Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 3895983" data-attributes="member: 32164">It's no harder than coming up with a list of magical items. As a matter of fact, you can limit the degree to which items can be abused. An item intended for fighters can be game-breaking if wizards get it. This is part of where the ridiculous saves of 3e come from. Items intended to make up for a fighter's defect (something that grants a boost to Will saves) allows the wizard's will save to become unbeatable. Bad design.Again, having to implement flavor controls to prevent characters from gaining a mechanical benefit is bad game design.I wouldn't dispute whether that's true. But the question frequently gets raised as to what degree D&D should duplicate the literature after which it's inspired. While I can certainly come up with examples in literature of the low-level character who gets a great magical item (like Tomas in Feist's Riftwar or Leigh Norrington in Stackpole's Dragoncrown War), those are usually what I'd call artifact-level items. Other examples include the One Ring and Stormbringer. But, in most cases, these items are intelligent or possessed and try "dominate" their wielders to a degree. Can you give an example of a drawback free magic item of the kind you're talking about?Covenant Items are, by their very nature, supposed to be rare. The average PC gets one in his career. If covenant items were common, you'd be absolutely right about the degree to which they'd be sought after and wanted. But the point is that in a world where you HAVE covenant items for the PCs, there's no need for them to have lots of items.I realize that if you were implementing this on a widespread basis (as in 4e, say), it needs some work as a system. But there's nothing inherently wrong with it.</blockquote>

Verification