sources. That solves my 'economy complaint' easily.

In a late issue of Dragon about the Drow they were described as born murderers, with even the children possessing surprisingly high levels of rogue or fighter and thus posing a deadly threat for PCs that relax their guard around them.

I am always in favor of level/skill, not gear making a character powerful and dangerous, so I will probably use this IMC. A level of rogue or two (with the sneak attack damage when flanking) should make up for "only" MW weapons on low-level drow.

(Although 2 low-level rogues pairing up against our PC elven archer almost managed to cut him down with flanking sneak attacks in 2 to 3 rounds despite being 5 to 6 levels lower, so I may have to be a bit careful not to make them too deadly ...)

 

[Henry]

Assuming the equipment of a 2nd level Drow fighter from one of the D1-D2 series, you have approximately 8,000gp worth of equipment - admittedly, were it normal equipment, far too much for your average 2nd level group of pc's to get hold of. However, most drow are faced with foes of 8th level or higher (since given the other threats in the underdark, and supply problems), the PC's will likely be much higher to face, and correspondingly have a higher treasure base to work from.

If an enterprising group of PC's try to sell to another drow city, I have no problem with this. There are innumerable dangers in travel between Drow cities, and another piece of anarchonistic information from the Drow source material: Teleports do not work underground beyond certain limited distances, making it necessary to travel that distance by foot or other means of conveyance. Should they travel the weeks required to trade with a rival Drow city, they they are deserving of such wealth.

Hence my statement: it doesn't really unbalance anything, since there are already rules checks and roleplay checks in place for all of these situations. As long as the DM are aware of all the ramifications, then there is no problem with drow weapons as originally written. Every rule or option has a loophole (mighty cleaving bucket-o-snails, anyone?), but this option doesn't necessarily cause the DM any undue problems.

 

[drnuncheon]

I am just wondering how you bypass 50% of my original point: Where does all the XP and cash come from to create the
enormous amount of items from?

Well, assuming that this is true:

As for item creation, according to the books, they just set magical items in a room, and the radiation of the Underdark makes it magical. The way I understand this, they just make Masterwork stuff, stick it in a spot where the radiation is strong for about a year, and the magical radiation makes it magical.

...then they don't need enormous amounts of XP and cash - it's a process more akin to making an adamantite weapon than it is to making a magical one.

One more extra point: The 'unusable treasure' schtick is used by me as well (most notably unholy weapons), but for how long can you withhold treasure (basically) from the opponents defeated to the party before one of the 'carrots' is no longer working? A prolonged drow campaign would eventually have PC's falling beneath 'the treasure per PC at level x'.

That's assuming that they're not getting treasure/equipment from other sources. A clever DM can certainly find a way around this. Perhaps some of the drow are equipped with magical items taken from previous surface-dweller invasions, or the party gets magical swords created for them by dwarven wizards as a reward for battling the drow scourge, or they recover enough valuable gems and jewelry from the drow that they are able to commission creation of items, or...well, you get the idea.

J

 

[Psion]

I am just wondering how you bypass 50% of my original point: Where does all the XP and cash come from to create the enormous amount of items from?

Oooh... big words. That'll make your point.

Where does it come from? Originally, the items were an adamantium alloy, and adamantium items in 3e don't require XP. As to where it comes from... it's not like there are "magic item shops" that exist outside of the contuity of the game you have to shelf gp out to. Drow live under the earth, so they obviously mine the raw materials and forge it into weapons at the behest of their masters.

You, like Sean, are obsessing on teatotaling gp values and failing to see the forest of the game world through the trees.

I just don't really like the "because the DM said so" approach

Then I recommend Synnibar instead of D&D, as that is a game that will keep those wily GMs in line. As for me, I play D&D where it is encumbent upon the DM to create the fantasy world and populate it, and don't feel the need to kowtow to some munchkin player because he doesn't feel like he is getting the magic items he thinks are coming to him.

Cumbersome rule? you've got me there: You are using house rules which I haven't seen statted.

So? House rules are part and parcel of D&D AFAIAC, and there is nothing especially cumbersome about applying this rule more than any other.

A prolonged drow campaign would eventually have PC's falling beneath 'the treasure per PC at level x'.

I already addressed this. Make the value of "drow items" in addition to their normal allotment, and adjust CR accordingly.

 

[Ravellion]

Originally posted by Psion Oooh... big words. That'll make your point.

