removing the Big 6 - how would 3ed play?

[GlassJaw]

I've always found high-level play in 3ed frustrating and the Big 6 are a big reason why. As I mentioned in the 4E magic item thread, I don't have a problem so much with item creation but the ability of players to cherry-pick the exact items they want, which are invariably always the Big 6.

So what if you removed all static plus items from 3ed and left in item creation.

Items that have both special abilities and pluses, like weapons, shields, and armor, would have abilities only.

Assuming you did this on both side - the PC's and NPC's/monsters - how much conversion would still have to be done? What would be some of the potential problem areas? Would one aspect of the game - saves, attack bonuses, armor class, etc - scale differently from levels 1-20 than another? Would one of those mechanics get more or less effective from levels 1-20?

 

[BSF]

So you wouldn't have a +2 longsword, but you might have a flaming longsword? No cloaks of resistance (or Charisma), but maybe a cloak of invisibility?

What about the books/librams/manuals that provide a permanent bonus? What about ioun stones?

AC already scales poorly in relation to attack bonus. But removing stat items and magic bonuses might resolve some of the scaling. I do have to wonder if it would just create a bigger divide between the magical/non-magical classes though. Fireball will still scale the same as always. Without that amulet of health, your fighter's HP will not be quite as high, so maybe the damage spells will feel even more effective? Of course, with the motivation to pump money into an elemental resistance for your armor, instead of the next 'plus', maybe the fighter would be even more effective against certain spellcasters?

It is an interesting idea. One that I will need to ponder a little bit more.

 

[Pale Master]

What "big six" are you referring to? The six stat-boosting items?

 

[DungeonMaester]

[Not trolling]Like a Role playing game[/Not trolling]

---Rusty

 

[drothgery]

What "big six" are you referring to? The six stat-boosting items?

I'm not exactly sure how it broke out, but I think it's weapon, armor/shield, cloak/vest of resistance, ring of protection, amulet of natural armor, and relevant stat booster.

 

[amethal]

What "big six" are you referring to? The six stat-boosting items?

* Magic weapon
* Magic armor & shield
* Ring of protection
* Cloak of resistance
* Amulet of natural armor
* Ability-score boosters

Its taken from the design and development article "Magic Item Compendium 1" dated 03/02/07, which can be found on the WotC site here :-

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20070302a

Ability score boosters presumably doesn't include amulet of health (constitution) or cloak of charisma since they used to clash with amulet of natural armour and cloak of resistance, at least until the magic item compendium encouraged DMs to allow items such as an "amulet of natural armour and health".

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I think the game would be really offense-heavy.

Spellcaster DCs scale pretty quickly. While the lack of stat-boosting items would reduce top-level save DCs by 3 points, the defenders would be 5 points behind.

Generally a spellcaster keeps cranking their primary stat while the defenders have to deal with three stats. A spellcaster is only disadvantaged if their opponent's primary stat is also a save stat. (For instance, clerics, druids and rogues are hard to target with Will, Will and Reflex saves under any circumstances; fortunately for spellcasters, there is a wide variety of spell attacks with all three save types.)

Attack bonuses scale faster than AC bonuses. The fighter gives up his +5 sword; his opponent gives up his +5 armor, +5 ring of protection, and maybe a shield and/or natural armor-boosting item. The two fighters may be balanced with each other, but the combat would get boring, and they wouldn't be balanced with monsters.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

Is this a step in the right direction? For what you're looking for? I think it is, but it doesn't go far enough. 3E is built "mathematically tight", with in fact the presumption that a certain amount of the Big Six are selected by the PCs. It's difficult to model with the additional seven years of Complete Splat on top of it and another edition because those books provide more factors to evaluate.

For the DM, if you take out those boosts, then you have to take out the boosts you're giving on the side to all the opponents. But now there are many more oddities running around. I think it might be cool for the DM. I don't think it goes far enough to provide a rich play experience for the six people also at the table.

 

[GlassJaw]

I don't think it goes far enough to provide a rich play experience for the six people also at the table.

Why not? If anything, I think it makes the play experience more enjoyable. First off, the numbers are toned down across the board. Anytime the game can be made to move faster, it's a plus in my book.

Also, it makes magic items more interesting instead of just reduced to "math in an item slot".

Think of this way - if you ran a campaign and never gave out an item with a static plus on it, do you think the PC's would be at a huge disadvantage?

I think it's a common belief that monster CR assumes a certain level of magic in the hands of the PC's. While this seems logical, I've never seen any quantifiable evidence of this. My gut tells me that the Big 6 make things easier for the PC's but certainly aren't required. If anything, they make it more difficult for the DM to challenge the party (the arms race).

 

[GlassJaw]

[Not trolling]Like a Role playing game[/Not trolling]

How is this helpful?