PHBII: Retraining?

[KarinsDad]

Do you NOT do this?

My current character is a Fighter/Warmage. I spent my extra human feats and my fighter feats to get rapid shot and to be able to use a Greatbow with some skill. If I go through the remaining 15 levels of my "life" as a character and the GM never changes any of the loot in the adventure to be an upgraded Greatbow then thats a load of hooey.

Agreed.

I think you might have missed the word "only" in my sentence.

The PCs in my game acquire a lot of useful and even specific to a given PC items. But, they also acquire a lot of less useful items. For example, having no Druid in the group and getting a Druid-only item.

This forces the PCs to find ways to sell or trade those items that they really cannot use. This, in and of itself, gives me adventuring hooks. For example, the last time this occurred, the Temple of Mystra would only purchase their "less useful" items if they went on a mission for the Temple.

In my game, there are potion, scroll, and component shops. But, more expensive items require the PCs to find a buyer in some manner. Very few NPCs have both the money and the motivation to purchase the more expensive magical items.

 

[KarinsDad]

Really? Huh. For me, ever since I started playing some 24 years ago, every single thing in the game has comprised trivial entertainment; none of it has ever really mattered .

Friendships made in the game matter.

 

[Pielorinho]

Friendships made in the game matter.

That's very true--but it's the friendship that matters, not the weapon focus feat.

Daniel

 

[Nail]

The PCs in my game acquire a lot of useful and even specific to a given PC items. But, they also acquire a lot of less useful items.

Stepping way off topic for a moment: This sort of thing is a fundamental flaw with the D&D system, IMHO. "Gear is Key". In a good 3.5e D&D game, the DM has to "give" the PCs gear -- gear specific to each character.

YMMV, but this runs counter to the fantasy genre as a whole. It's always the hero that matters. If he/she/it loses gear, so what?

If you're playing 3.5e, you're dead without gear; that's the "so what".

 

[KarinsDad]

Stepping way off topic for a moment: This sort of thing is a fundamental flaw with the D&D system, IMHO. "Gear is Key". In a good 3.5e D&D game, the DM has to "give" the PCs gear -- gear specific to each character.

YMMV, but this runs counter to the fantasy genre as a whole. It's always the hero that matters. If he/she/it loses gear, so what?

If you're playing 3.5e, you're dead without gear; that's the "so what".

While this might be somewhat true for armor and spell components, I do not see it as necessarily true for everything else.

The Fighter can still Power Attack with a tree branch if necessary and still overcome DR.

The Monk can fight with no gear whatsoever.

Even spellcasters can cast spells without components if they have the proper feats. Granted, this rarely happens. But, it can.

The real issue here is for offensive and defensive items. Because they exist in the game, equal challenges have to take them into account.


However, I do agree that DND is "gear oriented". The game is not really designed for PCs to spend most of their money on more normal investments (like a home or business). The game is designed for PCs to spend most of their money on gear. I think the reason for this is to give the PCs mobility (i.e. it's easier to travel to the other side of the world to adventure if you can carry most of your stuff on your person). I do not necessarily consider this a flaw.

 

[Dimwhit]

While I might agree that DnD is 'gear oriented,' I don't think it's so cut and dried. Many people successfully run low-magic campaigns within the 3.5 rule set. I'm running one now, and it works just fine. The DM just has to be a little more careful about the NPCs/creatures.

 

[FireLance]

Have you never met an Amish?

No, they are a little rare where I come from. Incidentally, I've heard that they object to cars, but not rollerblades. My understanding is they are not opposed to technology per se, just technology that loosens the ties that bind them together as a society. Cars are bad because they encourage people to travel far away, but rollerblades are OK because they speed up travel within their communities, but are not practical for long distances.