Results 11 to 20 of 40
Thread: chapter 3
-
08-10-2006, 05:57 AM #11Originally Posted by irdeggman
So, the rules for Double money and XP are there also, now I know where that came from.
I still like my variant more, just because the required RP is a real limiting factor, limiting creation to Scions, or appointees of scions. Also, the double cost, it seems to me, would encourage more low cost items rather than powerful ones. While my system would discourage the creation of lesser magic items (1RP for a level 1 scroll?). This is easily explained as something that came about after deismaar, as that is when Magic became locked up in the land, or less magic became available outside the land, however you want to explain it.
Expending Bloodscore instead of XP is a reasonal variant, and would definetely limit magic creation. However, I think it's too limiting, IMO.
-
08-10-2006, 06:53 AM #12
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
I've been giving this a bit of thought. On the whole, I'm not sure that merely increasing the price of magical items will have the desired effect.
At level 1, you buy whatever your meagre funds can purchase. By level 2, you probably have a decent masterwork weapon and if you're not a warrior, you've got masterwork armour as well. By the time level 3 rolls around, even warriors have all their mundane equipment needs sorted out.
From that point onward, spellcasters might burn money on spell research, and possibly rogues of the more dastardly type might invest in poisons, but for the majority of cases the only thing to spend your acquired cash on is magical items. (I'll come back to the question of whether or not you can buy them at all in a moment).
Of course, you'll only be able to afford half as many as you could in the core rules. Monsters in MM1-3 + FF are balanced assuming that the party facing them has the appropriate level of equipment (probably MM4 is as well; I don't own that at present, but I would be astounded to find out otherwise). Thus, going up against a CR10 creature with (effectively) only half the equipment that you're "supposed" to have may make that encounter much harder than it "should" be. This entails a fairly tricky case of trying to rebalance monsters to deal with the lowered resources of the party.
Unfortunately, that's going to be pretty hard to do. With a lot of money invested in magical items, PCs are likely to have several minor items (Handy Haversacks, potions of cure light wounds, the odd figurine of wondrous power, perhaps a backup weapon). Facing the prospect of having to pay more for magical items, I think a lot of players are going to decide to not get these "fluff" items and spend everything on acquiring good weapons, a high AC, and a good bonus to their spellcasting ability score. Other players will still continue to get the "fluff" items - for any number of reasons, roleplaying related up to mechanical (a party without an item creator, for example, may be restricted to whatever they have found). The upshot is that some players will be not much less powerful (in encounter strength) than they would be in a "normal" situation, while others will be half or less powerful. Balancing things will prove tricky.
On the other hand, it has been said before that most encounters in Birthright won't be with monsters, but rather with PC types (orogs, goblins, other humans, and so on). A steady diet of NPC encounters is a treasure inflation problem in a core rules campaign, and it would be no less so in a campaign where magic items are twice as valuable. If it is indeed true that PCs encounter NPC types more often in Birthright, then even doubling the price of magical items won't have the desired result, as NPCs have a lot more than double the normal loot for their CR.
Alright, what if you can't buy magical items? That seems to be the assumption in Birthright; there are no "magic shops". Does that help? If the party includes no item creators, sure - the party will have only whatever magical items they happen to acquire in the course of their adventuring; since the DM is able to control this absolutely, then magic items can be as common or as rare as desired (and as weak or as powerful as desired). Of course, in such a case, there is no need to give variant rules for the cost of magical items, since they are effectively priceless.
The BRCS does not propose to be so harsh as to remove item creation feats completely, however, and nor does ploesch's idea. That means that magic items can be created, which solves the "buy" side of the magic item shop issue. Can magic items be sold? If not sold, can they be usefully "harvested" by someone for the raw materials to create other magic items? (I've used a houserule not dissimilar to this in a homebrew game in the past).
