Goodman Games
http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/

no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?
http://www.goodman-games.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=68&t=14436
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Kruvil [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:30 am ]
Post subject:  no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

The playtest doc has no magic items, treasure, or XP rewards. Isn't testing rewards and leveling up somewhat important?

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Actually, I was going to post about magic items. Just like monsters every single magic item in DCCRPG should be unique. If you find a +1 longsword it should be ONLY magic weapon in the world that give a +1 attack bonus. Every other magic item needs to find some other way to be special. And thus the trading of magic items for better magic items won't exist in DCCRPG. And they should all cause corruption so a high level party is full of circus freaks by the time they reach level 10. You don't retire at level 10 you just morph into a green slime and disappear into a dark dungeon somewhere.

Author:  Kruvil [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

jmucchiello wrote:
Actually, I was going to post about magic items. Just like monsters every single magic item in DCCRPG should be unique. If you find a +1 longsword it should be ONLY magic weapon in the world that give a +1 attack bonus. Every other magic item needs to find some other way to be special. And thus the trading of magic items for better magic items won't exist in DCCRPG. And they should all cause corruption so a high level party is full of circus freaks by the time they reach level 10. You don't retire at level 10 you just morph into a green slime and disappear into a dark dungeon somewhere.


And no magic item shops work really, really well for me (and your green slime, wait I mean primeval slime, idea appeals to my crueler side :) ). But judges still need guidelines and maybe a couple of sample items. I would think those guidelines should be playtested.

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Of course, real old school says not even 5th level characters deserve magic items. :)

Author:  Kruvil [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

One reason I'd like to see the ideas for magic items (even if no 5th level characters deserve one and heck, who says any PC can even survive to 5th level?) is that the game is so different.

For example, I hate spell in a can items. A wand shouldn't be filled with fifty magic missiles like an eldritch machine gun (but that name could be a magic item--hmm). Instead, a wand might add a bonus to cast spells or hold one spell that can be cast but only after a certain task is performed or a ritual completed.

Same with magic swords. I'm okay with never seeing a +1 longsword. I'd rather the sword have a bonus against orcs and glow when orcs are within the same dungeon (or within half a mile outside). Or a ring that allows you turn invisible but you have to make a gradually more difficult check to avoid dying and becoming a wraith.

Gauntlets of ogre power don't boost strength. Instead, a warrior can bear hug like an ogre.

Those kind of items are what I'd like to see. And I'd like to confirm in general terms what rules for magic items will be in the final version of the rules.

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Personally I'd like to see even the flimsiest trinket look like a 1E artifact with side effects.

Author:  kataskicana [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

I'd love to see ideas for off the wall magic items.

OTOH, I don't think playtesting of magic items is as big of a deal as in most current games as magic should be rare and wondrous. Players should not think of the list of magic items as a shopping list, make wish lists and go to the first town they find and stock up on Holy Avengers or Hackmasters +12.

If my design for The One Ring seems over-powered... (and I'm thinking it would be!)... do not put it into one of your modules thus allowing one of your PCs to have it.

There are plenty of Appendix N characters who never had a traditional magic item. More common (from my recent reading) were mystical items that were key to some quest or allowed one time things to happen that created or ended adventures... not things that were collected and used again and again. Heck sometimes they were intentionally destroyed becuase they were so horrible to use in the first place!

Author:  finarvyn [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

jmucchiello wrote:
If you find a +1 longsword it should be ONLY magic weapon in the world that give a +1 attack bonus.

Of course, one could rule that a +1 blade could be non-magical but well crafted.

For example, the Elves and Dwarves in Tolkien's world often made fine weapons but they weren't as amazing as Orchrist or Glamdring. (The same way that all elves might wear elven cloaks, but very few have Elven Cloaks.)

So, a non-magical "magic" weapon might be able to hit creatures that can only be hit by magic weapons but not be a particularly special sword otherwise.

