Magic Items And Campaign Balance?

[Nightfall]

I like Jester's idea. Certainly it conforms to my own, as well as I what I want to do with the Scarred Lands. Towns, hamlets and small villages to me don't have a great deal of variety. Indeed they are lucky if a low level druid/cleric works with them in such places. That said, places such as small/large cities I think could easily support the use of master worked items and forged weapons of some magical power, the most being +2, but ALWAYS I make such things as magic armor, magic weapon, wonderous items, wands, rods, staffs and rings FAR more expensive, since R&R suggests as much. In any case, potions and scrolls are always set at normal prices since they tend to be less rare, though I triple the price when it comes to anything enhanced with metamagic feats as well as keeping such things rare.

 

[Kestrel]

I would have to disagree with the point of view that fighters are shafted in low-magic games. DnD is supposed to be a group-based game, with each member having a role to fill.

A fighter is the best at fighting. He has the highest base attack bonus, the most feats, and usually the highest hit points. Even at the higher levels, with or without magic items, this will be true.

The argument I'm hearing is that a spellcaster is more powerful at the higher levels. If the classes are taken individually, that just might be the case. But, if you take them as a group, as the game intends, then fighters still have thier role to fill.

A wizard that blasts away without a fighter to stop the baddies from reaching him is going to be a very dead wizard in short order. It only takes a superiorly strong opponent to grapple him and render his spellcasting useless. Without his meatshield (the fighter) to keep em off, he's pretty much screwed. Sure, in certain situations, like the open outdoors, his mobility can keep him protected, but not always.

A cleric, with buffs, can be just as powerful as a fighter in combat. The downside to this is that it takes time to get the spells prepared and even with buffs, he's only going to match the fighter, not exceed him. Wouldn't the buffs be better used if they were put on the fighter? The fighter could then be even stronger and deal more damage, leaving the cleric to keep him alive and throw out other spells to help the party.

Maybe parties should agree to work together to thier full advantage in low-magic games. A group of individuals is never going to work as well as a sychronized team.

 

[Lord Ben]

You can play a no magic items campaign just fine, but don't even begin to tell me it's balanced. A fighter without magic items is incredibly weak compared to a Wizard without.

To any of you who say no magic items is fine, do any of you play the Fighter? Or are you all Clerics, Wizards, and DM's? I've yet to see anyone who is a fighter fan say that it's balanced.

Also, anyone who plays fighters knows he can take a mage to town if they both have ample warning. There isn't a mage made that I couldn't kill if we started off on an equal footing.

 

[Hammerhead]

I would have to disagree with the point of view that fighters are shafted in low-magic games. DnD is supposed to be a group-based game, with each member having a role to fill.

A fighter is the best at fighting. He has the highest base attack bonus, the most feats, and usually the highest hit points. Even at the higher levels, with or without magic items, this will be true.

The argument I'm hearing is that a spellcaster is more powerful at the higher levels. If the classes are taken individually, that just might be the case. But, if you take them as a group, as the game intends, then fighters still have thier role to fill.

A wizard that blasts away without a fighter to stop the baddies from reaching him is going to be a very dead wizard in short order. It only takes a superiorly strong opponent to grapple him and render his spellcasting useless. Without his meatshield (the fighter) to keep em off, he's pretty much screwed. Sure, in certain situations, like the open outdoors, his mobility can keep him protected, but not always.

A cleric, with buffs, can be just as powerful as a fighter in combat. The downside to this is that it takes time to get the spells prepared and even with buffs, he's only going to match the fighter, not exceed him. Wouldn't the buffs be better used if they were put on the fighter? The fighter could then be even stronger and deal more damage, leaving the cleric to keep him alive and throw out other spells to help the party.

Maybe parties should agree to work together to thier full advantage in low-magic games. A group of individuals is never going to work as well as a sychronized team.

Actually, the barbarian will probably have more HP than the fighter, but that's really too fine a point since both classes are functionally the same in terms of magic ability.

It's a stupid or very unlucky mage who lets an enemy grapple him. It's kind of hard to grapple invisible or incorporeal people. And the mage could just use summoned creatures as cannon fodder. However, if the only point of the fighter is to act as a meat shield for the mage, then is the game really balanced?

I think a fully buffed cleric would exceed the unbuffed fighter. I do agree that teamwork is very important. When playing a cleric, I do buff the other characters with GMWs and strength spells. And they help quite a bit. However, the fighter still needs items of his own. Sometimes you won't have time to buff up, some creatures will end up dispelling your effects, and lots of spells work better if you start them on someone decent. There's a big difference between casting casting GMW on a masterwork weapon and casting it on a +1 Holy, Flaming weapon. In the later case, the fighter will do lots more damage on each hit.