If there's no way to turn an unwanted magical item into something more desirable of comparable value - in other words, if magic items cannot be sold to anyone - then you're back at the issue of encounters being harder than expected, but with a really nasty twist: now, the last thing your PCs want to find in a treasure horde is a magical item. Cash they can use, gems they can use, but magical items are virtually worthless to them (assuming it isn't one they'd be inclined to use anyway - and given the huge variety of magical items compared to the few types that most PCs and NPCs tend to actually use, this assumption often holds).
To put it another way: a possible consequence of removing magic shops is that players hate finding magic items on the dead bodies of their foes. One would think that this is an extremely unwanted side effect of trying to enforce a "rare magic" setting. Logically, in a rare magic setting, every magic item should be precious. But mechanically, if you're only going to get half the magic items you normally would, you don't have any room for items that are of no immediate use to you.
To summarise: I think that making magical items more costly, if done in a vacuum, will cause more problems than it solves. I think a better solution would be to make magical items different rather than merely more expensive. Perhaps magic items could require powering by regency every so often, or they gradually lose their enchantment. Maybe you could require that magic items be "attuned" using XP equal to the XP cost when the item was created in order to work (you might allow casters to automatically be attuned to any item they create - or you might not).
-
08-10-2006, 10:51 AM #13
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by gazza666
At no time did I ever state or intend to infer that magic items can’t be sold. Only that there are no “corner magic ships” like there are in many other settings. There is always someone willing to buy things.
The core rules already cover selling magic items (PHB pg 168) “Magic items, for instance, can be sold, but only for half of what they would cost to buy”
So there is already a mechanic in place to provide incentive to keep magic items found.
To put it another way: a possible consequence of removing magic shops is that players hate finding magic items on the dead bodies of their foes. One would think that this is an extremely unwanted side effect of trying to enforce a "rare magic" setting. Logically, in a rare magic setting, every magic item should be precious. But mechanically, if you're only going to get half the magic items you normally would, you don't have any room for items that are of no immediate use to you.
You’ve lost me on this “no room” thing. What do you mean by it?
To summarise: I think that making magical items more costly, if done in a vacuum, will cause more problems than it solves.
What this comes down to the basic role of the DM in the first place. If a DM is not planning and accounting for how things interrelate in his game he is doing everyone (himself included) a disservice. If a Dm is using adventures and rules right off the shelf without looking them over and making necessary “adjustments” he is just asking for trouble.
I think a better solution would be to make magical items different rather than merely more expensive. Perhaps magic items could require powering by regency every so often, or they gradually lose their enchantment. Maybe you could require that magic items be "attuned" using XP equal to the XP cost when the item was created in order to work (you might allow casters to automatically be attuned to any item they create - or you might not).
This sounds a lot like the Weapons of Legacy mechanic. The more I read that book the more I like it unfortunately it is not OGC.Duane Eggert
-
08-10-2006, 02:15 PM #14
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by irdeggman
The core rules already cover selling magic items (PHB pg 168)
But I may well be mistaken here again. Is the intention not to outright forbid the buying of magic items, but rather to just say that it's a little more difficult? For example, is it intended that you can find a private seller, perhaps with appropriate Gather Information checks?
So there is already a mechanic in place to provide incentive to keep magic items found.
But you're absolutely right - the core rules essentially say that if you sell everything and buy the stuff you "want", you're going to lose out in money.
You’ve lost me on this “no room” thing. What do you mean by it?
What I'm referring to is the "PC Cash by character level". For example, a 5th level PC is expected to have about 9000gp worth of equipment. If you create a 5th level character from scratch, that's the amount of money you get to "spend". The table is in the DMG, page 135.
For example: if you're playing a 5th level rogue, you might reasonably be expected to have (say) a +1 Mithral Chain Shirt, a +1 weapon, a Cloak of Resistance +1, a Ring of Protection +1, and an Amulet of Protection +1. (This is not by any means a "must have" list; some rogues will go for a more powerful weapon and forgo some of the AC stuff; others may prefer to get some Gloves of Dexterity. However, it's a fairly typical list of items). A 5th level rogue with this sort of equipment will have an AC of about 20, an attack bonus of about +8 (assuming Weapon Finesse), and saves of about +2 to +3 (Reflex save will be +8 or +9).
