Return of the DonkeyHorse!

[Zaran]

That would be a custom job. You could price it out using this book Stronghold Builder's Guide.

Right, we used to have info like this. I have the book myself. I'm sure there are alot of new groups out there that do not have this book though. Hence why I started this thread.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But, the way I see it, there are two options: First, you have mundane equipment which has mechanical effects, thus creating balancing issues and power creep. We saw this sort of thing all the time in 3e when players would cherry pick bits and pieces from multiple sources to create all sorts of very powerful effects. The more that is added to a system, the more difficult it becomes to manage this.

Given that mundane gear typically has minimal mechanical modifiers, how is supplying a consistent baseline for such items to the game's core somehow worse than insisting that DMs "wing it" to fill in those gaps?

Personally, I'd much rather have the former than the latter.

 

[Lanefan]

May I ask where on the internet you can get the pricing guidelines for a transdimensional flying city of the new gods?

Price to buy, or to build?

Either way, you're probably better off stealing one.

Or not.

Lan-"this does, barely, come under the 'transport' heading"-efan

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Right, we used to have info like this. I have the book myself. I'm sure there are alot of new groups out there that do not have this book though. Hence why I started this thread.

And they can buy one of the 26 copies currently available where I linked to. And they can buy it cheaper than a new book that would basically have the same info. Gold per level hasn't really changed that much between 3E and 4E to make the book unusable in 4E.

 

[Hussar]

Given that mundane gear typically has minimal mechanical modifiers, how is supplying a consistent baseline for such items to the game's core somehow worse than insisting that DMs "wing it" to fill in those gaps?

Personally, I'd much rather have the former than the latter.

Because, IMO, there simply aren't enough DM's who care about this sort of thing to justify an entire system for it. If you want it for your campaign, go for it, but don't pollute everyone else's campaign with it.

You're right. Sure, mundane items are just a few bonuses. But, that's where it all starts. You get +1 to Sneak for your Boots Low, Soft, and another +1 for the Face Paint, Black. Suddenly, you're Sneaking at 4 levels higher than what is expected for your level.

One of the goals in 4e was to limit the number of sources of bonuses, something they've managed to do fairly well IMO. You don't get bonuses to skills all that easily outside of some very specific abilities and items.

And all that besides, if all you want is a minor bonus due to equipment, the stock circumstance bonuses in the DMG 1 will cover everything. So, again, the rules guidelines are already there and all you need are the flavour elements.

If all you want is a big book of flavour, fine. Cool. Easily found in any library

Note, as I said above, things like strongholds, ships and whatnot are a separate matter. To me, those should be siloed off entirely from the rest of the game and turned into their own mini-game similar to how Affiliations were done in 3e.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

You're right. Sure, mundane items are just a few bonuses. But, that's where it all starts. You get +1 to Sneak for your Boots Low, Soft, and another +1 for the Face Paint, Black. Suddenly, you're Sneaking at 4 levels higher than what is expected for your level. One of the goals in 4e was to limit the number of sources of bonuses, something they've managed to do fairly well IMO. You don't get bonuses to skills all that easily outside of some very specific abilities and items.

I think alot of this is in the assumed abstract. A character trained in Stealth knows to wear the right type of boots. He knows when it's best to apply the black face paint. It's assumed he's doing these things to get that +5 that an untrained character does not.

 

[Nifft]

Note, as I said above, things like strongholds, ships and whatnot are a separate matter. To me, those should be siloed off entirely from the rest of the game and turned into their own mini-game similar to how Affiliations were done in 3e.

That would be a cool silo.

I think alot of this is in the assumed abstract. A character trained in Stealth knows to wear the right type of boots. He knows when it's best to apply the black face paint. It's assumed he's doing these things to get that +5 that an untrained character does not.

Agreed.

Gaining mechanical benefits from details at the level of "boots, hard, high" seems to go hand in hand with DM'ing in the style of "but you didn't say you looked up!"... and that's not my kind of game any more.

I'd rather play a game which assumes my character is competent in whatever the sheet says he's competent in, without me needing to micro-manage his wardrobe.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

I'd rather play a game which assumes my character is competent in whatever the sheet says he's competent in, without me needing to micro-manage his wardrobe.

Although, if you did, when a PC rolls a natural 1 on his skill check you can consult the Wardrobe Malfunction Table! <ducks>

 

[Ourph]

I think alot of this is in the assumed abstract. A character trained in Stealth knows to wear the right type of boots. He knows when it's best to apply the black face paint. It's assumed he's doing these things to get that +5 that an untrained character does not.

This, like, 10,000%

 

[Mark Chance]

This, like, 10,000%

So, then, if the character is deprived of his assumed stealth boots and black face paint, he'd suffer a -5 penalty to Stealth checks?