The problem of keeping magic items scarce...

[cignus_pfaccari]

I'll second Iron Heroes, its a GREAT system if you're wanting to make magic items feel special again.

My understanding is that magic items in IH are not so much "special" as "dangerous" and "soul-imperiling". But that's a minor quibble.

But certainly, if you don't like having magic items be available, regular D&D 3.5 really is not the best choice of games. IH would be a good fit, as might some of the other systems that Rem mentions.

Brad

 

[Lord Zardoz]

The best way to curb magical item bloat without making non monsterous NPC's noncompetitive is to use what amounts to cursed magical items, or at least a variant of them.

Basically, all you need to do is tie the functionality of a magic item to some common feature of the opponents who use it. The game has Bane weapons that add damage to certain foes. Why not have weapons that only work for certain users? A good example would be Orcish weapons that only feature for members who are tribe members. In the hands of a tribe member, the weapon acts as a +2 weapon. In the hands of anyone else, it acts as a -2 weapon.

As long as you do not carry this too far, and work out a way for a PC to get the gear they need in the long run, there is nothing wrong with this.

Some random ideas (feel free to replace Weapon with whatever sort of Item you wish):
- Weapons that become cursed as -X weapons unless the owner gives the weapon away for free (prevents the weapon from being sold or stolen, but does not prevent the weapon from being taken from someone who gives it up when they surrender).
- Weapons that only work in a particular geographic area
- Weapons that only work if the user worships a particular god for at least 1 hour each day.
- Weapons that inflict damage on a wrongful user (1d3 at a time) but otherwise function normally.
- Weapons that suffer 1 point of item damage for each use by a wronful user
- Weapons that must be within range of a turning effect by a cleric of a particular god in order to function, and then only function for 1 day

Imposing these features onto weapons should have the effect you seek.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Raven Crowking]

In a world with plentiful plot hooks (i.e. demand for adventurers), any ruler who angered adventurers overmuch (say, by confiscating their stuff) would rapidly find no adventurers willing to deal with said plot hooks.

You must live in a different world than I do. IRL, for example, few people make it onto professional sports teams. A lot of people are angered by not being selected. That doesn't stop them from trying.

RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

See, this is what I meant when I asked whether 3E/3.5 dictated a certain style of play.

And most people shouted me down.

Go figure.

"Dictated" is apparently too strong a word.

"Very strongly implies/urges you toward" is more accurate.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

See, this is what I meant when I asked whether 3E/3.5 dictated a certain style of play.

And most people shouted me down.

Go figure.

Because it was the same in 1st edition. If your fighter didnt have magic items, he wasnt going to be effective. If you had tons of gear, the DM had to use tougher monsters. No gear, weaker monsters. You got shouted down because people are sick of grognards whining about it like its a new thing.

 

[Kraydak]

You must live in a different world than I do. IRL, for example, few people make it onto professional sports teams. A lot of people are angered by not being selected. That doesn't stop them from trying.

RC

I fail to see the comparison. Adventurers are self-selected, and choose where they work. Would you work for a guy who takes your profits? When there are people in the world you could work for who *won't* take your profits? Adventurers are inherently mobile, and will avoid rulers who make their life hard (unless the ruler isn't powerful enough to enforce his will). Such rulers, having alienated the strongest military forces around, will end up by falling under uncompleted adventures. Driving heroes away is generally a bad thing.

I will note, in addition, if you (for the sake of "realism") want rulers to be trying to take adventurers stuff through taxes, where are all the people (including rulers) who are trying to curry favor with the adventurers by giving said adventurers stuff? Simplest way to combine them is to say gifts+taxes cancel (adventurers who stiff rulers are looked at as less trust/bribeworthy). This will break at high levels, but should be a good assumption at lower levels.

 

[Imp]

The rulers would probably negotiate letters of marque with the adventurers when they start getting the really big jobs and are high enough level to pose a significant threat. This might include a share of the loot in exchange for the information if the ruler isn't desperate.