A typical CR5 creature would be a troll, with AC16 and +9 to hit. Against this "typical" rogue, he'll hit 50% of the time with his claws, and be hit in return 70% of the time. There's a fair amount of flexibility in this build. If the rogue decides he'd rather have a Handy Haversack than an Amulet of Natural Armour +1, he's only going to be hit 55% of the time by the troll instead of 50% - that's really not that big a difference, so while the Haversack does not assist his combat abilities in any way, it's the sort of item a lot of PCs tend to get.
However, if you double the cost of magical items, then the same 9000gp buys a lot less. He might go with a Mithril Chain Shirt +1 and +1 weapon, and his left over money isn't enough to buy any of the other items. With an AC of only 18 he gets hit 60% of the time by the troll. Such a character is going to be much less likely to buy something like a Handy Haversack because it would now represent almost 50% of his available cash for the level (rather than the 22% it normally represents) - and at the same time the troll will have an even easier time with the rogue than it would against a rogue in the normal rules who did go for the "fluff".
The upshot is that the more magic items cost, the less non-combat related magic items are likely to be bought. In general, PCs tend to get themselves a decent weapon, decent armour (and other AC boosting equipment), a means to boost their primary ability, and a saving throw boost; then they'll spend the leftover money on items that round out their characters in noncombat situations. If they are strapped for cash - and they will be, if magic items are twice as expensive - then the noncombat stuff will be the first to fall by the wayside, which is unfortunate as such items tend to be more interesting.
Round about this point I suspect I'm offending some people with blatant powergaming observations. I'm sure many of you would keep something like a Scarab of Golembane rather than try to trade it for a Ring of Protection +1. If the power of magic items means nothing to your character, then the above analysis is equally meaningless. But characters like that wouldn't be creating lots of magic items in the first place, regardless of what the costs were. I would argue that changing the price of magic items is, fundamentally, a mechanical change rather than a roleplaying change, and thus it is appropriate to analyse the ramifications in powergaming terms.
Note that it isn't necessarily a bad thing if the result is that "fluff" items like Handy Haversacks or Figurines of Wondrous Power become very uncommon. It's just perhaps not the intended result of the price increase.
What this comes down to the basic role of the DM in the first place. If a DM is not planning and accounting for how things interrelate in his game he is doing everyone (himself included) a disservice. If a Dm is using adventures and rules right off the shelf without looking them over and making necessary “adjustments” he is just asking for trouble.
DMing is the hardest job in roleplaying; it can often be a fairly thankless task, and while it is also (at its best) the most rewarding role, we really want to make the job as easy as we can. Changing the assumptions that underly challenge ratings and encounter levels renders the numbers much less reliable, forcing the DM to do a lot more prepwork and on-the-spot changes than would typically be necessary. This is the main beef I have against "low magic" settings - it's not the low magic in and of itself (after all, my all time favourite fantasy heroes are Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser), but rather that D&D (especially 3rd edition) just isn't really constructed well to simulate it. There are (in my opinion) better games if low magic is your thing.
Of course you can make D&D work; that's not in contention. It's merely a question of whether or not the extra effort involved is worth it - especially given that the resulting changes may not actually result in magic items being any rarer (they may just end up less powerful, which means you've got all the problems of balance and haven't ended up with the benefit of a rare magic setting).
This is why I think changing magic items is a superior solution to just making them cost more. At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters that much if PCs have pretty much the same gear as they would in (say) Eberron. PCs are rare; PCs having lots of magical items does not necessarily imply that magic items are not rare, because there's a lot more NPCs than there are PCs. And by requiring "regency recharging" or "attuning" or something similar, you can tie the magic items into the setting - which is surely a highly desirable outcome. Magic items that need regency are immediately unique to Birthright and immediately are also rare, as only scions can recharge them (so PCs that are not scions will have to play nice with the rulers if they want their gear to work).
Though I realise that may be a somewhat radical change with no real precedent in the source material.
