I'm using a system similar to this and we just treat the inherent enhancements as just that - enhancement bonuses, and thus they don't stack with bonuses of the same type given from items such as this. So a character that has an inherent +2 STR and then equips this belt simply gains no benefit from that portion of the belt's enhancements, because the effects don't stack.
It's worked well for us so far.
I've thought about this also... I like the implications that a +3 sword makes you strike like a person with a +3 enhancement bonus.
I'm not sure I would use it, but there's something neat there for sure.
That's basically how it works out, yes =)
|
I think I might try to convince my group to use the following variation (based on these conversations) next time we play:
1st and every four) +2 enhancement to two stats OR +1 enhancement to all stats (this replaces the normal stat increases)
2nd and every four) +1 enhancement to armor (apply to best armor source, still applies if no armor source)
3rd and every four) +1 enhancement to weapons and shields (shield bonus only applies if using a shield)
4th and every four) +1 resistance to saves, +1 deflection to AC/CMDSpells that grant enhancement bonus to natural armor instead just grant a bonus to natural armor (non-stacking). The weapon enhancement does not make your attacks bypass DR, even magical DR, though enhancement coming from class features does.
Any weapon with a special feature whose benefits depend on weapon enhancement uses your natural enhancement or +1 (whichever is greater) as the effective enhancement. Reallocations of enhancement affect *all* weapons, not just the one doing the reallocating.
Class features that increase enhancement bonuses can still work, but are still capped at +5.
Magic items are to be earned or crafted, not assumed.
This gets rid of all of the big 6 items and leaves magic items solely the realm of cool stuff. This means no attack boosting items, no AC boosting items and no save boosting items. Maybe even ditch bracers of armor. Items that use those effects as only part of what they are will have cost recalculated when/if players ask about them.
Net result for 20th level: +10/+10 stats or +5 to all or somewhere between, +5 to armor, +5 to weapons and shields, +5 to saves, +5 to AC/CMD. This means shield users end up with a total of +15 'free' AC, while others only get +10.
As for world consequences: People will simply learn that magics work better on those that are already weaker. Not a bad consequence to have, IMO.
I like the thought of this variant not just because it gets rid of the christmas tree effect, but also because it allows magic items to become something rare and awesome without needing to rebalance the system. The core "big 6" items should be enough to keep you competitive on their own. This, in turn, means you can toss in a +2 equivalent weapon (say, holy) and name it and have a player actually be willing to use it through level 20 without worry about effectiveness.
Heck, I might even make natural armor and armor not stack, but that might be going too far.
Second, with the introduction of Ultimate Equipment, there are now a ton of magic items out there that do small ability enhancement coinciding with other powers inherent in the item (I'm sure many of these already existed in other sources that I just never had access to). Something like the belt Anaconda's Coils, which offer bonuses to grappling and offer a constrict ability when grappling, but also grant a +2 bonus to Strength. I'm still a little uncertain as to the best way to handle this, as granting that additional +2 Strength bonus flies in the face of the natural ability enhancement through progression, yet the item is not really about that bonus. Should I just eliminate the ability enhancement from said items at a specific cost reduction and let all else go? Curious at what others might think about this.I'm using a system similar to this and we just treat the inherent enhancements as just that - enhancement bonuses, and thus they don't stack with bonuses of the same type given from items such as this. So a character that has an inherent +2 STR and then equips this belt simply gains no benefit from that portion of the belt's enhancements, because the effects don't stack.
It's worked well for us so far.
This is the way we've decided to try it. Sounds like complete win to me!
Interesting stuff all around.
I'm gonna have to process the implications, and I'll also have to playtest what I've got so as not to frustrate my players by fiddling around too much.
Since there are good ideas here that I can't playtest for the above reason, please be sure to report back here with the variation you are using! I'm much more inclined to switch to your version if you can analyze the pros and cons with actual play.
I look forward to seeing more from you all.
@StabbityDoom: Good point about the armor bonus. Folks could just rock bracers of armor, I had a kind of blind spot for that. I think I will adopt that change. Interestingly, the defense bonus advocacy crowd might now be interested in the rule now.
I'm not sure I like +1 to all stats as a choice. What's your reasoning?