Substantively:

Binding a magical item's powers to a building, area, or person is a pretty good idea, and seems like something magicians would want to do, but it gets cheesy if you do it all the time; remember old-style drow and their crumbly-with-sunlight weapons? Boy did that get old. I'd suggest providing some way to unbind or re-bind the magic item.

Consider immobile magic items. As the cultists attack, they dip their weapons in a black pool that confers them with bless weapon and a +2 bonus, but the black liquid is unmagical if separated from the source. The inscription of the dark god on the floor gives the unholy faithful a +2 bonus to saves. The statue of the horse allows... etc., etc.

A pretty good way to introduce a campaign's BBEG is to have him abscond with some of the players' magical loot. I'd be less excited about having thieves do it unless the PCs initiated the beef.

Echoing the idea to use limited-use magic items. Give the barbarian underlings a dose of +3 greater magic weapon oil to prepare with and they can be more on-par with the PCs without providing them extra power off their dead bodies.

You can introduce the idea that magic items (inevitably? sometimes?) just go dormant, but have a reason. Perhaps they have a lasting bond with their creator that the creator's decided to revoke. Or that the sword is sated after x number of kills in a week/month/year.

 

[Raven Crowking]

I fail to see the comparison. Adventurers are self-selected, and choose where they work. Would you work for a guy who takes your profits?

I am reminded of the EN World stricture not to discuss real life politics, or I would point out that I do in fact work for someone who takes a portion of my profits, and then go into detail about that.

Instead, let me example drug dealers, as described from the interesting book Freakonomics.

At the lowest level, gang members in the drug-dealing gangs make no money at all. In fact, they pay money to have a shot at getting a high enough position in the gang to get a street corner. The guys working corners make less than minimum wage. At the time of the study used in Freakonomics, they had roughly a 1 in 4 chance of sustaining serious injury or being killed per year. The rungs over that made 80% of the profits.

So, why did people work in these gangs?

(1) Because there are incentives other than money involved. One is the chance to make it up the ladder to a position where you could potentially make real money. Of course, as with the chance of being a professional athelete or an international superstar, the odds are vanishingly small. Another is that the gang takes care of your family and funereal expenses if you're shot.

(2) Their other career options seem limited. As an example, "janitor" might seem to be a good job within the context of their world.

This relates to adventurers in a well-developed D&D world because the adventurers don't exist in a vaccuum. They have a symbiotic relationship with the peoples and governments in their world.

Most adventurers, when they start out, are looking for the chance to make it up the ladder. In the case of D&D, the ladder is the XP Ladder leading to Higher and Higher Levels. It is also the GP Ladder, leading to bigger and bigger treasures. It is likely that the PCs are only one set of a large number of would-be adventurers, and that not all of those adventurers are going to successfully make it up those ladders. In some games, the PCs success may be guaranteed, but this is by no means the only (or the best) way to play the game.

In a world based off of almost any real-world culture or time period, the government of the adventuring area is going to want to stay in power. A large part of that is based upon maintaining its rights while curtailing those of others. For example, certain weapons, items, and magicks are likely to be held as the province of government. Would-be adventurers need to earn the right to use/have/create them. Often, this means that they must demonstrate themselves to be staunch allies of the government.

This is also, by the way, the way that the paying gang members try to work their way up to a street corner. Being a "team player" is important in sports to get a chance to even get before a scout, let alone to having that scout recommend you.

When there are people in the world you could work for who *won't* take your profits?

Those people simply don't exist. Not in this world, not in any other. Of course, you could create a world where they don'e exist -- this is a fantasy rpg, after all!

Adventurers are inherently mobile, and will avoid rulers who make their life hard (unless the ruler isn't powerful enough to enforce his will). Such rulers, having alienated the strongest military forces around, will end up by falling under uncompleted adventures. Driving heroes away is generally a bad thing.