-
08-10-2006, 04:06 PM #15
- Join Date
- Nov 2001
- Location
- Virginia Beach, Virginia
- Posts
- 3,945
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by gazza666
In settings like FR or Eberron purchasing magic items is a routine thing (essentially magic shops are like 7-11's, IMO).
But I may well be mistaken here again. Is the intention not to outright forbid the buying of magic items, but rather to just say that it's a little more difficult? For example, is it intended that you can find a private seller, perhaps with appropriate Gather Information checks?
As an aside: the "half price" thing for magic items always bothers me. It makes it impossible for a PC wizard to make any money selling magical items, when he can easily do so selling mundane items - that just seems ridiculous. But that's not the fault of Birthright, and while an interesting side topic, I think I've derailed too many threads recently.
What I'm referring to is the "PC Cash by character level". For example, a 5th level PC is expected to have about 9000gp worth of equipment. If you create a 5th level character from scratch, that's the amount of money you get to "spend". The table is in the DMG, page 135.
For example: if you're playing a 5th level rogue, you might reasonably be expected to have (say) a +1 Mithral Chain Shirt, a +1 weapon, a Cloak of Resistance +1, a Ring of Protection +1, and an Amulet of Protection +1. (This is not by any means a "must have" list; some rogues will go for a more powerful weapon and forgo some of the AC stuff; others may prefer to get some Gloves of Dexterity. However, it's a fairly typical list of items). A 5th level rogue with this sort of equipment will have an AC of about 20, an attack bonus of about +8 (assuming Weapon Finesse), and saves of about +2 to +3 (Reflex save will be +8 or +9).
However, if you double the cost of magical items, then the same 9000gp buys a lot less. He might go with a Mithril Chain Shirt +1 and +1 weapon, and his left over money isn't enough to buy any of the other items. With an AC of only 18 he gets hit 60% of the time by the troll. Such a character is going to be much less likely to buy something like a Handy Haversack because it would now represent almost 50% of his available cash for the level (rather than the 22% it normally represents) - and at the same time the troll will have an even easier time with the rogue than it would against a rogue in the normal rules who did go for the "fluff".
Round about this point I suspect I'm offending some people with blatant powergaming observations. I'm sure many of you would keep something like a Scarab of Golembane rather than try to trade it for a Ring of Protection +1. If the power of magic items means nothing to your character, then the above analysis is equally meaningless. But characters like that wouldn't be creating lots of magic items in the first place, regardless of what the costs were. I would argue that changing the price of magic items is, fundamentally, a mechanical change rather than a roleplaying change, and thus it is appropriate to analyse the ramifications in powergaming terms.
Well, I don't outright disagree with you here. However, the point of having hundreds of pages of core rules is to make a DM's job easier.
DMing is the hardest job in roleplaying; it can often be a fairly thankless task, and while it is also (at its best) the most rewarding role, we really want to make the job as easy as we can. Changing the assumptions that underly challenge ratings and encounter levels renders the numbers much less reliable, forcing the DM to do a lot more prepwork and on-the-spot changes than would typically be necessary. This is the main beef I have against "low magic" settings - it's not the low magic in and of itself (after all, my all time favourite fantasy heroes are Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser), but rather that D&D (especially 3rd edition) just isn't really constructed well to simulate it. There are (in my opinion) better games if low magic is your thing.
Of course you can make D&D work; that's not in contention. It's merely a question of whether or not the extra effort involved is worth it - especially given that the resulting changes may not actually result in magic items being any rarer (they may just end up less powerful, which means you've got all the problems of balance and haven't ended up with the benefit of a rare magic setting).
This is why I think changing magic items is a superior solution to just making them cost more. At the end of the day, I don't think it really matters that much if PCs have pretty much the same gear as they would in (say) Eberron. PCs are rare; PCs having lots of magical items does not necessarily imply that magic items are not rare, because there's a lot more NPCs than there are PCs. And by requiring "regency recharging" or "attuning" or something similar, you can tie the magic items into the setting - which is surely a highly desirable outcome. Magic items that need regency are immediately unique to Birthright and immediately are also rare, as only scions can recharge them (so PCs that are not scions will have to play nice with the rulers if they want their gear to work).
