if your DM gave you 200,000 in magicals-what would you buy?

[Rystil Arden]

Oh, and Sir T, I would venture that most of the people here who are posting *have* played campaigns to 12th-level and *have* seen the PCs keep wealth in line (more or less) with the baseline. Heck, I give out lots of treasure, and my characters are way under (of course, there are reasons for this, as posted above plus I forgot about the time that the Shade PC stole 1 million GP from his teammates in various items recovered from a ruined city and gave them to an epic thief in payment for a job, then blamed the theft of the party's stuff on his character's elven sister, causing her to be banished to the Plane of Shadow, but then again, those items were random stuff that they never had much use for). But even for me as DM on a pendulum upswing (when they just got new loot instead of just losing it), 200k is quite a lot for 12th-level characters.

In another, less crazy campaign, my characters had wealth well below the baseline at 12th-level, although one of their problems was Pseudomagical items that ceased function when the Netherese mythallar came crashing down...oh well I guess all my campaigns are crazy (the party, having run out of arrows and spells, managed to defeat a powerful orc chasing them by throwing what had once been an minor--artifact at him "Umm...I throw the Orb of Pal-Jaz."). Also, the arcanist had a golem, but the golem was more of another character (and she was the only thing the party has worth more than a few thousand gold pieces). The point of my rambling is that we are not wide-eyed idealists who quote the rules without ever putting them in practise. We have all been there, many of us from the start of the new edition (I remember fondly my weekly session that was on the day the 3E PH came out when we tried to play without the other two core books), and we have seen these rules in real games.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

Now thats a low magic campaign! I like those the best, that is you can be a spell caster but no more than half your level etc....or no spell caster at all sometimes is fun.

I agree have the players reli on skills and feats rather than pure magic and thats why Half of our campaigns are in a low magic realm.

Thorncrest

You're right. My 12th level PCs had less. My whole party might not have added up to 88,000 gp.

That's what you call low-magic world, you see.

Of course, your experience may vary. That's the point of the boards and these questions, to get different people's experiences. Ours are clearly different from yours.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

Oh, and Sir T, I would venture that most of the people here who are posting *have* played campaigns to 12th-level and *have* seen the PCs keep wealth in line (more or less) with the baseline.

I know all campaigns differ slightly to drastically. My piont being I have never even seen a DM or players monitor to an exact coin the amount per level rule. I also have experienced that all games are kept in ck to a degree.

an example
If you stuck to the RAW and a 12th fighter goes into a cr 12 dungeon, he will need some will boost because his undoubtedly meager will and ref saves will get him killed more than 1/2 the time. And a +1 or plus 2 from the party cleric will simply mean he now has a 50% or worse chance of getting waxed.

It just seems by this level there are so many spells, poisons, touch attacks that make you save or die (BoVD especially) that without significant boosts your a gonner. And if your going by the 88,000 for 12th level rule & spend a lot of your cash to boost your saves then your left with lower magic in other areas....well i guess thats the balancing part.

but I still say your a gonner if the DM doesnt flub the dice!
Thorncrest

 

[MerakSpielman]

ST, you're arguing using a lot of hypothetical examples and few specific examples. This leads me to believe that you've never actually played at 12th level with core rules wealth levels. If I am correct, then you really shouldn't be arguing the point so forcefully.

 

[Rystil Arden]