@Orthos/Subcreator: Leaving enhancement bonuses on the items and relying on stacking to sort things out is an interesting approach. However, it undermines one of my personal goals with the rule — keeping players from seeking out enhancement bonus items above all else. If a character with a +3 weapons/shields enhancement from level can lay his hands on a +5 weapon, he's going to shell out all of his gold to do so. Pretty soon we're right back where we started, aren't we?
I understand that in practice, the GM has much finer control over availability. But in the abstract, it seems like a lot of work for nothing — you're helping the players cover all the bases, but many players will do anything to stay one step ahead on fundamentals.
I'm not saying it's badwrongfun, just that the GM should consider this implication before adopting that version.
If every choice has things to recommend it, it may be time to leave it up to table choice. Some GMs have time to substitute most of the items in an adventure path. Some do not. Some can make up customized magic item tables. Some can't.
If every choice has things to recommend it, it may be time to leave it up to table choice. Some GMs have time to substitute most of the items in an adventure path. Some do not. Some can make up customized magic item tables. Some can't.
That is my intention in all things. A discussion of the pros and cons is usually helpful to all tables, though.
It's a thin line I like to walk. I'd like to keep everyone who is using a very similar rule in the same conversation, without balkanizing into a dozen variants. But within that rule, it is best to experiment and share your results.
You people get this. This is the homebrew forum!
@Orthos/Subcreator: Leaving enhancement bonuses on the items and relying on stacking to sort things out is an interesting approach. However, it undermines one of my personal goals with the rule — keeping players from seeking out enhancement bonus items above all else. If a character with a +3 weapons/shields enhancement from level can lay his hands on a +5 weapon, he's going to shell out all of his gold to do so. Pretty soon we're right back where we started, aren't we?
I understand that in practice, the GM has much finer control over availability. But in the abstract, it seems like a lot of work for nothing — you're helping the players cover all the bases, but many players will do anything to stay one step ahead on fundamentals.
I'm not saying it's badwrongfun, just that the GM should consider this implication before adopting that version.
Well, I'm not advocating keeping enhancement bonuses on weapons or armor. Those enhancements have been dumped already. My question was how to handle minor ability enhancements that appear on certain magic items such as Anaconda's Coil or Belt of the Weasel. Orthos idea to attach stacking rules to them with the inherent bonus--so that if someone has already raised their strength bonus inherently by two, the +2 Strength bonus of the item is negated for them--was a good idea. It makes it so I don't have to worry about fiddling with costs on these items. All major ability enhancement items--or those whose primary job is stat increase, or anything that improves a stat by four or more--have already been removed from my game.
|
|
@StabbityDoom: Good point about the armor bonus. Folks could just rock bracers of armor, I had a kind of blind spot for that. I think I will adopt that change. Interestingly, the defense bonus advocacy crowd might now be interested in the rule now.
I'm not sure I like +1 to all stats as a choice. What's your reasoning?
Purely math, really. +3 to anything seemed like too much since it could lead to a total +15 (compared to the +11 between level-up and enhancement that's normally possible), so I chose +2/+2 as the primary option as that lands at a maximum +10. Then I figured that some characters are very MAD, or are played by people who prefer the balanced sorts of heroes, so I needed a more distributed option. The only option that seemed fair was +1 to all. My favored choice would likely be +2/+2 three times, +1 to all twice, for a net +8/8/2/2/2/2 or +8/+6/+4/+2/+2/+2 or any number of balancing combinations like that.
+2/2 is a total of +20 at level 17 (the final upgrade), while +1 to all is a total of +30. Someone who had pretty good belts/headbands would probably have a +6 in two stats and a +4 in the rest, for a total bonus (between that and level-up) of 33. This makes my suggestion a slight decrease compared to a good case, and notably lower compared to the optimal case (+6 to all for 41 points total), but I think it compares well to what is really seen (it's actually a slight net gain for my current 15th level character, if I were to theoretically switch rulesets).
If I applied my thoughts to my current (15th level) character, the net result is that on the positive side he would have better HP, better fort save, another skill point per level (from an int boost) and a slightly better weapon (by +1). However, he ends up with notably reduced AC (reduced by -4, to a final tally of 31, but he's an offense character), and slightly reduced CMD (-1, meh). If he had a shield his AC would be 36 or 37, which would be pretty good.
