minmax and benefits

[Walsingham]

I've been thinking about stuff in RL, and it occurred to me that some thing sin life are neat, but to get the best of them you have to be weak in certain areas. For example, some people gain tremendous strength from being in a cult, but to get that strength they have to be sufficiently weak to connect to it. It just occurred to me that some super-powerful items in games ought to be predicated not on minimum stats, but maximum stats. Thoughts?

[Cantousent]

For a long time, several years at least, I've had virtually no cursed items in the game. Oh, some of them can be called "cursed" in one way or another. Some of them even bind to the character in the tradition of old skool DnD. Still, most of the time, I provide items that are powerful but that have some sort of drawback. I've been seeing a lot more of this trend lately, and frankly I love it because it makes a decision to use a magic item far more meaningful for the player.

 

I think the idea of maximum ability scores is also quite good. I haven't done it yet, but I can think of some great items that would be great candidates.

 

As far as your real life example goes, I agree. If you'd said that some folks are strong while others are smart, I would have disagreed. Unfortunately, some folks are both weak and stupid while others are strong and smart. It's not fair, but it's true. However, your example makes sense because it underscores something I've observed over the years. The personality traits that are good about a person are often also bad. The person who is sensitive to others is often oversensitive as well. The strong, silent type is great in some circumstances, but his guarded and reserved demeanor is not always welcome. Someone might be great for conversation, but sometimes you just want them to shut up.

 

I don't even think we should just make it a straight stat conditional. Because it's based on a numerical value, a min/max stat is easy to enforce, but your idea, taking into account personality, makes for some wonderful opportunities in other ways as well.

[Walsingham]

Actually, I think you've come up with something even smarter than my suggestion. I was trying to say that the things that make you strong/smart/independent can prevent you from availing yourself of some augmentations. Because you're unwilling/unable to surrender enough of that quality to let it be augmented.

 

*snaps his fingers*

 

I guess the family thread set me thinking. I have friends who are almost completely independent. You know, travel around Yemen etc etc. But they can't surrender that enough to make close contact with family. they can't draw on it because... because they're too used to finding their strength and resources internally.

 

Maybe.

[Humodour]

I like ideas like this. The Ring of Biting in PS:T was interesting because while it was good, you couldn't replace it on the fly. Probably not the best example of a disadvantage, though. In BG1/2 the Claw of Kazgeroth had a nasty penalty to your constitution and death saving throws - two fairly important areas, but overall I often deemed its use meangingful. A somewhat different example is the innate ability of Minsc which made him go berserk. A lot of players hated this, but recently I've tried using it and have found it very useful, and often plan my battles around it.

 

I guess I'm saying that I like it when items and powers aren't 100% cookie cutter and have pros/cons - as long as the cons are meangingful and not arbitrary.

[Magister Lajciak]

I feel that in D&D terms, many if not all permanent magic items should be artifacts. This does not mean they should be overly powerful, but they should have drawbacks, interesting powers and a history behind them. Perhaps, they should even be unique.

[Humodour]

Yeah, I agree. I love it when items have unique powers and interesting back-stories to go with them.

Edited January 2, 2008 by Krezack

[Gorgon]

Running around wielding a 'Longsword +2' is an insult to anyones intelligence.

 

Anyway I much prefer magic weapons to be extremely rare, that the cost involved in crafting them is so huge that only a dozen or so are even known to exist.

[Walsingham]

Running around wielding a 'Longsword +2' is an insult to anyones intelligence.

 

Anyway I much prefer magic weapons to be extremely rare, that the cost involved in crafting them is so huge that only a dozen or so are even known to exist.

Yet at the same time an insult which is likely to go unchallenged by anyone not possessing +2 armour?

[BobbyN]

I agree with the benefits/penalties line of thinking you guys are discussing. A good 3.5 book that works with this subject is Weapons of Legacy. A pretty good system for a character to use and grow with a cool unique weapon/item (rather than upgrading every other level) while staying pretty balanced. The penalties can be pretty tough at times, so I think most players (by nature) would rather upgrade regularly. For a strong roleplayer that likes story and coolness factor over a min/maxed character, WoL is perfect.

 

I created a unique two bladed sword using the system in the book, and the player loved it. Was pretty much what defined his character over time.

[Walsingham]

I agree with the benefits/penalties line of thinking you guys are discussing. A good 3.5 book that works with this subject is Weapons of Legacy. A pretty good system for a character to use and grow with a cool unique weapon/item (rather than upgrading every other level) while staying pretty balanced. The penalties can be pretty tough at times, so I think most players (by nature) would rather upgrade regularly. For a strong roleplayer that likes story and coolness factor over a min/maxed character, WoL is perfect.

 

I created a unique two bladed sword using the system in the book, and the player loved it. Was pretty much what defined his character over time.

 

Good advice there.