Forked from Xmas Tree: Are Item Slots Necessary? [Any Edition]

[Tequila Sunrise]

Item slots are one of those gamist D&Disms that most of us just accept for the sake of game balance. (Item slots can be explained, if you go out of your way to do so. MoI goes out of its way to explain them for example, but that doesn't help anyone who's not familiar with the book.) But are they actually necessary for game balance?

I don't know whether there are item slots in OD&D/1e, and I don't remember if 2e has them.

Near the end of my 3e run, I started thinking "Is this necessary? Do item slots actually balance the game in any meaningful way? Why not just let characters buy the bonuses they need and describe their accessories however they want?" I suspect that a power gamer could probably find a cheesy combo or two if unrestrained by item slots -- but I never saw one and I could never think of one myself.

Now that I'm playing 4e, with its finely balanced/lamed items, I'm becoming less and less interested in enforcing item slots. If players have a finite supply of items to begin with, and if they're all balanced, why shouldn't characters run around with multiple necklaces or whatever?

But maybe I'm just ignorant. In fact, I'd like you to prove me ignorant: give me all the cheesy combos that item slots prevent, if you can!

 

[Dice4Hire]

Easy answer:

Almost any ten rings. Or twenty, if you allow toes. Or more, if you go for noese, nipples, belly buttons, fat rolls etc.

Item slots are an intuitive way to balance magical items. The best? No, and it presumes that there are a LOT of items available, which I know many people dislike.

 

[Garmorn]

A couple that I remember, A belt, a shoulder bardic, and a sash. A skull cap under a helm, with a hood over both.

Slots can also server a lesser purpose. They help with encumbrance. By limiting magic items to the slots, it helps avoid "I can carry a ton" with out actually having to figure the weight of the item.s

 

[Chrono22]

I don't think item slots are really a good solution to balance- but I like the concept of chakras in regards to magic. I'd prefer a system whereby a character could simply enchant or augment his own chakras- the supernatural traits would be conferred to items that occupy that slot. I'd just really prefer magic equipment to be subsumed by character progression instead of being based on economics. Perhaps a weapons-of-legacy esque system would also work.

 

[billd91]

I don't think of item slots as a D&Dism at all. They're pretty much a late-comer to the party since I don't think there was any formal definition for them before 3e. I think there's a certain value in making it absolutely clear that certain magic items really can't go on if something else is already there. But that's about it. I don't see much else of value in considering items "slotted".

 

[korjik]

Depends on what you consider balanced. If the DM takes the items into account, and adjusts accordingly, then the actual number and power of the items is not all that important.

In 4e, it should be even easier. Except for the enhancement bonuses, the items dont really have all that much power. You may be able to find some combos where two necklaces is a bit much, but that should be controllable on a per item basis.

I never really liked the 'slot' restriction. I more prefer a 'what you could wear' restriction. You may have on like 5 layers, between shirt, armour, tabard, robe, and cloak, but you should be able to get them on.

 

[SiderisAnon]

In general, I think item slots are realistic. You can only wear and use one pair of magic boots and one magic item on top of your head. You can't just wrap 12 magic belts around your arms and torso because the magic won't work that way as it's designed to activate when properly worn around your waist.

Where it gets gray for me is rings and amulets. I've seen explanations that you can't use more than one ring on each hand because they interfere with each other and I'm willing to accept that. However, while that makes sense for an always active Ring of Protection, what about if you wear a Ring of Feather Falling and Ring of Water Breathing? They're probably never active at the same time, so why couldn't you have both?

With the glut of magic in most D&D, I would say that the slotting is a necessary balance mechanic. I have run games where amulets were unlimted and it didn't throw things off too terribly, but I did make creating of amulets much more expensive.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Easy answer:

Almost any ten rings. Or twenty, if you allow toes. Or more, if you go for noese, nipples, belly buttons, fat rolls etc.

Care to be more specific? Rings are powerful, but if you have a bunch of rings then you don't have much else. Unless three rings have cheesy synergy, I'm not seeing a particular problem -- other than how gaudy a character will look wearing twenty rings. But hey, maybe it's in character.

I never really liked the 'slot' restriction. I more prefer a 'what you could wear' restriction. You may have on like 5 layers, between shirt, armour, tabard, robe, and cloak, but you should be able to get them on.

I like the idea of the 'what you can wear rule' too. DM judgment can usually suffice, but I wouldn't mind having a 'realistic item slot' rule. Naturally footgear would be limited to one item, or maybe two if I count socks (), while the neck and ring slots could be virtually limitless.

With the glut of magic in most D&D, I would say that the slotting is a necessary balance mechanic. I have run games where amulets were unlimted and it didn't throw things off too terribly, but I did make creating of amulets much more expensive.

What specifically did throw your game [slightly] off when you allowed unlimited amulets?

 

[Plane Sailing]

I hate to say it, but IIRC item slots came forth in CRPGs first (because the computer has to have defined places where you put stuff).

The first time I remember seeing item slots in a game was in 3e (it was part of the '3e is too videogamey' vibe at the time, but please don't drag this thread off in that direction, thanks).

In older editions it basically relied upon a few rules (the magic of rings meant that you could only wear one ring on a hand, maximum two rings) and that you couldn't wear two of the same thing at once to get the benefits (e.g. you can't wear two cloaks).

I have to say that in 20 years of playing under that system it never caused any problems in the groups I played with.

My preference is not to use a 'slot' system because it makes it seem as though the PC has 'slots that should be filled'. I much prefer to leave it pretty organic, ensure stuff doesn't stack, and just have a restriction on rings.

(in 3e you had sad situations with the slot system that sorcerers, bards and paladins had to choose between buffing their Charisma with a cloak or buffing their saves with a cloak, but couldn't have both buffed - unlike other classes who could have their primary attribute and saves both buffed since the things didn't share a slot!)

Cheers

 

[erf_beto]

Why not just let characters buy the bonuses they need and describe their accessories however they want?

I'd like to subscribe to this newsletter...