As to the defense bonus note: I hadn't even realized that. For non-shield-users, it effectively amounts to +1 AC per 2 levels. And for shield users it follows a pattern identical to 3/4 BAB. Not a bad thing, methinks.
I'm thinking that these bonuses should be (Ex) so that I don't have to think about how they interact with dispelling and anti-magic, and also because those things suck to spring on a player anyway. Heck, if the basics are Ex I might even be willing to spring an anti-magic field somewhere since it doesn't mess people up too hard.
I also have a couple more notes:
* This "natural enhancement" should probably increase the hardness of worn/wielded gear, but I'm not 100% sold on that thought. It definitely shouldn't increase HP since that gets weird if you drop it while it's low on HP.
* Foes with /magic DR have their DR become relevant (where it's normally pointless), but still easily bypassed by many classes, and the rest can get a flaming sword or something, or have a friendly cleric. Foes with /cold iron or /silver become tough if you don't prepare, but not bad otherwise as those materials aren't too expensive. Foes with /adamantine are the same, but much more expensive to counter. Foes with /alignment become VERY difficult for those who aren't paladins/clerics/etc to bypass without special holy weapons which are VERY expensive, but I think that's just fine. Even preferred.
* Since the highest weapon/armor you can buy is +5 equivalent (all bonus equivalents), the most expensive weapon is 50k + mundane materials cost. This makes the 17.5k for adamantine fullplate (for example) seem decidedly non-trivial, as with the 10.5k for mithril full plate. This should still hold true at high levels. It rescales the perceived prices of things, and IMO not in a bad way. This means you would probably have to warn players that mithril/adamantine and other expensive special materials cannot be assumed available by any stretch of the imagination.
My brother points out that bracers of armor do grant an armor bonus, not an enhancement bonus.
Another player of mine adds that the armored kilt has basically no barriers to entry, even for a non-proficient arcane caster. So there's not a lot of reason to disallow the AC bonus.
Thoughts?
The one problem with this system, is that it gives all characters the same plus to hit and damage, and the same to all attributes. As they progress, this "greying" gets worse and worse.
I hear where you're coming from, but not everyone gets the same benefit from those same stats. Your melee bruisers are all going to be looking for the same stats anyway, and hte fact that your skill-meisters or spell-chuckers are also gaining the benefit of full-enhanement weapons doesn't really mean less to the bruisers. Nor does it mean that your skill-meisters and spell-chuckers are going to really be using their fully-enhanced weapons any more than they would have, anyway... they don't have the BAB and melee stats/tricks to really make great use of them.
... at least that's what I'd think. I could be wrong.
|
|
The one problem with this system, is that it gives all characters the same plus to hit and damage, and the same to all attributes. As they progress, this "greying" gets worse and worse.
Since they have the choice to do +2 to two attributes /or/ +1 to all, it doesn't at all mean that they have the same. One guy could have +5 to all; another +10 to int and +10 to con, another +10 int, +4 con, +4 dex, +2 wis; a third might have +10 strength and dex; a fourth might have +10 strength, +6 cha, +4 con, +2 dex (probably a paladin); and so on like that. These result in /very/ different characters. And this is without using the +1 to all option.
The to-hit/damage thing is a wash anyway. I've never seen more than a +1 or +2 difference between the best weapon in the party and the worst, not counting back-up weaponry that never gets used. The cleric/oracle might not buy a +X weapon, but they usually use greater magic weapon once it's available (assuming they ever use their weapon). In my current party we have a character that literally never uses their weapon, but it's still a +3 thanks to that spell.
TL;DR - IMO there is just as much room for practical diversity in this alternate ruleset as their was in the original. There might be a +/- 1 or 2 difference here or there, but nothing that changes how anyone will play their character.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The one problem with this system, is that it gives all characters the same plus to hit and damage, and the same to all attributes. As they progress, this "greying" gets worse and worse.
Right. This is the system for people who feel like the game doesn't need more character creation options.
Kolokotroni's Heroic Distinctions is the system for people who want to solve this with yet more character creation options.
I respect that method, but frankly, with the addition of Traits making the character creation process take 10+ % longer now, any house rule I introduce has to be playable on auto-pilot or my players simply won't take their medicine.
So yes, I aim to take a step backward on the customizability track. All characters get the same bonus so that monster CRs are balanced to APL without gear. Simple. Inflexible. Awesome.
|
|
My brother points out that bracers of armor do grant an armor bonus, not an enhancement bonus.
Another player of mine adds that the armored kilt has basically no barriers to entry, even for a non-proficient arcane caster. So there's not a lot of reason to disallow the AC bonus.
Thoughts?
If the enhancement thing stacked with bracers (which, as I currently have it written, it would) then it would be only 1 point worse than full-plate with no weight, armor check or spell failure. With that in mind I would probably change bracers of armor to be more like the ring of force shield: It has a single static value, and that's what you get. Probably +4 to match mage armor. This makes it as good as a chain shirt, but with no armor check, spell failure or appreciable weight. I'd say that's fair for a 16k item. The other option is to ditch it entirely, which also probably works fine since it's no better than casting mage armor a couple times a day.
Well, you can't enhance bracers of armor.
So they don't count.
|
|
Well, you can't enhance bracers of armor.
So they don't count.
Right, but I feel it's better if the rules don't discriminate between sources of armor bonuses. Much simpler. Better to keep the options balanced. Also, I don't like the thought of having something that scales like enhancement bonus to AC (bonus squared times 1000) confusing people next to the non-existence of other forms of scaling AC bonuses.
The way I wrote my variant, the enhancement bonuses apply to your single bonus source of armor bonus, of which mage armor and bracers of armor would be one. Rather than make weird exceptions, I'd like to simply modify the special-case sources to be balanced with enhancement bonuses in mind. I think mage armor is probably fine, but putting bracers of armor above +4 would be too unbalancing. Maybe even leave it at +2 or 3. And static values are easier to handle. Since mage armor is the same kind of thing, I'd prefer it to match that spell and make it a +4.
No need to make new exceptions, just leave the existing Mage armor/bracers exception in place. It's RAW.
Opinions may differ as to which is more complicated, of course.
But I'd say, if you can't enhance it in the RAW, no bonus.
|
|
No need to make new exceptions, just leave the existing Mage armor/bracers exception in place. It's RAW.
Opinions may differ as to which is more complicated, of course.
But I'd say, if you can't enhance it in the RAW, no bonus.
I suppose we can agree to disagree on this (very minor) point. I'd rather see mages casting mage armor and using bracers (that are locked to +4) than wearing armored kilts everywhere, but I doubt it'll matter much either way since AC isn't the mage's primary (or even secondary) line of defense.
By your system, bracers of armor have only special qualities, not armor bonuses. Everyone of a high enough level will get the armor bonuses, even without plate mail or bracers.
If that is how it works, you can fit more special qualities into the bracers.
|
|
By your system, bracers of armor have only special qualities, not armor bonuses. Everyone of a high enough level will get the armor bonuses, even without plate mail or bracers.
If that is how it works, you can fit more special qualities into the bracers.
Are you referring to my thoughts on the issue, or Evil_Lincoln's?
My thoughts are to make bracers a static +4, then have the natural enhancement to AC apply on top. Bonus equivalents would be applied as though the bracers were a normal source of armor (so the extra cost is bonus squared times 1,000, up to +5 of equivalents). The rule that the special abilities only work if it is providing the largest armor bonus would still apply.
The net result is that you would spend as much on +4 armor to AC that has no ASF/weight/ACP as you would have +9 armor to AC that grants DR 3/- but has -5 ACP, weighs 50 pounds and has a 35% ASF chance. Enhancement from there would be equal. It becomes about trade-offs at that point.
I read that restriction in the core rulebook, but I thought it would be irrelevant like the minimum +1 to weapons for magical powers.
I'm late to the party, but i want to point out something i think is important for gameplay enjoiment.
This system puts all the eggs in the "level up" basket. One of the big reason why loot has become a mainstream addition to every game is that staggers the sense of progress from the "exp bar", giving any moment of play the possibility to be a "character advancement" opportunity by finding someting that makes your character better, as in the widest interpretation of better, ranging from more efficient to more cool.
By giving fixed bonuses at fixed level you overenphasize the moment of the "levelup". This can be quite counterproductive for the enjoiment of the game.
I'm late to the party, but i want to point out something i think is important for gameplay enjoiment.