Though I realise that may be a somewhat radical change with no real precedent in the source material.Duane Eggert
-
08-11-2006, 01:32 AM #16
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by irdeggman
Of course if you rarely encounter "monsters" instead of "NPCs", that point disappears. Unfortunately, as I've mentioned before, the lack of magic items does not affect all classes equally. Spellcasters are much less affected than non-spellcasters are.
As pointed out previously it is a recognized varaint in "official" WotC products (see Complete Warrior)
And not everything "official" is balanced; Shapechange and Gate are two obvious examples of this.
If the rule was (say) that a magic item needed to be "gifted" with a number of regency equal to 1 per 1000gp market value every year, say, then a powerful regent could power more items than he needs, to distribute to those who need them. PCs that had no ties to any particular regent get hurt, but is a campaign where PCs never interact with regents at all the "norm" for Birthright?
I've avoided bringing up this until now, but it seems important to point out that the use of the Finance action essentially allows regents to inflate their own wealth to overcome the "twice as expensive" penalty. Regents have a tremendous advantage over non-regents anyway.
-
08-11-2006, 05:06 AM #17
Forgive me for adding my thrippence to the discussion here, but I had always felt magic worked quite well as being even rarer than is currenlty being ventured.
Looking through the book, none of the wondrous items even have prices, all have unique names, and they all have singular unique origins.
Im my mind, extrapoling aout from this, birthright magic items are unique, and they all have names and histories, even the loliest longsword +1 might be known as King Edward's Blade, "that was wielded by the king at the mighty battle of X, where he single handedly... etc.", or something along those lines.
Part of that is that most Birthright PCs (in this little fantasy of an "ideal" BR game that I have) never really make it above 5-7th level, so there is also no real danger of the PCs making their own items, or mages getting the kinds of spells that really ruin the massed-army type combats. (cloud kill, for example)
~~~
As for the issue of PCs only being able to sell items for half the retail cost, generally I bend that based on who's buying. If it's the item the party wizard custom made to order, then he gets full price for the item, perhaps along with a fee for his time (and thus XP). I treat it as though the buyer was another PC (who it often can be, tbh). However, if they make X in bulk for the local shoppe, they only get half price for it, becasue the person you are selling them to wants to resell the items for a profit, and can only sell them at roughly the book price.
-
08-11-2006, 06:49 AM #18
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by nagebenfro
Part of that is that most Birthright PCs (in this little fantasy of an "ideal" BR game that I have) never really make it above 5-7th level, so there is also no real danger of the PCs making their own items, or mages getting the kinds of spells that really ruin the massed-army type combats. (cloud kill, for example)
My own tastes run to higher levels of play, which is typically where the problems start to show.
As for the issue of PCs only being able to sell items for half the retail cost, generally I bend that based on who's buying.
Consider that any PC can create a mundane item for 1/3 of the price and sell it for 1/2, thereby making a profit. Why are mundane items profitable (if only marginally) while magic items are not?
From the perspective of the buyer, how does he know whether the PC wizard made it or found it? Having different prices strikes me as not merely metagaming but illogical metagaming at that.
I think a more reasonable price is 75-80% or so. That still leaves a fairly healthy profit margin. Still, what I think and what the core rules say are quite clearly in opposition here - I'm too small a man to change the world.
However, if they make X in bulk for the local shoppe, they only get half price for it, becasue the person you are selling them to wants to resell the items for a profit, and can only sell them at roughly the book price.
-
08-11-2006, 07:18 AM #19Originally Posted by gazza666
I think a more reasonable price is 75-80% or so. That still leaves a fairly healthy profit margin. Still, what I think and what the core rules say are quite clearly in opposition here - I'm too small a man to change the world.
-
08-11-2006, 08:04 AM #20
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Posts
- 190
- Downloads
- 0
- Uploads
- 0
Originally Posted by nagebenfro
*Unless they have Fabricate...
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks