Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Was There A Mechanical Reason To Restrict Enchantments To Certain Weapons?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="b_took" data-source="post: 9890192" data-attributes="member: 7052043"><p>Another note: It's in the PHB2 that things start to get messy; the Invoker is a Chain-wearing Controller that uses the previously-only-for-warlocks rods and <em>not</em> holy symbols, meaning that when trying to find an appropriate rod, one has to painstakingly look at each description to make sure it's actually for the class in question. At the same time, they're restrained from being able to use the implement whose effects are pretty much <em>guaranteed</em> to work with divine classes.</p><p></p><p>The Druid did the something similar to hide as the Invoker did to rods, introducing several "while in beast form" enchantments that meant even if you were meant to wear hide, the enchantment would be functionally nonexistent.</p><p></p><p>And the Shaman introduced the possibility of a leader who wasn't expected to wear chain as the default (and the other build had to spend a feat to get it), creating a bunch of leather armors whose effects were nonexistent without a spirit companion, and, combined with Invoker getting chain, blurred that whole "chain is the assumed armor of leaders" thing that was going on. And so they added "when you use Channel Divinity" effects to chain, but that ruled out two of the divine classes (who would be in Cloth and Plate, respectively) from the ability and made the chain useless to the classes that would be accustomed to looking at enchanted chain.</p><p></p><p>(And, of course, Barbarian at-wills were mostly useless to Halflings and Gnomes. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> )</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure if this was the right direction to go, overall. It seems like beast form enchantments and spirit companion enchantments would have been better served being on totems instead of armors, while Chain could have remained focused on leaders (given the Divine class leader subtheme, Invokers in chain wouldn't be out of place). The PHB1 was scrupulous in avoiding armors that referenced specific class features. The contrast between Rods and Orbs (Warlock-specific and WIzard-specific, respectively) in the PHB1 also speaks volumes, with Rods very directly referencing a class mechanic, while Orbs provided class-neutral benefits with a control theme. Wands were restricted to power source (Arcane).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="b_took, post: 9890192, member: 7052043"] Another note: It's in the PHB2 that things start to get messy; the Invoker is a Chain-wearing Controller that uses the previously-only-for-warlocks rods and [I]not[/I] holy symbols, meaning that when trying to find an appropriate rod, one has to painstakingly look at each description to make sure it's actually for the class in question. At the same time, they're restrained from being able to use the implement whose effects are pretty much [I]guaranteed[/I] to work with divine classes. The Druid did the something similar to hide as the Invoker did to rods, introducing several "while in beast form" enchantments that meant even if you were meant to wear hide, the enchantment would be functionally nonexistent. And the Shaman introduced the possibility of a leader who wasn't expected to wear chain as the default (and the other build had to spend a feat to get it), creating a bunch of leather armors whose effects were nonexistent without a spirit companion, and, combined with Invoker getting chain, blurred that whole "chain is the assumed armor of leaders" thing that was going on. And so they added "when you use Channel Divinity" effects to chain, but that ruled out two of the divine classes (who would be in Cloth and Plate, respectively) from the ability and made the chain useless to the classes that would be accustomed to looking at enchanted chain. (And, of course, Barbarian at-wills were mostly useless to Halflings and Gnomes. :) ) I'm not sure if this was the right direction to go, overall. It seems like beast form enchantments and spirit companion enchantments would have been better served being on totems instead of armors, while Chain could have remained focused on leaders (given the Divine class leader subtheme, Invokers in chain wouldn't be out of place). The PHB1 was scrupulous in avoiding armors that referenced specific class features. The contrast between Rods and Orbs (Warlock-specific and WIzard-specific, respectively) in the PHB1 also speaks volumes, with Rods very directly referencing a class mechanic, while Orbs provided class-neutral benefits with a control theme. Wands were restricted to power source (Arcane). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Was There A Mechanical Reason To Restrict Enchantments To Certain Weapons?
Top