Well, aside from the fact that anyone who plays a straight level 12 Fighter is simply asking to be ineffective (if the campaign has lots of weird feats and PrCs, the player should specialise with a PrC, but if the campaign is Core Rules only, there aren't really enough good feats to justify Fighter levels over, say, Barbarian levels), it isn't hard at all to stay in tip-top shape for saves against appropriate encounters. With all those feats lying around (9 if he's a human), the fighter probably took Iron Will, which by itself accounts for the only difference between save DCs and poor Will saves at level 12 except those raised by ability score disparity (discounting someone crazy enough to take double spell focus feats). Don't believe me? The DCs are 16+stat and the save is 6+stat, which offers a 55% chance of success. "But Rystil," you say, "Of course the enemy wizard has higher in his favoured stat of Intelligence than the party's Fighter has on something like Wisdom." This is true. In fact, its easy to extrapolate an expected maximal distance. Assuming 32 point-buy, the fighter probably has around 12 Wisdom and the wizard probably has around 22 Intelligence. This is a disparity of 5 to the bonus, and it can be overcome by spending less than 1/3 of the 88000 gold on a Cloak of Resistance +5. Once again, the fighter has a 55% chance to save. Add in clerical buffs or a Wisdom boost and he's even better off (and Reflex saves won't matter too much, they all let him use his hit points as a shield). That being said, the only Will Save spell that the Fighter really needs to fear at this point in the game is Dominate Person, and that takes a full-round action to cast (easy to interrupt). If Dominate becomes a real problem, there is a very tricky way to become immune to 5th-level or lower Compulsion effects, if your party wizard is willing to spend a feat on Heighten Spell. Simply have them Heighten a Charm or Dominate Person and cast it on you. Now, whenever a 5th-level or lower Compulsion effect contradicts with your own wizard's effect, yours wins out, and you don't have to fight your own party.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

slavery I tell you! The combatants may object to this but you are right in desperation its a good idea.

Thorncrest

Well, aside from the fact that anyone who plays a straight level 12 Fighter is simply asking to be ineffective (if the campaign has lots of weird feats and PrCs, the player should specialise with a PrC, but if the campaign is Core Rules only, there aren't really enough good feats to justify Fighter levels over, say, Barbarian levels), it isn't hard at all to stay in tip-top shape for saves against appropriate encounters. With all those feats lying around (9 if he's a human), the fighter probably took Iron Will, which by itself accounts for the only difference between save DCs and poor Will saves at level 12 except those raised by ability score disparity (discounting someone crazy enough to take double spell focus feats). Don't believe me? The DCs are 16+stat and the save is 6+stat, which offers a 55% chance of success. "But Rystil," you say, "Of course the enemy wizard has higher in his favoured stat of Intelligence than the party's Fighter has on something like Wisdom." This is true. In fact, its easy to extrapolate an expected maximal distance. Assuming 32 point-buy, the fighter probably has around 12 Wisdom and the wizard probably has around 22 Intelligence. This is a disparity of 5 to the bonus, and it can be overcome by spending less than 1/3 of the 88000 gold on a Cloak of Resistance +5. Once again, the fighter has a 55% chance to save. Add in clerical buffs or a Wisdom boost and he's even better off (and Reflex saves won't matter too much, they all let him use his hit points as a shield). That being said, the only Will Save spell that the Fighter really needs to fear at this point in the game is Dominate Person, and that takes a full-round action to cast (easy to interrupt). If Dominate becomes a real problem, there is a very tricky way to become immune to 5th-level or lower Compulsion effects, if your party wizard is willing to spend a feat on Heighten Spell. Simply have them Heighten a Charm or Dominate Person and cast it on you. Now, whenever a 5th-level or lower Compulsion effect contradicts with your own wizard's effect, yours wins out, and you don't have to fight your own party.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

Im not trying to be forcefull here. OUr group plays in 50% low magic campaigns and 50% normal. I've played in several campaigns that go thru this level....I personally dont care for epic campaigns or anything over 15th level because the party needs to fight such things as demons etc to find a challenge. Having lost the challenges of fighting your standard orc etc.

My position is as clear as J. Kerry's, I voted for high level before voting against it dont you understand?

Thorncrest

ST, you're arguing using a lot of hypothetical examples and few specific examples. This leads me to believe that you've never actually played at 12th level with core rules wealth levels. If I am correct, then you really shouldn't be arguing the point so forcefully.

 

[ARandomGod]

Sounds like you're pretty attached to your character's kewl toys.

