Magic Item Wishlist: Yea or Nay?

[Umbran]

But, and I'm probably going to sound a little like an ass here, it's not 1979 anymore. The internet has vastly changed the way people gather information and knowledge. Unless you're playing with people who don't surf the net, are playing an out of print edition, or just playing with what I'd call casual players who aren't that into it, the chances of surprising the players with the cool, is probably not very high.

You don't sound like an ass, but you do sound like you're making an assumption. Specifically, that an engaged, committed player typically hunts down and reads everything there is to read about the game.

 

[Corathon]

One of the things that puzzles me about these statements, in terms of getting reasonable items, is that older adventurers are packed full with magic items. Often, especially with rings, those items are certainly not level appropriate. It almost seems like some are saying that if the player wants that sword X they that is already part of the packaging, they'll go out of their way to switch it to something not desired by the player. "oh, he wants a +2 two handed sword does he? Even though this prewritten adventure has one here I'm changing that to a +1 great trident. Screw him! He wants that sword he'll hunt it down to Odin's halls!"

Since you quoted me, I have to ask: Huh? How do you get that from what I wrote?

If I'm using a module (which is fairly rare; I mostly write my oqn adventures) I'll likely let the items in it stand, unless I feel them to be really ridiculous. I would no more change an item to screw a player than I would change it just to benefit a player. Also, since I play an older edition of the game, I don't really have any hard and fast rules about what items are "level appropriate". I merely consider how items will affect the campaign.

OTOH, in the case of a +5 sword or a staff of the magi, it seems logical that if such an item was lost, was known to be lost, and is still lost (i.e. not in the hands of some high level NPC) that its likely in the possession of something pretty nasty, or deep in a dungeon or other very dangerous area. If low level PCs want to go after that item regardless of what they learn from research or sages, fine - let the dice fall where they may. Maybe they'll luck out. But lesser-powered items (a +2 sword or a staff of striking ) are more likely to be in less dangerous locales.

In terms of the game as written, how far is it stretching it, in any edition, to make these item swaps? What if the power level of the item players find in the random loot is higher. Has the GM shown that random loot is superior or does lack of even acknoledging the wish list existance prevent them from even knowing it?

The wish list sever several types of wish fufillment ranging from mechanical bonuses to themes in my opinion.

Its the principal of the thing. I'm the referee; I don't favor the players, nor do I seek to "defeat" them. Of course, I actually want to see them triumph, but I don't change things to allow them to win; they stand or fall on their own merits - and on luck. Likewise, if they find the item that they want in some monster's hoarde (or pry it from some villain's cold, dead fingers) good for them! But if they want a specific item they need to control their own destiny and quest for it.

Also, the wish list thing seems to me to ruin verisimilitude.

 

[Dausuul]

Likewise, if they find the item that they want in some monster's hoard (or pry it from some villain's cold, dead fingers) good for them! But if they want a specific item they need to control their own destiny and quest for it.

Right on. I'm not against PCs having items they like! I'm just against having them pick those items from a catalog and then wait for them to fall off some monster's corpse. Either take what the dice and the will of the DM give you - which may be awesome or may suck - or go out and do something in-world to get your prize.

 

[S'mon]

Here's one for you.

My long running fighter in 2nd edition was double specialized with long sword and was a two-weapon fighter.

I had two +4 long swords that were blood red and were supposed to be 'special.' After a few pushes from the GM, the party and I went on some crazy quest to discover the purpose of these items.

They merged into a single +5 two handed sword that did all this awesome stuff. But I wasn't as good with the new weapon in terms of overall hitting bonus, #of attacks, etc... so I sold it for two... yup, +4 swords. The GM was baffled I tell you. He couldn't understand why I did that. It was one of several instances where I experienced the GM thinking he was being clever and catering to the players with things they'd never want but he thought were cool. And I've been quilty of that myself a time or two which is why I try to listen to players when they talk about what they want out of the game.

As a quest item that's a major fail by the GM, yup, apparently not knowing the Weapon Spec rules. Look how Moorcock does it - say in The Dragon in The Sword, 2 swords from 1, but they're all still the same size! Or take a leaf from the UA Sunblade, let it be used as *either* 2hS or LS and spec bonuses still apply.

The appropriate thing for these bonded swords would be give them a synergy bonus - eg to raise both to +5 when wielded together.

 

[FireLance]

Also, the wish list thing seems to me to ruin verisimilitude.

