Lago PARANOIA wrote: And anyway, what was up with the hate for being dependent on magical items? I like magical items. I like my characters' awesomeness coming from magical items.
What I don't like is my characters' awesomeness being dependent on boring magical items like +4 subtle longswords to the point of not letting me have decks of illusion--all it does is make my character look like a bunnypants. What I don't like is my characters' awesomeness being dependent on magical items while some things aren't at all, like 4E humanoid monsters--all that does it make my character look like a bunnypants. What I don't like having to suck the cocks of other characters to get my magical items--all that does is make my character look like a bunnypants.
But as far as having a backpack filled with a magic carpet, a retractable grappling hook, a ring of invisibility, and a cloak of the bat? While having an enchanted booze-filled water fountain supplying my Valhalla-horn summoned pirates with booze so they can fire the delayed blast fireball and magic missile magical cannons on my golden airship? I love that shit. Bring on the bling, baby.
I believe this is a good starting point for a new discussion. What are your views on what your character’s relationship with their items should be?
I see it this way: there are primary and secondary items. A lot of characters if fiction have an iconic item that is the one big source of their awesomeness like Excalibur or Gandalf’s staff and some others that are in the spotlight less often and serve as means of giving more options for interacting with the world – and that’s how I would like to play the game.
Depends on the game and purpose. HeroQuest the magic items are just tools. When you get a power drill you MAY stop carrying around the hand drill.
For D&D, it depends on the character.
I like the option of having some family heirloom handed down, even if it is not some artifact ot plot device.
Things like that, without being an artifact, could slowly awaken with the character or be changed.
Kind of like Narsil being turned into Anduril.
Some things are throw away by design, like potions and such, by lasting items should sometimes last a good while.
Play the game, not the rules.
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
Well from fiction and literature, it is rare to see characters with more than 2-3 notable magic items. But in the heavily D&D influenced realm of video games, you see paradigms where characters may have dozens of items.
In the abstract, I would like it better if many of the options currently granted by magic items in D&D were instead available as feats, skills or class features.
I feel especially strongly that this should be done for the raw numerical bonuses that 3e and 4e were balanced around. There's no reason that 3e fighter-type characters shouldn't just get an appropriate enhancement bonus to Strength instead of needing to buy a Belt to do that. In 4e, where the RNG is fairly harshly enforced, there's no reason to just not hand out a +1 enhancement bonus to everything enhancement bonuses can apply to at first level and have it increase by another +1 at every 5 levels beyond 1st In both 3e and 4e, the monsters and challenges were written with the assumption that PCs would have such bonuses, but PCs actually having such bonuses depends on DM fiat / random treasure rolls as well as appropriate player choice. That's not an option, that's a fucking newbtrap - and from a mechanical perspective it makes a better game to do so.
From a genre perspective, it also makes sense to do so. Heracles, Beowulf, and Shrek just have super strength. They do not have belts, gauntlets and magic books that grant them super strength.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Swordslinger wrote:Or fuck it... I'm just going to get weapon specialization in my cock and whip people to death with it. Given all the enemies are total pussies, it seems like the appropriate thing to do.
Lewis Black wrote:If the people of New Zealand want to be part of our world, I believe they should hop off their islands, and push 'em closer.
good read (Note to self Maxus sucks a barrel of cocks.)
angelfromanotherpin wrote:Lancelot has a shield of super-strength. Thor has super strength and a belt of more super strength.
And Popeye has Spinich of Super Strength.
It's not that nobody buys their strength through items - it's that only some of them do. And yet in the D&D rules, you can only get super strength through items or spells, and if you want to make a guy who is just super strong, you will suffer if you try to do that without using items.
"But transportation issues are social-justice issues. The toll of bad transit policies and worse infrastructure—trains and buses that don’t run well and badly serve low-income neighborhoods, vehicular traffic that pollutes the environment and endangers the lives of cyclists and pedestrians—is borne disproportionately by black and brown communities."
Horizontal, not vertical is the mantra I seek, right?
First, magic items should first never be needed to stay effective at what your character does. It doesn't matter if its sword of +X that you need to be able to kill foes at level Y, or a cloak of resistance you need not to get owned horribly, or Artifical Infinite Bladder that makes you never need to go to toilet.
I don't mind great warriors obtaining the Mythical Sword of Slicing and Dicing, but having it be necessary at some point? Bad. Especially if you don't formalize it in any way, but you leave players to figure out things themselves.
Magic items that give tricks to characters? Awesome.
I really do not give a damn as to should characters have few or a bunch of magical items with them. A good system where they are a nice and interesting addition should handle both.
Kobajagrande wrote:Horizontal, not vertical is the mantra I seek, right?
First, magic items should first never be needed to stay effective at what your character does. It doesn't matter if its sword of +X that you need to be able to kill foes at level Y, or a cloak of resistance you need not to get owned horribly, or Artifical Infinite Bladder that makes you never need to go to toilet.
I don't mind great warriors obtaining the Mythical Sword of Slicing and Dicing, but having it be necessary at some point? Bad. Especially if you don't formalize it in any way, but you leave players to figure out things themselves.
Magic items that give tricks to characters? Awesome.
I really do not give a damn as to should characters have few or a bunch of magical items with them. A good system where they are a nice and interesting addition should handle both.
Sounds a little Final Fantasy 10, where the weapons give boosts or effects, but aren't the dominant factor in a character's powers or ability--the character him- or herself is.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
angelfromanotherpin wrote:Lancelot has a shield of super-strength. Thor has super strength and a belt of more super strength.
And Popeye has Spinich of Super Strength.
It's not that nobody buys their strength through items - it's that only some of them do. And yet in the D&D rules, you can only get super strength through items or spells, and if you want to make a guy who is just super strong, you will suffer if you try to do that without using items.
This is why I suggest having a limit of magic sources for permanent or semi-permanent magical effects (e.g., those that would come from items like belts of giant strength). Any number of things can take up these slots, be it magical clothing or having bathed in dragon blood or whatever. And you get say 2-3 of these slots. If people actually want to dress up like Iron Man, they need to take feats and stuff that allows them to put on more magic bling. Normal people just can't latch that much magic onto their body.
And the horizontal vs. vertical deal is a given.
Last edited by Caedrus on Sat Nov 28, 2009 3:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
