ideas that need to go away

[Desdan_Mervolam]

Actually, I really am in the camp where different weapons having different stats needs to go away. There is no good goddamned reason why someone who is highly trained in knife fighting and someone who is highly trained with the greataxe shouldn't be equally lethal, and why two idiots who picked up the weapons for the first time shouldn't be equally inept.

[Seerow]

Okay, so what's your problem with said brute orc having something like a keen flaming burst axe, and Fuchs looting it and transfering that enchantment to a rapier because he prefers the rapier?

If someone wants to stick with using one type of weapon, that should be an option for them.

Because 'needs a specific weapon to function' is a retarded flavor limitation for characters at higher levels and is one of the reasons why DMFs suck so much. Weaning people off of that crap is good for the game in the long run because it forces people to think outside the narrow and weaksauce box of 'I'm Krusk, I hit things with an AXE. My AXEness is how I define my character because I hit stuff with an AXE'.

It's nothing to do with game balance and everything to do with not falling into the 4E trap where an epic-level character wanks over to piddling shit like what kind of weapon they use.

Why not? No, seriously, what's your problem with a character being happy with one type of weapon, and not liking other weapons? Not saying he has to be taking the class axe master and spend 10 feats on axe specialization. I'm saying a guy who is a fighter who prefers to use an axe instead of some other melee weapon. Sure he can use other melee weapons, but why force him to if he doesn't like them?

There is no valid mechanical reason to make it impossible. There is a large contingent of players who will call BS if you try to, and probably get their DMs to ignore shitty loot rules to make their concept viable regardless of what you put in. So why not put your personal bias against weapon specialists aside and let people choose what they think is fun rather than telling them they are wrong and what the correct way to play is.

[Daztur]

Actually, I really am in the camp where different weapons having different stats needs to go away. There is no good goddamned reason why someone who is highly trained in knife fighting and someone who is highly trained with the greataxe shouldn't be equally lethal, and why two idiots who picked up the weapons for the first time shouldn't be equally inept.

OD&D had that damage was by class, not weapon.

[Lago PARANOIA]

I'm saying a guy who is a fighter who prefers to use an axe instead of some other melee weapon. Sure he can use other melee weapons, but why force him to if he doesn't like them?

Because when a character is allowed to define as a major part of his concept 'I use a sword' then that locks the character's conceptual growth, because being primarily defined by swordfighting is a low-level concept. This does not change whether Excaliburs or Lightsabers are part of the equation.

Just take a look at some American comic superheroes/villains. Darth Vader and Thor and Doctor Doom would not stop being their idiom if they had to change to a Vibroglaive and some Power Fists and a Lifedrinker Sword. Iron Man could replace all of his kinetic weapons on his suit with lasers and sonics--or vice versa--and no one would really care. Hell, Wonder Woman for absolutely no reason started using a sword and no one batted an eye.

However, if Green Arrow and Iron Fist and the Phantom started using something different then their characters would become damn-near unrecognizable. There are other characters who don't give a shit what kind of weapons they use and those that do and you know what? The characters who are derailed by using a different weapon are low-level concepts.

[Seerow]

I'm saying a guy who is a fighter who prefers to use an axe instead of some other melee weapon. Sure he can use other melee weapons, but why force him to if he doesn't like them?

Because when a character is allowed to define as a major part of his concept 'I use a sword' then that locks the character's conceptual growth, because being primarily defined by swordfighting is a low-level concept. This does not change whether Excaliburs or Lightsabers are part of the equation.

Just take a look at some American comic superheroes/villains. Darth Vader and Thor and Doctor Doom would not stop being their idiom if they had to change to a Vibroglaive and some Power Fists and a Lifedrinker Sword. Iron Man could replace all of his kinetic weapons on his suit with lasers and sonics--or vice versa--and no one would really care. Hell, Wonder Woman for absolutely no reason started using a sword and no one batted an eye.

However, if Green Arrow and Iron Fist and the Phantom started using something different then their characters would become damn-near unrecognizable. There are other characters who don't give a shit what kind of weapons they use and those that do and you know what? The characters who are derailed by using a different weapon are low-level concepts.

So you wouldn't be bothered at all by Vader suddenly picking up a glaive instead of a lightsaber, or Thor using a longsword? Because despite what you say, the weapons those characters use are a fundamental part of their characters.

Seriously, you say that prefering a certain weapon type is ultimately a low level concept, that is wrong. Saying ALL I can do is use that weapon is a low level concept. But that's not what's being said. You can have a Elven Gish who uses a Courtblade who is doing all the crazy stuff you expect a 20th level caster to do while still fucking up people with his sword. The fact that he won't use that Demon Axe that the party just picked up isn't suddenly making him a low level character. It's making him a character who is making his actual preferences known above what provides an immediate mechanical benefit and there is nothing wrong with this.

