What's wrong with the magic item Christmas tree?

[Lanefan]

1. The system expects and requires that PCs have tons of magic items as they get to higher levels. Without them, the non-casters can't handle CR-appropriate encounters and are even more disadvantaged compared to the casters.

Depends what system or edition you're playing; while what you say is true for the newer editions, I'd posit it's nowhere near as big a deal in the older ones.

A second variable is how easy it might be to replace such items as were lost. If the DM tends to give out lots of magic anyway, losing some shouldn't matter much: easy come, easy go. If the DM is unusually stingy, however, again it's a bigger deal.

I'm very much in the easy come, easy go camp. Magic items in my games tend to be on the fragile side...

2. I hope I never have a DM that thinks like you, though if I did I wouldn't stick around long anyway.

::shrug:: I fail to see a problem with his ideas.

Different strokes, I guess.

Lanefan

 

[FireLance]

Depends what system or edition you're playing; while what you say is true for the newer editions, I'd posit it's nowhere near as big a deal in the older ones.

I'd say that the newer editions are about the same as the older ones in this respect. The older editions didn't have balance guidelines so judgement by the DM or the players (depending on whether it was a more scripted or sandbox game) as to which encounters the PCs could take on was the default. In the newer editions, there are explicit balance guidelines provided, but if you choose to ignore them, you will just need to go back to using DM or player judgement.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Depends what system or edition you're playing; while what you say is true for the newer editions, I'd posit it's nowhere near as big a deal in the older ones.

The poster I replied to said it was 3rd edition. I don't know about older editions, but I doubt that it wasn't a big deal back then. Wasn't one of the first versions of the game on an "gp = xp" system? If a single spell can wipe out tens of thousands of gp in a single casting, how exactly would that work?

A second variable is how easy it might be to replace such items as were lost. If the DM tends to give out lots of magic anyway, losing some shouldn't matter much: easy come, easy go. If the DM is unusually stingy, however, again it's a bigger deal.

If you're handing out insanely large amounts of treasure, far more than the game expects, I guess it does balance. Then again...instead of bashing the players with a disjunction every few months to keep their power in line, why not just take some basic steps to keep track of the wealth you're giving them and not let the problem start in the first place?

::shrug:: I fail to see a problem with his ideas.

Different strokes, I guess.

No, not just "different strokes." If you're keeping the PC's wealth well below what the system expects at higher levels (in 3E at least), it's not just an "aw shucks, guess we like different things" situation. The noncasters need those items more than the casters do, and the casters were already more powerful than the noncasters. To help visualize what is happening at that point: The DM is stealing food from the homeless.

(I should probably mention that I don't mind casters being more powerful at higher levels. Higher levels by definition will see the smallest amount of play time of any of the levels anyway. And despite what internet forums keep claiming, I have yet to see a game where the casters were up to par with the warriors at low levels, so it's also a see-saw kind of balance. I also like the thematics of high level casters just plain surpassing their warrior peers. I'm not criticizing the high level power imbalance. I just think it's twisted to make things even worse for the weaker classes than it already is.

And yes, I play high level non-casters myself. About 2/3 of my characters that started at or reached level 15+ had no spellcasting ability at all.)

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I brought this up earlier in this thread, but it seems to have been missed or ignored.

Wasn't this dropping a +1 item to pick up the +2 item an issue only in older editions of D&D? Later editions have the option to upgrade an item, so the PC can upgrade his +1 item to a +2 item instead of dropping to pick up. Right?

Yes, but that's still a problem, just a lesser problem.

A +2 sword cost 8,000 gp in 3.x. A +3 sword cost 18,000 gp. It takes 1 day to make 1,000 gp worth of items, so that's a ten day wait period. And it gets worse at higher levels. (Using core rules only; I think there was some Eberron artificer feat that let you do this ten times faster.)

IME, most games proceed at too fast a pace for that to be reasonable. You could actually gain three levels during that period, which would push your expected wealth levels much higher (perhaps even to a +4 sword, or other items that need upgrading).

