No Random treasure !?!?...

[cr0m]

Because it was like having a greatsword and a longsword in one weapon. One handed it was longsword damage; two-handed it could do 2d8 vs. large creatures, versus the 3d6 for the tw-handed sword. So, an average of one pt of damage less, all for dropping your shield and using the second hand. That's why it had its popularity

I think it was 1d10 one-handed, 2d6 two-handed, etc, etc.

It was totally a minmax choice.

 

[Lanefan]

If a player and-or character want to go to the trouble, it's easy enough to figure out what the most common weapon in any given area is likely to be: just look at what the local militia are armed with. Better yet, look at what the *enemy* (if any) uses as its usual weapon, as there'll be lots of those to be had as well.

If glaive is standard issue for the local military, then there's probably a number of blacksmiths kept busy churning out glaives; they'll be common, and some will end up getting enchanted. But if the local military's weapon of choice is shortsword, you can expect to find a fair supply of shortswords - some enchanted - but not many glaives.

My last campaign ended up awash in lightly-enchanted longswords and plate mail, mostly because the Hobgoblin military units they kept fighting (thawed out of the polar ice after 10000 years) had such things as part of their standard issue. Eventually, the party wound up giving them to the local King to equip his guard and military with...everybody won.

Lanefan

 

[Spatula]

Your earlier statement was phrased to say that random item generation explicitly produces awesome results. Even here you suggest that it usually produces awesome results. I just wanted to point out that neither of these assertions are the universal truths you purport them to be.

err, I said nothing of the kind. I stated that it was better to get something unexpected that's good than to get something good that's not a surprise.

 

[pemerton]

That doesn't make any sense. The DM presents the world, the player plays in it.

Well, that's one way to play an RPG. But it's not the only way, and it's not the way that 4e approaches things.

Further to that last point:

I made my first adventure for my son, based on a quest idea he had. But I mad the whole adventure. And then I realized that playing a D&D PC didn't give him nearly the narrative control he wants

There is a discussion of this in a sidebar in the DMG (interestingly, James Wyatt also uses his son as the example player).

As far as I know, the 4e DMG is the first DMG to talk seriously about players adopting director's stance.

 

[pemerton]

That old chestnut of "there must be consequences" doesn't (or shouldn't, IMO) apply to character creation choices.

On the whole I agree with the line you're taking on this issue, but I don't quite agree here. Character creation choices should have consequences - part of the point of choosing to play a Tiefling, after all, is to deal with the consequence of being the heir to an infernal bloodline and a fallen empire - it's just that the consequences should (more or less) be those that the player opted for, rather than traps sprung by the GM after the event.

I would add - it should never be one of the consequences that the game sucks for the player. In a good RPG, adversity for the PC is fun (perhaps the fun of a challenge, but fun nevertheless), not adversity, for the player. That's what makes it a game.

 

[Nyaricus]

Wow. That is some really bad DMing right there.

Sorry, it's not the fault of the treasure tables.

How in the world is that bad DMing? I was playing 3.5e. My players killed a monster. Monster stats says it has X amount of items it has dropped. I rolled randomly on the tables. Chaotic Evil Battleaxe of DOOM comes up, and since I don't fudge rolls, and the barbarian loved his axes, he grabs the swag, is dominated by the Axe, and then goes on a murderous rampage as the Axe commands him too.

What am I missing?

Lemme throw an anecdotal at ya:

Bunch of years ago, when I was in the AF, pay was always short. Some bills just didn't get paid on time, if at all. Rough time for an Airman First Class, but at least I had someplace to live. Well, it seemed a prudent time to talk to the financial counselors on base. We go over the budget, he asks about insurance on the car. Well, naturally, that is one of those things that tended to lapse when you are starting a family on a government paycheck. The guy almost blows his top. He goes on and on about how important insurance is when you are driving. To make sure his point is made, he tells us about how his daughter in law was in a terrible accident and the other guy didn't have insurance, and nothing would have happened if the other guy would have had insurance. I was a bit confused about how insurance would have prevented the accident, but he is pressing on with his story. Gotta have insurance! Sure, the guy was drunk at the time of the accident, but INSURANCE! HIS DAUGHTER IN LAW! ACCIDENT!.