Sure, adventuring is a team sport. But I'd rather have someone who is good by himself, and better on a team than someone who is good on the team, but also completely dependent on it.

 

[Aven]

IMC "permanent" magic items like rings and swords can only be found. I.C. Feats like Forge Ring are not available. A character can brew a potion or scribe a scroll, but he can't make armor or wondrous items, etc

Then who the hell makes them in the first place?!?!

 

[Lord Ben]

Then who the hell makes them in the first place?!?!

Only exp20/bard20, that's the only way it's fair and balanced. Otherwise DM's might have to use tactics to defeat players.

 

[mmadsen]

Has anyone looked at allowing Fighters and Rogues to take Epic Feats before they meet the Epic Prerequisites? That seems like it could balance things out, and it doesn't really matter if the Fighter's sword is a Dragon Bane weapon because he found/bought one, or because he used up a Feat for that power. And really, who's going to bat an eye at a guy with 100 Hit Points displaying a few other superpowers.

 

[hong]

The argument I'm hearing is that a spellcaster is more powerful at the higher levels. If the classes are taken individually, that just might be the case. But, if you take them as a group, as the game intends, then fighters still have thier role to fill.

Fighters having a role to fill is quite compatible with them still getting teh shaft.

A wizard that blasts away without a fighter to stop the baddies from reaching him is going to be a very dead wizard in short order. It only takes a superiorly strong opponent to grapple him and render his spellcasting useless. Without his meatshield (the fighter) to keep em off, he's pretty much screwed.

Being a meatshield is a supporting cast role. If that's all you want fighters to be, just ban them. Have your players play wizards or sorcs, and hire NPC warriors to be the meatshields.

Maybe parties should agree to work together to thier full advantage in low-magic games. A group of individuals is never going to work as well as a sychronized team.

True, but irrelevant.

 

[S'mon]

He holds that no class should be able to meet any challenge (for example, he seems to think it's not really an issue that Sorcerers can far more easily deal with a flying creature than a Fighter without magic can), and doesn't think that every class should be able to meet almost any challenge if they have the appropiate amount of power.

So, what does everyone else think?

I agree with 'him'.
You don't need to have free trade in magic items (an idea which would be horribly disruptive to many lower-magic settings) to have viable Fighter or Rogue PCs. That said, a game with NO magic items at all will make Fighters much weaker than Clerics or Sorcerers at higher levels. In my game, you can usually buy minor potions, and higher-level NPCs often have magic that can be looted or traded for - defeat the 12th level Fighter and get his +2 sword. Permanent MI like +1 weapons can occasionally be bought or commissioned. This seems to work ok.

 

[AvarielAvenger]

Re: Re: Magic Items And Campaign Balance?

I agree with 'him'.
You don't need to have free trade in magic items (an idea which would be horribly disruptive to many lower-magic settings) to have viable Fighter or Rogue PCs. That said, a game with NO magic items at all will make Fighters much weaker than Clerics or Sorcerers at higher levels. In my game, you can usually buy minor potions, and higher-level NPCs often have magic that can be looted or traded for - defeat the 12th level Fighter and get his +2 sword. Permanent MI like +1 weapons can occasionally be bought or commissioned. This seems to work ok.

I tend to disagree with doing stuff like that, because situations like this will occur:



Fred The Fighter: Crap, the enemy is flying! I can't touch him!
Steve The Sorcerer: Not to worry, Fred. (Steve fries the enemy.)
Fred The Fighter: Damn, you're good.
Steve The Sorcerer: That I am. Oh look, there are some kobolds you can smash. Have fun!

Fred The Fighter: Crap, the enemy has DR+3 and I only have a +2 weapon! I can't touch him!
Steve The Sorcerer: Not to worry, Fred. (Steve fries the enemy.)
Fred The Fighter: Damn, I wish I could be more useful.
Steve The Sorcerer: (Pats Fred on the back.) It's ok Fred, you're good at being a bodyguard. And oh look, there are some kobolds you can smash! Have fun!

Fred The Fighter: Crap, the enemy is invisible! I can't see him!
Steve The Sorcerer: Not to worry, Fred. (Casts See Invisibility and fries the enemy.)
Fred The Fighter: Damn, what am I even doing adventuring?
Steve The Sorcerer: It's okay Fred. We can't all be as amazing as me.

Etc, etc. There are too many situations which practically require Fighters to have good magic items (and specific ones) to do well. When you take away a Fighters choice of what magic he can buy, it's no different then it would be to start randomly rolling for a Sorcerers spellcasting choices. And if you limit it, it's even worse.