This system puts all the eggs in the "level up" basket. One of the big reason why loot has become a mainstream addition to every game is that staggers the sense of progress from the "exp bar", giving any moment of play the possibility to be a "character advancement" opportunity by finding someting that makes your character better, as in the widest interpretation of better, ranging from more efficient to more cool.
By giving fixed bonuses at fixed level you overenphasize the moment of the "levelup". This can be quite counterproductive for the enjoiment of the game.
This seems like a separate issue to me, but, if you were to use SKR's "Step" leveling system, that would fix the issue for you I think. You'd get the enhancement bonus to weapon/shield only when you increased your BAB increased, saves with saves, etc.
I'm late to the party, but i want to point out something i think is important for gameplay enjoyment.
This system puts all the eggs in the "level up" basket. One of the big reason why loot has become a mainstream addition to every game is that staggers the sense of progress from the "exp bar", giving any moment of play the possibility to be a "character advancement" opportunity by finding something that makes your character better, as in the widest interpretation of better, ranging from more efficient to more cool.
By giving fixed bonuses at fixed level you overemphasize the moment of the "levelup". This can be quite counterproductive for the enjoyment of the game.
I agree that there is a balance between level and item power. That's why I see the moving of pluses to the character level should be balanced by additional power slots being opened in the items.
Interested in how this turns out.
The focus on the "big 6" is enough, I think, that it detracts from the fun and fantastic feel of the game. Players are so worried for "keeping up" that they'll pass on these more fun, wonderful items that add such flavor to the game.
Even useful items are passed over. A recent party showed me that potions of lesser restoration are nothing compared to a '6.
Evil Lincoln, a couple of questions:
(1) Why did you leave amulets of natural armor and rings of protection as magic items instead of turning them into personal natural armor and deflection/dodge bonuses? This makes unarmored classes cry.
(2) Say I play a wizard and decide to take +2 to int and dex every five levels. Later I decide to multiclass into fighter. (2a) Can I switch from int and dex to str and con? (2b) Can I switch from two stats every five levels to four stats every four levels? I don't see how to support that but not doing so seems... wrong.
Oh, and a very minor issue with your house rules document---your algorithms list stat-boosting as "to a max at 17th level" though the first option maxes at 15th.
With my ritual, I described it as any plus item. A similar core rule will cover left out items and typos. Maybe let characters take a numeric bonus every other round, only allow a current max of 1/4 of level rounded up for each individual CTE bonus, and let it stack with non CTE bonuses.
Blarg. Okay, dotting for later. I'm about a quarter way down the second page. Interesting thoughts, all.
Evil Lincoln, a couple of questions:
(1) Why did you leave amulets of natural armor and rings of protection as magic items instead of turning them into personal natural armor and deflection/dodge bonuses? This makes unarmored classes cry.
(2) Say I play a wizard and decide to take +2 to int and dex every five levels. Later I decide to multiclass into fighter. (2a) Can I switch from int and dex to str and con? (2b) Can I switch from two stats every five levels to four stats every four levels? I don't see how to support that but not doing so seems... wrong.
Oh, and a very minor issue with your house rules document---your algorithms list stat-boosting as "to a max at 17th level" though the first option maxes at 15th.
1) Those items work well for both armored and unarmored characters. Honestly, they felt properly "magical" to me — I have the amulet of natural armor as a word-activation item that actually transmutes your skin, and deflection bonuses look cool in practice.
In addition, AC-boosting items are sort of okay as magic items. Mythologically speaking, there are a ton of amulets and talismans that are meant to protect the wearer. They are obviously coveted because of our mortal terror. I felt that removing all of them would be too much.
If you disagree, I'd be happy to see what ratios you assign to their by-level values.
2) I'd say no, but then again my group is extremely lax about retraining any part of the character, so we'd let it happen anyway. In written rules, I would disallow it, because I would like to discourage people from shuffling around their bonuses with any sense of entitlement. This answer really only applies to my style of play though.
3) I'll have a look and fix that, thanks.
With my ritual, I described it as any plus item. A similar core rule will cover left out items and typos. Maybe let characters take a numeric bonus every other level, only allow a current max of 1/4 of level rounded up for each individual CTE bonus, and let it stack with non CTE bonuses.
Had to correct it, and it was too late to edit.
