Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Magic weapon/implement/etc. tax?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mneme" data-source="post: 5138785" data-attributes="member: 59248"><p>Infiniti: you're making the (false, IMO) assumption that classes don't get anything for having to worry about multiple weapons/implements.</p><p></p><p>Here's the thing, though: Every class that has this split (and it just isn't an issue for classes that are pure implement builds -- not having a magic FOO on something you do really rarely (or just using your bare hands to make OAs, even) just isn't a huge deal) actually has different kinds of capabilities along the different styles of power. Bards have a melee build (uses magic weapons) and a ranged build (uses implements) -- a bard can be built using just one or the other (eg, the equivalent of a fighter who chooses to take heavy blade powers, not flail or axe powers), or you can spend a bit more or takes some feats so you can do both. Similarly, Druids are a classic example, as in beastform, they're very effective melee combattants (even without a weapon; beastform Druids make melee basics with their implement and add wisdom), but can't do ranged or area attacks; in human form they have at best a very bad basic attack without serious feat support that's frankly not worth putting into them, given that it only takes a minor action to shift to beastform. The -worst- is the Artificer -- who pays for being able to use both ranged and melee weapons -and- implements with the player having to maintain and juggle three items.</p><p></p><p>But--all classes are segmented. You're never choosing from the full list of powers unless you pay a lot to do so -- and that's intentional; remember that every class has a choice between either two primary abilities or two secondary abilities. So the fact that there's a cost for, effectively, getting access to an entire class's worth of new abilities to choose from (because nearly every class can play very effectively on just one side of their divide -- you can build an artificer that's a pure weapon build; a bard that's pure ranged or pure melee, a laser cleric or a melee cleric (and even give the laser cleric some melee attacks); a druid that spends all their time in beast form or one who only goes into it to get the minor action shift.</p><p></p><p>The only real issue here are options that are clearly better than other options. Staff is the big one (for everyone except sorcerers, who get dagger as an implement, which since it gives them a usable basic melee -and- a basic ranged attack, is a one handed, off-hand weapon, and has a higher proficiency bonus to boot, is clearly superior aside from there not being a dagger of ruin) for classes that have it as an option.</p><p></p><p>There, It's incumbent on the designers to provide cookies for the other implements that help them measure up. In general, I think implements are better than a weapon of their level (note, for example, the high crit die implements, which often also have a good power), but I'm not convinced the designers have properly balanced things (though usually the non-weapon implement at least has a pile of class-specific powers that can be better than the generic stuff. Warlocks get a ton of cool things to do with rods; songblades all have their own powers and properties as well as being weapliments for bards; totems have cool and interesting shaman and druid powers.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mneme, post: 5138785, member: 59248"] Infiniti: you're making the (false, IMO) assumption that classes don't get anything for having to worry about multiple weapons/implements. Here's the thing, though: Every class that has this split (and it just isn't an issue for classes that are pure implement builds -- not having a magic FOO on something you do really rarely (or just using your bare hands to make OAs, even) just isn't a huge deal) actually has different kinds of capabilities along the different styles of power. Bards have a melee build (uses magic weapons) and a ranged build (uses implements) -- a bard can be built using just one or the other (eg, the equivalent of a fighter who chooses to take heavy blade powers, not flail or axe powers), or you can spend a bit more or takes some feats so you can do both. Similarly, Druids are a classic example, as in beastform, they're very effective melee combattants (even without a weapon; beastform Druids make melee basics with their implement and add wisdom), but can't do ranged or area attacks; in human form they have at best a very bad basic attack without serious feat support that's frankly not worth putting into them, given that it only takes a minor action to shift to beastform. The -worst- is the Artificer -- who pays for being able to use both ranged and melee weapons -and- implements with the player having to maintain and juggle three items. But--all classes are segmented. You're never choosing from the full list of powers unless you pay a lot to do so -- and that's intentional; remember that every class has a choice between either two primary abilities or two secondary abilities. So the fact that there's a cost for, effectively, getting access to an entire class's worth of new abilities to choose from (because nearly every class can play very effectively on just one side of their divide -- you can build an artificer that's a pure weapon build; a bard that's pure ranged or pure melee, a laser cleric or a melee cleric (and even give the laser cleric some melee attacks); a druid that spends all their time in beast form or one who only goes into it to get the minor action shift. The only real issue here are options that are clearly better than other options. Staff is the big one (for everyone except sorcerers, who get dagger as an implement, which since it gives them a usable basic melee -and- a basic ranged attack, is a one handed, off-hand weapon, and has a higher proficiency bonus to boot, is clearly superior aside from there not being a dagger of ruin) for classes that have it as an option. There, It's incumbent on the designers to provide cookies for the other implements that help them measure up. In general, I think implements are better than a weapon of their level (note, for example, the high crit die implements, which often also have a good power), but I'm not convinced the designers have properly balanced things (though usually the non-weapon implement at least has a pile of class-specific powers that can be better than the generic stuff. Warlocks get a ton of cool things to do with rods; songblades all have their own powers and properties as well as being weapliments for bards; totems have cool and interesting shaman and druid powers. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Magic weapon/implement/etc. tax?
Top