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

finarvyn wrote:
So, a non-magical "magic" weapon might be able to hit creatures that can only be hit by magic weapons but not be a particularly special sword otherwise.

POWER CREEP!!! :)

Author:  Kruvil [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 5:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

I hope magic items are rare and wondrous in DCC. But several times the combat rules state that magic bonuses can be added due to magic items. I'd like to not have it assumed that magic items will simply add bonuses or that at the very least it will be rare.

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Kruvil wrote:
I hope magic items are rare and wondrous in DCC. But several times the combat rules state that magic bonuses can be added due to magic items. I'd like to not have it assumed that magic items will simply add bonuses or that at the very least it will be rare.

Good catch, get that text out of there so there isn't a hint that +1 guisarme glaives exist.

Author:  Hamel™ [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 7:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

As I've already said in an old thread, you don't need too much magic weapons in your campaign: a valid substitute for magic weapons could be what I call weapons of renown.


Hamel™ wrote:
Talking about weapons, I remember that CODA System's Lord of the Rings suggested that also a "simple" masterwork weapon could be granted with a particular bonus (not necessarily of magic nature) if the wielder stroke down a major foe with it.

For example, if a battleaxe (crafted by dwarves) was used to kill an Orc Lord in an important battle (gaining a name and a big renown), that battleaxe could grant a morale bonus to hit (or a morale malus to hit, for Orcs) if announced (calling loud its name) when drawn.

A morale bonus/malus could fit for natural foes (giants, goblins, orcs) while you could have a bonus of different nature if that weapon killed a magical creature (such as undead or dragons).

Sometimes renown could be more powerful than magic itself (just think about 90% of Dragonlances - during the core timeline - were fake, but still working as real Dragonlances in DL's novels). :mrgreen:

Author:  talmor [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Personally, I'd like to know where DCC is going to go with magic items. I've seen alot of different ideas, and I have my own way for how I'd like to handle things, but I'd want to see how it's "supposed to be" before I start making my own house rules.

After all, it's a play test--aren't we supposed to be trying to break this thing?

Also, XP--what the heck?

Author:  mshensley [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

jmucchiello wrote:
Of course, real old school says not even 5th level characters deserve magic items. :)


psssh.... go read some old modules some time. They are stuffed with magic items.

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 12:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

There are no old school 1st level modules aside from say B1, B2 and maybe T1. All other 1st level modules came after the old school era. And B1 and B2 were both designed to used over and over again beyond 1st level

At 5th level, there is the A slaver series and maybe C1. How full of magic items are these modules? I really don't remember and they aren't within easy reach at the moment.

Author:  reverenddak [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

As far as I can tell, standard D&D magic items (from Oe to 3x) would work perfectly fine. A +1 sword? should work fine. A +5 vorpal sword? Probably work fine too with some tweaks to the crit chart. This is where it really depends on your game whether you want the world filled with magic items or for them to be scarce.

Scrolls and potions... hmmmmm.

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

You missed the point. I don't ever want to see a generic +1 sword ever again. I want Bitterfang, the sword of Roary King of Ilgar, lost three centuries ago in the gullet of Saughirem the great whale when Roary's ship was swallowed whole in the Sea of Regrets. Nor do I want see bags of freakin' holding or potions of healing.

Author:  talmor [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

jmucchiello wrote:
There are no old school 1st level modules aside from say B1, B2 and maybe T1.


Wait...WHAT?!?! THAT'S the definition of Old School?!?!

Wow...um...ok.

Author:  reverenddak [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 1:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

No, don't get me wrong. I have aversion to "generic" magic items too. It was really just an example for play-testing (I guess I missed your point.) I plan to drop my play-test group into adventures made for OD&D, and see how those magic items will work with the rules. Thus I don't see a problem.

With that, I don't think I want the DCC to have pages unique magic items listed. I think it'd be my job as the Judge to create the flavor and history of each item. If every item should be unique, then rules for making unique items would be important, and we should definitely be play-testing these rules--sooner than later. Is that the direction that DCC is going? I'd love to see them.