[shadzar]

This point is well taken, but no one's suggesting that monsters not drop items they were using. Tailoring treasure to the party means tailoring encounters to the party from the ground up, but you do that anyway.

but just because Fuchs wants to be uber-raper man, doesnt mean the encounter is going to have an orc using a rapier.

Thog: me use pointy stick pick my teeth then throw it away, but where me sword at?

tailoring encounters to the party, then breaks the worlds internal consistency ever more, when you create 4th edition. create exists because PC wants to fight it.

that is jsut bad world design, suggested by 4th edition and its ilk. the encounters should make sense WHY they are there, not jsut throw a level 5 brute at the party where it doesnt have room to move or fight, because it is level appropriate.... and then give him a rapier so Fuchs can have it after, even though this creature not anyone in the surrounding area would know how to use or make a rapier...so any found SHOULD have been melted down to something else for the metal in it, but somehow it is there JUST FOR FUCHS to collect it.

Okay, so what's your problem with said brute orc having something like a keen flaming burst axe, and Fuchs looting it and transfering that enchantment to a rapier because he prefers the rapier?



Because while I'm not sure you specifically have said you are against that, I do know that in this thread at least Lago has said he doesn't want people doing that, because he personally thinks a character concept involving a specific weapon type is stupid. I consider that kind of thinking to be pretty disingenuous and honestly a very petty mindset for anyone who is designing any game. If someone wants to stick with using one type of weapon, that should be an option for them. I don't think anyone is really suggesting that arrow demons should start dropping spiked chains instead of longbows, or orcs should start carrying rapiers and daggers, because that's what the player wants. Just that a player should have some way to acquire a magic item appropriate to their level of their chosen type. Whether that come from transfering an enchantment, enchanting a weapon themselves, questing for a weapon, or going to ye olde magic shope, the option should be there. A GM who continuously shuts down every possible way for a character to get a weapon of the type they want is just being a jerk to the player for wanting a character type that the GM doesn't like.

1. i dont know what "keen" and "burst" are....

2. weapons CAN be enchanted.. that is how they GET enchantments. if you can find someone or do the research to find a way to transfer your flaming form one object to another then so be it, but the risk of BOTH items being destroyed in the process WILL exist. so you risk not only your flaming axe, but the rapier. neither of which will you be guaranteed to get replaced.

i dont like a character concept built around a single weapon, because it is shallow.

but the players are the ones that decide what possessions they START WITH AND KEEP. what they find isnt, and what they DO with what they find is up to them.

each edition i know of has wizards capable of research, so a wizard workign with a blacksmith MIGHT be able to make just about ANY type of magic item in my world, given proper research and trial and error...which costs money and materials, so be prepared for failure.

and YES, Fuchs has on many occasions stated the DM OWES him the rapier that is better than his current rapier. so he expects the orcs to drop them. read back through the thread and you will see it from him, and sometimes echoed by Desdan as well as others.

[Maj]

Fuchs, thanks for explaining in an excellent if completely unaware way why there should be minimal if any player or DM input into the magical item acquisition system if you want magical items to be special.

Whoa... What?!

What on earth does the specialness of magical itemry have to do with any of this conversation at all? Magic stuff is special if the attitude of the world treats it as special. You can do that by making NPCs ooh and ahh at magic stuff. You can do that by bequeathing magic stuff upon someone. You can do that by making sure that the streets aren't paved with magic stuff.

Player/DM input doesn't take away specialness at all. That's a completely separate discussion.

Really, what the fuck is wrong with allowing players - through wishlist or in game actions such as trade or comissions or questing - to get stuff they want, instead of stuff they don't want to use?

There's nothing wrong with it.

What's actually wrong with the current system that totally needs to go is the fact that personal weapons/armor don't upgrade as a character goes. I think the Samurai could do it with a bulky mechanic... To make sure everyone's on the same page, the DM just needs to decide X level = X weapon (it's not like the DM doesn't do that anyway, but when you roll the dice it creates the illusion of an abdication of power). Then, insert the appropriate flavor text describing how the upgrade happens (found in treasure pile, god comes down and blesses, magic fairies wave wand, weapon gnomes make improvements, steeped in magic location, bought it at the store, character invested a piece of soul into it... doesn't matter). Voila! All characters are on the same approximate page, player gets input, DM gets input,story proceeds.