Excepting that, presumably (and certainly using the DMG demographics!), the area that the PCs want to move onto are also ruled by people not unlike the ones they're leaving behind. Moreover, those people have a pool of adventurers of their own, who, like the street venders and paying gang members, have demonstrated their loyalty to the current structure. Not only will the rulers here want as much as they do from their underling adventurers, but they will want to make damn sure that these new people have neither the desire nor the power to rock their political boat.

Think of it as split-off members from a rival gang moving in on your turf, and you'll see what I mean.

I will note, in addition, if you (for the sake of "realism") want rulers to be trying to take adventurers stuff through taxes, where are all the people (including rulers) who are trying to curry favor with the adventurers by giving said adventurers stuff?

I fully endorse this concept, from free meals and beds coming from common folk through to land grants at higher level. However, the idea that stuff = taxes is, I think, incorrect.

The local ruler doesn't want you to be glutted with the means to take him down. He wants you to be tied into the system. Therefore, while some of his gifts might be pretty baubles (jewelry for the most part) or specific items needed to complete a mission (probably a loan), other gifts will be things like titles, land grants, rights to perform specific functions or colelct specific taxes, and so on -- things that make your continued investment dependent upon the healthy state of the local government.

And marriages. There's nothing like a marriage and a few kids to cement an alliance. For a stronger alliance, how about you raise my kid and I raise yours?

I like to point out The Godfather as a good example of how D&D politics can work.

(Speaking of which, giving gifts to underlings is a great way to spend the extra magic items that PCs accumulate. Eventually, they may discover themselves to be the local rulers!)

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

To address the OP's question:

If your chief concern is that classed NPCs suck as enemies... well, you're right. They generally do. Compare the hp, damage per round and tricks of a 10th level NPC barbarian (keeping in mind, he has the 'elite array,' not even a 25 point optimized point-buy, much less 28 or 32 point) with that of a CR 10 physical threat. The monster has a huge edge.

Frankly, I've always wondered if the CR=level for classed NPCs and the NPC wealth tables were not developed independently.

My personal favorite 'NPC magic item' comes from Complete Arcane, and goes by the lovely, lovely name of 'Craft Contingent Spell.' Wealthy NPCs IMC invest in a nice suite of contingent spells: Shield (trigger: when injured), Cure Critical Wounds - or, at higher levels, Heal - (trigger: when critically injured/25% hp), Haste, Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace and Expeditious Retreat (trigger: when critically injured).

At higher levels, you start seeing contingencies like Teleport Without Error: to safe, predetermined place (trigger: when unconscious) or even that one-round Raise Dead spell from the Spell Compendium, the name of which I can't think of offhand (trigger: when slain).

I'm also fond of combining Teleport Without Error, a Summon Monster or Nature's Ally, and a Major Image to make it seem like you polymorphed rather than teleported.

 

[Kraydak]

So, why did people work in these gangs?

(1) Because there are incentives other than money involved. One is the chance to make it up the ladder to a position where you could potentially make real money. Of course, as with the chance of being a professional athelete or an international superstar, the odds are vanishingly small. Another is that the gang takes care of your family and funereal expenses if you're shot.

(2) Their other career options seem limited. As an example, "janitor" might seem to be a good job within the context of their world.

This relates to adventurers in a well-developed D&D world because the adventurers don't exist in a vaccuum. They have a symbiotic relationship with the peoples and governments in their world.

Most adventurers, when they start out, are looking for the chance to make it up the ladder. In the case of D&D, the ladder is the XP Ladder leading to Higher and Higher Levels. It is also the GP Ladder, leading to bigger and bigger treasures. It is likely that the PCs are only one set of a large number of would-be adventurers, and that not all of those adventurers are going to successfully make it up those ladders. In some games, the PCs success may be guaranteed, but this is by no means the only (or the best) way to play the game.

In a world based off of almost any real-world culture or time period, the government of the adventuring area is going to want to stay in power. A large part of that is based upon maintaining its rights while curtailing those of others. For example, certain weapons, items, and magicks are likely to be held as the province of government. Would-be adventurers need to earn the right to use/have/create them. Often, this means that they must demonstrate themselves to be staunch allies of the government.

