Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
[FULL] OOC: Dichotomy's Age of Worms Redux [FULL]
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="o3caudata" data-source="post: 3731757" data-attributes="member: 45361"><p>I vote we change the rules to read as such:</p><p></p><p>You can create any wondrous item whose prerequisites you meet. Enchanting a wondrous item takes one casting of every required spell for every 1,000 gp in its price, and a minimum of one day. To enchant a wondrous item, you must spend 1/25 of the item’s price in XP and use up raw materials costing half of this price.</p><p></p><p>And that we get to playing again.</p><p></p><p>(my justification is: m_n will whine if we don't. the point of this whole thing is to have fun. I seriously doubt that we'll have less fun as a result of this. Especially if m_n actually makes things for all of us <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p>it will still take time to craft. 16,000 gp +4 str things are not going to be a "hey, i'll make this now, while she runs inside to gather some information" sorts of things. if it's your goal to prevent m_n from crafting, it'll still be within your power to move the group to be able to do so. if you're goal is to attempt to drive some non-combat, non-pre-built-storyline roleplaying, you'll still be provided the opportunity to. More than we would be if we took the feat away, or left it as is [as m_n has already said he'd never use it.] </p><p></p><p>To me, this solution might actually present SOME opportunity to incorporate those aspects into our games, and possibly we will find that we enjoy them and in the future not need to fight so vigorously to avoid them.)</p><p></p><p></p><p>and now, to continue this discussion, i would like to move on to m_n's next point of argument: </p><p></p><p>"wondrous items should not have a predetermined body slot. rather, they should have a slot which is similarly fitting for the enhancement being provided. for instance, there is no reason a +2 cha thing needs to be a cloak, a periapt or robe should be equally fitting. many other similar situations exist."</p><p></p><p>thank you and have a good sunday.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="o3caudata, post: 3731757, member: 45361"] I vote we change the rules to read as such: You can create any wondrous item whose prerequisites you meet. Enchanting a wondrous item takes one casting of every required spell for every 1,000 gp in its price, and a minimum of one day. To enchant a wondrous item, you must spend 1/25 of the item’s price in XP and use up raw materials costing half of this price. And that we get to playing again. (my justification is: m_n will whine if we don't. the point of this whole thing is to have fun. I seriously doubt that we'll have less fun as a result of this. Especially if m_n actually makes things for all of us ;) it will still take time to craft. 16,000 gp +4 str things are not going to be a "hey, i'll make this now, while she runs inside to gather some information" sorts of things. if it's your goal to prevent m_n from crafting, it'll still be within your power to move the group to be able to do so. if you're goal is to attempt to drive some non-combat, non-pre-built-storyline roleplaying, you'll still be provided the opportunity to. More than we would be if we took the feat away, or left it as is [as m_n has already said he'd never use it.] To me, this solution might actually present SOME opportunity to incorporate those aspects into our games, and possibly we will find that we enjoy them and in the future not need to fight so vigorously to avoid them.) and now, to continue this discussion, i would like to move on to m_n's next point of argument: "wondrous items should not have a predetermined body slot. rather, they should have a slot which is similarly fitting for the enhancement being provided. for instance, there is no reason a +2 cha thing needs to be a cloak, a periapt or robe should be equally fitting. many other similar situations exist." thank you and have a good sunday. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
[FULL] OOC: Dichotomy's Age of Worms Redux [FULL]
Top