Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pming" data-source="post: 6545960" data-attributes="member: 45197">Hiya! Here's another 2¢... I totally get why some people want more in-depth rules for creating magic items. That said, there are actual rules for creating magic items in the DMG...some folks just don't like them. Fair enough. However, what I'd like to point out is that of the "Is it easier to give something to your players, or take it away from them?" problem. I remember pointing this little tid-bit out to the 2nd edition folks when 2e had just hit the market. Everyone was all about the "new options/spells/classes/etc". If you, as DM, go to your players and say "Hey guys, in this campaign I've decided to remove level caps for demi-humans", most players would be pleased if not outright excited. But if the game allows for unlimited leveling by default and you, as DM, go to your players and say "Hey guys, in this campaign I've decided to add level caps for demi-humans"...well, prepare for a poop storm of epic proportions! You'd hear everything from You just don't want us to have fun! all the way to You just suck as a DM and can't handle it!.   Why? Simply because the "default assumption/rule" has been taken away from them. Even if it was never really in their hands to begin with, because it was printed in the book as default, the players feel entitled to use it. Period. If there were detailed rules for creating magic items, and detailed lists of the costs of magic items, this would be the "default assumption/rule", even if it was labeled as "Optional" (sort of how Multi-Classing and Feats are...they are OPTIONAL, but so-o many complaints or build-optimizations are just outright assuming they are used...leads to a lot of bickering and heartache; better if they weren't even there, IMHO). As those magic item rules would be in the books, if/when a DM said "Nope", many players would feel all that negativity towards the DM's "ruling" instantly. Now, call me crazy, but I'd rather have a game system written so that when the DM makes a ruling, exception, addition, etc., that the players get positive feelings. They think "Oh, hey! That's cool! So dwarves from the Iron Clan of Khoranite can be multi-classed Paladin/Sorcerers? And the're called the Iron Spells, like some sort of elite fighting contingent? Coooolll......!". That's MUCH better than saying "Nope, you can't do that".Cool idea, yes you can!  <--- leads to warm fuzzies and positive reinforcement.No, you can't. Forget it! <--- leads to cold pricklies and negative feedback.  So...keep the detailed magic item creation and costs OUT OF THE GAME. Rough, vague, and heavily DM-interpreted rules for this kind of thing is FAR superior, IMHO.  Besides, allowing purchasing of magic items is an all-or-nothing thing. If one player in the group wants to be able to, two players don't much care, and one player doesn't like the idea....if it is allowed, EVERYONE but the player who wants it will be getting the "cold prickles". Basically, if the other three players don't start buying and optimizing their character via magic item purchases, they will quickly encounter more and more "cold pricklies" type things during the game sessions as their characters quickly become out-classed by the magic-purchasing optimization fiend. So, like power gamers, it's a group All-or-Nothing endevour. You can't "just have one guy" in the group do it and maintain a balanced campaign. Allowing the purchasing of magic items only leads to one thing: OP, optimized, characters. I've never seen it end up any other way.^_^Paul L. Ming</blockquote>

Verification