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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="StreamOfTheSky" data-source="post: 5189464" data-attributes="member: 35909">All 3E changed was making the rules more clear and uniform.  Or actually putting rules in place where once an issue was handled solely by DM fiat.  If you don't want PCs able to buy a magic item, don't put it in a store!  If you don't want them to be able to make the item for themselves, don't give them the lengthy downtime it requires to make said item!  If you just plain don't want the item to exist, ban it!  You're the DM for crying out loud!  No edition changed that.Again, that's a campagin style decision of the DM.  I've been in 3E games where the party had NOTHING. Like, we were frantically grabbing at shackles that had previously held us captive just to have some sor of weapon that could deal lethal damage.  Seriously nothing.  I've been in others where there truly were magic Walmarts for anything you could desire.  And I've been in lots of in between those extremes.  Either extreme can work, or fail miserably, depending on how well thought out the DM's approach is.  In the slave game example, it didn't work out too well, because he was shocked his changes unevenly hurt Fighters (though the Wizard was the most hurt; not even a spell component pouch nor spellbook = "That's why you had to make him as an NPC, none of us wanted to deal with that <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=":)" /><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=":)" /><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=":)" /><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=":)" />!") more than casters, and was also surprised that a CR 5 monster was an easy TPK for our level 5 party and thus we wisely ran away almost immediately (he had expected it to be a run of the mill fight).  If he had actually given some thought into what his campaign style would do to the game, it could have been a really fun game, as it was aside from his poor expectations on encounter balance.  I also had a game where the DM never exerted any control at all and simply let out evil party conquer lands for their own, massively tax the populace with not a single drawback or revolt, and use that money to buy crazy stuff like a Mirror of Opposition.  At level 9.  Again, not the system's fault, she was just far too much of a hands-off DM.  And again, aside from the gross imbalance that led us to actually utterly destroying the level 20 NPC party she sicced on us intending to put a merciful end to the game, it was a fun game.  My friend and I have used character background and plot elements from that game in at least half a dozen campaigns since.  Don't know how this got so long, but the point is...this isn't the fault of an edition.The DMG is pretty clear that the table for magic item pricing is a guideline.  Not much to say beyond that.  Other than that if you look at the specific DMG magic items themselves, it's obvious in many cases that they didn't exactly follow said guidelines themselves.By the time you can reasonably be expected to afford a ring of invisibility (keeping in mind that until then, you've been saving up a wad of cash and been significantly weaker than a hypothetical similar PC who spent it as he got it), you could have just been say...a Pixie... and had at will GREATER Invisibility anyway.  Probably for a few levels prior to getting the ring.  The ring of Invisibility isn't undervalued.  You just overvalue it.  It's a level 2 spell, and lots of monsters can use it by the time you get the ring.  As can the caster use it (or buff with it) for many levels by then.  If you want a lower magic setting, limit the levels by playing E6 or E8, severely nerf casters and eliminate most magic items, or do something along those lines.  Otherwise, accept that the game is no longer "grim and gritty" after PCs reach level 6 or so and that the game has different tiers of power levels.  Also, as a Rogue who eagerly used the Ring of Invisibility in a game as early as he could get it -- level 8-9 in his case -- it's really not THAT amazing.  You get one atack off. And then you get the attention of all the enemies and they make you a priority target before you can go invisible again.   Fun.  Or if they're smart, they toss a homing spell like Spiritual Weapon, or a covering spell like Glitterdust (or even mundane flour, dirt, etc...) something to leave a trail for when you go invisible...  You also still have to make the Move Silently checks or they can generally know the square or area you're in.My general rule (ie, it's just "a guideline," like with item creation tables <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />) is that for "gamechanger" spells like Invisibility and Fly, they tend to be fairly devastating when first becoming available, but thankfully also typically of limited use.  By the time they can be frequently or reliably used, roughly 5 levels after initial availability, EVERY character should have a means to deal with or counter it.  And if they don't, it's their fault.  A level 10 Fighter can easily afford a potion of Fly, and if he really was concerned, could even have Boots of Flying by then, for example.  At the very least, he could bother to have a decent ranged weapon, which is probably his best counter for the tactic around level 5 when it first becomes an issue.Yes, 3E has a lot of counters for invisibility in the system.  And at higher levels, high Hide checks actually are arguably more useful than invisibility, as spells like True Seeing become almost ubiquitous and render magical hiding worthless.</blockquote>

Verification