Include a retraining option that conforms to retraining in ultimate campaign. It has an associated cost and time to accomplish.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've been chewing on this for a while, as one of my most-revisited threads.
In between GMing campaigns right now, so have a chance to implement something, and took a stab at tweaking this for my table:
Murph's level-up table and considerations.
It is 95% based on Evil Lincoln's endpoint, and thank you to all for providing those shoulders to stand upon!
The couple changes:
I pushed shield bonus back a bit, to space out the per-level benefits more and ovoid overwhelming WBL is first few levels.
I put all ability score boosts at even levels, starting with +2/one or +1/two at 6th level. Same reasons as shield bonus, plus reflects what my players tend to do (which is rarely purchase ability score boosters unless/until they've exhausted the rest of their shopping options). This is still going to seem like a leap forward to most of them.
To compensate a little bit for the reduced progression, I'm thinking to offer bonus feats at every 4th level, and am trying to define a category of "personal" feats for this purpose: essentially, feats from the "general" or racial buckets that don't build on class abilities. This is an opportunity to pick up things like Improved Stonecunning / Stone Sense, Nimble Moves, or Taunt, which rarely if ever rise to the top of people's lists. I still have to figure out if there are some "top 10" feats that should be specifically excluded from this list -- Spell Focus, Toughness, etc. -- to meet this interest of diversity of feat choices.
Would appreciate any feedback / questions before I dump this on my players (you can skip the "Background" wall o text, since it's largely a re-summarization of this thread's premises).
As a thought, if you're giving away bonus attributes and feats, you could simply the table a lot by allowing these Kirthfinder feats (or something similar):
AGILITY TRAINING
Prerequisite: Acrobatics 3 ranks as a class skill.
Benefit: Through constant physical training, you have a +1 enhancement bonus to Dexterity per 3 ranks in Acrobatics you possess (maximum +6 enhancement bonus at 18 ranks Acrobatics). Any condition that prevents this training for more than 1 week eliminates the bonus until you can get back into training.
STAMINA TRAINING
Prerequisite: Endurance 3 ranks as a class skill.
Benefit: Through constant physical training, you have a +1 enhancement bonus to Constitution per 3 ranks in Endurance you possess (maximum bonus of +6 with 18 ranks in Endurance). Any condition that prevents this training for more than 1 week eliminates the bonus until you can get back into training.
STRENGTH TRAINING
Prerequisite: Athletics 3 ranks as a class skill.
Benefit: Through constant physical training, you have a +1 enhancement bonus to Strength per 3 ranks in Athletics you possess (maximum bonus of +6 at 18 ranks). Any condition that prevents this training for more than 1 week eliminates the bonus until you can get back into training.
MORAL TRAINING
Prerequisite: Perception 6 ranks.
Benefit: Through constant pondering of moral puzzles and koans, you have a +2 enhancement bonus to Wisdom. A condition that prevents this
training for more than 1 week eliminates the bonus until you can get back into training.
Special: You may select this feat up to 3 times. Each time, the requisite number of ranks in Perception increases by 6, and the enhancement bonus to Wisdom increases by +2 (to a maximum enhancement bonus of +6).
SOCIAL TRAINING
Through constant socialising, you have learned assert your own personality and to dominate those around you.
Prerequisite: Diplomacy 6 ranks.
Benefit: You gain a +2 enhancement bonus to Charisma. A condition that prevents your training for more than 1 week eliminates the bonus until you can get back into training.
Special: You may select this feat up to 3 times.
Each time, the requisite number of ranks in Diplomacy increases by 6, and the enhancement bonus to Charisma increases by +2 (to a maximum enhancement bonus of +6).
That way, you're still giving away feats and people's saves and attributes are still going up, yet you have a simpler table.
Cool stuff, Murph. I like how you listed your objectives, maybe that should catch on.
"Klaatu barada nikto."
With any luck, this thread necromancy spell will work.
Anyway, been observing this thread for sometime, and I'd love to know how these systems have been working out for folks, as I think I've convinced my group to finally let me try them out.
"Klaatu barada nikto."
With any luck, this thread necromancy spell will work.
Anyway, been observing this thread for sometime, and I'd love to know how these systems have been working out for folks, as I think I've convinced my group to finally let me try them out.