This is also, by the way, the way that the paying gang members try to work their way up to a street corner. Being a "team player" is important in sports to get a chance to even get before a scout, let alone to having that scout recommend you.



Those people simply don't exist. Not in this world, not in any other. Of course, you could create a world where they don'e exist -- this is a fantasy rpg, after all!



Excepting that, presumably (and certainly using the DMG demographics!), the area that the PCs want to move onto are also ruled by people not unlike the ones they're leaving behind. Moreover, those people have a pool of adventurers of their own, who, like the street venders and paying gang members, have demonstrated their loyalty to the current structure. Not only will the rulers here want as much as they do from their underling adventurers, but they will want to make damn sure that these new people have neither the desire nor the power to rock their political boat.

Think of it as split-off members from a rival gang moving in on your turf, and you'll see what I mean.
[\QUOTE]

Adventurers who lack the power to rock the political boat are useless. Anything they can do can be replicated at lower cost by a bunch of 1st lvl warriors. Remember: any restrictions rulers want to put on adventurers they ALSO want to put on plot hooks. Giving the presence of plot hooks at a party's level, one can infer a lack of ruler's power to constrain the adventurers. This continues all the way down to lvl 1.

I fully endorse this concept, from free meals and beds coming from common folk through to land grants at higher level. However, the idea that stuff = taxes is, I think, incorrect.

The local ruler doesn't want you to be glutted with the means to take him down. He wants you to be tied into the system. Therefore, while some of his gifts might be pretty baubles (jewelry for the most part) or specific items needed to complete a mission (probably a loan), other gifts will be things like titles, land grants, rights to perform specific functions or colelct specific taxes, and so on -- things that make your continued investment dependent upon the healthy state of the local government.

And marriages. There's nothing like a marriage and a few kids to cement an alliance. For a stronger alliance, how about you raise my kid and I raise yours?

I like to point out The Godfather as a good example of how D&D politics can work.

(Speaking of which, giving gifts to underlings is a great way to spend the extra magic items that PCs accumulate. Eventually, they may discover themselves to be the local rulers!)

I cannot see most adventurers so much as wanting land (while still in their adventuring years and given that if you keep adventuring you'll gain the ability to claim yet more land when you retire...). If someone tried to give to one of my characters it I'd turn it down. High level adventurers are adrenaline junkies. They may have the skills needed to be good rulers (often in spades), but they lack the mentality for it. This is one reason I dislike the "ruler as badass" concept, when instead an EL 15 nation would have an EL 10 court (can't be TOO weak or it would need rescuing too often) which rules at the whim of an EL 15 patron who can't be bothered by the day-to-day tedium of governing.

This of course is where life gets really wierd. That EL 15 patron (if he is a decent sort) will want to have a replacement available when he retires. This means he needs to create a replacement for himself. EL 15 people are created through adventuring: he needs adventuring hooks to level people up! If none are available, he might well create some. (There are lots of ways you could look at this but, fundamentally, the only military that matters in DnD is high level characters, which means every nation needs to create high level characters or their equivalent). Ever wondered why adventure seems to stalk PCs? Ever wonder how cities without PCs survived? Ever wonder how some random 3rd lvl adept got his hands on that Tome of Evilness(tm)? Ever wonder why that glorious lvl 15 adventuring party hasn't eliminated the goblin threat to the North? Ever wonder why the bad guys *just seem* to have equipment useful to your party, even if that means a missized gnomish hooked hammer? Here is the dirty little secret: your PCs are being groomed by a group of 13th lvl rogues and bards who have created adventuring hooks in every city and initiating them when you get close. Some civilian casualties are unfortunate, but unavoidable. By about 10th lvl they will have to confess everything, but thats when mercenary activity in the planes becomes a legitimate training activity. Of course, this means that the authorities will be forbidden to overly harass your party.