This point is well taken, but no one's suggesting that monsters not drop items they were using. Tailoring treasure to the party means tailoring encounters to the party from the ground up, but you do that anyway.

Actually, I'm with you here. Frank made a very good point, though it also undermines the idea of random treasure because the encounter is tailored to being a bunch of orcs wielding big-ass weapons and not toothpicks. But that's OK, we can totally solve that problem by saying that the orcs may have beaten other parties of adventurers and taken their stuff. In which case, why couldn't one of those things have been something the player would be more inclined to use?

"Hey, DM, if you pick a magic weapon, don't bother with non-swords if it's for me."

I think you're missing the whole point of random or procedurally generated treasure. Mister Cavern doesn't 'pick' a magic weapon under such systems, he looks up a result on a table, whether it's random or a function of exactly what you're fighting, and maybe that's a sword, or maybe it's an Apparatus of Kwalish.

See...? This is exactly how Magic Mart got started.

Some entrepreneuring [non-player] character decided to start following around adventurers and seeing what sort of things they found in treasure piles. The party of fighters got some sticks and a metal box, took one look at them and said, "WTF do we do with this?" They then proceeded to leave them where they were so they didn't have to carry them, and the entrepreneur scooped them up and opened a store. All of a sudden, there was a place where wizards could bring those pesky swords they found in dragon hordes, while purchasing some sticks that fighters couldn't care less about.

Pretty soon, Magic Mart opened other stores all across the country because it became quite evident that dungeon delvers weren't always smart enough to bring carts with them. Admittedly, there have been some issues in the business ever since those pesky haversacks and holes started becoming more common, but they're mainly used to carry around large quantities of money and non-magical pretties. Thank heavens the enterpreneur didn't try to open a museum!

[shadzar]

but just because Fuchs wants to be uber-raper man, doesnt mean the encounter is going to have an orc using a rapier.

Not at all, nor should it. But there's no reason why you can't have the party attacked later on by a human(oid) assassin who DOES use a rapier, hired by someone the party pissed off earlier.

why would someone using such a shitty weapon come from ME to attack the party?

again it isnt my job as the DM to make sure Fuchs gets babysat. he got to choose his starting weapon and has it as long as he keeps up with it, it isnt stolen, or destroyed. that doesnt mean the DM should constantly make Fuchs pet weapon his entire focus of ANY part of the game.

Fuchs entered a game with rapier as an exotic weapon and wanted to use one, it is his own fault for picking a bad character concept.

[Lago PARANOIA]

So you wouldn't be bothered at all by Vader suddenly picking up a glaive instead of a lightsaber, or Thor using a longsword?

No, really, I wouldn't be bothered. Only fanboys would be bothered. Does Vader using a glaive stop him from pulling the blasters out of the hands of mooks? Does Vader using a glaive to him from being able to deflect lasers in all directions? Does Vader using a glaive stop him from choking people he's aware of over the Internet? Or throwing giant METAL BAWKES? Or shooting lightning out of his dick?

No. It's not a concept derail, it's just a minor flavor change. Green Arrow on the other hand, as deep of a character as he is, would have his fighting style completely neutered if he had to switch over to bolas or even javelins. Not that it's a big deal, Green Arrow is a low-level character and at the realm he operates in the difference in range and speed between that of a crossbow and a longbow is important to him. Because he's fighting street level mooks and underpowered supervillains on the level of Captain Boomerang and The Joker.

It's making him a character who is making his actual preferences known above what provides an immediate mechanical benefit and there is nothing wrong with this.

No shit. So why is he whining that the Demon Axe doesn't come in rapier flavors? If you want to basket weave, then basket weave. I'd be similarly contemptuous of a paladin who wanted their horse (not a magical unicorn pegasus, just a regular horse) to be able to be a viable mount or a wizard to still be able to fight in melee competently with their staff as well as they did at level one as at level sixteen..

[shadzar]

Pretty soon, Magic Mart opened other stores all across the country

Congratulations you just invented Aurora's Wholre Realms Catalogue, and turned ALL of D&D into Forgotten Realms...

which Realms Shattering event would like like first, maybe a Spellplague? then all those magic items in the Magic Mart become useless as the plague has affected ALL magic.

Guess you just closed Magic Mart as quickly as you opened it huh?

[Seerow]

So you wouldn't be bothered at all by Vader suddenly picking up a glaive instead of a lightsaber, or Thor using a longsword?