We've been using one of the earlier versions in Kingmaker and I love it. There's been some growing pains when you start looking at combining enhancement bonuses and such from Paladins Empowered Weapons and things... but nothing that's been much issue.
I'm a big fan of not 'NEEDING' SPECIFIC items just to be viable. I think his current magical gear at 10th level is a Feybane Bastard sword and Ioun stone that sheds light and one that's a +1 AC... All the rest of the bonuses are all him :D
We've been using one of the earlier versions in Kingmaker and I love it. There's been some growing pains when you start looking at combining enhancement bonuses and such from Paladins Empowered Weapons and things... but nothing that's been much issue.
I'm a big fan of not 'NEEDING' SPECIFIC items just to be viable. I think his current magical gear at 10th level is a Feybane Bastard sword and Ioun stone that sheds light and one that's a +1 AC... All the rest of the bonuses are all him :D
Good to hear. We're pretty tired of the big 6. It'll be nice to finally be able to put in some flavor-related items in which aren't immediately discarded.
Good to hear. We're pretty tired of the big 6. It'll be nice to finally be able to put in some flavor-related items in which aren't immediately discarded.We've been using one of the earlier versions in Kingmaker and I love it. There's been some growing pains when you start looking at combining enhancement bonuses and such from Paladins Empowered Weapons and things... but nothing that's been much issue.
I'm a big fan of not 'NEEDING' SPECIFIC items just to be viable. I think his current magical gear at 10th level is a Feybane Bastard sword and Ioun stone that sheds light and one that's a +1 AC... All the rest of the bonuses are all him :D
The only disappointment I had, was when I realized that I couldn't turn a headband into a crown of wisdom... As a Paladin, Wisdom gets the short straw :P
Still, we're getting the bonuses anyway... I'm just choosing to put them into charisma and strength... so that's no me ;)
|
|
*casts raise thread*
I'm curious how this has been going for folks using it. My above mentioned Wrath of the Righteous game stepped down in favor of some old school 2E action, however, tonight I am starting a Serpent's Skull game for a different group and might give this a whirl. For this game especially it seems like magic should be ancient and wonderful, not standard fare.
My concerns are that it be a simple system to implement and this seems to be. If I can grant simple bonuses to the characters each level and then just drop certain items from treasure hoards in the AP that would be fantastic. I'd really like a lower magic feel this time around.
So does this work when applied to APs?
*casts raise thread*
I'm curious how this has been going for folks using it. My above mentioned Wrath of the Righteous game stepped down in favor of some old school 2E action, however, tonight I am starting a Serpent's Skull game for a different group and might give this a whirl. For this game especially it seems like magic should be ancient and wonderful, not standard fare.
My concerns are that it be a simple system to implement and this seems to be. If I can grant simple bonuses to the characters each level and then just drop certain items from treasure hoards in the AP that would be fantastic. I'd really like a lower magic feel this time around.
So does this work when applied to APs?
I think it does. I'm the one GMing the Kingmaker game mentioned a couple posts up. I'm finding that players are truly enjoying the lower magic feel this inherent bonus system is supplying to the AP. There's only one kicker that I've found, but I'm going to spoiler it because of the connections to Kingmaker Book 5 & 6:
I think you'll find this quite enjoyable and simple for your campaign though.
I've been using the system for a while now; both I and my players are quite happy with it. The version we use is in all respects identical to those presented here, save that weapons, armor, and shields are still used under the old system.
We felt the ability score, save, deflection, and natural armor increases should be integrated into the system as standard, while weapon, armor, and shield enhancements should remain. It has worked quite well for us.
It's cold iron, so I would consider making it bane to fiends. Maybe all bonuses to damage and hit are doubled against fiends when using that sword.
|
|
Fiends, or fae maybe since it's Kingmaker.
I'm glad to hear this has been working in practice. I will definitely be telling my players about it next session. We had our first session tonight and I made sure to point out to them that what I am trying to do in this campaign is make their primary antagonist be the environment and survival is a struggle. I think a low-magic feel will really help drive that tone home.
|
|
So my Serpent's Skull party is just about to hit level 2 and get into this house rule. Folks were a little skeptical but they trust me enough to give it a try. I just want to clarify a point: does this table assume the +1 stat increase every four levels already inherent to characters or does it replace this?