It's just easier to trade the +2 sword for a little cash, then buy a +3 sword.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

At very high levels, there's the epic feat for 10x production speed (I think the Eberron one is only double the rate). At moderately high levels, a PC could casually shift to a plane with a much faster rate of time and get 30 days of work done in 3 material plane "days."

But yeah, generally creating items requires more down time than the game/DM allows for. I just don't get it, though. This seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don't issue. I've seen so many people complain that in 3E, item creation is "too easy" and "broken," and upset that the spellcasters can outfit the entire party with whatever gear they need (when you actually look at the required spells the caster may not have and the sometimes exhorbitantly high required CL, you realize it's not quite so). But then on the flipside, the creation takes so long that in many campaigns it's just not practical to do that, and then people complain about that.

I don't know who's criticized 3E item creation in which fashion or both. It just bewilders me how disparate people's opinions of the power level of item creation is.

My experience has been that item creation is great for getting small items and utility stuff (MIC adding augment crystals and tons of enhancements with a flat gp cost helped a lot here, too), and at low to mid level CAN be used to generally outfit the entire party. At higher levels, you need plane hopping shenanigans or a cohort to sit by at home base and do the crafting for you for it to still be practical.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

On the note of crafting, keep in mind that artificers do get a homunculus that's explicitly meant for crafting while the artificer is adventuring

Regarding the throwaway sword issue, what I've done in one game is change how weapons work drastically. Weapons aren't +1, flaming, etc, etc. Instead, PCs get a sort of "adventurer's spirit" or "hero's soul" or whatever they want to call it that get's upgraded and improved as they adventure. They spend the gold and train, meditate, pray, whatever, and gain the enchantment not on one weapon but on whatever it is they're wielding. Keep in mind this period of training/meditation/etc has it's time cut short from the typical time needed to craft, but still takes awhile - we've more or less abstracted it to "you can't train in the middle of an adventure unless there's downtime."

Weapons in turn come in three variaties. Common weapons can't take the self-enchantment - they're the standard, +0 nonmagical weapons, and can't progress past that. Masterwork weapons can take the enchantment. And magical weapons are all artifacts or legendary or - well, you get the idea.

In practice, it means that a fighter PC might have +3 flaming as a self enchantment. That means if he has a masterwork spear, it counts as +3 flaming. If he were to then grab a masterwork longsword, it would also get the +3 flaming enchantment. On the other hand, if he's imprisoned and, in the ensuring jailbreak, can't get much better then a common axe, it's just an unenchanted normal axe.

PCs who want to have a variety of different types of weapons can, now. The master of arms can have a short sword, and axe, and a javelin armed. Likewise, the young post-farmer boy wielding his father's sword has no reason to get rid of it. Fighter types are no longer depending on their weapon - rather, they're strong because they're strong, though normal, shoddily built weapons can't let them really show it. Lastly, magic weapons stand out - there's no "Ho hum, another +1 weapon, throw in the bag with the rest," now when a magic item is found, it's rare and awesome.

I haven't had much issue with balance yet - keep in mind I'm doing this in a Pathfinder game that allows for most 3x content to be brought in, though I glare at a few caster stuff and books - as martial classes didn't really need to be balanced downward, and crafting time didn't balance much anyways.

 

[Teemu]

I've been using the DMG2 Inherent Bonuses variant and I love it. I've expanded the "boons" reward system so that there are "martial" boons and "arcane" boons and so forth. Most simply represent the characters' abilities in their chosen field, frex the ranger has the "Wounding Strike" boon, which is pretty much identical to a Wouding weapon, but the boon is part of his fighting skills instead of a magical effect. The warlord has the "Inspiring Leader" martial boon, which is just a reworded Exalted armor property, but doesn't carry the baggage of a magical item.

