Magic item creation question for the DMs

[Michael Tree]

I answered Yes to the poll, but in retrospect I should have answered Sort-of.

I encourage players to create magic items that aren't in the book, but will modify or flat-out disallow items that are too unbalancing to the game, or completely change the nature of the game. The reason isn't "because I say so" but rather "because it will unbalance the game, and ultimately make it less fun."

I, as a GM, want to have fun telling a story, and challenge not just the PCs but the players as well. When a single magic item removes that chanllenge, when my GMing changes from "challenging the player" to "trying to cope with a magic item" it's not fun anymore.

Take for example your +40 Hide item. Yes there are ways of dealing with this, but having to constantly have to counteract it is a pain, and destroys the verisimilitude of the game as well. If every opponent suddenly has means of undoing a +40 hide item, that's metagaming in the worst way.

That particular item has other problems. Firstly, it detracts from the classes whose usefulness revolves around being stealthy. If any fighter or wizard could suddenly gain a +40 bonus to hide, what's the point in taking 10 levels in rogue or ranger for a measly 13 ranks in hide?

Secondly, characters don't know about numerical bonuses. A character could make an item that "makes me much better at hiding", but not one that "gives me a +40 bonus on hiding". It's up to the GM, and to a lesser degree the player, to determine the mechanical effects of items a character makes.

We have to remember that those numbers in the back of the DMG are guidelines, and nothing more. Any item that seems too cheap for what it does *is* too cheap for what it does, and should be made more expensive. Any item that seems too outrageously powerful to ever be allowed into the game should never be allowed into the game. An unlimited use cure light wounds gizmo definitely fits into the latter category, for all but perhaps the highest level characters. An unlimited use use-activated True Strike weapon also falls into the latter category IMO.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Exactly analysis on the True Strike use activated item guys!

BTW the DM needs to be careful about allowing spells that are restricted to the caster to be transferred into a magic item.

 

[kreynolds]

Take for example your +40 Hide item. Yes there are ways of dealing with this, but having to constantly have to counteract it is a pain, and destroys the verisimilitude of the game as well. If every opponent suddenly has means of undoing a +40 hide item, that's metagaming in the worst way.

It's only metagaming if a bad DM allows it to be, and a bad DM will let it go that far. What's wrong with a player having an advantage with Hide? So what if every single PC is going to have trouble spotting them. They're supposed to. They're players. The've been leveling up, growing more powerful, and probably wealthier. What else are they gonna do with that cash? Eat it for lunch and just let a big fat number sit on their character sheet while the DM hands out cookie-cutter magic items straight from the DMG? I doubt it.

That particular item has other problems. Firstly, it detracts from the classes whose usefulness revolves around being stealthy. If any fighter or wizard could suddenly gain a +40 bonus to hide, what's the point in taking 10 levels in rogue or ranger for a measly 13 ranks in hide?

No it doesn't. If any fighter or wizard could suddenly gain a +40 bonus to hide, that also means that a rogue can too. You take 10 more levels in the Rogue for more sneak attacks, BAB increases, saving throw increases, ability score increases, hit point increases, skill point increases, and additional feats. What I was arguing was that it is possible to create the +40 Hide item. Now, it's not very likely that a fighter would want it because it's better suited for a rogue, but if the fighter does want it, let the bum have it. If he would rather plop down over 30,000gp on a +40 hide item than spending it to upgrade his weapon or armor like he should, that's not your problem. It all works out in the end.

 

[kreynolds]

Exactly analysis on the True Strike use activated item guys!

We already did it. Go back and reread the thread.

 

[sylvyr]

My answer would have to be a resounding yes... with a bit of reserve.


I agree with the post before me, if it's unbalacing: just say it. Don't beat around the bush. I agree with the original idea behind this post; tell the player why. If a player wants to make an insane item, tell him why you don't want it in the game.

But yes, custom magic items is what it's about. Let them become the goal of a chatacter. I played with a nazi DM once... it was horrible... I was a 16th level char and all I had were two katanas +3 and a ring of water walking..

I think people forget the D&D is designed to be built upon, tinkered with. f no one thought of anythingnew, it would really suck. The trick is not to get caught up in unbalancing isues.. which is quite difficult. But I encourage my players to explore new venues; that's the only way to promote originality.

 

[Michael Tree]

It's only metagaming if a bad DM allows it to be, and a bad DM will let it go that far. What's wrong with a player having an advantage with Hide? So what if every single PC is going to have trouble spotting them. They're supposed to. They're players. The've been leveling up, growing more powerful, and probably wealthier. What else are they gonna do with that cash? Eat it for lunch and just let a big fat number sit on their character sheet while the DM hands out cookie-cutter magic items straight from the DMG? I doubt it.

Any situation where the only choices a GM has are 1)letting the player dominate the gam, automatically succeeding because of a magic item, and 2)metagaming to keep the item in line, is a no-win situation. The GM is no longer challenging the player - the GM is deciding between letting the item arbitrarily succeed, and making the item arbitrarily fail. There's no more chance or randomness or fairness. The GM is basically deciding whether or not the character succeed or fail.

There's nothing wrong with a player having an advantage with Hide. There is something wrong with a player having an unbeatable advantage with Hide. There's an enormous difference between an item that gives a cool bonus and an item that makes the character ultimately good at what the item gives a bonus on, one which you seem to be missing.

You argument about "what else are they going to do with that cash" is a straw-man argument. No one here is arguing that players shouldn't be able to make magic items, just that they shouldn't be able to make items that are terribly unbalancing and make the GM's job a pain in the *ahem*.

Out of curiosity, are you just playing devil's advocate, or do you truly see nothing wrong with items of +40 Hide, weapons of True Strike (+20 on all attacks, wahoo!), and gizmos of unlimited Cure Light Wounds?

No it doesn't. If any fighter or wizard could suddenly gain a +40 bonus to hide, that also means that a rogue can too. You take 10 more levels in the Rogue for more sneak attacks, BAB increases, saving throw increases, ability score increases, hit point increases, skill point increases, and additional feats. What I was arguing was that it is possible to create the +40 Hide item. Now, it's not very likely that a fighter would want it because it's better suited for a rogue, but if the fighter does want it, let the bum have it. If he would rather plop down over 30,000gp on a +40 hide item than spending it to upgrade his weapon or armor like he should, that's not your problem. It all works out in the end.

In most circumstances, the difference between a +40 Hide and a +53 Hide is purely academic. You could counteract the difference by giving +40 spot items, but then the characters who are supposedly stealthy but don't have a +40 Hide item become useless at hiding.

As for a fighter, you're wrong. It's *extremely* likely that a fighter would want it, since it would make him ultimately good at Hiding as well as a fantastic combatant, for a measely 30,000 gold.

Only the cheeziest of powergamers would complain that the GM wouldn't let him create a +40 Hide magic item.

IMO a character's abilities should come primarily from their race and class, and only secondly from their magic items. The moment when magic items start to overshadow what the character can naturally do, is the moment I stop playing. I want to play a cool useful character who has some neat items that accentuate his abiltiies and give him a few cool tricks, not a magic-item-platform who also, incidentally, has some minor abilities of his own.

 

[kreynolds]

Out of curiosity, are you just playing devil's advocate, or do you truly see nothing wrong with items of +40 Hide, weapons of True Strike (+20 on all attacks, wahoo!), and gizmos of unlimited Cure Light Wounds?

Neither. And you and I agree on this issue of magic items. You are unlike the others when this thread first started. Go back and check out the posts between you and I. It's amazing what we had to go through just so that you would fully explain your reasoning to me. But that was the point of this thread, to get it out in the open and find out once and for all what the hell these DMs have a problem with.

It always starts out the same. For 2 or 3 posts I get a really piss poor excuse about why someone wouldn't allow a magic item. These few posts start off strong, and then my argument tears them to pieces. In the end, the person finally explains what their deal is and, BAM!, low and behold, they actually see this objectively. But for some reason, they wouldn't tell you why before.

I have three different theories on this.

1) 75% of the DMs out there don't have a frickin' clue how to build, price, or balance magic items and they don't wanna deal with it so they just ban crap at will without any explanation what-so-ever. After this argument, they change their tune so that it matches the argument that the majority agrees with. (This one isn't very likely)

2) A high number of the DMs out their are just crappy DMs or they just lack adequate experience. (This one is pretty likely)

3) Some of the DMs already agree with me on this, but they just don't come outright and say it, because to be honest, it's a real pain in the butt to express an opinion like this on a messageboard. It's time comsuming because there is so much involved in an opinion like that. (Some people will claim this one, even though they truly should claim #2)

So Michael, in the end, you and I, like Axiomatic and Crothian and CRGreathouse and others, we all know how to balance a magic item in a campaign. We all know how to make a magic item. We all know the limits of a magic item. But most importantly, we know when a magic item and it's powers are appropriate or not. This is what we base our decision on.

And this whole thread got started because of answers like "No.", yet we all see it pretty similarly, thus my theories above. Go figure.

As far as the items you mentioned above in that quote: I do recognize that a +40 to hide magic item or a gizmo of cure light wounds could be difficult to deal with from a DM perspective, but it wouldn't be difficult for me. I guess I'm just lucky. As far as a weapon of true strike, absolutely I would allow the weapon, but not as you describe it, and if you bothered to read the previous posts, you would also realize that nobody else would allow the weapon the way you describe either. However, I would allow it, so long as it functioned in the manner previously discussed in this thread, which was part of the basis for my entire argument.

 

[Benben]

Nitpicking...

A Wand of True Strike is obvious: Standard action to activate that provokes an attack of opportunity.

Wands do not provoke attacks of opportunity.

SRD:

Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn’t provoke attacks of opportunity.

 

[kreynolds]

Re: Nitpicking...

Wands do not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Yeah, I was damn tired last night. This thread ran for a while and it was late. Thanks for pointing it out though, as I hadn't noticed it until now.

 

[Victim]

Adding really powerful skill items doesn't really take way the point of skill based classes, no more than a +5 weapon takes away the point of a barbarian. They just create an additional area for an arms race. It's assumed that high level characters will have powreful magic weapons and defenses. Powerful skill items just mean that it's assumed that they'll also have said skill items. If +40 skill items are allowed - I tend to think that there's a cap on certain bonuses for items below artifact level, like a weapon can't have more than +5 enhancement and +10 total - then it just means that many characters will those items along with +40 items in Spot, etc. Just as you wouldn't run around without a magic weapon at level 20, many characters might not venture outside without their contact lense of sumpreme seeing and hearing aids +40.

No it doesn't. If any fighter or wizard could suddenly gain a +40 bonus to hide, that also means that a rogue can too. You take 10 more levels in the Rogue for more sneak attacks, BAB increases, saving throw increases, ability score increases, hit point increases, skill point increases, and additional feats. What I was arguing was that it is possible to create the +40 Hide item. Now, it's not very likely that a fighter would want it because it's better suited for a rogue, but if the fighter does want it, let the bum have it. If he would rather plop down over 30,000gp on a +40 hide item than spending it to upgrade his weapon or armor like he should, that's not your problem. It all works out in the end.

I'd just like to comment about your operating theory on fighters and magic items.

A fighter who exclusively focuses on weapons and armor at high levels is a rather straightjacketed character with glaring weaknesses. Powerful magic items are his chance to develop other skills that other characters have taken for granted for a long time, and counter some potentially crippling weaknesses. Look at the CRs on pure melee combat monsters with no brains. They're all a bit lower than pure melee damage ability would indicate. Why? Because encounter with enemies that can't fly, effectively fight invisible people, or make saves against crippling effects are easily trivialized. Consider the same effect for player characters.

Slapping a GMW on a moderately enchanted weapon gives a character a serviceable weapon for almost all day. The utility type effects that a fighter needs usually have much shorter durations.