Reducing the number of bonus types

[Tequila Sunrise]

That would render whole items useless. This is a way to simplify things but not neuter choices for the players.

All these item choices are what is creating the problem that you're trying to solve. Example: if a fighter only has access to belts of strength (enhancement), magic weapons (enhancement) and manuals of strength (inherent) well, you've not only made the game a lot simpler but you've stopped all those bogus PC 'choices' from sending his AB thru the roof!

 

[SSquirrel]

All these item choices are what is creating the problem that you're trying to solve. Example: if a fighter only has access to belts of strength (enhancement), magic weapons (enhancement) and manuals of strength (inherent) well, you've not only made the game a lot simpler but you've stopped all those bogus PC 'choices' from sending his AB thru the roof!

So then you have (at least according to these boards):

"But it's in the DMG!?!? Why can't I have it, even pay for it myself!?"

or

"Oh look guys, ANOTHER Greataxe +2."
"What no Blue Ioun Stones or an Apparatus of Kwalish or a <insert magic item here>?"
"Noe, the gods destroyed all items like that due to some sort of confusion"

Besides, if the only magic items someone could find came from a list about 10 items long, a lot of the magic of D&D is goine IMO. I like teh variety of items you can get, I'm simply wondering about maybe limiting exactly how high everything can stack due to 18 different types of stacking or so.

 

[szilard]

Okay, I like that you're simplifying, but if you put most bonuses into the categories that stack with themselves, how is this preventing the original problem?

I think it is useful to have some bonuses which stack with themselves. The problem was the huge number of possible bonuses which stacked with each other.

I don't think that I "put most bonuses into the categories that stack with themselves" at all - most things would likely become competence, arcane, or divine. The general idea behind the way I have it here for those which do so stack (which I admit I haven't playtested or anything) would be that either they are fairly central to the character and don't change much (inherent) or they are pretty much wholly under the eye of the DM (circumstance).

-Stuart

 

[Silverhair]

Why not three bonus types?

Why not three bonus types (bonuses of different types always stack with each other):

1. Extraordinary (Ex):
   
   Extraordinary bonuses always stack with each other. Many feats or class features, as well as circumstances, grant this type of bonus.​
2. Supernatural (Su):
   
   Supernatural bonuses never stack with each other unless otherwise stated. Some feats or class features grant this type of bonus. Magic items can be made to grant this type of bonus for an extra cost (x1.5).​
3. Spell-like (Sp):
   
   Spell-like bonuses never stack with each other. Spells, spell-like abilities, psionic powers, and most magic items grant this type of bonus.​

You'd need a new feat:

Supernatural spell (Metamagic): A supernatural spell grants a supernatural, instead of spell-like, bonus. This feat is required to make magic items which grant a supernatural bonus. A supernatural spell uses a spell slot one level higher than the spell's actual level.​

 

[Lorehead]

Oh, offhand:

• If we don't have axiomatic or anarchic bonuses, why do we have separate sacred and profane ones? How often do the forces of good and evil bless the same person in the same way? Fold these into something like a grace bonus, or perhaps even make them luck bonuses, since even luck can really be the favor of the gods.
• There is no compelling reason that magical bonuses to saving throws are resistance bonuses, while magical bonuses to everything else are enhancement bonuses. This will do nothing about bonuses stacking, but it will remove a bit of needless complexity.
• If enhancement bonuses stack, they should become unnamed bonuses.
• Competence, haste and insight bonuses are sufficiently like enhancement bonuses that they could become enhancement bonuses, if you were so inclined. If it's important that these bonuses stack with typical items, they could become unnamed bonuses. Even deflection bonuses might follow suit; a player who understands that the enhancement bonuses from his armor, his shield and his amulet of natural armor all stack because they modify different items that add to AC, why would making the bonus on a ring of protection another enhancement bonus cause any more confusion?
• It is rare enough for there to be multiple ways of getting an alchemical bonus to the same roll that this could simply become an enhancement bonus (like the non-magical enhancement bonus on a masterwork weapon), or even an unnamed bonus.
• Racial bonuses could almost always become unnamed bonuses; when does a single character ever get two racial bonuses to the same roll?
• The rule that multiple size-changing effects don't stack might make the size bonus type redundant.

The rules don't seem broken to me; you might even argue that having lots of bonus types simplifies the game, since it frees you from needing to keep track of where each bonus is from. I would advise against calling everything an "enhancement" bonus and yet having enhancement bonuses stack; we don't need another exception to the stacking rules. I would also strongly advise against a +10 cap.

 

[airwalkrr]

I have nothing to add to the conversation at this point (it is tricky but I am thinking about it). However, I would like to state that I wholeheartedly support this thread and will be keeping a close eye on it.

 

[SSquirrel]

I have nothing to add to the conversation at this point (it is tricky but I am thinking about it). However, I would like to state that I wholeheartedly support this thread and will be keeping a close eye on it.

Wellconsidering I started the thread cause I had some thoughts and opinions for your otehr thread, but found it had been closed....that's probly a good thing

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

"But it's in the DMG!?!? Why can't I have it, even pay for it myself!?"

This is when I tell the player 'here's the world's smallest lyre playing for your tears.' If they still whine and moan about it, I can always kick them out.

Besides, if the only magic items someone could find came from a list about 10 items long, a lot of the magic of D&D is goine IMO. I like teh variety of items you can get, I'm simply wondering about maybe limiting exactly how high everything can stack due to 18 different types of stacking or so.

I hate the plethora of magic item crap in d&d. At the basic level, magic items in d&d are one thing and one thing only: an essential tool for players to get bonuses. Any item that doesn't do this is just needless complication. But if you feel differently, well that's what d&d is about.

 

[SSquirrel]

This is when I tell the player 'here's the world's smallest lyre playing for your tears.' If they still whine and moan about it, I can always kick them out.

I try not to kick out good friends, who are generally teh only people I game with.

I hate the plethora of magic item crap in d&d. At the basic level, magic items in d&d are one thing and one thing only: an essential tool for players to get bonuses. Any item that doesn't do this is just needless complication. But if you feel differently, well that's what d&d is about.

Then again I enjoyed the original Final Fantasy on the NES, building my character up, finding neat new gear etc. This was a million times worse (or better depending on how much variety you want) in games like Diablo 2 and now World of Warcraft. Personalization of your character thru any means. If that means you want to have a whip dagger and have a jagged scar next toy our eye cool. If it works out that you're able to get a few magic items that you deem pretty cool and suit your character well, bonus.

I'm gonna be pretty lenient when I DM cuz hey, we're all here to have fun. Is it more fun for my players to have magic shops they can ditch things they don't like and buy other magic items? Likely more common ones rather than just plain anything, but yeah it probably is. OK cool the setting has em. Real simple. Fit the game to the players. If they expect low magic, gritty combat and characters that only last a few sessions, I'll hand out less magic, watch the CR levels and use Ken Hood's Revised Grim N Gritty combat system heh.

 

[Quartz]

Good stuff so far - I think Silverhair's on to something - but one thing I'd eliminate is unnamed bonuses. Every bonus gets named.