E.G.

 

Ring of overwhelming focus - 1.5x focus gain, -10 all defenses

Ring of spell storing - +2 wizard spells per level, -2 all attributes

Natures Corruption - Quarterstaff with +3 level 1-4 druid spells, -25 endurance, -2 athletics.

 

Suggest your own!

My cipher stays in the back and never goes closer than mid-range to the melee. That Ring would have virtually no drawbacks for me. Same with my Druid and that staff.

Ya. But squish if you get hit. Higher risk for higher rewards.

Edited April 6, 201510 yr by Mungri

I have nothing against such items in principle, but you have to be really careful when designing them. Often there are ways to just ignore the drawback, and that can lead to huge balance issues.

I think I didn't consider that.

I remember that there was a sword back in BG1 that was crazy strong but it will inflict a berserk status on the wielder. I thought it was pretty cool.

I remember that there was a sword back in BG1 that was crazy strong but it will inflict a berserk status on the wielder. I thought it was pretty cool.

 

It was actually quite irritating that the most powerful weapons in vanilla BG1 (aside from Drizzt's stuff) were all cursed - three +3 weapons, if I remember correctly. Not that such powerful items would've even been appropriate, of course.

I think I didn't consider that.

 

That's cause you like power building. (Nothing wrong with that.) It's easy to compensate for this in table top games, not so much to do in video games. In table top games you just make everything fighting your character that much stronger even if it's just a normal level 1 skeleton to everyone else.

I remember that there was a sword back in BG1 that was crazy strong but it will inflict a berserk status on the wielder. I thought it was pretty cool.

Yeah, give to Minsc. He can solo most of the non-unique enemies with it. And most of your party, but what's a little murderous rampage between friends.