Needless to say, we didn't take him very seriously after that.

And I'm not seeing how your anecdote is in any way connected to randomly rolled treasure in a game of make-believe... would you mind filling in the blanks there?

cheers,
--N

 

[Orius]

Because if there's no consequence to player choices, those choices don't mean a whole lot. What does it say about my fighter who specializes in a glaive? It's not a common weapon, and that means sometimes he has to make tough decisions, like whether to use a mundane glaive or a +1 longsword.

Except players don't choose glaives out of metagaming. Glaves aren't common on the generation lists, they (probably) don't do impressive damage, and probably like most polearms in 1e and 2e, the had slow weapon speeds. So no one picks it. That and weapons like swords, axes and other common weapons just are more "glamorous" to the average player.

Just look at my comment on it. I have no idea what the stats are, where as I know dagger is 1d4, staff and mace are 1d6, longsword and battleaxe are 1d8, and two-handed sword is 1d10, 3e greatsword is 2d6.

3. Stuff created by bored high powered magic users of questionable sanity simply for something to do before the technology was invented to post YouTube videos of live fairies being cooked in microwaves.

I think I want to create lot of these items just to mess with the PCs.

I remember in 2nd edition it was next to impossible for me to find a player that didn't equip his PC with a bastard sword if his character's class was proficient in it. I don't even remember why everyone thought they were so great.

Same here. EVERYONE in my 2e campaigns used the damn things. And Henry said why: the damage splits with S-M/L damage and one/two-handed use made it a very versatile and optinal weapon. I was glad when 3e made it Exotic, because I figured I'd be seeing a lot less of them on the PCs.

I still say wishlists are cheesy, but otherwise, 4e looks like it has a decent treasure system.

 

[theNater]

Okay, a couple things that I think need to be pointed out.

With weapon choice mattering as much as it does in 4th edition, especially for fighters, punishing a character for choosing an uncommon weapon(by not providing that weapon as treasure moderately often) is pretty harsh. It also cuts down on a character's build options, and the DM should treat it with the same approach as other build-altering rules.

As to the wishlist issue, assuming each player's wishlist includes an item for each slot, including two rings, a melee weapon, a ranged weapon, and an implement, that's 12 items on each list. If the party has five characters, that's a grand total of 60 items.

Assuming the characters retire immediately on reaching level 30 and have been receiving the suggested treasure, they will have acquired 116 magic items.

Under these assumptions, nearly half of the items acquired will be items not on anyone's wishlist. Therefore, it is possible to have a bunch of random treasure that characters may or may not be interested in and give them exactly what they want.

For those who like to surprise their players, give them a powerful item that's not quite what's on the wishlist when it is the level+4 item, then give them the wishlist item when it's a level+1 item.

For those who like to give their players hard choices, provide the guy who wants a Dragonslayer Battleaxe a +5 Dragonslayer Battleaxe(item level 24) and a +6 Viscious Battleaxe(item level 27) at the same time. Now he's got the item from his wishlist and a tough choice.

For those that like to use random treasure tables as an inspiration point for dungeon design, you can use the wishlists the same way. Once you have a pile of magic item names, why does it matter whether it's the result of a bunch of dice rolling or player choices? You can even peruse the magic item lists in the PHB for ideas when you know that the characters are due to receive an item of a particular level. Find the one that sparks your imagination and run with it.

Any machine can provide random treasure. It takes a DM to consistently provide interesting treasure.

Oh, and one comment I need to respond to directly:

Some players prefer a robust ruleset that provides all the tools without need for the DM to play game designer.

4th edition provides you with all the necessary tools to place treasure. Just because they're not the tools you're used to doesn't mean they're not there.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

The reason why everyone picked bastard sword/longsword in 1e/2e was due to the treasure table.

From what I've seen is that the longsword is chosen because it is most likely going to be an item given via the adventure module the group is playing. I've seen a lot of treasure lists that had longswords in them. Not too many ear-spoons though.

 

[Vanuslux]

Personally, once I'm done with KotS and start writing my own adventures I plan on doing something of a half and half approach. Half items from the wishlists, half semi-random (as in randomly generated, but discarding anything that's totally useless to the party).