 

[Smeelbo]

My favorite magic item ever was a DM special: Ring of Night. It allowed the wearer to see the stars above the horizon as if it were night, regardless of time of day or obstruction, i.e. you could see the night sky day or night or underground, etc. The flavor was wonderful, and it involved some skill to get the most use out of it, but essentially, all it did was detect north, and determine time to within ten or fifteen minutes.

30 years later, and I still remember that item.

Smeelbo

 

[AllisterH]

At very high levels, there's the epic feat for 10x production speed (I think the Eberron one is only double the rate). At moderately high levels, a PC could casually shift to a plane with a much faster rate of time and get 30 days of work done in 3 material plane "days."

But yeah, generally creating items requires more down time than the game/DM allows for. I just don't get it, though. This seems like a damned if you do, damned if you don't issue. I've seen so many people complain that in 3E, item creation is "too easy" and "broken," and upset that the spellcasters can outfit the entire party with whatever gear they need (when you actually look at the required spells the caster may not have and the sometimes exhorbitantly high required CL, you realize it's not quite so). But then on the flipside, the creation takes so long that in many campaigns it's just not practical to do that, and then people complain about that.

I don't know who's criticized 3E item creation in which fashion or both. It just bewilders me how disparate people's opinions of the power level of item creation is.

My experience has been that item creation is great for getting small items and utility stuff (MIC adding augment crystals and tons of enhancements with a flat gp cost helped a lot here, too), and at low to mid level CAN be used to generally outfit the entire party. At higher levels, you need plane hopping shenanigans or a cohort to sit by at home base and do the crafting for you for it to still be practical.

But that's the biggest problem.

The most "powerful" item you can craft is actually the good old wand of cure light wounds/lesser vigor.

This low level item is relatively cheap and quick to make but has such a HUGE effect on the game.

I personally blame THIS as one of the main reasons why 3e combat had to be so deadly.

 

[Hussar]

On the note of crafting, keep in mind that artificers do get a homunculus that's explicitly meant for crafting while the artificer is adventuring

Regarding the throwaway sword issue, what I've done in one game is change how weapons work drastically. Weapons aren't +1, flaming, etc, etc. Instead, PCs get a sort of "adventurer's spirit" or "hero's soul" or whatever they want to call it that get's upgraded and improved as they adventure. They spend the gold and train, meditate, pray, whatever, and gain the enchantment not on one weapon but on whatever it is they're wielding. Keep in mind this period of training/meditation/etc has it's time cut short from the typical time needed to craft, but still takes awhile - we've more or less abstracted it to "you can't train in the middle of an adventure unless there's downtime."

Weapons in turn come in three variaties. Common weapons can't take the self-enchantment - they're the standard, +0 nonmagical weapons, and can't progress past that. Masterwork weapons can take the enchantment. And magical weapons are all artifacts or legendary or - well, you get the idea.

In practice, it means that a fighter PC might have +3 flaming as a self enchantment. That means if he has a masterwork spear, it counts as +3 flaming. If he were to then grab a masterwork longsword, it would also get the +3 flaming enchantment. On the other hand, if he's imprisoned and, in the ensuring jailbreak, can't get much better then a common axe, it's just an unenchanted normal axe.

PCs who want to have a variety of different types of weapons can, now. The master of arms can have a short sword, and axe, and a javelin armed. Likewise, the young post-farmer boy wielding his father's sword has no reason to get rid of it. Fighter types are no longer depending on their weapon - rather, they're strong because they're strong, though normal, shoddily built weapons can't let them really show it. Lastly, magic weapons stand out - there's no "Ho hum, another +1 weapon, throw in the bag with the rest," now when a magic item is found, it's rare and awesome.

I haven't had much issue with balance yet - keep in mind I'm doing this in a Pathfinder game that allows for most 3x content to be brought in, though I glare at a few caster stuff and books - as martial classes didn't really need to be balanced downward, and crafting time didn't balance much anyways.

That is a VERY cool idea.

Yoink!