Magic Item Wishlist: Yea or Nay?

[Hella_Tellah]

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!"

As noted, no one at least in this thread, is advocating that the players walk into a store and pick up said item....But I guess it's easier to present that we're saying one thing so some can rally against it?

Seemingly so.

 

[JoeGKushner]

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.

People. The DM, unless it's some weird mind meld thing going on, is not people, the DM is a person.

And... it may come as some surprise, but if you look at books like the DMG2 for 4e, it has a lot of recommendations on letting the players do some of the world building/creation. And surprise, that's not the first book with such advice in it.

And yeah, getting a group that matches the GM can be problematic. That's true of almost every game system/genre I've seen though and is not a unique thing to D&D.

And ironically enough on that second mark, I think that bad GMs, or GM/player incompatibilities if we want to avoid labelling peoiple bad/good/etc... as GM's, is one of the biggest reason why people flock to games like WoW. The level of reward they get out of it is much more determined by how much they invest in it whereas some GM's posting here seem to be against sharing the world with the players in a way that makes them meaninful participants in the world as opposed to observers who have to go through the motions.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Seemingly so.

Can you elaborate on that? Seemingly so what? That a GM cannot put a magic item in a random rolled pile that is already there? That a GM cannot work with a player so that both are happy in the game? That a GM will blindly follow a written adventure to the point of not catering to the players?

Having a GM say, "No, it's my world. You will never have those items because I don't want you to" seems to be the message that you're quoting my response to. The GM in that post seemed to be saying, "Yeah, nice ideas here but hey, a hill giant can throw you and your a dwarf. Same thing right?" But I suppose that's part of the problem with communicating on the internet. It's better to award xp and live vicariously through other's arguements of quote things and put some one word sentince that implies something that the long line of conversation around it doesn't.

The good thing though, is that the game does accomidate a wide range of play styles. Players having GMs that can work with them is a great thing.

Heck, as some GM's noted, they can't even get enough involvement with their players to get a wish list from them.!

 

[I'm A Banana]

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.

See, I think that's a flaw in a magic item system. I'd like to see a world where that +5 two-handed sword really is better than your two +4 swords, even for your specialist character. That makes for an interesting player choice, at least, and it gives the DM more freedom.

 

[JoeGKushner]

See, I think that's a flaw in a magic item system. I'd like to see a world where that +5 two-handed sword really is better than your two +4 swords, even for your specialist character. That makes for an interesting player choice, at least, and it gives the DM more freedom.

That would be one hell of a change for D&D though. The character investment in and of itself represented levels of acheivement thanks to the way weapon proficiency and specialization worked.

In other game systems like Warhammer or Fantasy Hero, where two weapon fighting isn't quite the power horse it could be in previous editions of D&D, your idea would probably carry over easier. Heck, in 4e it might carry over easier. Especially with ideas like retraining in full effect.

But at the same time, in terms of character concept, I'd be running that dude for 10+ levels from 1st level and it still would have went against a lot of the character background and... god, I hate to say 'method' I'd been playing him, but it was his thing.

 

[Tallifer]

I love the idea of the wishlist and the treasure parcels in 4th edition, but I have taken it even further.

Whenever the heroes plunder a room or defeat soem rich enemies, I simply tell them they have found heaps of treasure. I might describe it fancifully, "You find swords with jeweled pommels and silver runes, rings, chains, bracelets and other jewels; you find bags of coins in strange denominations and bearing the icons of long-dead emperors."

Then when the adventure is finished, I do the math: add up all the parcels and divide the number of players: that is the abstract sum in gold piece-worth of what each player gets.

Then each players determines what items, coins or residuum he actually found. Everyone gets a fair share and good stuff this way.

 

[Lanefan]

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.

Well, guess what. It can be 1979 (or equivalent) as long as you want it to be; and here's how:

Think outside the rulebook. Steal ideas from other games and systems. Come up with some cool items of your own creation...

...and chuck 'em all in your game. Sure, you won't be able to pull "the cool" every time, but when you can it's worth it. And don't get hung up on the mechanics of how it's made - hell, it's magic. Just run with it.

[...] games like WoW. The level of reward they get out of it is much more determined by how much they invest in it [...]

Literally.

Lan-"what are the subscription rates these days"-efan

 

[Hella_Tellah]

Can you elaborate on that? Seemingly so what?

You accused your opposition in this thread of setting up a straw man:

But I guess it's easier to present that we're saying one thing so some can rally against it?

Then turned around and did just that a few posts later:

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!"

I wanted to point out that irony to you.

Nobody in this thread is advocating the attitude, "No, it's my world. You will never have those items because I don't want you to." Nor is anyone advocating having PCs walk into a store and pick up any item they choose. You accuse people with viewpoints opposing yours of not listening to others, but have you listened to their views?

I dislike wishlists, as a player, because I want to be surprised. As a DM, players are more than welcome to ask me for anything that will make the game better for them. I don't feel qualified to summarize others' arguments for them, but I haven't seen an advocate for the "No soup for you!" attitude in this thread.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Well, guess what. It can be 1979 (or equivalent) as long as you want it to be; and here's how:

Think outside the rulebook. Steal ideas from other games and systems. Come up with some cool items of your own creation...

...and chuck 'em all in your game. Sure, you won't be able to pull "the cool" every time, but when you can it's worth it. And don't get hung up on the mechanics of how it's made - hell, it's magic. Just run with it.
Literally.

-efan

and that can work. In my experience, it tends to work a little better with some of the older editions because the older editions are a little... wonky when it comes to item balance and the game system isn't necessarily set up to assume player wealth/magic items.

 

[His Dudeness]

I loathe wishlists. As a player it totally destroys my suspension of disbelief.

As a DM I do not accept them. You find what the orc/demon/dragon would have, not what you need.

If you want a +derp sword, go find it, I'm not gonna leave it there as a gift unless you are really lagging behind in terms of power