(I'd also like to see the rules for creating unique monsters. So far I've only seen the generic monsters I thought we weren't supposed to see. (in regards to the whole Adventuring in DCC thread.)

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 2:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

talmor wrote:
jmucchiello wrote:
There are no old school 1st level modules aside from say B1, B2 and maybe T1.


Wait...WHAT?!?! THAT'S the definition of Old School?!?!

Wow...um...ok.

For me, old school ends with the 1e DMG's publication. At that point the OD&D small boxset was fully supplanted by the newer game. Before that no one knew what the hell they were doing. :) Name a module from 1979 or earlier that is for 1st level characters.

Author:  goodmangames [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:19 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Magic items are rare, unique, and "the" vs. "a". By that I mean that when you find "the" +1 longsword, you have found THE +1 longsword. There isn't such a thing as a "generic" +1 longsword. There may be a couple in the world but each has its own properties and history.

The core rules do include more information on magic items. Including this part... :)

Ire of the Gods

Magic items tear the veil that separates man from god; they break the rules. It is generally unwise to draw the attention of higher-order beings, lest their scrutiny find you wanting. A character who wields a magic item may suffer a penalty to his Luck score. This is a temporary penalty that remains in place as long as he wields the item. Generally speaking, the following actions draw a Luck penalty:

• Wielding a magic item of potentially sufficient power to challenge a demi-god. This is considered to be any rod or wand, any weapon of +2 enchantment or better, and any extremely powerful staff. Certain unique items may also qualify.

• Wielding any sort of magical artifact.

• Wielding any intelligent magic item, or one that possesses (or traps) a soul.

• Wielding a lower-powered magic item that is not of the possessor’s own personal casting.

The Luck penalty ranges from -1 to -4, depending on the nature of the item and the degree to which greater powers feel threatened. The final penalty is determined at the judge’s discretion. Some magic items may have arcane powers that partially offset this Luck penalty, but that is rare.

Author:  Harley Stroh [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

reverenddak wrote:
I'd also like to see the rules for creating unique monsters. So far I've only seen the generic monsters I thought we weren't supposed to see. (in regards to the whole Adventuring in DCC thread.


No worries there, Reverend. In the adventures Joseph has commissioned, all the monsters are unique and monstrous. The ones in the beta are for the purpose of providing a baseline for your own beasties, between now and November.

//H

Author:  reverenddak [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

goodmangames wrote:
Magic items are rare, unique, and "the" vs. "a". By that I mean that when you find "the" +1 longsword, you have found THE +1 longsword. There isn't such a thing as a "generic" +1 longsword. There may be a couple in the world but each has its own properties and history.

The core rules do include more information on magic items. Including this part...


omg. or should I say, IreMG. Magic items are SCARY! So they're more like Stormbringer than Sting? Interesting.... but it makes me wonder, what is treasure going to be like? If there are any piles of gold (assuming dragons like to sit on them) what would our looters spend it on? I'm so used to spending gold on magic items...

Author:  jmucchiello [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

goodmangames wrote:
Magic items are rare, unique, and "the" vs. "a". By that I mean that when you find "the" +1 longsword, you have found THE +1 longsword. There isn't such a thing as a "generic" +1 longsword. There may be a couple in the world but each has its own properties and history.

Exactly what I said magic items should be. AWESOME. +d100
Quote:
Ire of the Gods

+d30. I also said they should be built like 1E AD&D major artifacts, including side effects. Close enough.

Author:  orcface999 [ Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: no magic items--shouldn't those be playtested?

Just the story of the history can make the item "magical" if the new owner believes. Old Jack's sword cut down 300, and his Da' kilt 200 hisself wit it. Now it's mine and I caint lose neether. Self confidence conferred from a perfectly mundane item with a story. Is it magic?

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/