Then you shouldn't have ignored them when they were small before, instead of just focussing on the weakest point of my argument, and actually calling me hypocrite (albeit in lesser words)... I really don't see why you need adverserial statements like these to make your point. Is there a personal bias you have against me? I don't see you focus on semantics with other posters now, do I? Do Drow items hold a special place in your heart or something?

Where does it come from? Originally, the items were an adamantium alloy, and adamantium items in 3e don't require XP. As to where it comes from... it's not like there are "magic item shops" that exist outside of the contuity of the game you have to shelf gp out to. Drow live under the earth, so they obviously mine the raw materials and forge it into weapons at the behest of their masters.

Fine, you could have told me so before. The thing is, as I already said, I just have the 2e shadowdale adventure to go on, and the 2e MM. In the shadowdale adventure, the (by then probably 2nd or third level PCs, depending on class) will have lots of 'kewl stuff'. +3 swords, chain and bucklers. The module and the 2e MM said 'disintegrates in Sunlight'. It specifically did not mention anything like 'underdark radiation'. This will create big problems for the DM, if your players are resourceful enough.

Above and beyond that, adamantine itself does not disintegrate from being exposed to the sun, or away from the underdark, not in 2e, or in 3e. Only drow adamantine derivative weapons did that in 2e.
And even though there are no: "magic item shops' that exist outside of the contuity of the game", there might (and IMC, there are) be equivalents inside the continuity of the game.

You, like Sean, are obsessing on teatotaling gp values and failing to see the forest of the game world through the trees.

I do happen to believe that roleplaying restrictions do not work. I also never read anything in the core rules about not being able to teleport and sell your loot either. I actually take pride in my campaign world, which I have, as you put it, created and populated, and in which my players have great fun, even though one of them is a bit of a minmaxer/steam venter.

Then I recommend Synnibar instead of D&D, as that is a game that will keep those wily GMs in line. As for me, I play D&D where it is encumbent upon the DM to create the fantasy world and populate it, and don't feel the need to kowtow to some munchkin player because he doesn't feel like he is getting the magic items he thinks are coming to him.

You are severely overstating, and misquoting, my previous statements. I now wonder if you do this in your reviews, which I always enjoy reading, as well. Note also that you do not know said player in my campaign, and that I refrained from using the word munchkin, which I think is another word which I can only see as being adversarial, as there isn't even a good, clear, definiton of what a mucnkin actually is.

So? House rules are part and parcel of D&D AFAIAC, and there is nothing especially cumbersome about applying this rule more than any other.

You are right, but it wasn't even clear about which house rule we were talking about! I was thinking back to 2e, and in that ruleset, I really did NOT like the drow weapons, and wouldn't even begin to consider using them again at all. See my example above.

I already addressed this. Make the value of "drow items" in addition to their normal allotment, and adjust CR accordingly.

My apologies, I missed that.

I haven't addressed everything, but I'll wait till I have another reply, before posting more.

Rav

 

[Psion]

Then you shouldn't have ignored them when they were small before, instead of just focussing on the weakest point of my argument,

And what is wrong with that? I address the points that concern me the most or I take the most exception to, naturally. It's not that I ignored your points, I just didn't feel it worth my time to address the other points as I obviously did not feel them particularly relevant and/or compelling. But you said "whatabout" and I answered, so let's not dwell on it.

Above and beyond that, adamantine itself does not disintegrate from being exposed to the sun, or away from the underdark, not in 2e, or in 3e. Only drow adamantine derivative weapons did that in 2e.

What it does in 3e is already irrelevant to this discussion, as we already all well know what rules the book provides, and we also have the reasoning behind why those rules were excluded from 3e. The topic of this discussion is WHY some of use find those reasons are particularly ill-founded.

And even though there are no: "magic item shops' that exist outside of the contuity of the game", there might (and IMC, there are) be equivalents inside the continuity of the game.

There may well be. But your argument about "where does all this gold come from" essentially treats magic items like this tremendous black hole in the drow elf economy that is unreasonable. In the context of the game, it doesn't work that way. Drow elves enslave others to do their bidding, mining the resources they need to make what implements of war that they need. It's not like they even ever have to use gold -- the GP rating is a rating of power, not ready cash.

I do happen to believe that roleplaying restrictions do not work.

Who said anything about roleplaying restrictions? The statement that you were replying to was directly in reference to the attitude that gold must change hands for magic items to exist, as if the gm were some infinite bank in a game of monopoly.