No, really, I wouldn't be bothered. Only fanboys would be bothered. Does Vader using a glaive stop him from pulling the blasters out of the hands of mooks? Does Vader using a glaive to him from being able to deflect lasers in all directions? Does Vader using a glaive stop him from choking people he's aware of over the Internet? Or throwing giant METAL BAWKES? Or shooting lightning out of his dick?

And despite this Vader never picks up a different weapon. Why? Does the fact that he doesn't use a different weapon make him a bad character? No.

No shit. So why is he whining that the Demon Axe doesn't come in rapier flavors? If you want to basket weave, then basket weave. I'd be similarly contemptuous of a paladin who wanted their horse (not a magical unicorn pegasus, just a regular horse) to be able to be a viable mount or a wizard to still be able to fight in melee competently with their staff as well as they did at level one as at level sixteen..

Except Paladin horses ARE still viable. Especially since they have spells that let their horses fly and shit, and the horse typically has a better set of bonuses than exotic mounts. While the exotic mounts are better, it's not a huge enough difference to stop people from using a regular horse.

Similarly, the Wizard CAN still fight competently with his staff. He uses Greater Mighty Wallop, a few other buff spells, and goes to town like a goddamn ninja that makes a Fighter cry in envy.

And who said anything about the player complaining the axe not coming in rapier flavor? Don't confuse me with other people. I'm not saying bitch to the GM about "Why couldn't it be a courtblade instead?" but why can't I transfer the enchantment from that weapon to my courtblade. Or, why am I not able to specifically go looking for some legendary courtblade, perhaps after doing some digging discovering a plot hook involving a Demon Prince who killed a epic blademaster and keeps the blade as a trophy.

All I'm saying is if a magic weapon is required to compete, then you should have some way to specifically seek out a magic weapon of a type you like. If magic weapons aren't actually necessary to compete I could give less than 2 fucks what magic items you drop.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

why would someone using such a shitty weapon come from ME to attack the party?

again it isnt my job as the DM to make sure Fuchs gets babysat. he got to choose his starting weapon and has it as long as he keeps up with it, it isnt stolen, or destroyed. that doesnt mean the DM should constantly make Fuchs pet weapon his entire focus of ANY part of the game.

Fuchs entered a game with rapier as an exotic weapon and wanted to use one, it is his own fault for picking a bad character concept.

Yes, yes it is your job to "babysit" Fuchs, because you chose to be the goddamned Dungeon Master. The job of a Dungeon Master is a complicated and hard one, and if you think all you have to do is show up, set down a map and throw a monster at the party, you're a pretty shitty DM.

The DM's job is to make sure that the party has a fun story to play through, which includes things that everyone considers fun and allows everyone an opportunity (If only in turn) to take the spotlight. This means that if your game gets to the point where you need +1 weapons to be relevant, you better god-damned well give people +1 weapons they can fucking use, or YOU have failed. Because the game is no goddamned fun if I am required to sit around with my thumb up my ass because for some goddamned retarded reason, my Asperger-Case DM decided that Rapiers were for pussies but didn't have the good grace to tell me that at the beginning of the game.

[shadzar]

Yes, yes it is your job to "babysit" Fuchs

no, no it isnt, because i dont game with little kids. Fuchs should go play Red Light Green Light, Freeze Tag, or Hide and Seek.

a weapon the PARTY can use, does not mean a weapon jsut for Fuchs, nor does it mean a weapon that Fuchs preferes to use.

again, the need of the many come before the need of the one. ERGO:
Fuchs = little kid that needs a babysitter

[...You Lost Me]

Shadzar, remember posted once saying that the DM owes the players "nothing". That's right, nothing. They should entertain him.

And so you are trying to argue with someone without a legitimate design philosophy--a person who no roleplaying game is or will ever be designed for. So why are you arguing with him?

[RadiantPhoenix]

Here's a way to make this whole thing work: If you want a swordmaster character, have the sword be an intelligent item. Either you are the sword, and the wielder is your cohort, or vice versa. The two level up together. How does that sound?

[shadzar]

Shadzar, remember posted once saying that the DM owes the players "nothing". That's right, nothing. They should entertain him.

no, because i never posted that.

cutting and pasting words form a post to make something said that wasnt by taking it out of context...such a shocker.

[shadzar]

Here's a way to make this whole thing work: If you want a swordmaster character, have the sword be an intelligent item. Either you are the sword, and the wielder is your cohort, or vice versa. The two level up together. How does that sound?