Nah, it just simulates the genre convention of the protagonists finding or being given the equipment needed to overcome the challenges they face. Or did you think that Perseus's DM randomly rolled his helm of invisibility, vorpal adamantium sickle, flying sandals and mirrored shield? If a character's DM choosing magic items to be found in an adventure doesn't break verisimilitude, neither should a character's player choosing the items instead. Although I do agree that it might break the player's immersion into the character, due to the disjoint between player and character knowledge, expectations and emotions.

 

[brainstorm]

Although I have been solely a DM for the last 10 years or so, I do remember playing characters that I had very specific ideas about. I envisioned my dwarf fighter with plate armor and a dwarven thrower. A wizard with a staff of power. A halfling rogue with boots of striding and sprinting, a ring of invisibility and a dagger of venom.

I never got these things.

Instead, I got a large variety of meaningless (to me) magic items that I had to use because they were the random treasure found in the published modules my DMs usually ran.

I'm sitting here reading these posts and I'm amazed at the amount of effort DMs expect their players to go through in order to get items they envision their characters having. Now, I can understand going on quests if a player wants an item or items way above their current level of play. I can understand it if they want an artifact. But I don't understand DMs who are such control freaks that they have to make their players jump through hoops to realize their character's vision with typical magic items.

Save the quests for the Eye of Vecna or the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords.

 

[SteveC]

I think that wishlists are a useful tool. I wouldn't feel restricted by them, but I'd want to see what my players are looking for and plan accordingly.

I've ran with random treasure for a long time (I played a lot of Rolemaster and the game has a book called the Treasure Companion that's all items and tables) and most of the time I've found that what that does is give the group a lot of junk they never use. There certainly are exceptions where something interesting appears that the group would never have thought of, but a lot of the time it's just junk. I remember my group's reaction to the +1 Holy Symbol of Hope in Keep on the Shadowfell where they said "you know we don't have anyone who uses the Divine power source, right?"

There's nothing that absolutely ruins my sense of wonder in a game like having a bunch of enchanted items that are not only not interesting to the group, but they're actively trying to get rid of them.

So yes, I do use them.

--Steve

 

[ExploderWizard]

Although I have been solely a DM for the last 10 years or so, I do remember playing characters that I had very specific ideas about. I envisioned my dwarf fighter with plate armor and a dwarven thrower. A wizard with a staff of power. A halfling rogue with boots of striding and sprinting, a ring of invisibility and a dagger of venom.

I never got these things.

Instead, I got a large variety of meaningless (to me) magic items that I had to use because they were the random treasure found in the published modules my DMs usually ran.

I'm sitting here reading these posts and I'm amazed at the amount of effort DMs expect their players to go through in order to get items they envision their characters having. Now, I can understand going on quests if a player wants an item or items way above their current level of play. I can understand it if they want an artifact. But I don't understand DMs who are such control freaks that they have to make their players jump through hoops to realize their character's vision with typical magic items.

Save the quests for the Eye of Vecna or the Axe of the Dwarvish Lords.

Try and remember that there was a time when official rulebooks and supplements did not decide what existed within the campaign at all and that the dwarven thrower you wanted so badly was called a hill giant.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Try and remember that there was a time when official rulebooks and supplements did not decide what existed within the campaign at all and that the dwarven thrower you wanted so badly was called a hill giant.

And this is part of the problem. DMs wanting such control over the mileniu of the campaign thta even things that make sense in the standard of the campaign are there only for mocking. "A dwarf warrior with a hammer of dwarven throwing? Bah! Like a magic user with a staff of the magi. Foolishness I tell you. None shall have my power that I as the GM wield. I control the volume! I control the contrast! Tremble at my awesome glory as I give you this giant to fight and you find 1d4 *5 large rocks in his pouch!"

 

[ExploderWizard]

And this is part of the problem. DMs wanting such control over the mileniu of the campaign thta even things that make sense in the standard of the campaign are there only for mocking. "A dwarf warrior with a hammer of dwarven throwing? Bah! Like a magic user with a staff of the magi. Foolishness I tell you. None shall have my power that I as the GM wield. I control the volume! I control the contrast! Tremble at my awesome glory as I give you this giant to fight and you find 1d4 *5 large rocks in his pouch!"

So you think the almighty printed rulebook should determine the contents of a campaign rather than the people participating in it? Of course the DM has control over the milieu, he or she is the one creating/preparing it!

The idea that products are more important than the people you game with is a foreign concept to an old fart like me.

People wonder why finding/recruiting DMs is such a chore. Well I guess being treated as 2nd fiddle to pile of wood pulp doesn't exactly have them lining up to run games.