You are severely overstating, and misquoting, my previous statements.

Am I? I don't remember quoting you at all to be "misquoting" you to begin with. But since you bring it up, the statement I was responding to is: "I just don't really like the "because the DM said so" approach". That's a pretty extreme statement where I am standing, one on par with the design approach behind Synnibar, which purports that the GM should have extremely limited licence.

Not that I think you really beleive that or run your game that way (I wouldn't know - perhaps you do) but you statement did sound perfectly on-par with Synnibar to me in attitude. I suspect you were using a little hyperbole or exagaration yourself, but if you use such argumentative techniques, don't be surprised when I take it at face value to demonstrate how silly your characterization is.

Now to be fair, I do belevie that the GM should meet certain expectation of players, else why should the players play. But I consider giving dark elves items that players cannot take full advantage of to be well within a DM's reasonable license. As the initial poster said, this is tantamount to not allowing a player to harvest any of a number of capabilities from enemies.

 

[the Jester]

Well, imc, I run drow pretty close to the 1e vision of them. They are extremely rare, sneaky, vicious, and powerful. They have access to magicks unknown to the surface folk, and their items do disintigrate in sunlight.

Why is there such a strong sentiment against this? It doesn't seem to me any different from having orc-only weapons that give the half-orc's racial trait of orcish blood meaning.

 

[jgbrowning]

The reason why this new rule bothers me so much is that there is this undercurrent about it. As if I as a DM make situations that are challaging to my players and i dont reward them with stuff they can use that i am somehow being an "unreasonable" DM. An "adversarial" DM.

It also implies that as a DM, i cannot make weapons that have special qualities.... what about underwater only weapons that dont work if they're not underwater? That crumble to dust because they need to be immersed in water?

To me the disintigrating effect was simply another charactaristic flag, to use nerd terms, on drow items. they do this and they do that.

Personally i find this new drow ruling to be one of many short, seemingly logical steps, towards promoting the idea that DM's must materially reward players. The first seamingly logical step was basing monster CRs off one particular concept for how much magic PC's should have. And then the CR's were used to generate exp.

As anyone can tell you, if you try to play DnD in low magic settings, you run into serious balance issues, making the game less flexible for people who like that type of play.

again i think the real problem is not world consistancy, economic issues, or item creation rules. the main problem is that players expect to be able to use drow weapons as regular weapons.

It is that expectation that makes them think the items are unfair or used by DMs who want to "screw their players outta some good magic."

If players expected to be able to use medusae head and turn people into stone with them, this arguement would be the same.

I think the "reasons" for this change are "justifications" for people not liking the fact that, although they look like regular weapons, drow weapons are different.

joe b.

 

[herald]

I wish I had BOVD with me, but here goes.

I know that there was a section that deleved into bad guys trapping thier gear. If who ever found it, bad things would happen.

Well, if there ever was a Race that qualified for BOVD concept, the Drow are it.

It really comes down to this. There are two ways of looking at it. From a "Crunchy" side, or a "Fluff" side.

The Crunch side says, there aren't rule to cover that and we don't want to make rules that will screw with players sense of fairness.

The Fluff side says, "Hey, what about the history we have here. You haven't explained why these weapons don't work, in a canon sort of way."

So there has to be some kind of middle ground. Every DM will have to make there own discission. And that is what works the best for me.

Here is a scenario:
We know for a fact that there are some raw materials that are used in the manufacture of magic items, above and beyond the masterwork item. Those items are consumed in the manufacture of the item. Chances are the object on the surface, are differant than what is used in the Underdark. The process in which the Drow magical items costs as much as much to make as any others, but because thay are have to use nonstandard consumables, they have a flaw. Once exposed to sunlight, they loose the enchantment permanently.

Here is another senario:

Drow are mysterios being that most races haven't encountered. Those that did, traveled far underground and faced Drow and defeated them. When they brought back thier spoils of war, they found out that the weapons lost thier enchantment upon being exposed to sunlight. And for a while, that was a common knowledge among some adventures. But since then Drow have been making more and more raids on the surface world and have have been using Drow Armor and Weapons of more standard materials.

In otherwords, the Drow adapt and change to meet thier needs. They avoid using using the components to make their weapons last on surface because it is conveniate for them. The go to the extra expense to purchace raw materials for standard magical items as per need.

Either way it can be worked into the game one way or the other. I would say flavor to your own taste.