I am, I really, really am. They've very important to me.

So maybe Im trying to say "yes it says that in the book, yes that is the rule but I have yet to see anyone actually use this as a rule inforcing the exact guidline."

Thorncrest

Yea, it's all about relativity.

On the other hand, I'm in at least one similiar campaign that I consider higher magic item level than I'm used to (the existing PC's definitely have more than average character wealth). But I took a mage (Arcane Trickster, actually. My favorite mage type) and bought nearly 100% of my items using the Craft Wonderous Items feat. At "recommended" wealth levels. In that end I had way more magic than anyone else in the group. Another new PC who came into the party at the same level I did (And, strangely enough, it was at exactly 12th level) and ended up with substantially less. Of course, not only did I effectively double my starting gold at the cost of a relatively paltry amount of XP (No, I didn't buy any spells other than that needed for my items. I stuck with the base amount given per level plus a few for specific items), but I also optimized those items. It's not how much you buy, but what you buy.

...
All the PC item loss in my campaign due to Disjunction has been through the PCs whacking themselves with their own Disjunction flung back at them. After the wizard crafted her fourth Headband of Intellect +6 and then Disjoined it again, she just stopped casting the spell. So I'm not some evil DM who tries to take away my PCs' magic items. My players are just that careless and willing to repeat mistakes.
...

Well that's more than fair. ^_^
If you dish it out, expect to bite it now and then.

I do prefer my completely altering the spell. It now (when I'm in charge) works just like disjunction, only instead of destroying the items it mealy suppresses them for a period of ... ususally several days. (I make this variable).
More of a Mordenkaian's (sp?) antimagic bomb than a disjunction.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

Can you tell me your Arcane trickster build? I have a PC that wanted to play a rogue/wizard but other than being multi classed 6 wiz 6 rogue there isnt anything but the Arcane trickester. And this would be a great role playing combo of classes yet there only 1 prstg class available. He was reluctant because he had to be what 9th level to qualify...can you explain to me how you qualified? I would like to copy and paste your response and e mail to the player. (if you would be so kind include the advantageous of the class)

Thorncrest

I am, I really, really am. They've very important to me.



Yea, it's all about relativity.

On the other hand, I'm in at least one similiar campaign that I consider higher magic item level than I'm used to (the existing PC's definitely have more than average character wealth). But I took a mage (Arcane Trickster, actually. My favorite mage type) and bought nearly 100% of my items using the Craft Wonderous Items feat. At "recommended" wealth levels. In that end I had way more magic than anyone else in the group. Another new PC who came into the party at the same level I did (And, strangely enough, it was at exactly 12th level) and ended up with substantially less. Of course, not only did I effectively double my starting gold at the cost of a relatively paltry amount of XP (No, I didn't buy any spells other than that needed for my items. I stuck with the base amount given per level plus a few for specific items), but I also optimized those items. It's not how much you buy, but what you buy.



Well that's more than fair. ^_^
If you dish it out, expect to bite it now and then.

I do prefer my completely altering the spell. It now (when I'm in charge) works just like disjunction, only instead of destroying the items it mealy suppresses them for a period of ... ususally several days. (I make this variable).
More of a Mordenkaian's (sp?) antimagic bomb than a disjunction.

 

[Terath Ninir]

You want to cast Disjunction on my once, as is? Nope. I'm going home.

Sorry, just had to throw my incredible distast for that spell out there.

Amen! A stupid cheesy tactic is no less stupid and cheesy when it's mostly done by the DM to the PCs. You have a game that obsesses over every gp and every magic item, then you're going to suddenly take some/all of them away from the PCs with a cheesy spell? Uh-uh. That is the sign of 1) bad game design and 2) bad DMing.

It wasn't so bad when it was a rare spell found only in a supplement book. But as a Core spell, it is cheese on a stick. The rules are based on everyone having all their 1337 kewl stuff -- when you take them away, you're unfairly punishing the players.