If inherent bonuses and enchantment bonuses stack - what are the implications?

[Viking Bastard]

So, Monte Cook's recent article on magic has fired up a lot of discussion on the merits of expected magic item ownership being worked into the math. I've enjoyed reading these discussions, but I want to narrow down the discussion in this thread towards certain mechanical aspects. It seems to me that if you want characters to not need magic items to keep up, but still want that +3 Ancestral Sword of Magical Pwnage to give you the expected "Ooh! Aah! Magic! Of pwnage!" bonuses, you simply make inherent bonuses and enchantment bonuses stack.

But by doing so you are moving beyond the expectations of the system math. So my question is: if enchantment bonuses stack with inherent bonuses, what implication would that have for the DM and the game?

 

[Riastlin]

It would depend on how high the enhancement bonuses went. If they remained just as high as they are now (i.e. up to +6), then you would end up with PCs hitting all the time (or having to up monster defenses which in turn makes the magic items necessary again).

If on the other hand, you limited enhancement bonuses to say a max of +2, then it probably wouldn't be that big of a deal. Any time a flat +X to hit/damage/defense/whatever is relatively easy to come by, it will likely turn into an arms race since hitting more often/being hit less often are alway more fun than "deal an addition X damage if situation Y occurs".

This is why I like the idea of simply going with inherent bonuses (or scaling the system such that even inherent bonuses are not necessary) and just limiting magic items to having properties and powers. A sun blade would still be cool because it can double as a torch. Sting would be useful for alerting you to the presence of orcs. A frost blade would be handy should you happen to come across fire elementals, etc.

 

[Rune]

Well, that's one way to speed up combat!

Your monsters will have a harder time hitting the PCs and the PCs simply will not miss. The added damage will just be gravy.

 

[Viking Bastard]

It would depend on how high the enhancement bonuses went.

I'm thinking what if inherent bonuses were as they are and magic items were as they are. No fiddling on the player end other than the bonuses stacking.

Lets rephrase the question to: if WotC released this as an optional rule with guidelines, what would the guidelines need to entail?

 

[Incenjucar]

I'm thinking what if inherent bonuses were as they are and magic items were as they are. No fiddling on the player end other than the bonuses stacking.

Lets rephrase the question to: if WotC released this as an optional rule with guidelines, what would the guidelines need to entail?

+1 to monster attacks and defenses and +5% monster HP every 5 levels

 

[Riastlin]

I'm thinking what if inherent bonuses were as they are and magic items were as they are. No fiddling on the player end other than the bonuses stacking.

Lets rephrase the question to: if WotC released this as an optional rule with guidelines, what would the guidelines need to entail?

I don't have the inherent bonus rules in front of me, but I believe that they go up to +6 bonus as do the enhancement bonuses (the idea being that you can have a no magic campaign and still make the math work).

So, if they stack, you would end up with PCs with +12 by the end of epic just from items and inherent bonuses. Throw in feats and you are looking at +15 to hit and up to +16 to defenses all the time. Conditional feats and powers, etc., will just make it that much worse. The end result would be as [MENTION=67]Rune[/MENTION] says the PCs always hit and are never hit in return.

So as for guidelines: [MENTION=6182]Incenjucar[/MENTION] has a good start with +1 to hit and defenses per 5 levels. Thing is though, that while this balances out the stacked bonuses, it also kind of defeats the purpose of the inherent bonus. The idea by inherent bonuses is to get around the need for magic and to in some cases make the game a bit simpler. Now though you'd just be adding another layer of math to the equation, thus making it more complex rather than less.

So personally, I think the better guideline would be to allow them to stack, but to a) make items with enhancement bonuses very rare and b) cap the amount of enhancement bonus at +2, maybe +3. Actually, making enhancement bonuses +1 per tier wouldn't be so bad. It would be a nice way to speed up combat (particularly as characters get more complex) and can be compensated by having monsters gain +1 to hit and defenses per tier.

 

[Viking Bastard]

Presumably, if one were to do this, it would be for a game with fewer magic items than the norm, otherwise it is, as you point out, pointless.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm thinking what if inherent bonuses were as they are and magic items were as they are. No fiddling on the player end other than the bonuses stacking.

Lets rephrase the question to: if WotC released this as an optional rule with guidelines, what would the guidelines need to entail?

As they are? i'm not sure you can get there. But if it worked, the easiest way that I can see is:

1. Have inherent bonuses as written, and let them stack.
2. Remove all "math fix" feats.
3. Let items handle the math fixes.

Since the +1 to +6 items are going to give somewhat more than the eliminated math fix stuff, you'd have to decide if the increased capabilities were worth it dealing with via other means. However, I think if you limited yourself with items of +1 per tier (roughly) but were judicious in how you let them be found, this could work well enough. You'd have to keep a sharp eye on party synergy.

I'm doing something similar right now, with a group that really milks party synergy (in any system). After some thought, and having started before the CB let us do inherent bonuses, I decided to eliminate the math fix stuff, but deliberately award better items than normal. I expect if this breaks down later, I can always switch to the inherent bonuses. But since the campaign is expected to stop mid-paragon, probably won't be a problem.

 

[bganon]

I like to use inherent bonuses a lot. When I do, I usually just remove most item enhancement bonuses (but keep the other properties). Occasionally I'll give an item a +1 or +2 that does stack with the inherent bonus. Going much beyond that would seem to put players rather far ahead of the curve, and goes against the major reason I use inherent bonuses in the first place: to allow high-level characters to still be effective without equipment.

 

[Ryujin]

I would hope that they wouldn't state this, as an optional rule, and would go so far as to say that the wouldn't. The predictable result would be taking a largely balanced system, and breaking it.

Inherent Bonuses need to be Enhancement Bonuses, so that they don't stack.