Magic Item Wishlist: Yea or Nay?

[Scribble]

Ah, but consider your impact as GM. If you are having fun, the odds are that you will able to run a more fun game, right? Therefore, you should not shape the game towards the fun of everyone else at the table at your own expense. If you absolutely hate the idea of the auto or the moon, you shouldn't include them. It will douse that fun, whether you mean to or not, because it will douse your fun.

Sure- I guess I figured it wasn't needed to be mentioned that the only time something would be denied is if it creates an overly disproportionate lack of fun. It's not really that cut and dry thing though. If something DOES come up that someone isn't jiving with, we talk about it.

Generally I'm pretty easy going- Watching/making people happy is something I enjoy, so there isn't a lot of stuff that could be introduced to the game that I would say wrecks my fun. (Flavor wise at least.)

Usually if there's something I'm thinking wouldn't fit the tone of the campaign or something I would rather state "I'm rather no one was evil" for instance.

People are free to approach me with "Hey I know you'd prefer no evil, but I have this idea..." yada yada.

I mostly game with an equally easy going group of players. If something DOES come up and after we talk about it we can't find a solution, the sure we won't go that route...

Can't really think of a time this has happened though.

I am a strong advocate of only running games that you want to run, and only playing in games that you wish to play. Life is too short for anything else.

Sure- I mostly agree... But life is also too short to continuously look for people who want to play the game exactly like you want to at all times.

Sometimes life demands compromise even in activities designed for amusement.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Sure- I mostly agree... But life is also too short to continuously look for people who want to play the game exactly like you want to at all times.

Sometimes life demands compromise even in activities designed for amusement.

This is only a problem if what you want to run or play is so rigid that you cannot compromise.

Luckily, the game is self-correcting in this fashion. You end up alone.



RC

 

[JoeGKushner]

Ah, but consider your impact as GM. If you are having fun, the odds are that you will able to run a more fun game, right? Therefore, you should not shape the game towards the fun of everyone else at the table at your own expense. If you absolutely hate the idea of the auto or the moon, you shouldn't include them. It will douse that fun, whether you mean to or not, because it will douse your fun.

I am a strong advocate of only running games that you want to run, and only playing in games that you wish to play. Life is too short for anything else.

IMHO, YMMV (you immortal, you).


RC

I hope this doesn't sound too strange coming from me, but I agree.

On the other hand, the problem I've seen with some GMs, and I've done it myself, is that their so intent on running things their way, it ruins everyone else's fun, leading to a dead game anyway.

In my experience, having the right mix of players with the GM is probably the single most crucial element of any successful RPG.

 

[JoeGKushner]

You must spread some xp around...

This is an interesting idea. In some point buy games, like Fantasy Hero, you can spend your starting character points on magic items. Having something like that built into the game might work for some people. Maybe some type of level allowance of magic items alongside some limitations to avoid potential abuse...

I like the potnetial. It's got the possibility of 'leveling' up with the character like an Earthdawn or Weapon of Legacy item if the player's going that route and retaining abilities that grow with the player.

So here's my question for the pro-wish-list crowd:

Why do you need the DM to be involved at all?

I mean, if it's that all-fired important to you to have X, Y, and Z magic items, if it's central to your character concept and you don't want the hassle of questing for them, why do you want the hassle of writing up a wishlist that the DM will have to keep track of and who knows when you actually get the items? Why not just decide "Okay, I have this item now?"

I'm envisioning a system where you accumulate some type of resource over time, and then you can expend that resource to produce the item you want. Of course this gives you an advantage over the folks who just use what they find, so you have to pay a little extra for it--a feat, say. And we'll need some kind of in-game justification for where these items are coming from. How about saying your character has learned to craft magic items? Yeah, that should work.

Man, if only we had a system like that in D&D.

 

[JoeGKushner]

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



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



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."

I'm having a hard time agreeing with this when this is where you pulled my quote from. If that's not advocating that the GM is saying exactly that it's his world and the player will never have those items, I am missreading it.

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

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'm trying to. I appreciate it when people, like you here, expand upon what their saying. I love the fact that the internet lets us communicate with people we might not normally ever do so due to distances, but hate how ineffective it can be.

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.

Maybe I'm misreading the thread I quoted then. Stranger things have happened.

 

[Dausuul]

This is an interesting idea. In some point buy games, like Fantasy Hero, you can spend your starting character points on magic items. Having something like that built into the game might work for some people. Maybe some type of level allowance of magic items alongside some limitations to avoid potential abuse...

I like the potnetial. It's got the possibility of 'leveling' up with the character like an Earthdawn or Weapon of Legacy item if the player's going that route and retaining abilities that grow with the player.

You, uh... do realize I was talking about the 4E magic item creation system, right?

Ritual Caster feat + Enchant Magic Item ritual + gold = magic item.

 

[JoeGKushner]

You, uh... do realize I was talking about the 4E magic item creation system, right?

Ritual Caster feat + Enchant Magic Item ritual + gold = magic item.

But then it really only works for... people with ritual casting. And as WoTC is putting the nerf on that, indeed, apparently not supporting rituals at all from the previews we've seen, I think that the idea has morem erti that the implementation you're talking about.

But that's just me.

Making it part of the game would also eliminate the need for all the damn gold that's reqauired to keep players 'in power' so to speak.

 

[jgbrowning]

Other people's opinions?

I don't use them. IMO, magic item placement is a world creation activity and entirely up to the DM. I also don't place magic items based upon their usefulness to the players. They're there for other, entirely non-character deterministic, reasons.

joe b.

 

[pemerton]

So here's my question for the pro-wish-list crowd:

Why do you need the DM to be involved at all?

<snip>

I'm envisioning a system where you accumulate some type of resource over time, and then you can expend that resource to produce the item you want.

<snip>

Man, if only we had a system like that in D&D.

I hope it's OK to answer your rhetorical (and mildly sarcastic, in an inoffensive way) question with a straight answer.

It preserves the game/metagame distinction - the wishlist is purely an artifact of the metagame. Whereas item creation is something that happens within the gameworld. So eliminating the ingame gold and creation steps, and instead just sticking the item into the encounter as something to be found by the PCs, or having the item given to the PC by an NPC, makes a different type of story possible.

It also reduces the need to incorporate ludicrous quantities of gold into your treasures.

 

[Lanefan]

... It also reduces the need to incorporate ludicrous quantities of gold into your treasures.

Hey!

Some of us enjoy wallowing in ludicrous quantities of gold!



Lan-"as long as I land on it rather than it land on me"-efan