Weapon Ego

Only after all aspects of a weapon have been determined and recorded can the ego rating of a weapon be found. Ego, along with intelligence, will be a factor with regard to the dominance of weapon over character,

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

i dont think people here would like the player agency taken form them when the DM run intelligent weapon decides to take control over their body... they would pout and throw too many tantrums.

however, with mature people, the intelligent weapon idea, DOES work.

i think you would be looking more for something along the lines of a bonded weapon...you put part of your lifeforce into the weapon, and thus as you level it does, so no need to exchange weapons.

kind of like a wizards familiar, but doesnt cause damage when lost from the wielder. might however cause problems or delay in being able to be bonded to a new weapon later and penalties for being without a bonded weapon.

actually an idea i toyed with in a short adventure, but it wasnt fully developed. the range of penalties weren't ever fleshed out.

[Desdan_Mervolam]

no, no it isnt, because i dont game with little kids.

Then for fucks sake, quit treating your players like children.

Noone's suggesting that all treasure must only ever be intended for one player. This magic item should be something the Fighter can use. Maybe the next magic item can be something the cleric can use. And the one after that? Hey, how about something fun that doesn't necessarily play into anyone's strengths directly but has a neat effect.

Because if I'm an archer, and the party gets a bow, the party has gotten something the party can use. My archer is in the party, too.

[shadzar]

no, no it isnt, because i dont game with little kids.

Then for fucks sake, quit treating your players like children.

So, idea that has to go away: That the fucking DM has to tell me how to play and equip my character. If the DM wants to decide what weapon I wield for me (by roll or choice), then he can play my character and I'll play something else.

when they stop acting like them....

[RadiantPhoenix]

i dont think people here would like the player agency taken form them when the DM run intelligent weapon decides to take control over their body... they would pout and throw too many tantrums.

If it's your cohort, you control both characters anyway, so it's not a concern.

[shadzar]

i dont think people here would like the player agency taken form them when the DM run intelligent weapon decides to take control over their body... they would pout and throw too many tantrums.

If it's your cohort, you control both characters anyway, so it's not a concern.

IF it is your cohort.

i think a weapon familiar was done once...but dont ask me where i would have to search the old AD&D netbooks to find the idea.

[RadiantPhoenix]

IF it is your cohort.

Well, my suggestion was to start out that way, so yes, it is. Alternatively, you play the sword and the human is your cohort.

"Hi, I'm Blackrazor, and this is my cohort Bob the Fighter."

[Count Arioch the 28th]

Actually, I really am in the camp where different weapons having different stats needs to go away. There is no good goddamned reason why someone who is highly trained in knife fighting and someone who is highly trained with the greataxe shouldn't be equally lethal, and why two idiots who picked up the weapons for the first time shouldn't be equally inept.

OD&D had that damage was by class, not weapon.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't, actually. Each weapon not only had its own damage and stats, but the game also additional stats for weapons of basic, skilled, expert, master, and grandmaster levels of proficiency.

A normal sword dealt 1d8 at basic, 1d12 at skilled (plus gained the ability to disarm and deflect 1 attack per round as well as giving a -2 bonus to AC versus one weapon attack per round), and so forth until at grand master a normal sword dealt 2d8+8 (+str) to weapon user,s 2d4+8 (+ str) to non weapon users, deflects 3 attacks per round, and granted a +4 penalty to the saving throw to disarm attacks as well as granting a -4 bonus to AC versus 3 weapon attacks and a range of 5/10/15 when thrown.

"Basic" D&D my ass!

[Whatever]

Actually, I really am in the camp where different weapons having different stats needs to go away. There is no good goddamned reason why someone who is highly trained in knife fighting and someone who is highly trained with the greataxe shouldn't be equally lethal, and why two idiots who picked up the weapons for the first time shouldn't be equally inept.

OD&D had that damage was by class, not weapon.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't, actually. Each weapon not only had its own damage and stats, but the game also additional stats for weapons of basic, skilled, expert, master, and grandmaster levels of proficiency.

A normal sword dealt 1d8 at basic, 1d12 at skilled (plus gained the ability to disarm and deflect 1 attack per round as well as giving a -2 bonus to AC versus one weapon attack per round), and so forth until at grand master a normal sword dealt 2d8+8 (+str) to weapon user,s 2d4+8 (+ str) to non weapon users, deflects 3 attacks per round, and granted a +4 penalty to the saving throw to disarm attacks as well as granting a -4 bonus to AC versus 3 weapon attacks and a range of 5/10/15 when thrown.

"Basic" D&D my ass!

OD&D and Basic D&D are actually not the same game. OD&D was the original, wargamish "white box" edition, which was split into Basic and Advanced D&D later.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editions_o ... 26_Dragons

[Count Arioch the 28th]

Ah, I have been instructed. I thought the older version was called Chainmail. My apologies.